| Very disappointed not to se Woolf or Mcguinnes 09:06 - Oct 21 with 1791 views | BiGDonnie |
In the side last night. Lamberts done a full 180 and now doesn't rotate at all!
Watching Holy, Toto and Wilson trying to keep the ball is a fookin embarrassment.
Why would you play that way with such limited ballers?
Makes Saturday massive. |  |
| |  |
| Very disappointed not to se Woolf or Mcguinnes on 09:08 - Oct 21 with 1777 views | Herbivore |
It would have been harsh to drop Toto or Wilson based on their performances so far this season. The loss at least gives him a basis to now make some needed changes. [Post edited 21 Oct 2020 9:21]
|  |
| |
| Very disappointed not to se Woolf or Mcguinnes on 09:09 - Oct 21 with 1776 views | itfcjoe |
I think it would have been very harsh to drop them, and you don't rotate CBs generally.
Has a big decision to make now, posted about it here:
Don't think it's panic stations yet by itfcjoe 21 Oct 2020 8:59It's an incredibly difficult situation for Lambert to judge/manage now....
Play well, you keep your shirt - had conceded 2 goals in 6 games as a defence
One poor game with Nsiala and Holy particularly poor at what we want to do, and TN just generally poor - do you deserve to lose place after one bad game.
But these issues were there previously, we just hadn't been punished for mistakes made, often because , Toto especially, we were getting away with things - even last night that poor kick from Holy was saved by Toto.
But - we need to get Woolfie back into the team - he's a key asset to the future of the football club, and has earned right to start after performances last season, and before he was injured this season.
It's a very difficult decision to balance out - but Woolfie coming back inot the team is a matter of when not if, and I think Cornell taking over between the sticks is as well - he's just much more comfortable with the ball and that is what we need. I thought Bursik in goal for Donny last night gave a bit of an understated masterclass with regards to comfort on the ball and really highlighted what we were missing
|  |
| |
| Very disappointed not to se Woolf or Mcguinnes on 09:29 - Oct 21 with 1698 views | blueislander |
| Very disappointed not to se Woolf or Mcguinnes on 09:08 - Oct 21 by Herbivore |
It would have been harsh to drop Toto or Wilson based on their performances so far this season. The loss at least gives him a basis to now make some needed changes. [Post edited 21 Oct 2020 9:21]
|
If Holy has been told to play it short then we definitely need someone more comfortable on the ball than those two |  | | |
| Very disappointed not to se Woolf or Mcguinnes on 09:39 - Oct 21 with 1672 views | BiGDonnie |
| Very disappointed not to se Woolf or Mcguinnes on 09:08 - Oct 21 by Herbivore |
It would have been harsh to drop Toto or Wilson based on their performances so far this season. The loss at least gives him a basis to now make some needed changes. [Post edited 21 Oct 2020 9:21]
|
Not really. As a manager you should be able to rotate the squad enough without people getting the hump for being dropped.
Watching them three trying to play out from the back was a shambles. | |
| |
| Very disappointed not to se Woolf or Mcguinnes on 09:40 - Oct 21 with 1670 views | BiGDonnie |
| Very disappointed not to se Woolf or Mcguinnes on 09:29 - Oct 21 by blueislander |
If Holy has been told to play it short then we definitely need someone more comfortable on the ball than those two |
Yup!
If you you're gonna go with those two, bypass them when trying to play it out, go to Dozzer or Nolan. | |
| |
| Very disappointed not to se Woolf or Mcguinnes on 09:59 - Oct 21 with 1642 views | Chocorange |
| Very disappointed not to se Woolf or Mcguinnes on 09:39 - Oct 21 by BiGDonnie |
Not really. As a manager you should be able to rotate the squad enough without people getting the hump for being dropped.
Watching them three trying to play out from the back was a shambles. |
I asked this question weeks ago, pointing out our central defenders had not suddenly became the best at the club and asking whether they should be dropped even though we were winning to improve the team for when we came up against better opponents.
The fonts of knowledge on here , wailed and gnashed their teeth at the mere thought of improving your starting 11 and abuse rang out about how dare I question Wilson’s passing.
