I dont think many of us will have expected to get a result today in all honesty

If we are to make the play offs at least, we should be getting points from these games. It's no good thinking "its ok we lost as they are higher in the league than us", we should go at them from the start and let them know we mean business.

I think thats a bit overly harsh, "these types of games?"

You mean against teams who player for player are whacking out much higher wages, spending 200k plus on players and who are just a much bigger club than us?

I think your a being a tad shan there (as i used to say when i was a nipper)

I think it's fair to say that financially Huddersfield are a bigger club than we are but that doesn't mean to say we can't beat them. Football is played on grass, not in the boardroom. I was on another message board where a Huddersfield fan came on and was really condescending - calling us a small town club. It pi$$ed me right off - as it did others- when a certain crap manager from the not too distant past said we had over achieved.

This club has moved on from the 80's. We can compete with the best in League 1. If Colchester & Donny can do it, so can we.

Yeah Im over the moon at spending money watching one of the most negative and awful second half performances all season.
Lee clark suggested that his players would still be in for training today.
Now there's a manager for you .
Who knows where we could be in the table with a decent manager.

You can only play as well as your opponents let you and I thought Huddersfield thoroughly stifled us in the second half. They gave us absolutely no time on the ball and outplayed us completely. Perhaps it would have been better to have packed the midfield for the second half rather than continuing as it was in the first.

But hey ho. Southampton and Carlisle in the next two games offers us a realistic chance of getting 6 points. We always seem to do well at Brunton Park and Southampton are clearly very beatable.

Come on Pools.

Unfortunately, generally, Huddersfield have been very good this season. They have now put themselves in a great position of competing for an automatic promotiion place, let alone the play-offs.

I that two-horse race we saw at the start of the season with Leeds and Charlton is starting to become a close four-horse race, with anybody really from 7th down to 12th getting in the play-offs.

I think we can beat Southampton if Brighton managed to play well against them.

Let us see where we are at Christmas.

Ahhh, you can't beat a 'soundbite', can you



Aye, a massive seven points ahead of Pools, he is the nuts and no mistake, give the fact he has spent over half a million on players and has a wage budget we can only dream of

I doubt we pay the lowest wages in this division, we have an Icelandic international and a Norwegian sat twiddling their thumbs, they won't have come cheap.

We also have a very large squad and i'd imagine a lot of the money made from last seasons cup run was given to turner.

Of course, we are punching above our weight in this league and therefore a defeat to a team who have spent more money is a formality and acceptable.

I wish I'd have known this yesterday. I wouldnt have bothered going.

Where did I say that?

It sounds as if, shock, horror, a team was better then us, it can happen

I simply pointed out the fact that the most available players will go to a club of that size and the fact Lee Clarke is full to the very brim of shoite

I'm still waiting for us to perform.
Apart from the Burnley game and the last 30 minutes of the last home game I haven't seen it.
I thought we had Huddersfield by the knackers yesterday.
2nd half I thought some players gave up.
I didn't see a difference in quality between the two teams.
One team wanted it more and in the end they got it.

If you didn't see a difference in quality in the second half then you were looking at your shoes.

We could rarely get the ball. They used the wings well. The run from a full-back for the goal was superb.

Here's the news- when you spend big money you often get quality - even without the crowds 5 times the size of Pools' crowds they have a chairman who has written a blank cheque.

To be winning at half time and shading the game was excellent and gives great hope to me for Tuesday.

