ask chris

Tax Paying Poolie · **Joined:** Sat Aug 19, 2006 8:18 am **Posts:** 9053

misterb2001 wrote:

No im not missing the point at all, Turner made the changes necessary to give the team its strongest defence available.

Which defence is stronger?

Austin Clark Cherel Humphreys

or

Sweeney Clark Cherel Austin

He chose what i would consider to be the strongest defence of the 2 which makes perfect sense to me!!!

FFS, There's no hope.

misterb2001 · **Posted:** Thu Jan 07, 2010 7:39 pm

Tax Paying Poolie wrote:

misterb2001 wrote:

No im not missing the point at all, Turner made the changes necessary to give the team its strongest defence available.

Which defence is stronger?

Austin Clark Cherel Humphreys

or

Sweeney Clark Cherel Austin

He chose what i would consider to be the strongest defence of the 2 which makes perfect sense to me!!!

FFS, There's no hope.

care to expand?

Fetish_Bob · **Posted:** Thu Jan 07, 2010 7:53 pm

misterb2001 wrote:

Fetish_Bob wrote:

My question and CT answer

When Hartley was sent-off against Oldham it appeared that only one tactical change was needed - simply drop Humphreys to left-back (a position he has played for the last few seasons). Why did you feel it necessary to make the number of changes you did to accommodate one position?

CT: We simply moved Neil Austin over to the left against Oldham. Their winger Chris Taylor was giving Peter Hartley a torrid time - he fouled him once, he fouled him twice and was then red-carded. Ritchie Humphreys isn't a left-back, Neil Austin is - he played there for Darlington last season. Antony Sweeney has played right-back in the last couple of games so it was an easy switch for us. There were only three minutes of normal time remaining - if there had been forty minutes maybe we'd have re-assessed but to quickly re-organise for a free-kick coming in to your penalty area then it was easy to put a player to left-back who can play there and a player to right-back who can play there.

I agree Humphreys is not a left back, but in the same way Sweeney's not a right back. But to say Sweeney is an easy switch, surely as Humphreys played left back more than Sweeney has played right back is the EASIER switch for us(IMHO) And if he's actually saying Humphreys can't play left back (most would agree) WHY O WHY did he persevere with him in that position LAST SEASON?????????? Fair do's to him for answering it, but I still think to many changes to accomodate one position.

sweeney isn't a right back by trade, but he does a bloody decent job there when asked to. Whereas Humphreys can't, not in any way, shape or form.

I wont disagree with that in any way shape or form, but the number of changes made totally disrupted almost all of the 10 player's left on the pitch. I just believe the least number of changes made in that particular game would have been more beneficial to the team. it's all about opinions.

misterb2001 · **Posted:** Thu Jan 07, 2010 8:04 pm

MadJohn wrote:

As far as making a difference to the pattern of play, I still think that the substitutions made by Dave Penney were a bit more significant than the ones made by Chris Turner.

stop bigging the opposition up, thats Turners job! :wink:

Fetish_Bob · **Posted:** Thu Jan 07, 2010 8:20 pm

Just to re-iterate, before putting this reply on, I don't have a personal problem with CT, it's all about opinions. But carrying on with a couple things.

MadJohn wrote:

As far as making a difference to the pattern of play, I still think that the substitutions made by Dave Penney were a bit more significant than the ones made by Chris Turner.

I agree Penney's changes made more difference.

Going back to a couple things CT has said in his answer's which slightly confuse me.

He said "It's not a matter of tactics" already on this thread I've disagreed with that

He then states in reply to my question

"Their winger Chris Taylor was giving Peter Hartley a torrid time"

He has seen a problem a problem he can sort.....because when he says Humphreys isn't a left back he says

"Neil Austin is - he played there for Darlington last season."

So a player is currently being given a "TORRID TIME" why not make a tactical change earlier move Austin over sub Hartley, move Sweeney to right back, and hopefully nullify the right winger. We still end up with the same back 4 we ended game with, and end game with 11 men, though he wasn't to know Hartley was going to be sent. he did know, by his own admission that Hartley was having a torrid time.

