Howay then MrB....

Gibsons Beard · **Posted:** Sat Jan 16, 2010 6:14 pm

What are all the positives from todays "performance"?

I thought Austin played well....

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

Monkhouse I thought also did ok.

tigro · **Posted:** Sat Jan 16, 2010 6:23 pm

I heard Jones played a blinder on right wing

Gibsons Beard · **Posted:** Sat Jan 16, 2010 6:29 pm

tigro wrote:

I heard Jones played a blinder on right wing

Yeah a tactical masterstroke by Turner.

Turner even had the nous to take Jones off rather than Ritchie when bringing Larkin on. A genius!

Gibsons Beard · **Posted:** Sat Jan 16, 2010 6:33 pm

MadJohn wrote:

Grave wrote:

tigro wrote:

I heard Jones played a blinder on right wing

Yeah a tactical masterstroke by Turner.

Turner even had the nous to take Jones off rather than Ritchie when bringing Larkin on. A genius!

To be fair Jones had been fooking awful. Whether it's his preferred position or not, he is capable of much much more than that performance he produced today. He was rank.

Yeah he was poor (but he aint a right winger) but switching him to the centre and subbing Ritchie was clearly a better option (if not a legally permitted one)!

misterb2001 · **Posted:** Sat Jan 16, 2010 6:35 pm

Grave wrote:

What are all the positives from todays "performance"?

I thought Austin played well....

i assume you have addressed this to me as i called you a tit in the other thread?

I think you were spot on with your assessment of the game and if you go back and re-read my post you will see i agreed with you.

I merely called you a tit because you said we deserved to be relegated based on a very poor 45 minutes of football.

Optimistic · **Joined:** Sun May 31, 2009 4:07 pm **Posts:** 1065

Monkhouse & Austin the only two who tried

Gibsons Beard · **Posted:** Sat Jan 16, 2010 6:37 pm

misterb2001 wrote:

Grave wrote:

What are all the positives from todays "performance"?

I thought Austin played well....

i assume you have addressed this to me as i called you a tit in the other thread?

I think you were spot on with your assessment of the game and if you go back and re-read my post you will see i agreed with you.

I merely called you a tit because you said we deserved to be relegated based on a very poor 45 minutes of football.

No, the 'tit' comment is fine lol. No problem.

Normally I can rely on you to put a positive spin on a result though hence the thread

In all honestly apart from Austin I thought we were a shambles all over the pitch. I dont beleive even you could defend the manager after that :wink:

misterb2001 · **Posted:** Sat Jan 16, 2010 6:47 pm

Grave wrote:

misterb2001 wrote:

Grave wrote:

What are all the positives from todays "performance"?

I thought Austin played well....

i assume you have addressed this to me as i called you a tit in the other thread?

I think you were spot on with your assessment of the game and if you go back and re-read my post you will see i agreed with you.

I merely called you a tit because you said we deserved to be relegated based on a very poor 45 minutes of football.

No, the 'tit' comment is fine lol. No problem.

Normally I can rely on you to put a positive spin on a result though hence the thread

In all honestly apart from Austin I thought we were a shambles all over the pitch. I dont beleive even you could defend the manager after that :wink:

you could tell after 5 minutes it was going to be one of those games. We were so far off the pace it was untrue. I thought the decision to play both clark and liddle was a joke as neither have the ability to boss a game, it would have made much more sense to play clark and cherel and have liddle at full back.

I would have played mcsweeney on the wing with jones and gamble in the middle.. I was a little shocked to see humphreys starting.

I honestly cant think of a single positive.

Although i will say that mk dons were a very good team.

Gibsons Beard · **Posted:** Sat Jan 16, 2010 6:50 pm

misterb2001 wrote:

you could tell after 5 minutes it was going to be one of those games. We were so far off the pace it was untrue. I thought the decision to play both clark and liddle was a joke as neither have the ability to boss a game, it would have made much more sense to play clark and cherel and have liddle at full back.

I would have played mcsweeney on the wing with jones and gamble in the middle.. I was a little shocked to see humphreys starting.

I honestly cant think of a single positive.

Although i will say that mk dons were a very good team.

Agreed re Clark and liddle. Clarks performance today showed just how good Collins actually is! Clark, as much as I like his attitude is not up to league one standard.

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

misterb2001 wrote:

I would have played mcsweeney on the wing with jones and gamble in the middle.. I was a little shocked to see humphreys starting.

That would have involved playing 2 players IN position though!

Gibsons Beard · **Posted:** Sat Jan 16, 2010 6:54 pm

Tree_With_Hamster wrote:

misterb2001 wrote:

I would have played mcsweeney on the wing with jones and gamble in the middle.. I was a little shocked to see humphreys starting.

That would have involved playing 2 players IN position though!

misterb2001 · **Posted:** Sat Jan 16, 2010 6:59 pm

Tree_With_Hamster wrote:

misterb2001 wrote:

I would have played mcsweeney on the wing with jones and gamble in the middle.. I was a little shocked to see humphreys starting.

That would have involved playing 2 players IN position though!

Howay then MrB....

Gadgies online