Minority Report - Walsall

I think the biggest problem here is simply that perhaps yesterday wasn't the right day to post an analytical analysis of the game we has just played as the outcome was everything and emotions were very high. Football is, above everything, an emotional game, and no-one wanted to read any kind of negative in relation to the game or the players, whether the comments were fair ones or not. All anyone leaving the game yesterday thought was not "Lalkovic had the beating of Scowen", it was "god that was brilliant".

 

My bigger concern would be that you seem to have taken absolutely no joy whatsoever out of the team you have "supported for over 50 years" beating a team 3-0 in the playoffs.

 

The Lalkovich/Scowen tussle reminded me of the Wildschutt/Scowen battle at Wigan a week earlier. Then Wildschutt did get the better of Scowen to cross for Wigan's first goal, and I think the Walsall manager was hoping for Lalkovich to do the same. As at Wigan, though, I thought Scowen coped quite well.

Against Walsall in the second half, I thought Heckingbottom brought on White and put Scowen in midfield as a 4-5-1 to counter Walsall's switch (seemingly) to a 4-3-3. I may be wrong, though. Having played for many years, my tactical awareness is still neglible!

 

Before I start, I need it known that I've not read any posts since reading this one, that I'm quoting and replying to, so apologies if someone has already said all this. It's how I roll when getting in from work. When I eventually switch on the laptop and look at the BBS, I rewind to the earliest thread I've not read, and read the lot (give or take) right up to the latest posted thread. I'm sure it's a common approach. But aye.


Red Rain (I wish I knew your name, it would be easier - kinel, sounded like a great song lyric dinnit?.... "oh Red Rain, I wish I knew your name, it would be easier".... acoustic guitar and that.. anyway, I digress.. I'm still speaking in brackets aren't I?)

Mr Rain (no relation to Mr Vain). Whilst it's admirable that you reckon you defended LJ and told everyone we should persevere with him, I don't think you should keep using that to justify your posting on here. I was right earlier. With the missus. It's as rare as a Gary Glitter video on youtube, but it happened. I did a little dance afterwards and't lot. She needs to up her game. But aye, for every time you're right (with LJ you say) you're wrong elsewhere. For example (and I've bloody said this before to you, pal ) you constantly told us during our **** run of results that Winnall and Hourihane couldn't play together. You posted paragraphs explaining why. You then said Hourihane can't play in a two. Now, many of us disagreed with you. We posted sentences explaining our reasoning. That's what you want, you reckon. To have your ideas challenged. So if you were right about LJ, you were wrong about Sam/Conor. So we've challenged you, you've challenged us, and we're all bloody wrong. Fair?

I only ask if it's fair, because despite you suggesting your own missus (who's probably always right, like mine... except today.. 1-0 biitch) told you that yes, you do come across as condescending on here which you insisted you'd try to fix, you're still resorting to your usual tactic when others disagree with you or 'challenge' (that thing you insist you come on here for) your own opinions and views. You're free to do that. But it's colouring my opinion of you. I always tell the truth and I've told you I really value your contributions on here. But about two/three years ago I remember a thread of yours where your responses gave the impression you were trying to belittle me. In that thread, others took grievance with you for doing so. I told you I no longer saw any point in engaging with you. And for a while I stuck to that.

But in the end, I realised you did it with everyone. It's just your way. And I don't think you intentionally do it. Nor do I ever see any proper malice in your stuff. So again, I appreciate your contributions mate, and if you look at my response to your minority opinion/report last night, I actually accepted you had a point. That yes, Josh came off second best once or twice. But that in my opinion, I'd rather praise the opponent or just accept he's not a right back nor is he even the best midfielder. None of our players are perfect. It's why I shake my head at other threads criticising our goalscoring machine up front. It'd be like having the best holiday you could afford, really enjoying it but telling your family who all enjoyed it that it was good but we could have had a better holiday if we had the money. Or summat.

That's not criticism of those people who like to do that, of which you're one. It's a forum, and I love to read alternative views on BFC. But not when it seems folk are just doing it alternatively, for God knows what reason.

Your quote of "he had Scowen on toast" is not 'even minded' or 'steady'. It's a reactionary comment. And when EVERY OTHER POSTER suggests he wasn't on toast, I'd have thought that might be a bit of a guide, like. But no. You tell everyone else they al must be wrong.

Got to be honest. I ******* admire that about you. **** em. I'm right, THE END.



I'm not many folk's cup of tea on here at times, so feel free to retort in a similar fashion. I can handle it. So I'm not at all suggesting I'm better than you or that I am correct about the way I'm seeing you on here. Roy comes across as funny on here, but in person he just talks about squirrels. I feel I'm doing my bit for society by caring for him. The old, grecian 3000 applying, Springsteen loving wally. So maybe you're really empathetic in person, really accepting of others and that? But on here, you're still coming across badly. Not to me. I find it amusing. Because I'm a wally.


