Not a Leap Year, who says so? Away to Reading , Sat, Feb 1st 3-0'clock.

Where fellow sufferers gather to share the pain, longing and unrequited transfer requests that make being a Wanderer what it is...

Moderator: Zulus Thousand of em

Post Reply
nicholaldo
Passionate
Passionate
Posts: 2638
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2018 8:23 pm

Re: Not a Leap Year, who says so? Away to Reading , Sat, Feb 1st 3-0'clock.

Post by nicholaldo » Sat Feb 01, 2025 5:42 pm

A mention to each of the back three, who I thought were tremendous and are really benefitting from our shift away from Evattball.

The upturn in Johnston's form is incredible and Forrester just feels a natural fit in the middle.

User avatar
BWFC_Insane
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 38809
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:07 pm

Re: Not a Leap Year, who says so? Away to Reading , Sat, Feb 1st 3-0'clock.

Post by BWFC_Insane » Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:05 pm

GhostoftheBok wrote:
Sat Feb 01, 2025 5:30 pm
BWFC_Insane wrote:
Sat Feb 01, 2025 5:27 pm
Not a judgement on the player but a 23 year old coming back from injury with barely any football this season is unlikely to fire us up at least not for a few months. That’s not his fault it’s just hard to see him making a contribution in time and today only solidified that.
It seems like an odd choice, especially given he signed a new deal and so isn't a "loan to a freebie" with an eye on next season.

However, we have until Monday night. Let's see what they do in that time. If the answer is nothing then you'd guess they've agreed to "give it a go" this season, but their eyes are mainly on the summer and then a proper go at 25/26. If they go out and spend then Kion may just be a cheap Plan B option.
Yep all fair. It’s all happened and can’t be changed now but I do agree with Hill and those on the radio saying that selling Dion for what we did and bringing Randall in don’t look the greatest of decisions. It sounds like Dion was maybe not for staying so fair do’s. I guess I just wish we had kept money back to get a replacement as we can’t rely solely on Collins yet don’t really have other good options for goals in the side unless McAtee comes good - though again his record does not suggest he’s about to become a 20 goal a season man.

User avatar
GhostoftheBok
Legend
Legend
Posts: 8666
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2018 12:51 pm

Re: Not a Leap Year, who says so? Away to Reading , Sat, Feb 1st 3-0'clock.

Post by GhostoftheBok » Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:06 pm

Today's list of positives include:

- Murphy can head a football
- Sheehan is about as soft as concrete
- Jonno is looking more like his old self
- Toal exists!
- We didn't seem to pick up any obvious injuries

Er...yay.

User avatar
BWFC_Insane
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 38809
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:07 pm

Re: Not a Leap Year, who says so? Away to Reading , Sat, Feb 1st 3-0'clock.

Post by BWFC_Insane » Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:07 pm

nicholaldo wrote:
Sat Feb 01, 2025 5:42 pm
A mention to each of the back three, who I thought were tremendous and are really benefitting from our shift away from Evattball.

The upturn in Johnston's form is incredible and Forrester just feels a natural fit in the middle.
Strongest part of our team. You can today extend that to the wing backs who were both excellent. The starters at least. Good that Schuey picked the two of them out in his post match.

User avatar
BWFC_Insane
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 38809
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:07 pm

Re: Not a Leap Year, who says so? Away to Reading , Sat, Feb 1st 3-0'clock.

Post by BWFC_Insane » Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:08 pm

GhostoftheBok wrote:
Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:06 pm
Today's list of positives include:

- Murphy can head a football
- Sheehan is about as soft as concrete
- Jonno is looking more like his old self
- Toal exists!
- We didn't seem to pick up any obvious injuries

Er...yay.
On the negative thomasson is now suspended for two games after his tenth yellow. He did not have a great game either sadly. Though I don’t think the midfield three looked right in general.

User avatar
GhostoftheBok
Legend
Legend
Posts: 8666
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2018 12:51 pm

Re: Not a Leap Year, who says so? Away to Reading , Sat, Feb 1st 3-0'clock.

Post by GhostoftheBok » Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:09 pm

BWFC_Insane wrote:
Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:05 pm
Yep all fair. It’s all happened and can’t be changed now but I do agree with Hill and those on the radio saying that selling Dion for what we did and bringing Randall in don’t look the greatest of decisions. It sounds like Dion was maybe not for staying so fair do’s. I guess I just wish we had kept money back to get a replacement as we can’t rely solely on Collins yet don’t really have other good options for goals in the side unless McAtee comes good - though again his record does not suggest he’s about to become a 20 goal a season man.
I do wonder why Schumacher went with a barely fit players who arrived the day before, rather than putting Lolos on the bench and giving Kion a week to train with us.

Easy to second guess with the benefit of hindsight, though.

