No Jackett required?
Moderator: Zulus Thousand of em
-
- Reliable
- Posts: 859
- Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 10:16 am
Re: No Jackett required?
Sounded like a good performance from the white men. Thanks for the commentary Tango.
Well, I suspect we shall be moving further up the league over the next month ready to launch our assault on the summit. Ice axe and crampons at the ready.
Well, I suspect we shall be moving further up the league over the next month ready to launch our assault on the summit. Ice axe and crampons at the ready.
Re: No Jackett required?
bedwetter2 wrote:Sounded like a good performance from the white men. Thanks for the commentary Tango.
Well, I suspect we shall be moving further up the league over the next month ready to launch our assault on the summit. Ice axe and tampons at the ready.
Re: No Jackett required?
throwawayboltonian wrote:Dropped to 17th, Boro just equalised.thebish wrote:dizzy heights... 16th!!
poo-buckets!
-
- Passionate
- Posts: 2681
- Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 12:21 am
- Location: On the hunt for Zat Knight's spinal cord
Re: No Jackett required?
Freedman out.throwawayboltonian wrote:Dropped to 17th, Boro just equalised.thebish wrote:dizzy heights... 16th!!
Re: No Jackett required?
Haven't felt this good about the team since Dougie's last little run, but here we are 7 games unbeaten with 3 wins in there and it seems safe to say we're turning into a team in form. Glad the club stood by Dougie during the rough start. Really hope there's optimism and faith in Dougie in the dressing room and we can start to climb the table because we still have a squad that should realistically be challenging to go up.
-
- Reliable
- Posts: 859
- Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 10:16 am
Re: No Jackett required?
They are for the quieter periods.
- Lost Leopard Spot
- Immortal
- Posts: 18436
- Joined: Wed May 09, 2012 11:14 am
- Location: In the long grass, hunting for a watering hole.
Re: No Jackett required?
Cheers Tango. Thanks for the commentary. Eel pie here I come (yuck).
That's not a leopard!
頑張ってください
頑張ってください
-
- Passionate
- Posts: 2076
- Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 12:54 pm
Re: No Jackett required?
Before the usual accusing suspects appear....
I didn't go so I can't possibly comment on the performance, but it's certainly a good result to improve the teams confidence - well done it's certainly an improvement.
I didn't go so I can't possibly comment on the performance, but it's certainly a good result to improve the teams confidence - well done it's certainly an improvement.
- Harry Genshaw
- Legend
- Posts: 9131
- Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2005 10:47 pm
- Location: Half dead in Panama
Re: No Jackett required?
Thanks for the commentary Tango. Appreciated
Thems that went - reports please!
Thems that went - reports please!
"Get your feet off the furniture you Oxbridge tw*t. You're not on a feckin punt now you know"
- plymouth wanderer
- Icon
- Posts: 4571
- Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2010 10:20 pm
- Location: Er Plymouth
Re: No Jackett required?
Peter Thompson wrote:Before the usual accusing suspects appear....
I didn't go so I can't possibly comment on the performance, but it's certainly a good result to improve the teams confidence - well done it's certainly an improvement.
Never get into an argument with an idiot. i'll bring you down to my level and beat you with experience
- Worthy4England
- Immortal
- Posts: 32757
- Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 6:45 pm
Re: No Jackett required?
We were the better team today, first two goals were both built up pretty well, second one was a great through ball from Ream to Beckford. Beckford seems to be playing with more confidence and in truth could've had a couple more on a different day. We did get nervous in between our first and second goals. It was a bit "job done" after goal number one. We seemed to go more on the counter in the second half and nearly sprung the defence on a few occasions. Hall looked pretty good. They were in a spell of pressure second half when Knight came on to shore it up a bit, and Moritz eventually wrapped it up.
I'd forgotten what a home win felt like. I can now confirm, it feels pretty good.
I'd forgotten what a home win felt like. I can now confirm, it feels pretty good.
-
- Dedicated
- Posts: 1321
- Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2011 1:54 am
Re: No Jackett required?
Good result.
Re: No Jackett required?
Ahem, 2nd week in a row. Called it.
Next week...hmm. I'll let you know.
Next week...hmm. I'll let you know.
- Worthy4England
- Immortal
- Posts: 32757
- Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 6:45 pm
Re: No Jackett required?
You will not fail next week.Jakerbeef wrote:Ahem, 2nd week in a row. Called it.
Next week...hmm. I'll let you know.
I know this to be true.
Re: No Jackett required?
Great result and 3 quality goals. Don't miss them tonight.
I got shot down last home game for saying we was playing better stuff. Today we didn't do anything dramatically different from that game.. Didn't hold the ball much.. Gave it away lots etc but we was clinical when it mattered.
Ream and Mills = quality today. Have been for a while now.
Just a shame we have an international break now and can't push on.
Onwards and upwards
I got shot down last home game for saying we was playing better stuff. Today we didn't do anything dramatically different from that game.. Didn't hold the ball much.. Gave it away lots etc but we was clinical when it mattered.
Ream and Mills = quality today. Have been for a while now.
Just a shame we have an international break now and can't push on.
Onwards and upwards
Re: No Jackett required?
SmokinFrazier wrote:Good result.
Out of interest, would you still sack DF now or stick with him SF?
Re: No Jackett required?
Just home, much needed and deserved result and 3 excellent goals. The first was a good passing move and team goal. 2nd goal the ball was being passed sideways at the back and no-one really showing so Ream took responsibility and drove forwards, passed it, got it back and then threaded Beckford through. The third was a counter finished with real class by Mirtz, he had plenty to do but looked very confident.
Highlights were Beckford looking like a proper striker and now on a genuine scoring run, great play from Ream to set up his goal, and Moritz looking like a class act and capping it with a tremendous finish right ion front of me. Middle 30mins of 2nd half were pretty awful and I was expecting them to equalise as we were practically inviting them to do so, as we do. Not happy at that point, but one good breakaway goal later I'm a lot more cheerful.
We defended well apart from the slip for their goal, and Beckford looked good but Medo and Spearing were disappointing, as was Lee.
Really hope he starts Moritz over a few games now, he's just what we need, seems to have a bit of everything, strong, quick and skilful. remains to be seen if he'll be consistent.
Feeney was well marshalled by Bap, ably assisted by Danns who gave another energetic performance.
Highlights were Beckford looking like a proper striker and now on a genuine scoring run, great play from Ream to set up his goal, and Moritz looking like a class act and capping it with a tremendous finish right ion front of me. Middle 30mins of 2nd half were pretty awful and I was expecting them to equalise as we were practically inviting them to do so, as we do. Not happy at that point, but one good breakaway goal later I'm a lot more cheerful.
We defended well apart from the slip for their goal, and Beckford looked good but Medo and Spearing were disappointing, as was Lee.
Really hope he starts Moritz over a few games now, he's just what we need, seems to have a bit of everything, strong, quick and skilful. remains to be seen if he'll be consistent.
Feeney was well marshalled by Bap, ably assisted by Danns who gave another energetic performance.
...
Re: No Jackett required?
What makes you think he might not be a clueless know nowt any more?ChrisC wrote:SmokinFrazier wrote:Good result.
Out of interest, would you still sack DF now or stick with him SF?
Sto ut Serviam
Re: No Jackett required?
Talk us through Ream's performance today.CAPSLOCK wrote:What makes you think he might not be a clueless know nowt any more?ChrisC wrote:Out of interest, would you still sack DF now or stick with him SF?SmokinFrazier wrote:Good result.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 166 guests