When we where 1-0 up, I kept expecting-hoping. DW would put McCourt and or Jennings on to finish em off..
Coventry were there for the taking, big time. I spoke with a guy at half time who's words were "if we do go down and play teams like Coventry week in week out then we should bounce back".........on that last 30 mins showing we'd tow getting in top half of league 1. I heard 3 Coventry fans after the game saying how ***** our defence were and that the game changed when we took the big lad off up front (o'grady)
To me? I will say not. I will say though that he is not above criticism and if he continues to believe the advice he recieves then he will be out of a job.
We should build our team around Paddy, Cywka, Mellis and JOB couldnt lace his boots. Paddy does more good passes in one of his **** games than those 3 do in there so called good games.
Can't believe this thread hasn't drawn him out Mark, but good effort, still time with the cricket tonight!
So to review then - where does that leave your question with regard to those who do not like Paddy? Given that they do not pick the team? Are you saying DW was wrong in not picking Paddy? In which case your criticism ought to be direceted to the manager Shirley?
3 main factors today. 1. No support for O'Grady - Paddy wouldn't of changed that 2. Kennedy kills 90% of our attacks, even when there's balls free to be played forward he still goes back - Paddy wouldn't of changed that 3. Our defence crumbled under the first bit of pressure, it was just it took 70 mins to come - Paddy wouldn't of changed that Some of you need to take your McCourt blinkers off & realise that 90% of the time he's garbage. Nicky Eaden summed it up right when he said we've got 4 decent championship players - Steele, Hassell, Cranie & O'Grady. I'd possibly add Mellis & Ramage to that but beyond that we're shocking. Cwyka can give us a decent 20 mins a game & Paddy might give you a decent 5 mins once every 5 games & the rest aren't up to it. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
My question was to those that do not want him in the team, it has nothing to do with the manager not picking him or not. As I said in the original post, do they feel happier now he has not played ? See if I had been asking the manager I would have posted it to the manager not the fans ! Hope that helps.
So then , you are saying that he is not the reason why we have been losing? That it is a fault that runs through the team, but because he does not run around a lot he gets the lions share of the stick when he plays !
not sure where you're going with this, to be honest. no evidence at all, to suggest paddy mccourt would have made a difference. i could just as easily say the same about not playing dale jennings.
You didnt want him to play, you got what you wanted. Did it make you feel better when you saw that, because from what I listened to it seemed we were lacking in any sort of creativity. I was not there , but it seems that this is a feeling amongst the ones that went too.
Jesus christ u really are on drugs. In all my time on this site that is by far the stupidest comment ive seen Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk
I repeat, there's no evidence whatsoever, to suggest Paddy McCourt would have changed the result. We lost because we were completely unable to stop them attacking us at will. I guarantee you, Paddy McCourt would have not stopped them attacking us. He would have been stood in the centre circle, waiting for the ball.
But before that he might have got us the second goal that killed them off, but without him we wont ever do that. When he has the ball, there are 3 players surrounding him, so therefore we have at least 2 players free and THEY are the ones that should be doing something other than standing around in the centre circle, they should be showing for the ball , then maybe we could get more goals, but without him we are still gash, but with less threat !