User avatar
GhostoftheBok
Legend
Legend
Posts: 8666
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2018 12:51 pm

Re: Not a Leap Year, who says so? Away to Reading , Sat, Feb 1st 3-0'clock.

Post by GhostoftheBok » Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:11 pm

BWFC_Insane wrote:
Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:08 pm
On the negative thomasson is now suspended for two games after his tenth yellow. He did not have a great game either sadly. Though I don’t think the midfield three looked right in general.
Not to sound like a dickhead (or no more than usual), but I think Thommo could do with sitting out a couple of games.

Whatever is going on for him he needs a reset.

Was that Matete's last suspended game after his bullshit against Charlton? If so we have cover.

User avatar
Prufrock
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 24831
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 11:51 pm

Re: Not a Leap Year, who says so? Away to Reading , Sat, Feb 1st 3-0'clock.

Post by Prufrock » Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:13 pm

It was a midfield two for most of the game.
In a world that has decided
That it's going to lose its mind
Be more kind, my friends, try to be more kind.

User avatar
BWFC_Insane
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 38809
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:07 pm

Re: Not a Leap Year, who says so? Away to Reading , Sat, Feb 1st 3-0'clock.

Post by BWFC_Insane » Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:15 pm

GhostoftheBok wrote:
Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:09 pm
BWFC_Insane wrote:
Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:05 pm
Yep all fair. It’s all happened and can’t be changed now but I do agree with Hill and those on the radio saying that selling Dion for what we did and bringing Randall in don’t look the greatest of decisions. It sounds like Dion was maybe not for staying so fair do’s. I guess I just wish we had kept money back to get a replacement as we can’t rely solely on Collins yet don’t really have other good options for goals in the side unless McAtee comes good - though again his record does not suggest he’s about to become a 20 goal a season man.
I do wonder why Schumacher went with a barely fit players who arrived the day before, rather than putting Lolos on the bench and giving Kion a week to train with us.

Easy to second guess with the benefit of hindsight, though.
I’ve seen reference that Lolos fell out with Lowe at Plymouth. So could be there is bad blood with Schuey?

User avatar
Harry Genshaw
Legend
Legend
Posts: 9403
Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2005 10:47 pm
Location: Half dead in Panama

Re: Not a Leap Year, who says so? Away to Reading , Sat, Feb 1st 3-0'clock.

Post by Harry Genshaw » Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:16 pm

Must admit I thought McAtee was a Dion type when we first signed him. Chippy, niggling at defenders, bit of pace and could take a chance etc. Perhaps he needs a run of games in his preferred position or he was never that good?
"Get your feet off the furniture you Oxbridge tw*t. You're not on a feckin punt now you know"

User avatar
GhostoftheBok
Legend
Legend
Posts: 8666
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2018 12:51 pm

Re: Not a Leap Year, who says so? Away to Reading , Sat, Feb 1st 3-0'clock.

Post by GhostoftheBok » Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:17 pm

Schumacher hitches his wagon to Etete and hugely positive about the performance. Good good.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjrhdxMAn4c

nicholaldo
Passionate
Passionate
Posts: 2638
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2018 8:23 pm

Re: Not a Leap Year, who says so? Away to Reading , Sat, Feb 1st 3-0'clock.

Post by nicholaldo » Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:18 pm

Prufrock wrote:
Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:13 pm
It was a midfield two for most of the game.

Yeah, Randall notably further forward.

User avatar
dave the minion
Reliable
Reliable
Posts: 896
Joined: Sat May 14, 2016 9:41 pm

Re: Not a Leap Year, who says so? Away to Reading , Sat, Feb 1st 3-0'clock.

Post by dave the minion » Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:19 pm

Spartan2 wrote:
Sat Feb 01, 2025 5:11 pm
dave the minion wrote:
Sat Feb 01, 2025 4:58 pm
Spartan2 wrote:
Sat Feb 01, 2025 4:50 pm
What the actual feck. Who the feck picks these donkey fecking signings, Markham has to go.
Absolutely brilliant!!

Who can we blame for this? Evatt? Nope, gone already. Santos? Oh, injured and not playing. JDC? Off the pitch....

Damn. Need to think of someone else quick. That's it, Markham out! Markham out! Markham out!!!

Priceless...
Someone is to blame for signing that donkey and you can add Randall to that as well. Our signings this season can only be described as a complete disaster. We've gone backwards. Whoever is responsible should be sacked. All the rest exists solely in your own mind.
Ok. Sorry, my bad. You're right and I'm clearly wrong.

Yep, let's sack Markham then, and anyone else whose mucky fingers may have touched our signings.

I mean, clearly we need to try to forget the signings he's helped with that have turned out to be good (some really good), and let's also set aside the fact that he led the recruitment of the new manager that was practically everyone's favourite for the role. But yes, let's focus on a young signing who has played minimal football this year, and write him off after 25 minutes, and fire the guy who brought him in....

