Not a Leap Year, who says so? Away to Reading , Sat, Feb 1st 3-0'clock.
Moderator: Zulus Thousand of em
-
- 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.
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.
The upturn in Johnston's form is incredible and Forrester just feels a natural fit in the middle.
- BWFC_Insane
- 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.
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.GhostoftheBok wrote: ↑Sat Feb 01, 2025 5:30 pmIt 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.BWFC_Insane wrote: ↑Sat Feb 01, 2025 5:27 pmNot 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.
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.
- GhostoftheBok
- 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.
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.
- 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.
- BWFC_Insane
- 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.
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.nicholaldo wrote: ↑Sat Feb 01, 2025 5:42 pmA 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.
- BWFC_Insane
- 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.
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.GhostoftheBok wrote: ↑Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:06 pmToday'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.
- GhostoftheBok
- 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.
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.BWFC_Insane wrote: ↑Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:05 pmYep 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.
Easy to second guess with the benefit of hindsight, though.
- GhostoftheBok
- 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.
Not to sound like a dickhead (or no more than usual), but I think Thommo could do with sitting out a couple of games.BWFC_Insane wrote: ↑Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:08 pmOn 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.
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.
Re: Not a Leap Year, who says so? Away to Reading , Sat, Feb 1st 3-0'clock.
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.
That it's going to lose its mind
Be more kind, my friends, try to be more kind.
- BWFC_Insane
- 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.
I’ve seen reference that Lolos fell out with Lowe at Plymouth. So could be there is bad blood with Schuey?GhostoftheBok wrote: ↑Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:09 pmI 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.BWFC_Insane wrote: ↑Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:05 pmYep 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.
Easy to second guess with the benefit of hindsight, though.
- Harry Genshaw
- 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.
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"
- GhostoftheBok
- 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.
Schumacher hitches his wagon to Etete and hugely positive about the performance. Good good.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjrhdxMAn4c
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjrhdxMAn4c
-
- Passionate
- Posts: 2638
- Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2018 8:23 pm
- dave the minion
- 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.
Ok. Sorry, my bad. You're right and I'm clearly wrong.Spartan2 wrote: ↑Sat Feb 01, 2025 5:11 pmSomeone 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.dave the minion wrote: ↑Sat Feb 01, 2025 4:58 pmAbsolutely 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...
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....
- GhostoftheBok
- 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.
Macca just came off the bench and set up two game-winning chances. He can't finish them for people.Harry Genshaw wrote: ↑Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:16 pmMust 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?
He will be absolutely fine here.
- BWFC_Insane
- 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.
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.GhostoftheBok wrote: ↑Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:11 pmNot to sound like a dickhead (or no more than usual), but I think Thommo could do with sitting out a couple of games.BWFC_Insane wrote: ↑Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:08 pmOn 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.
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 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.
Re: Not a Leap Year, who says so? Away to Reading , Sat, Feb 1st 3-0'clock.
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.
- GhostoftheBok
- 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.
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.
-
- 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.
GhostoftheBok wrote: ↑Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:17 pmSchumacher 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.
- GhostoftheBok
- 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.
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.nicholaldo wrote: ↑Sat Feb 01, 2025 6:28 pmI liked the reference to not needing twenty or thirty passes.
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.
- TANGODANCER
- 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.
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.


Si Deus pro nobis, quis contra nos?
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], irie Cee Bee and 12 guests