I applaud him for answering the questions, putting himself in the firing line, and I'm not a knocker off CT, but someone who see's things differently and as I have said it's all about opinions, but 2 of his answer's there seem to contradict themselves , tactics don't matter, but then in a way using Sweeney as right back is saying it tactical, and he knows he can make a change earlier in the game to attempt to nullify a threat he himself is seeing. Just a thought.

MutleyRules · **Posted:** Thu Jan 07, 2010 8:41 pm

Tax Paying Poolie wrote:

He is confident that we can return to being the top scorers in League football by playing exciting football, that's a hell of a transformation from the current football being dished out. How long will we have to wait for this though?

Didn't he say we'll have to wait till January a few months ago????

Well it's January now and here's the scores on the doors....

Played 1....Won 1....100% record!!!! :coool:

The Bloke's a Genius!!!! clappp

MutleyRules · **Posted:** Thu Jan 07, 2010 9:17 pm

misterb2001 wrote:

there were 2 really good teams in the division that were a million miles ahead of us (size wise and financially) last time, this time round there are at least 4.

But I don't think people or on about the size of a club and how much money they've got!!!! confised

misterb2001 · **Posted:** Thu Jan 07, 2010 9:31 pm

MutleyRules wrote:

misterb2001 wrote:

there were 2 really good teams in the division that were a million miles ahead of us (size wise and financially) last time, this time round there are at least 4.

But I don't think people or on about the size of a club and how much money they've got!!!! confised

they are on about how many clubs are miles ahead of us in quality. Which nowadays seems to go hand in hand with the size of the club and their finances, unfortunately.

PJ_Poolie · **Posted:** Thu Jan 07, 2010 10:13 pm

misterb2001 wrote:

MutleyRules wrote:

misterb2001 wrote:

there were 2 really good teams in the division that were a million miles ahead of us (size wise and financially) last time, this time round there are at least 4.

But I don't think people or on about the size of a club and how much money they've got!!!! confised

they are on about how many clubs are miles ahead of us in quality. Which nowadays seems to go hand in hand with the size of the club and their finances, unfortunately.

Errr, no it doesn't you are totally missing the point and thing that is slightly miffing people about Turners comments!! Apart from the top end of Premiership football (thankfully) doesn't really work like that.

If the order of play went by size of club, Newcastle wouldn't be in the Championship, Leeds wouldn't be in League One plus Wigan Athletic and Burnley wouldn't be in Premiership! Arguably only Leeds United are 'miles' ahead in terms of quality on the pitch we are the same league as 23 other clubs whose level this season in the third tier irregardless of average attendance or transfer budget. I've seen much better sides at this level than the likes of Norwich, Charlton, and Southampton all is different is that they are so called 'big clubs' they all got relegated because they didn't have enough quality to stay in the Championship.

pde147 · **Posted:** Thu Jan 07, 2010 10:52 pm

No of course it doesn't work like that otherwise we'd probably have Leeds, Norwich and Charlton bossing this league.

PJ_Poolie · **Posted:** Thu Jan 07, 2010 10:58 pm

pde147 wrote:

No of course it doesn't work like that otherwise we'd probably have Leeds, Norwich and Charlton bossing this league.

The only team 'bossing' this league are Leeds (in their 3rd season at this level) and if did work like that those clubs wouldn't be in this league in the first place to boss it. Also just because the top three are Leeds, Norwich, and Charlton doesn't make the division any stronger than previous years, namely the ones we did well in.

MutleyRules · **Posted:** Thu Jan 07, 2010 11:07 pm

I think QPR and Plymouth would have well beaten the above teams when they were last in this Division!!!! :coool:

Yubep · **Joined:** Wed Jan 31, 2007 6:35 pm **Posts:** 25266

I know it's been said loads, and i will say it again, but under cooper it was never an issue who we were playing, we had a lot better team spirit then and playing the 'bigger clubs' seemed to bring out the best in us.

