Budtz- 6- ok
McCunnie- 6- ok
Humphreys- 6- ok
Nelson- 5- disappointing
Antwi- 3- cack again
Brown- 5- for effort when they were doubling up on him
Monkhouse- 3- worst I've ever seen him play
Boland- 5- not one of his better days
Liddle- 6- ok
Barker- 5- he keeps trying
Porter- 4- maybe DW is right?
Sweeney- 4- did nowt
Clark- 6- ok
MacKay- 5- ran about a bit

Budtz- 6- much more in command than he has been but why does every fookin kick go down the left
McCunnie- 6- average
Humphreys- 5- side foot display straight out of the roy hogan book of side foot telegraphic displays - an odd day at the back for him
Nelson- 6 - ok as compensating for an out of sorts partner - couple of vitals and had hands full with mooney who played the sort of game barker should have done.
Antwi- 4 - out of sorts
Brown- 7- looked more up for it than the rest but learn to pass (sticky get) - why the left and then not helped by sidefoot sam?
Monkhouse- 5- why the right and then not helped by sidefoot sam when on left
Boland- 6 - looked fine first 20, struggled rest of half. Looked ok as well before he came off
Liddle- 6 - quiet day = quiet Pools -
Barker- 5- doesn't seem up for it - a big lad but always backing in to defenders to 'hold up' - fook it richy - get the ball at your feet and run with it, put yourself about and use that weight, hurt people make a nuisance of yourself - stop being so bloody nice.
Porter- 5- missed a sitter
Sweeney- no score - did he touch ball?
clark no score - was sleepy by the time he came on
MacKay- darent judge him on that - er,fast and ...

it must be 'Joel Porter Knocking Season' again....

Budtz- 5- Didn't like his kicking.
McCunnie- 6- OK but not as good as previous.
Humphreys- 6- OK but not as good as previous.
Nelson- 5- Agree, disappointing
Antwi- 3- Poor passing
Brown- 5- Never penetrated as he was too sticky. His decision making on releasing the ball let him down.
Monkhouse- 4- Never penetrated, struggled to make an impact. Did have a decent shot.
Boland- 4- Struggled to get going.
Liddle- 4- His worst peformance for Pools.
Barker- 5- No supply. No striker can have a good game with such little supply.
Porter- 5- No supply and missed a sitter when he was supplied. No striker can have a good game with such little supply.
Sweeney- 3- Not a good warm up at HT with his wayward passes to Clark. No impact, he did touch the ball, stumbled and almost fell over.
Clark- 5- Not a good warm up at HT with his poor control Not enough time when he came on.
MacKay- 5- Not enough time. Ran a bit. No striker can have a good game with such little supply.

Now I've calmed down after yesterdays display I feel I can put some perspective on that performance. The team were poor against poor team. If the team had performed in third gear we would have got something from that game yesterday.

I'm not having a go at IOR, Danny Wilson or the crowd but at the level of performance put in by the team, my team who I've gone too see for over 40 years.

I for one would have loved the opportunity to play football for a living but didn't along with a lot of people who follow football. The team should remember that when going out onto the pitch to perform in a Hartlepool shirt, you have an opportunity I didn't get.

Now go and put it right on Tuesday night and let us forget yesterday.

I think everyone wants to see the Joel of a couple years ago, but yesterday was just one of days really. We were poor and he was poor. What doesn't help him as that all we have heard this season is that Joel should be starting, he was becoming a better player each time he wasn't selected raising expectation on him with every match. I think that's part of the reason people were so disappointed with him yesterday when he finally got an opportunity much was expected.

I seriously think you have feelings for him. Nothing bad has even been said about him!

I don't understand why he's been singled out. They were all as bad as each other. None of the strikers had a lot of supply.

The main issue was the midfield.

When has he been 'slagging him off' in the paper? Serious paranoia for him or you I reckon. I reckon on yesterdays evidence Wilson was merely saying as he sees it. Even was true what would be the best way to respond to say "fook you. you doyle I'll show you" or sulk for 90 minutes? Nobody has made him a scapegoat, we are just saying he didn't play well like several others. Are you not allowed to say Joel Porter didn't play well which is a fact? His body language was poor as well, which is also a fact. If you are going by the throw a six to start Sunday Sun ratings you are really clutching at straws. I've seen him at his best and at the moment he isn't close to that for a variety of reasons.

At the end of the day one person will make sure Joel Porter gets back regularly into the starting eleven and that's Joel Porter. Walking about feeling sorry for himself isn't going to get him anywhere.

I fully concur

Simply because Monkhouse is better than the air than Brown.

Oh and iv heard it all now, someone using the Sunday Suns ratings as back up for a player!!!

Must admit that was my first thought too. Who gives a f**k what the Sunday Sun thinks.

I think it's probably a good thing that I was unable to attend the game on saturday. It is concerning that even the positive brigade are saying that we were crap.

We were truly awful

You really are incapable of taking in opinion that's different to your own. I watched the game on Saturday, I apologise for coming across as a half wit. Or daring to say Porter was poor, which he was on Saturday. I concede he can do no wrong. Talking of ratings did you see Nick Loughlins (a proper poolie) in the Echo? He gave Porter a 4, is he a half wit?

I refer my learned friends to the above depicted drum.

This is the drum that a certain poster has been beating for a long, long, long, long long.......snore.......

Problem is, the player in question HAS studied the game inside out, and HAS played the game at some level, well international actually, and STILL didn't score on Saturday.

But I wasn't there and so can't possibly comment.

It was still seemingly 1-0 on Sunday morning though.

But not to us.

So we all have to take a man most of us don't know from Adam for our opinions???

Chip you really need to look at the bile you have been posting in response to people who have valid points about the love of your life!

Chip, who has said at any stage that Porter was the only player who wasn't at his best on Saturday? Antwi, Boland, Liddle, Barker, Brown, and Monkhouse were also well below par on Saturday in my opinion, it was just one of those days. This point has been reiterated on several occasions since Saturday by different people which you have obviously ignored here is one example;



You seem to have a sort of haze were Joel is concerned. At least you have now admitted he was poor which is all that was said in the first place

re: point 3:

Jesus Chip, you are boring the gord out of everyone with your dull anodyne patter

We weren't crap but given the high standard set at Leyton Orient we were very disappointing. I agree with Wilson's comments about the crowd who were likewise fairly disappointing for me, although those in the Town End gave it a go at times. It's encouraging for the team to hear the people in the stadium willing them on. When Orient scored their 1st goal last week, the Poolies were still singing "Hartlepool Hartlepool Hartlepool" like it didn't matter.

Hartlepool have a team of class players and even though most were well below their best against Walsall, there were still plenty of shows of brilliance. The way that Monkey dribbled past 3 defenders down the left as if the ball was glued to his feet; the way we stroked the ball around from time to time.

Towards the end you could see the team wilting however. It was rather different from my previous visit to the Victoria Ground back in March when we snatched an equaliser against Lincoln right at the death.

Such are the vagaries of football. Good luck to Walsall. They snatched 3 points. Our players had an off day. The fans had an off day. We can all do better. Let's make sure we do!

He wouldn't have impressed though Chip, he had been dead for 21 years by then.