Absolutely fecking ridiculous some of our fans....

User avatar
GhostoftheBok
Legend
Legend
Posts: 8666
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2018 12:51 pm

Re: Not a Leap Year, who says so? Away to Reading , Sat, Feb 1st 3-0'clock.

Post by GhostoftheBok » Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:19 pm

Harry Genshaw wrote:
Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:16 pm
Must admit I thought McAtee was a Dion type when we first signed him. Chippy, niggling at defenders, bit of pace and could take a chance etc. Perhaps he needs a run of games in his preferred position or he was never that good?
Macca just came off the bench and set up two game-winning chances. He can't finish them for people.

He will be absolutely fine here.

User avatar
BWFC_Insane
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 38809
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:07 pm

Re: Not a Leap Year, who says so? Away to Reading , Sat, Feb 1st 3-0'clock.

Post by BWFC_Insane » Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:20 pm

GhostoftheBok wrote:
Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:11 pm
BWFC_Insane wrote:
Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:08 pm
On the negative thomasson is now suspended for two games after his tenth yellow. He did not have a great game either sadly. Though I don’t think the midfield three looked right in general.
Not to sound like a dickhead (or no more than usual), but I think Thommo could do with sitting out a couple of games.

Whatever is going on for him he needs a reset.

Was that Matete's last suspended game after his bullshit against Charlton? If so we have cover.
I agree about Thomason needing a rest. However the balance in midfield is already not there with him and when he’s out we really do lack mobility in there. I hope that can be fixed by Monday but Matete is a 6 who can run from deep. Sheehan is a 6 who isn’t going to cover ground. Morley is probably a 6 who has got better as an 8 but I still don’t think he is. Randall is a passenger imho.

I feel that’s more or less our biggest issue. We need strong and aggressive type in there. Number of second balls and 50:50’s we could have won with a more physical ground covering type today would I think have ensured a totally different game. We’d have been able to Reading in for periods.

Bijou Bob
Icon
Icon
Posts: 4051
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2007 12:35 pm
Location: Swashbucklin in Brooklyn

Re: Not a Leap Year, who says so? Away to Reading , Sat, Feb 1st 3-0'clock.

Post by Bijou Bob » Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:22 pm

I thought we needed more graft than craft in midfield today, especially on that pitch. We still don’t have that player who can protect the back three, sitting just in front and breaking up play to find a pass and get our wingbacks in behind, or play a through ball for forwards to run onto. Sheehan played well today, but he’s not big enough or tough enough for that role in most games.
Uma mesa para um, faz favor. Obrigado.

User avatar
GhostoftheBok
Legend
Legend
Posts: 8666
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2018 12:51 pm

Re: Not a Leap Year, who says so? Away to Reading , Sat, Feb 1st 3-0'clock.

Post by GhostoftheBok » Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:22 pm

nicholaldo wrote:
Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:18 pm
Prufrock wrote:
Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:13 pm
It was a midfield two for most of the game.

Yeah, Randall notably further forward.
It was his Plymouth system and the same system Evatt wanted to use at the start of the season, just with a slightly different approach.

nicholaldo
Passionate
Passionate
Posts: 2638
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2018 8:23 pm

Re: Not a Leap Year, who says so? Away to Reading , Sat, Feb 1st 3-0'clock.

Post by nicholaldo » Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:28 pm

GhostoftheBok wrote:
Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:17 pm
Schumacher hitches his wagon to Etete and hugely positive about the performance. Good good.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjrhdxMAn4c

I liked the reference to not needing twenty or thirty passes.

User avatar
GhostoftheBok
Legend
Legend
Posts: 8666
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2018 12:51 pm

Re: Not a Leap Year, who says so? Away to Reading , Sat, Feb 1st 3-0'clock.

Post by GhostoftheBok » Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:38 pm

nicholaldo wrote:
Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:28 pm
I liked the reference to not needing twenty or thirty passes.
On that pitch there's no way to play Evattball or anything like it. We passed when we could, but you could see from Collins starting to seal-dribble away from defenders that it wasn't an afternoon for finesse.

Same reason Randall struggled. He wanted to take touches and the ball was reaching him between his knees and shoulders.

Schumacher will assess his squad and adapt. Or I hope he will.

User avatar
TANGODANCER
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 44175
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2005 9:35 pm
Location: Between the Bible, Regency and the Rubaiyat and forever trying to light penny candles from stars.

Re: Not a Leap Year, who says so? Away to Reading , Sat, Feb 1st 3-0'clock.

Post by TANGODANCER » Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:48 pm

Losing is never a happy time, the reasons matter not in the records. Reading's passing and possession were admirable. We need to be harder but less obviously so. Other teams do it.

ae:)
Si Deus pro nobis, quis contra nos?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 10 guests