Why was Mackay dropped........

tucker · **Posted:** Mon Mar 24, 2008 8:25 pm

?????

mouldy old dough · **Posted:** Mon Mar 24, 2008 8:26 pm

tucker wrote:

?????

To make way for the top scorer Sir Richard of Barker.

misterb2001 · **Posted:** Mon Mar 24, 2008 8:29 pm

tucker wrote:

?????

because he has been rubbish the last 2 games. And if the truth be told, is probably no better than a conference/league 2 player!

Barker looked pretty good when he was on to be fair and i think we would all rather see Brown & Porter up front.

So thats why he was dropped :wink:

The Lightning Tree · **Joined:** Thu Nov 30, 2006 5:30 pm **Posts:** 5804

misterb2001 wrote:

tucker wrote:

?????

because he has been rubbish the last 2 games. And if the truth be told, is probably no better than a conference/league 2 player!

Barker looked pretty good when he was on to be fair and i think we would all rather see Brown & Porter up front.

So thats why he was dropped :wink:

He's been very good the last 2 home games so how you can say he is league 2/conference standard

This is his first full season and i've been very impressed with him lately, he's eager, enthusiastic, runs himself into the ground and he scores goals.
True, his link up play and positioning aren't the best (thats supposed to be wilsons job) but for fook sake give him time, there's plenty of other players who have been getting in the side who i'd have dropped on many occasions this season!!!

tucker · **Posted:** Mon Mar 24, 2008 9:04 pm

misterb2001 wrote:

tucker wrote:

?????

because he has been rubbish the last 2 games. And if the truth be told, is probably no better than a conference/league 2 player!

Barker looked pretty good when he was on to be fair and i think we would all rather see Brown & Porter up front.

So thats why he was dropped :wink:

And you obviously have not got a clue about football fella.

Snowy · **Joined:** Fri Aug 18, 2006 12:18 pm **Posts:** 37186

misterb2001 wrote:

tucker wrote:

?????

Barker looked pretty good when he was on to be fair and i think we would all rather see Brown & Porter up front.

So thats why he was dropped :wink:

....'looked pretty good when he was on'..... he lacked stamina and was blowing for a tug the brief time he was on ... Danny Boy has been talking him up all week so his return was even more inevitable than you agreeing with everything Wilson says...... and that's saying something... :roll:

Fetish_Bob · **Posted:** Mon Mar 24, 2008 10:04 pm

His performance at Crewe was nothing better than non league at best. so if a choice of him or Porter on past games then it had to be Mackay.

PJ_Poolie · **Posted:** Mon Mar 24, 2008 10:22 pm

I think Mackay is always going to struggle to make an impact away from home at the moment. He's shown glimpses but I don't understand peoples complete over rating of the lad. People (who have no doubt seen very little of him) have been arguing his case all season. He did alright in the last home game and may count himself unlucky but the fact is he's started the last two and we've lost and today (though reading board you wouldn't believe it) we won.

He has a chance of making it but has got a long way to go before he's starting every week in league one.

The Lightning Tree · **Joined:** Thu Nov 30, 2006 5:30 pm **Posts:** 5804

From what I recall he did more than alright in the last home game.
He has at least another year on his contract and I still think he'll come very good.

Montpoolier · **Posted:** Mon Mar 24, 2008 10:31 pm

PJ_Poolie wrote:

He did alright in the last home game and may count himself unlucky but the fact is he's started the last two and we've lost, and today (though reading board you wouldn't believe it) we won.

Hard to argue with that, but don't worry, someone will. :wink:

Gibsons Beard · **Posted:** Mon Mar 24, 2008 10:48 pm

chip fireball wrote:

at some point you have to make a decision whether mckay is going to make the grade. if wilson has already made that decision then thats fair enough. if he hasnt then he needs to give him as many games as possible between now and the end of the season.

the same could be said of rae.

at the end of the day we all know what barker is and isnt capable of. to my knowledge barker had 3 consecutive poor games before he got injured, where he struggled to get a single attempt on goal against 3 very average sides. we didnt win any of those games, and didnt look like winning any of them either.

and yet he walks srtaight back into the side after allegedly suffering a serious injury and only taking part in one training session.

i would love to hear the managers explanation for selecting him ahead of james brown.

its little wonder that some players and fans believe that the manager has his favourites when it comes to team selection.

and yes i know we won and won well. and im over the moon, not least because we finally got to see a glimpse of porter and brown up front together.

I concur

mr plow · **Posted:** Mon Mar 24, 2008 11:01 pm

chip fireball wrote:

its little wonder that some players and fans believe that the manager has his favourites when it comes to team selection.

The same can be said of Wilson's change after we scored the second, when he took Boland off.
Foley went wide right, Sweeney went right back and McCunnie went centre midfield.
Wilson seems determined that McCunnie has a role there, based on a 20 minute spell at Leeds, but since then he's done nowt.
I don't think it's any coincidence that Yeovil looked more like scoring in the last 20 minutes than at any other time in the match, as we surrendered centre midfield to them.
I think McCunnie is an adequate fullback but is not a midfield player. I personally think Mickey Barron could and should have done a job at right back for us this season, I even asked him in the car park before the game if he fancied a game!
He's obviously not one of Wilson's favourites though.