Our demise in the second half had nothing to do with our inability to get the ball but had everything to do with us continuously giving it away, something we didn't do as much in the first half.
The first half saw us pass the ball in the manner of which we are capable, whereas we didn't string more than two passes together in the second half.
We simply resorted to that well known Turner tactic of hoofball, and his abject inability to change our approach. Our front two might as well have stayed in the dressing room at half time because the service to them, evident in the first half, was non existent in the second.
Our second half tactic of hoofing the ball forward simply resulted in it coming back with interest. We just didn't have an out ball.
Even then Huddersfield equalised with an emormous stroke of good fortune and then got the winner as a full back, yes a full back, was allowed the freedom of the park, and didn't he respond.
What could we have done different ????? Well seeing we decided to isolate our ball playing strike force, we might as well have replaced them and strengthened our midfield thus further protecting our back four and our lead. Not pretty and not ambitious....I agree but I think we could, by that tactic, have prevented the continuous flow of balls being sprayed wide from a midfield area consisting only of Jones, as Humps was sat in front of the back four and rarely left our defensive third. One man attempting to suppress the obvious talent in Town's midfield could only have one result, even though our defence performed heroics.
It was effectively eleven against nine in the second half, Boyd and Brown were starved passengers and Behan had as much effect on the game as I did, and I was in the crowd.
Our support was again magnificent, I only wish our management team could match them. Tactically clueless.
Sorry for the gloomy answer, but Huddersfield are not light years in front of us, we just made them look good, or al least Turner did.

In the second half Pools where out almost five minutes before the ref and H'field turned up getting cold in the very persistant rain.

H'field ran out after their half time cocoa and scored not too long after while pools were still warming up.

What happened there then, was it a display of come out here if you think you're hard.

Obviously a good first half for Pools but they didn't compete in the early part of the second half and suffered the consequences.

They could've won it y'know.

An' our kid don't get onto me about being a jonah.

No, I was listening and it just seemed like Huddersfield had had the bollocking of a lifetime with the accompanying threat of being in the stiffs at Frickley or somewhere on Tuesday and it lit them up. I'd have been delighted with a point and we almost got one. The one thing I will say is that I thought the substitutions were wrong, although one was unavoidable. I'd have put Ben Clark on for Boydy and gone five across the back while we still had the lead. Sweated the second half out and bored them to death.

I that you Martin.....?

Ok, I retract obviously my aim was to go win lose or draw but I still thought we threw it away.
Even you have to admit you could see the second goal coming after their lucky first.

How much dogshit can people write on this thread?

Huddersfield were a quality team who played with a lot of pace.

In the first half our boys ran their collective bollocks off closing them down all over the pitch. Ritchie Humphrey's block on the edge of the box for example was outstanding.

Second half they continued knocking it around quickly, I suppose this is the quality that you get when you spend the kind of money that they have done. Unfortunately our boys were that quarter or half a yard slower in the second half, unable to keep up the pace they'd had in the first and it was that tiny difference that made a big difference.

Huddersfield are the best team I've seen us play this season bar none, we lost 2-1 away and some clowns are going on as though it's the end of the bastad world. This was summed up at the match by the coachloads of drunk kids who went from singing about Chrissy Turner's blue and white army to Turner Out in the space of about 10 second half minutes.

By the way, another thing about Saturday- Huddersfield were using what I believe they call the "multi-ball" system when the ball went out of play right up until they scored their second goal. Surely if they are gonna use it at all they should have to use it for the whole game and not just til they're winning? I'd love to know the rules on that one.

That sounds like a conspiracy Mr Elvis.

Ah, I see it all now.
We were so knackered after forty five minutes football that suddenly we couldn't compete any more.
Why didn't I think of that




























What were you were saying about dogshit??????

Well Mr Derwent, either our players couldn't match the pace that they'd closed down it in the first half or they upped it a little. Or a bit of both. The result was that we didn't close them down the same in the second half and they beat us. They were a bloody good team, but some people just want to be negative ALL of the time. Obviously some think that Turner told them to give Huddersfield more space in the second half purely because they don't like him. To me that is dogshit.

Don't be relevant, Mr Chip.............some people can't take it.

Just for clarity, can you confirm that all of the players that they spent a fortune on this summer were playing in that game last season?

