....sorry I hate to name names....but after watching him miss a procession of worthwhile chances yesterday....it must be obvious that he is not League 1 standard. You are carrying a player who needs as many opportunities as he had yesterday to score. I hark back to last year when in the dying minutes of the game against Kettering he chipped the keeper and cleared the bar, and yesterday he had the same equally gettable chance and chipped their keeper only to put it wide........well sorry, nice lad but I'm afraid just not good enough at this level.

Sweeney has been one of our best players this season and is currently the clubs top scorer.

He didn't have a great game yesterday but to suggest he isn't League 1 standard based on that one game yesterday, in which several players were poor, is ridiculous.

I would agree. If he was playing up front and had spent the rest of his career as a centre forward/striker. But he isn't and he has always looked more dangerous when we have 2 up front and he is running into the box from midfield.

There are a lot of players I would get rid of that are infront of Sweeney in the imaginary P45 queue.

..dont agree with you there mate, he's only our top scorer this season because we dont have a recognized striker. I like Sweens as he always gives 100%, but I'm afraid he's just not good enough at this level .....imo......and I'm not just basing my opinion on yesterdays game only.

Maybe so but the fact remains that he IS the top scorer so far. My personal opinion is that he's done well from midfield so far this season. Comments like he isn't League 1 standard remind me of things that were said about Matty Robson. He to was often said to be below par for League 1 but since he's moved to Carlisle he's been one of their best players by all accounts.

There are, without a doubt, several players currently in the squad who are not league 1 standard but I don't think Sweeney is in that bracket. Just my opinion of course

I've hit that point now in following Pools where I'm sick of defending players who simply just aint good enough at this level. I'd always support our players as I think they do give their best, but it's noticable that when you play the better teams at this level their players dont need 10 chances a game to score a goal, whereas unfortunately we have too many players in our side at the mo' ......who do...imo.

If we intend to move on from where we are now we need to accept that fact I'm afraid, as we are consistently giving players too long a time to 'turn the corner'......unfortunately too many are 'mounting the kerb'.

isn't Sweeney our top scorer this season?
some of the runs he made yesterday were top quality, but unfortunately he couldnt put one away.
how many of our other midfielders make the runs he makes? If he put away every chance he gets, he wouldnt be playing for us.
no, I dont think getting shot of our most prolific midfielder will be top of MW's priorities,
i think getting a striker might.

I'm not doubting that he makes some good runs, but if you had a team full of players who make good runs but no end product you'd be bottom of the league. What we need is someone who can convert the many chances we create. At the moment no-one in the team is doing that.....sadly.

But Sweeney's job isn't to score goals. It's to provide an effective link between defence and attack which by and large he has done very well so far.

Moreover, whilst yesterday he was, admittedly, poor, he HAS taken the majority of the chances that have come his way this season.

At the moment and due to the way we play, and the absence of effective strikers, it is the job of Sweeney and probably Monkhouse, to score goals.
Unfair pressure on those two lads, I would add, but where else are the goals going to come from.
Sweeney and Monkhouse should be supporting the goal tally, not leading it.
Unless we get our current strikers to start producing, or get strikers who can produce, then we will be relying more and more on Mr Sweeney.

Our five man midfield works when Murray plays, he makes us tick.

Sweeney had excellent season when he was playing with a similarly effective player in Mark Tinkler. He should have scored four yesterday but he was playing well until his injury.

January coming up deadwood springs to mind get rid not sweens thou

Totally agree. Yes he missed chances, but, come on people, at least he had a shot, unlike others I could mention.

Sweeney did on Saurday what he has been doing all season, namely getting on the end of chances. This time he missed a few but he was in the right place to miss them, unlike a few of the others.
It does worry me though that we are relying too much on the lad. As I said earlier his goals should be supporting the strikers, not doing the job for them.

Name the last forward to score a goal! Sweeney is our top scorer is he not???

not only is he the least of our problems but hes done great early doors this season and yeah he hasnt been banging goals away or playing aswell as he can recently but im confident he'll come good again and he'll be one of our best players this season when we look back in august.

I wasn't saying Sweeney is a problem, I'm saying our midfield misses Paul Murray when he isn't playing. I know he's 33 but we can't really afford to rest him. In a three Sweeney should be in the team, at least he's getting in positions to miss chances now, last season he was largely anonymous. At the minute I'd leave out Gamble, he can look a very decent player at times but on Saturday he was shocking.

At tnhe minute Sweeney is the first name on the teamsheet for me.

I've been a little critical of Sweeney in the past but he has done a really good job this season. Like has been said on saturday he got himself in good areas, he should of notched a few but the goals will come if he keeps getting in the right areas. Joe Gamble's use of the ball has been disappointing in recent weeks but at least I feel like he has got it in him to have a good game unlike someone who's name has been mentioned a lot on here.....

It's probably that its more obvious when a goalscorer isn't that good.