Now we just sound scared.

Yubep · **Joined:** Wed Jan 31, 2007 6:35 pm **Posts:** 25266

ElvisAintDead wrote:

Yubep wrote:

I know it's been said loads, and i will say it again, but under cooper it was never an issue who we were playing, we had a lot better team spirit then and playing the 'bigger clubs' seemed to bring out the best in us.

Now we just sound scared.

Just refresh my memory....which Big Clubs did we beat under Cooper (apart from a weakened Sheff Weds side on Penalties?)

Sheff wed at home 3-0

Yubep · **Joined:** Wed Jan 31, 2007 6:35 pm **Posts:** 25266

also Hull City, Luton (who were championship bound)

Yubep · **Joined:** Wed Jan 31, 2007 6:35 pm **Posts:** 25266

Port Clarence

Tax Paying Poolie · **Joined:** Sat Aug 19, 2006 8:18 am **Posts:** 9053

ElvisAintDead wrote:

...and now a list of the Big Clubs we've beaten under Chris Turner...

Cup- weakened West Brom, weakened Stoke and weakened Coventry.

League- none that I can think of.

Mr Ripper · **Posted:** Fri Jan 08, 2010 10:10 am

Mr I wrote:

I'm quite saddened that despite CT having the bottle to come out and answer his critics directly, one or two still feel the need to pick holes in it.

FFS take it for what it is and give him some respect for having the balls to stand up and be counted.

Well said.

alleztfc · **Posted:** Fri Jan 08, 2010 10:55 am

Mr Yubep:

Exactly WHO would you like to see as manager at the moment?
Looking around, can you seriously think of anyone available who could have us in, let's say, the automatic spots?

Sometimes you seem to post without thinking. Sorry and all.

misterb2001 · **Posted:** Fri Jan 08, 2010 11:02 am

he only got two of them wrong as he didnt have the ability to predict the future though. if hartley had not been sent off we probably would have won comfortably.

Mr Irrelevant · **Joined:** Thu Aug 17, 2006 8:25 pm **Posts:** 22671

Does who did what to whom really matter in a game we won 2-1?

Mr Irrelevant · **Joined:** Thu Aug 17, 2006 8:25 pm **Posts:** 22671

ADG wrote:

Thats a very odd thing for soemone who runs a discussion forum to say. :laugh:

I'm a very odd person.

Salty · **Posted:** Fri Jan 08, 2010 11:46 am

do you really think a football manager - ANY manager not just ours - will admit he's got things wrong and eat a slice of humble pie??

I dont.

Turner seems sound though and i for one hope that privately he might accept that he's got stuff wrong and will maybe change things...most importantly to stop bigging the opposition up.

Fetish_Bob · **Posted:** Fri Jan 08, 2010 11:57 am

MutleyRules wrote:

Tax Paying Poolie wrote:

He is confident that we can return to being the top scorers in League football by playing exciting football, that's a hell of a transformation from the current football being dished out. How long will we have to wait for this though?

Didn't he say we'll have to wait till January a few months ago????

Well it's January now and here's the scores on the doors....

Played 1....Won 1....100% record!!!! :coool:

The Bloke's a Genius!!!! clappp

But.......... can we count that game as it was meant to be played in December, so we haven't played any of the opposition from the fixtures from January yet........ rolfl

parmopooly · **Posted:** Fri Jan 08, 2010 3:06 pm

no amount of talking from Turner will convince me he knows what he's doing, until I see things improve on the pitch.

paulus the woodgnome and a side salad · **Posted:** Fri Jan 08, 2010 3:26 pm

ADG wrote:

Why though?

The vast majority of comments were positive, and we were all delighted and relieved to have won.

But the game was just as notabale for the utter chaos our team ended the game in. If that isnt worth discussing we may as well close all discussion forums down.

And remember that win and they way we ended up will not bring back the missing hordes. And the club are us asking us what we think is wrong.