Montpoolier · **Posted:** Mon Mar 24, 2008 11:10 pm

It's damned if I do and damed if I don't isn't it.

Scott got criticised for chopping and changing.

Wilson has set his stall around fielding a stable team, which just happens to feature Barker. It might not be a strategy that pleases, but it makes sense from a consistency point of view. If you have a salesman who has made more sales than anyone else this year and is then off sick for two weeks, you don't hesitate to bring him back when he's fit again.

Now that the season is finished (provided Wilson also accepts it as fait accompli), there's no need to continue pursuing that strategy. He could use the remaining six games as a filter, to decide who will or will not make it into the squad next season and start developing his next strategy.

I for one hope he does.

PJ_Poolie · **Posted:** Mon Mar 24, 2008 11:13 pm

The Lightning Tree wrote:

From what I recall he did more than alright in the last home game.
He has at least another year on his contract and I still think he'll come very good.

I'm not sure he did. His performance sort of summed him up. He missed an absolute sitter when Porter played him, almost showing a lack of awareness to how much time he actually had. He gave the ball away a bit. He played with loads of enthusiasm he scored a well taken header, then nearly scored with a piece of brilliance.

He was up and down, but did alright.

He's got a chance but he's still got a hell of a way to go in my opinion.

Cowboy · **Posted:** Mon Mar 24, 2008 11:26 pm

McKay is very much "work in progress" - he has a lot of potential, he may or may not make the grade

TalbotAvenger · **Posted:** Mon Mar 24, 2008 11:38 pm

chip fireball wrote:

how many players fall into that category though pj ? gibb is still on the books isnt he, though bullock has gone. then you have the perennial matty robson problem. what about foley ? how long do you give him ?

the likes of rae young haigh and turnbull who all have squad numbers havent been within a country mile of the first team.

whats the crack with the mystery 3rd keeper ? is he going to get a first team run out before the end of the season, and if not why the fook was he signed ?

i dont know if mckay is good enough to play first team football regularly and maybe that we will never find out. he could be a jack wilkinson. then again he could be a jermaine easter, currently scoring goals in the championship.

theres lots of questions that have never been answered. will the manager try to keep antwi. will he sack budz off at the end of the season. where has mickey barron been all season ? if he was never going to play then why was he given a playing contract ?

why was nelson dropped ?

has monkhouse really settled his differences with wilson, because the word on the street is that he certainly hasnt.

will sweeney be even more miffed at mcunnie getting the centre mid role ahead of him ?

all interesting stuff.

When you say Easter is scoring goals in the championship, are you confusing this with 'not scoring very many'

Whoever signed him for Plymuff must of been on glue, or Special Brew, or both

misterb2001 · **Posted:** Tue Mar 25, 2008 12:05 am

tucker wrote:

misterb2001 wrote:

tucker wrote:

?????

because he has been rubbish the last 2 games. And if the truth be told, is probably no better than a conference/league 2 player!

Barker looked pretty good when he was on to be fair and i think we would all rather see Brown & Porter up front.

So thats why he was dropped :wink:

And you obviously have not got a clue about football fella.

i would say i know enough :wink:

why because Mackay isnt good enough to be a regular in a league 1 team?????

He has a fantastic eye for goal and will run all day, but when all is said and done, i believe he isnt going to be good enough to start very many games.

he is a good player, but not good enough for a team with ambitions to be 'in the top 6 or even top 2' as DW put it. Saying that Barker isnt good enough either, but hey i know nowt me :roll:

MutleyRules · **Posted:** Tue Mar 25, 2008 12:50 am

misterb2001 wrote:

tucker wrote:

?????

because he has been rubbish the last 2 games. And if the truth be told, is probably no better than a conference/league 2 player!

Barker looked pretty good when he was on to be fair and i think we would all rather see Brown & Porter up front.

So thats why he was dropped :wink:

Before I read the rest of the Thread....For Fecks Sake....he's the equivallent of a 1st Year YTS!!!! confised

Give the lad time....I reckon he's gonna' be 'explosive'!!!! :sweeeet:

MutleyRules · **Posted:** Tue Mar 25, 2008 12:51 am

PS....Really I think he will be a cushty 'Striker' for Pools!!!! :sweeeet:

mreeve85 · **Joined:** Tue Mar 04, 2008 4:37 pm **Posts:** 104

He (Mackay) must have been dropped becasue he is still too lightweight, he would have been bullied by their two big centre halves hence DW's decision to play Barker, who obviously can't do anything right to please some of the people on here. Although I do agree that when Brown came on, him & Porter looked good together.

I think Foley has maybe had his time, he doesn't look good enough for this level - runs around like he has no idea of what he's doing. Maybe it is time to give other youth players a game or two conisdering we are all but safe now.

Mr Ripper · **Posted:** Tue Mar 25, 2008 4:58 pm

For as long as Foley gets anywhere near the first team squad then I'll be convinced that Wilson has no idea what makes a good striker at any level of the game.