Oh, one last thing. The only point you made that I'm in total disagreement with, is the bit where you say folk are all agreeing and that they don't want to hear other opinions etc. Like I said in another thread last night, I refuse to be made to feel bad about enjoying what I'm seeing right now. I refuse to accept that because I'm quite happy to not dissect every minute detail of the game or a players performance that I'm somehow just a sheep, baaaaaaa-ing along blissfully unaware, or passively insouciant.

Fair play to you or anyone else if you've read this far. And sorry. If I could give you that five minutes of your life back, I would. But I don't own a Tardis. But I have pissed in a telephone box if that helps?

 

[video=youtube;k2jk48HEWyU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k2jk48HEWyU[/video]

 

Hecky made that change to put scowen in midfield.

To stop them coming forward.

Nothing to do with lalkovic.

He said as much on radio on the way home

 

Well, first of all, I read it all, from beginning to end. In fact I read most of your stuff from beginning to end. Someone posted the web address for a test the other day. I noted that we both did the test, and on one particular character indicator we were at either end of the scale. Essentially, we are similar in most respects, but very different people in one aspect of our character. I knew immediately how we can respect each other in most things, but differ in one major aspect.

There is no doubt that I am very analytical, and as you have pointed out often, "you just want to have fun". More lyrics for your song book. In that case there is little wonder that sometimes we have a failure to communicate. That does not mean that we cannot have our own opinions, but it makes it less likely that we will agree. That does not make either of us bad people. It just means that we approach things from different directions. You seem to want me to agree with you, that I am wrong. I am not sure why that is so important to you. As has been pointed out to me many times, football is about opinions and opinions are never wrong. Only facts can be wrong.

For example, you have mildly chastised me for not accepting that I was wrong about Winnall and Hourihane being unable to play together. There is absolutely no doubt that I did say that, and equally, there is absolutely no doubt that Winnall and Hourihane are have played together very successfully since before Christmas. Now according to you, I should just roll over and accept that I was wrong, but I am not going to do that. The reason that I am not going to do that is that Hourihane has changed the way that he plays very significantly. Indeed, LJ commented that Hourihane and Winnall could not play together in the 4-4-2 system until he worked with Hourihane to change his game. At this point, you have a number of possible responses available to you. You can call me a ****er and never speak to me again. You can tell me that LJ was talking out of his arse. You can tell me that you were right and I was wrong all along. Or you can accept that Hourihane has changed his game in order to fit into a 4-4-2 system. The fact is that I gave an honest opinion at the time that Hourihane's game was not well suited to 4-4-2. He played far too far forward to fulfil his defensive responsibilities in that formation. Now he has fewer shots on goal, but his defensive alignment is far better.

Having read the above explanation, it is of course up to you what you make of it. You could decide that I have admitted that I was wrong. You could decide that I have not admitted that I was wrong. You could decide that I have used weasel words to dodge a bullet. Or you could simply accept that we have differing opinions on the matter.

By the way, Rain Rain is a song title by Peter Gabriel. The end of our nascent friendship is signalled by the fact that I am a dreaded prog rock fan, and for that, I am truly sorry.

 

I have listened to Hecky's comments as you did, but my interpretation of them is different. I guess that we all hear what we want to hear, don't we.

 

Well if this is becoming a confessional I have to admit to having seen Yes in concert twice. (I've seen U2 three times, mind).

 

"Red Rain" is the Gabriel song. And my favourite song of his is "Here Comes The Flood", just to preserve the dampness.

 

Yes you do

 

Where have I said I want you to accept you're wrong? Nowhere. Because I don't. I again used that example to counter your usual "I defended LJ" argument. In other words, I don't feel it was necessary for you to again refer to that. I don't what your reasoning for doing so is. You're clearly a very intelligent bloke, if it's possible to determine that based on someone's writing/typing? Not sure. And you do know your football, again, clearly. So you don't need to refer back to times you reckon you were right. Unless you were comparing that with your Scowen assessment last night? As in, you were very much in the minority in supporting LJ (at the end... if you remember, I was just as supportive of LJ until Altrincham and a txt conversation I had with him) therefore even though you're in a tiny minority in singling out Scowen, the LJ episode is proof that you can be correct when all others aren't? Or summat.

I'm still no wiser as to your motives behind last nights post. We'd just won 3-0, in a huge game. The emotions of that, the atmosphere, the one foot in Wembley stadium etc. How can that not stir something in you? And if it did, how come you choose to log on here and find fault somewhere? That's a question. I'm genuinely intrigued.

As for being friends, I have made quite a few over the years via this forum. Young and old. Male and female. All of them happen to be intelligent. Except Roy. Obviously. In fact, do you remember Dr Zazlos? I used to think he was a ****. But I met the bloke and realised he was far from it. He behaved like a **** with me, which is why I felt he was a ****. But in person he was nothing of the sort. There'll be others on here who've felt he's a **** (and Roy, who just feels ****) and then met him to find he's quite the opposite. He was barred from here. I understand why. And some of the lads who run this forum also run Redfearn's. The bar that Zazlos helped them out with a couple of years ago, for nowt. And yesterday he paid £300 for a Scowen shirt D) in Redfearn's in a charity auction thing. He's done some proper genuinely standout things for me in the year or so since I met him. So this place is more than just a forum. I just wish we all spoke to each other on here as we would in person. Zazlos didn't. Most folk do. So I have always tried not to judge other posters.