It would be dogshit to me as well, but I can't find where it says that Turner specifically told them to give Hudds more space, nor can I find where anybody has said that.
IF your comment about space is right then perhaps you can ask Turner why he didn't change it in order to DENY them this " more space" that he's allegedly give them.
Humps dropped deeper in the second half, presumably on Turner's instructions, leaving Jones to cope with their existing midfield which was added to by the marauding fullback.
Hence they had more time to spray passes here, there and everywhere. Cue disaster.
To suggest we were over run due to lack of fitness after only forty five minutes is ridiculous, it was lack of tactical nous not fitness.
If we are knackered after forty five minutes then we're due a few batterings in the coming games.
As for negativity. They got praise for their first half display but not for their second half effort. I wouldn't say that was ALL negativity.
The way you and Turner are talking, we should be grateful that we're allowed on the same pitch as Hudds.
We fell victim of poor tactics from the management...........endof.

Exactly Mr Dibble.

I truly despair at some of the posts on this board at times. Twisty spactards who think we should walk the league and that if we don't beat teams who've spent a fortune then it's all down to Chris Turner.

Just for the record and speaking for myself, I think we have a better defence than last season.
We have strengthened the attack by employing more quantity, but have done absolutely nothing to strengten our centre midfield.
More importantly we have still to appoint a manager.

I don't think that there is a Pools fan with even a partially working brain who doesn't think that we could do with improving the midfield.

I believe that we have somebody currently performing the role of manager.

You just don't get it do you?????
We are discussing one game here.
We're not discussing expectations, who has spent the most money, or who has a right to the points.
No one is disputing that Hudds are a bigger club, have more money or whatever.
Why are you using any of that as an argument against us winning or drawing at Hudds. Have we no right?? Kettering anyone?????
What I am saying is that, with better tactical nous in charge, we could have got something from that game.

Name me one twisty spactard who has said we should walk this league. You make it up as you go along, probably a good sign that your arguments are so so weak.
A result ( win or draw ) was there for the taking.

We had somebody performing the role of goalkeeper last season.......two in fact.
One of which was one of the best in the division according to Turner.
It didn't stop you slating them.

We have somebody in the role as manager....performing is another question.

Mr ADG, how can you call Mr Chip bitter. At least he is consistent.

Oh and now very loyal to his lady love............the only one.

Well done Mr Chip.

There are plenty of twisty spactards who, although they haven't said that we should walk the league, invariably say after every game that we should've won and the reason that we didn't is due to the manager. Or the fact that he's not called the manager.

Logic tells me that if we won every game we'd walk this league.

You just don't get it, do you.

Well if the fact that you're both old, short and funny looking is appealing to women then you may have a point.

Valid points Mr Fireball, however it was easy to see on Saturday that Huddersfield have spent their money well and are a very good team. A better team than us. Sometimes you have to accept that you'll lose to a better team without moaning that we should've or could've won. Yes, we can beat better teams on the day but this would usually rely on them not being at their best, like we weren't against Kettering. Huddersfield played well on Saturday, they impressed me and are the best team I've seen us play this season and they deserved to win. I'll be surprised if they are not top six at the end of the season.

I'm not calling people clowns for expressing an opinion, that would be disrespectful in my opinion. It's the radical stuff that I find baffling, how we should've won, how it's all Turner's fault etc.

And yes, we probably all got excited when we were kids but it doesn't stop it being a bit annoying now that I'm a grumpy old man.

Perhaps we have a different forward line this season? Without checking I don't know who we had up front in that game last season. However we DO miss Joel Porter, especially when James Brown is largely ineffective which he was on Saturday.

It might be a little controversial, but for me his best games have been on the wing. I was one who wanted him to be up front but to date he hasn't justified this, here's hoping that it's just a matter of time.

I don't agree about Brown. I'd rather him be left out than put on the wing. I think we take one of our bets attackers out of the game by putting him there.

Regarding Saturday I feel Turner could possibly have packed the midfield in the second half which may have made life harder for them going forward and may have made it easier for us to retain possession when we had it. The killing factor in the second half on Saturday was that we simply didn't have the ball enough.