But what I feared would happen did, the first opposition we have played who were in or around the top 6 last season won easily and those defenders hardly covered themselves in glory.
Other teams will watch last nights game and know to put pressure on the weak links.
Ward will help with his influence and experience , but we knew when we signed him he wouldnt play every game.
kVY will also help when he returns but Chambers has looked good in his position most people will agree.
Wolfenden didn’t have his best game vs Gillingham in the EFL trophy amid rumour he fell out with Lambert too.
Mcguinness looked good in the same trophy vs us .....
So where do we go from here .... keep the fait( in these 2 and hope it was an off day or try the others.
For me Wolf and McGuinness needed game time against weaker opponents first, PL wasted that opportunity. |  | | |
| Very disappointed not to se Woolf or Mcguinnes on 10:08 - Oct 21 with 1620 views | Pinewoodblue |
Have a feeling we could see as many as four changes for the Lincoln game with Holy, Toto, Nolan and one of the front three losing their place.
If Lambert convinces himself it is time to bring Wolfenden back into the starting eleven can’t see him stopping with that. |  |
| |
| Very disappointed not to se Woolf or Mcguinnes on 10:13 - Oct 21 with 1596 views | GhostOfBenters |
| Very disappointed not to se Woolf or Mcguinnes on 09:59 - Oct 21 by Chocorange |
I asked this question weeks ago, pointing out our central defenders had not suddenly became the best at the club and asking whether they should be dropped even though we were winning to improve the team for when we came up against better opponents.
The fonts of knowledge on here , wailed and gnashed their teeth at the mere thought of improving your starting 11 and abuse rang out about how dare I question Wilson’s passing.
But what I feared would happen did, the first opposition we have played who were in or around the top 6 last season won easily and those defenders hardly covered themselves in glory.
Other teams will watch last nights game and know to put pressure on the weak links.
Ward will help with his influence and experience , but we knew when we signed him he wouldnt play every game.
kVY will also help when he returns but Chambers has looked good in his position most people will agree.
Wolfenden didn’t have his best game vs Gillingham in the EFL trophy amid rumour he fell out with Lambert too.
Mcguinness looked good in the same trophy vs us .....
So where do we go from here .... keep the fait( in these 2 and hope it was an off day or try the others.
For me Wolf and McGuinness needed game time against weaker opponents first, PL wasted that opportunity. |
If you were questioning Wilson's passing then I'm not surprised people pointed out your error. As Bluefish's stats yesterday showed, he has been one of our best passers and in one game, (Rochdale I think) he WAS the best - with a 90% pass completion rate. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Very disappointed not to se Woolf or Mcguinnes on 10:18 - Oct 21 with 1581 views | BiGDonnie |
| Very disappointed not to se Woolf or Mcguinnes on 09:59 - Oct 21 by Chocorange |
I asked this question weeks ago, pointing out our central defenders had not suddenly became the best at the club and asking whether they should be dropped even though we were winning to improve the team for when we came up against better opponents.
The fonts of knowledge on here , wailed and gnashed their teeth at the mere thought of improving your starting 11 and abuse rang out about how dare I question Wilson’s passing.
But what I feared would happen did, the first opposition we have played who were in or around the top 6 last season won easily and those defenders hardly covered themselves in glory.
Other teams will watch last nights game and know to put pressure on the weak links.
Ward will help with his influence and experience , but we knew when we signed him he wouldnt play every game.
kVY will also help when he returns but Chambers has looked good in his position most people will agree.
Wolfenden didn’t have his best game vs Gillingham in the EFL trophy amid rumour he fell out with Lambert too.
Mcguinness looked good in the same trophy vs us .....
So where do we go from here .... keep the fait( in these 2 and hope it was an off day or try the others.
For me Wolf and McGuinness needed game time against weaker opponents first, PL wasted that opportunity. |
"The fonts of knowledge on here" - know exactly who you mean!
