Dont care about losing, dont care about being hammered 5-0, but disappointed that he thought playing 2 pressing midfielders in a 4-4-2 formation was seen to be the answer against the English Champions. We've not played at all well with that formation all season, so why use it again City? I took one look at the team and knew we'd get nothing from the game. Felt sorry for the players as the formation strangled them and left them with little chance. Doesn't mean i want Flicker out by any means. I just hope he changes back to 5-3-2.
Some were shouting it at the game. No coincidence they were pissed up and hated everything that wasn't born, bred or brought up in Barnsley. Visionaries.
No, he's not Snake Plissken did. http://bbs.barnsleyfc.org.uk/showthread.php?186458-What-the-****-is-this To quote :"The sooner we go down, get rid of the entire squad and board, the better. New manager also."
Re: No, he's not OK I missed one post in the multitude of reasonable ones, OK I ADMIT I AM A LIAR AND A TOTAL B AS TARD !!!
Stop shouting You know I've got delicate ears! I think 99.9% of the criticism from Saturday's game was constructive, despite people hurting from the manner in which we lost. Folk offered alternatives to formation, selection of individual within the team. Whether these were practical, or not, is open to debate. However, in my opinion, they were reasonably argued and the BBS is the perfect medium for such debates.
I appologise , apparently Barnsley Bomber said it in one post, you were right and I was wrong. I most humbly grovel at you feet !!
No worries buddy, maybe ease off on the angry pills. We're meant to be all after the same thing. United we'll stand, divided we'll fall
Re: No, he's not To be fair - Hill had a good go at the first bit and the last takeover did the second. So we're nearly there.
Re: No, he's not And another one http://bbs.barnsleyfc.org.uk/showthread.php?186494-Embarrassment refers to Flitcroft as a pillock who's luck has finally run out PS I don't accept your admission Mark...have you been under duress?
I agree with most of that the players I really thought would be 'in their faces' (Perkins, Dagnall, O Brien) were completely subdued, either rabbits in the headlights or the pre match build up was completely wrong. Hopefully Flitcroft will learn from it, but he's gone back several steps imho and all the good work is in danger of being undone. The mental scars from the capitulation at City will be removed if we win a few on the bounce, but procrastinating over replacements for Stones and Goldborne and keeping faith with Wiseman (and now Tunicliffe) will only further undermine confidence.
Re: No, he's not I said his luck had ran out. I believe it has. Hope I'm wrong. I often am. But get it right, pal, before you goad people - I didn't ask for his head, call for him to go, or anything like. I called him a pillock. I believe that Hassell and Mellis both deserved to start. I believe, that without Hassell at Hull, and Mellis at MK Dons, we'd have not reached the QF at Manchester City. So I found it poor form from Flitcroft, selecting a loanee who had done **** all in his previous starts. And only the apologists and idiots among us would ever suggest Wiseman is better at right back than Hassell. Therefore, Flitcroft came across to me as very similar to Keith Hill on Saturday - a grade A pillock. Do I want him sacked? No. Do I agree with his team selections? Not often. Am I allowed to form an opinion, and share it on here? Yes. I might go about it in a rather different way to some on here, but I reckon I'm in a large majority of fans who would merely like a fair selection policy, and to see our best players in the team. If that constitutes wanting him sacked, then so be it..
Re: No, he's not Sorry if you've taken offence over my post,but I wasn't goading anyone Whitey,just repeating what you had written... 'Be amazed if this pillock keeps us up. His luck ran out 5 games ago.'....I'm glad to hear you want to stick with a pillock whose luck has run out...perhaps I've just interpreted it wrongly. PS I agree with you Hassell and Mellis should have started.
Re: No, he's not Where does that say he wants him sacked? It says he is a pillock and his seems to have run out and he will not keep us up ! But hey ho kick digging for some more ! Edited to add, just seen Whiteys reply and yours.