You and I are similar in that we can attract posters who like to judge us. I've even seen it claimed that you're Mr Cryne, based on the fact he too uses a wider vocabulary than most do on the forum. I'd take that as a compliment.


Peter Gabriel? Not my cup of tea I'm afraid. It's not an age thing or owt. I think Frank Sinatra and Elvis were brilliant. My musical tastes are as random as my typed words and thoughts. I'd listen to blink-182 and punk rock if I could only choose one band or genre, but Jackson, Cobain, Bowie, Prince, Lennon, Gallagher, Brown, Springsteen, Cash and of course Elvis and ol blue eyes I probably listen to every week even if it's just the odd song with the headphones on reading a book or whatever. Can't remember the last 'new' music I listened to. I don't count blink's new song. It's blink. I've been at them for 20 odd years. But I never really got into Genesis and Gabriel. I didn't care for Phil Collins really and I ******* hate Sting.

Most of my pals are older than me. It's been the case all my life. My missus is much older than me. I like mature things. Like cheddar. Dunt we all?

So no, I've no issue with you, pal. I think you're a credit to the forum and wish you'd participate more freely in other threads. But I have to admit that you do still come across badly at times (as I probably do too) and like Zazlos (but nothing like) it's a shame if folk see that as you.

I'm rambling. Randomly. I do that.

 

And still it goes on. It's like f-cking Freebird or summat...

 

I found a bird in our kitchen cupboard the other day. Seriously.

Sorry, I'll stop posting now. Fuhrer.

 

RR- for a bloke who doesn't defend himself- you're spending a lot of time defending yourself.

I jest of course- I like your stuff.

You and Whitey do seem to be in a 'lets see if anyone is reading this by the end competition' though- once again I'm being jocular by the way.

You're a good read RR, nothing can take that away nor can anyone honestly deny it.

However (of course) scowen was great yesterday and- in my humble and irrelevant opinion- a minority report of true minority value would have attempted to big up Walsall - cos after what I saw- you're in a minority if you thought they were even half as good as us.

Any road- keep fighting the Minority fight.

 

In my own defence, I did not use the example of supporting LJ when most were against in order to prove that I am always right. I used it as an example of being patient and even tempered in my approach and refusing to get carried away by hype, both negative and positive. I really do not want to be the guy who gloats over their successes and draws a veil over their failures. But I do want to be the guy who refuses to be drawn into hype.

The Minority Reports represent my reluctance to go along with the crowd, and some on here interpret that as attention seeking and some interpret it as talking down to others. In reality that could not be further from the truth. I am a very private person and I really do not want to betray my real world identity. I value my independence. Having said that, I should not have posted on Saturday evening. It was an honest analysis and it was my honest opinion but I should have realised that people just did not want to read my down to earth analysis when we are within touching distance of Wembley. I did not have any motivation other than the fact that I usually post my thoughts on the game. I am though sometimes painfully honest, even when dealing with my own problems. It could also be argued that I am a poor judge of when and where I should share that honesty. It was that cruel honesty with myself that first caused me to give up alcohol. I do have stomach problems, but they are controlled provided I do not over-indulge. However, I did enjoy both wine and beer and one binge convinced me that I did not have the will power to drink sensibly, but that I do have the will power to not drink at all. Hence I have not had a drink for 15 years. It does have it down sides though, and one of those is being perfectly sober when everyone else is drunk.

Not surprisingly, I also have opinions about music. I believe any musician's best work is done before he is 45. After that, he stops being as original, becomes formulaic and starts to repeat his successes of the past. This means that I am constantly on the search for new music to enjoy. It also means that many of my favourites must be cast aside as they begin to repeat themselves. Currently two of my favourites are teetering towards rejection as they near, or indeed pass that magic age. Rob Reed, the driving force behind Magenta is worrying me and John Mitchell the driving force behind many of my favourite sounds in bands such as It Bites, Frost* and Kino also seems as though he might be a spent force. Never mind though, because Gazpacho and Airbag are still producing great sounds (in my opinion). Peter Gabriel has produced a CD every 10 years throughout his career and shows no sign of repeating his successful formula. Gabriel and the band IQ are the exceptions to my rule.

 

I actually proper laughed out loud at thi feeling **** comment....which is worrying :-D

 

I really should not be doing this as I have not enjoyed the attention that I have generated, but if you take away a 10 minute period in the middle of the game, they were as good as us. They had 58% of possession. They regained possession in our half more time than I was comfortable with and if Winnall had swopped sides, they would have won.

Now all that seems very strange considering they lost comfortably, but most of football is played out with the tiniest of margins between victory and defeat.

 

For once I agree 100 percent. Fine margins. Wallsall area good team though they played into our hands a little by playing the long ball to Bradshaw but overall quite an even game where we took our chances and they didn't

 

The members of blink-182 are in their early 40's. You've just ruined my life.


Apologies to Mr C for posting.