So the common denominator was Joel Porter? Makes sense, he was a hell of a player. An attacking four of him, Boyd, Brown and Monkhouse would've been the equal or better of any in this league.

Performances this season have been very poor based on many peoples expectations after turners spending spree.
Also the crowds are down partly because of the awful football we have been playing all season.
Mr turner doesn't do himself any favours by signing a boatload of players and not having the tactical nouse what to do with them.

James Brown is like most flair players, he needs good and regular service. When he gets that he performs as a rule. When he doesn't he just switches off.
He got very little service on Saturday so might have been replaced by someone from the bench who could have added to our midfield strength.
Whatever Hudds have spent and whatever recent reputation they have gained by scoring bagfuls of goals, at half time on Saturday they were one down
You didn't need a crystal ball to tell you that they would get a flea in their collective ear and that they would come out all guns blazing.
We were discussing this at half time and my answer was to narrow the back four, to play McSweeney and Monky as wing backs and put Clark, Jones and Humps to congest the midfield. We also had Sweeney who we could have used as a wing back if his Irish namesake wasn't up to it.
The question is, would they have been able to break that down and score two goals. How long would it have been before the crowd got on their backs?

We have seen teams do this before to thwart attack orientated sides and it sometimes results in the side holding the lead in getting another one.
After the Grimsby game Turner said that once a team goes in front then stifles play, it is very difficult to break them down.
We were ahead at Exeter, ahead twice at Brighton and ahead at Hudds. So if he believes in the theory, why the hell doesn't he try it?
We know Hudds are a big club, have spent a lot of money and on paper have a better team than us. On Saturday however we were beating them with less than forty minutes left, but the signs were there that they were getting more joy, so if at that point or even at half time we had changed it to stifle them.....who knows....but we chose to do nothing except watch them....which to me was criminal.
Wycombe got murdered by them last week but the same Wycombe went to Millwall, another club with big ambitions, and turned them over.
It can be done...........it really can.

surely if we did pack the midfield and still got beat, people would have slagged turner off all the same? The truth is hindsight is a wonderful thing and turner will be slagged off if we lose, no matter how we play.

Of course.

He'd have been sitting back on a precarious one goal lead and totally inept as a manager for trying to shut up shop so early.

We thought he should do it at half time actually. The signs were there. We were praying for our lead to be still intact at half time, which it was. Flinders was hardly troubled mind but we expected an onslaught in the second half.
We then said change it. One guy just before they got their equaliser was screaming for Turner to change it.
However not everybody wanted to do that and I'm sure there would have been an outcry, as you say, if Hudds had went on to hammer us. As it is they got a very fortunate goal and a winner without us doing anything, so it could be argued that by stifling the space we just might have got something. Surely Turner wouldn't make a decision based on " oh dear, I might get slated on the Bunker"
You pays yer money and takes yer choice.
I have seen leads at Exeter disappear, two at Brighton and now one at Hudds. Other, dare I say, lesser teams can defend a lead, why not us.
After all Turner harps on about the importance of the first goal....does he not?

Or you could argue that by packing the midfield and defence and trying to just sit back then we might have had five or six knocked past us. It's all conjecture.

On the other hand some people would accept that at least he tried something.
Contrary to what you think Mr Ripper, none of us expect to win every game and I for one do accept that there are better teams than us but a one goal lead at half time at a place where goals seem to go in freely needs to have some thought thrown at it.
As far as I am concerned we took the wrong option.......simple as.

Of course its conjecture....its fans discussing the game and tactics. Long may it continue.

We managed to do it against Coventry, Gillingham, Oldham, Walsall, Swindon, Tranmere, Orient...

Ah but surely you can't mean we can do so at grounds like the Galpharm...............far too big for us.
Top of the league....ten points clear..........careful, mate.................you might be classed as a twisty spactard.
Not by me of course cos I just luuuurrrrvvvve ya.