Spender · **Posted:** Tue Mar 25, 2008 5:29 pm

Nobodys Hero wrote:

I dont suppose any of you doubters care to compare his goals per game ratio to another striker at the club?

Go on then Fat Statto?? :grin:

Don't forget penners count.

And we still leak goals like a leaky thing with leaks in it's leaky bit just above the leaky cracks.

But lets not forget to bang on about strikers like a big bunch of big whingy, disenfranchised, ill-informed, misfocused, biased, one dimensional, blinkered, completely missing the problem, daft, dozy, looking the wrong way, that's-a-claim, I'm-a-victim-, I-know-my-rights, ill-tattoo'ed bounders?? :grin:

No offence like.

tREE_wiTH_hAMStER · **Joined:** Sat May 19, 2007 11:00 am **Posts:** 20758

Mr Ripper wrote:

For as long as Foley gets anywhere near the first team squad then I'll be convinced that Wilson has no idea what makes a good striker at any level of the game.

I think next season we need to loan him out to League 2 or the Conference and then re assess him. He looks out of his depth but he has never had a string of games to get going. If he fails on loan then maybe he aint gonna make it?

Mr Ripper · **Posted:** Tue Mar 25, 2008 5:39 pm

Tree_With_Hamster wrote:

Mr Ripper wrote:

For as long as Foley gets anywhere near the first team squad then I'll be convinced that Wilson has no idea what makes a good striker at any level of the game.

I think next season we need to loan him out to League 2 or the Conference and then re assess him. He looks out of his depth but he has never had a string of games to get going. If he fails on loan then maybe he aint gonna make it?

For as long as his arsehole points South then he aint gonna make it.

He can run fast but is totally inept at playing football.

If Wilson just wants a fast runner he might as well sign Dwain Chambers.

PJ_Poolie · **Posted:** Tue Mar 25, 2008 5:50 pm

Mr Ripper wrote:

Tree_With_Hamster wrote:

Mr Ripper wrote:

For as long as Foley gets anywhere near the first team squad then I'll be convinced that Wilson has no idea what makes a good striker at any level of the game.

I think next season we need to loan him out to League 2 or the Conference and then re assess him. He looks out of his depth but he has never had a string of games to get going. If he fails on loan then maybe he aint gonna make it?

For as long as his arsehole points South then he aint gonna make it.

He can run fast but is totally inept at playing football.

If Wilson just wants a fast runner he might as well sign Dwain Chambers.

I tend to agree sadly.

His end product is Zero, and sometimes his lack of stature especially away from home makes him a liability. He made absolutely no impact at all yesterday, I was amazed when he he was brought on for Boland who was having a canny game, especially as we'd just gone 2-0 up.

Countless appearances and no league goals speaks volumes.

Spender · **Posted:** Tue Mar 25, 2008 5:52 pm

Mr Ripper wrote:

If Wilson just wants a fast runner he might as well sign Dwain Chambers.

Is there enough Columbian marching powder in Hartlepool? bbolt

gremmlin · **Joined:** Fri Oct 05, 2007 9:23 am **Posts:** 3141

i would keep foley and play him in the middle as a striker not a winger
maybe not start every game but as in the past bring him on against tired defenders

Snowy · **Joined:** Fri Aug 18, 2006 12:18 pm **Posts:** 37186

Foley...... I'd buy him a canoe. :roll:

Mr Ripper · **Posted:** Tue Mar 25, 2008 10:14 pm

gremmlin wrote:

i would keep foley and play him in the middle as a striker not a winger
maybe not start every game but as in the past bring him on against tired defenders

And would you enthusiastically beat a deceased equine with a stick?

Jonny · **Posted:** Tue Mar 25, 2008 11:05 pm

Foley should of been loaned out a long time ago. He has been mis managed by DW in my opinion, and DW should take some responsability for not helping him reach his full potential. Foley should of been starting games up front last season after impressive appearances from the bench instead of Eifion Williams who was crap most of the time. This may of helped the lad develop and in the team that we had and against Division Four opposistion I don't think Dave would of done too badly.

Wilson also proved that he isn't the brightest by not giving Foley a chance for about a month after he scored 2 from the bench earlier in the season, David's confidence was probably sky high at the time and then Wilson barely plays him..... stpid

parmopooly · **Posted:** Wed Mar 26, 2008 12:57 am

Foley will never be a professional footballer as long as the Sun shines.

Fuck-ing hell, it's dark outside.................... :laugh:

Snowy · **Joined:** Fri Aug 18, 2006 12:18 pm **Posts:** 37186

Foley assumed the Istead mantle when he left...the role of coming on towards the end to earn a penalty, as cute little player is treated mercilessly by grizzled pros. Why Wilson put him on against Yeovil I'll never know, unless Boland was injured, there was no point. He pranced around in his lucozade boots, got knocked off the ball by the big boys and once tried one of his training ground tricks, that was it...oh, and he made women of a certain age go .... "Aaaaw" as they supressed a maternal urge to mother him...... :roll:

Why was Mackay dropped........

Gadgies online