But is'nt anything good we've ever achieved been accompanied by a poor finale...aka:- promoted the day we get beat 4-0, gifting the league to other teams, being promoted in front of only 12 of our fans, Cardiff, Aston Villa replay,etc (91 exempt).

Spender · **Posted:** Fri Jan 08, 2010 5:51 pm

chip fireball wrote:

People go on about tactics and strategies but it's a simple game really - there's a goal net at your end of the field and one at theirs and if you put the ball in their net more than they do yours then that's what football's all about.

Isn't that a straight lift from another manager, years ago??...............Oh what's his name......Brian someone......

Might have been a Bill.... confised

MutleyRules · **Posted:** Fri Jan 08, 2010 8:21 pm

Fetish_Bob wrote:

MutleyRules wrote:

Tax Paying Poolie wrote:

He is confident that we can return to being the top scorers in League football by playing exciting football, that's a hell of a transformation from the current football being dished out. How long will we have to wait for this though?

Didn't he say we'll have to wait till January a few months ago????

Well it's January now and here's the scores on the doors....

Played 1....Won 1....100% record!!!! :coool:

The Bloke's a Genius!!!! clappp

But.......... can we count that game as it was meant to be played in December, so we haven't played any of the opposition from the fixtures from January yet........ rolfl

Bugger....forgot about that!!!! confised

Gibsons Beard · **Posted:** Fri Jan 08, 2010 8:47 pm

ADG wrote:

chip fireball wrote:

Mr I wrote:

Does who did what to whom really matter in a game we won 2-1?

when we have been losing when in front for large chunks of the season then yes i suspect it does. as turner himself admitted after totally dominating the game for 85 minutes we were very fortunate to get the 3 points. the ref and lino missed a handball in the box, flinders made a great save, and abbott missed one from about 3 yards out.

successful teams know how to close a game down when they are in front. look what bristol rovers and charlton did to us earlier in the season.

with pools however we tend to go in front, the opposition scores and then usually score another, and often this happens within a relatively short space of time.

looking at our last 8 league games :

oldham score after 88 minutes and had 3 chances to score in added on time.

leeds come from behind to score on 38 and 45.

southend come from behind to score on 49 56 and 74

carlisle come from behind to score on 33 52 and 63

southampton come from behind to score on 29, 53 and 82

huddesfield come from behind to score on 56 and 66

im sorry but even a halfwit could see a pattern there. but for luck this would have led to more dropped points in the oldham game. turner may not think tactics and strategy are important, but there are times when you have to kill games off. if there are players causing you problems you have to find a way to stop them.

it seems to me lessons are not being learnt. now possibly its just a lack of concentration on behalf of the players. perhaps its a loss of confidence. but if a manager keeps saying you cant compete with these teams maybe the players have now started to believe that, and once they concede they accept the games over.

anyone at the oldham game could see the composure of the pools players had gone completely, as turner states, it was " panic stations " and some of us there felt this was mainly due to too many positional changes and too many players playing out of position.

That all makes perfect sense to me.

me too

Tax Paying Poolie · **Joined:** Sat Aug 19, 2006 8:18 am **Posts:** 9053

Part 3 is up now.

I have no problems with any of it.

We're going up.

PJ_Poolie · **Posted:** Sat Jan 09, 2010 1:20 am

Tax Paying Poolie wrote:

Part 3 is up now.

I have no problems with any of it.

We're going up.

I was perturbed by part three.

Fook all to pick fault with apart from the slightly distant look on the picture of him, he was probably getting all dreamy about Norwich's average attendance.

misterb2001 · **Posted:** Sat Jan 09, 2010 9:29 am

PJ_Poolie wrote:

Tax Paying Poolie wrote:

Part 3 is up now.

I have no problems with any of it.

We're going up.

I was perturbed by part three.

Fook all to pick fault with apart from the slightly distant look on the picture of him, he was probably getting all dreamy about Norwich's average attendance.

ask chris

Gadgies online