Agree with all of that. Obviously he'd missed the opportunity to get some minutes into Woolf and Mcguinness, but was absolutely imperative that one of if not both started last night. | |
| |
| Very disappointed not to se Woolf or Mcguinnes on 10:19 - Oct 21 with 1580 views | Dyland |
| Very disappointed not to se Woolf or Mcguinnes on 10:08 - Oct 21 by Pinewoodblue |
Have a feeling we could see as many as four changes for the Lincoln game with Holy, Toto, Nolan and one of the front three losing their place.
If Lambert convinces himself it is time to bring Wolfenden back into the starting eleven can’t see him stopping with that. |
Let's hope so.
I like how Lambert has consistently played the same style. If he wants to continue, and why not, he needs at least one decent ball playing centre half. Hell, we could even have two with the on loan ad. If it still doesn't work and we get demolished by Lincoln, he needs to think again.
The problem with last season's constant changes was very different. These changes would make sense, even to an amateur eye (me). Yeh you can argue I just didn't know what was going on last season but I think that is bullsh1t. He simply fooked it up, and for ages as well.
Downes is such a loss. Even Skuse gives us so many more options of how to set up in midfield, especially if Lambert is moved to start Bennetts and/or Lankester, and dare I say it, Dobbers. |  |
| |
| Very disappointed not to se Woolf or Mcguinnes on 10:20 - Oct 21 with 1572 views | Swansea_Blue |
| Very disappointed not to se Woolf or Mcguinnes on 09:08 - Oct 21 by Herbivore |
It would have been harsh to drop Toto or Wilson based on their performances so far this season. The loss at least gives him a basis to now make some needed changes. [Post edited 21 Oct 2020 9:21]
|
If he'd have left them out last night everyone would have been giving him grief for making changes. |  |
| |
| Very disappointed not to se Woolf or Mcguinnes on 10:21 - Oct 21 with 1573 views | BiGDonnie |
Obviously those who have downvoted thought last night was a passing masterclass and we were just unlucky... | |
| |
| Very disappointed not to se Woolf or Mcguinnes on 10:45 - Oct 21 with 1534 views | MaySixth |
On what basis would you have dropped Wilson or Nsiala after the Accrington performance? |  |
| |
| Very disappointed not to se Woolf or Mcguinnes on 10:47 - Oct 21 with 1523 views | Herbivore |
| Very disappointed not to se Woolf or Mcguinnes on 10:20 - Oct 21 by Swansea_Blue |
If he'd have left them out last night everyone would have been giving him grief for making changes. |
Agreed. There's a case he should have pulled Nsiala at half time as he was looking shaky and he went on to cost us another goal (think he had some involvement in the fourth as well but that was mainly on Holy). Not starting him would have been bizarre though based on his performances to date. I do feel that generally Lambert isn't proactive enough with his substitutions and that's a sign of a not very good manager. | |
| |
| Very disappointed not to se Woolf or Mcguinnes on 10:51 - Oct 21 with 1511 views | BiGDonnie |
| Very disappointed not to se Woolf or Mcguinnes on 10:45 - Oct 21 by MaySixth |
On what basis would you have dropped Wilson or Nsiala after the Accrington performance? |
On the basis that it's a long season and Woolf and Mcguinness need to play. We rotate other positions, so why not the centre backs? | |
| |
| Very disappointed not to se Woolf or Mcguinnes on 11:09 - Oct 21 with 1466 views | SamWhiteUK |
They have been absolutely fine with the ball at their feet in previous games. Don't just make up arguments to suit your agenda. |  | | |
| Very disappointed not to se Woolf or Mcguinnes on 11:17 - Oct 21 with 1451 views | JammyDodgerrr |
| Very disappointed not to se Woolf or Mcguinnes on 10:51 - Oct 21 by BiGDonnie |
On the basis that it's a long season and Woolf and Mcguinness need to play. We rotate other positions, so why not the centre backs? |
Because for a defense, stability and partnerships are more key than other areas of the pitch. |  |
| |
| Very disappointed not to se Woolf or Mcguinnes on 11:44 - Oct 21 with 1404 views | Guthrum |
McGuinness is a 19-year-old who has played zero senior (let alone League) fixtures in his career. Don't think we can expect him to step into a starting role in our back line just yet. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
