Things is though first time my 12 year old son comes on here and puts an opinion on. At that as well the first time hes ever posted he gets called a fecking idiot ..hes now in tears
Does the balanced view have words like "gel" "time" and "improving" in it?
then he's a wimp.... tell him gi em **** back..... harden the kid up...otherwise he's gonna lose a fortune in dinner money at BIG school
There was no need for that. </p> Tell him his opinion's welcome, he's talking sense and Wellsie's going to get a winder.</p>
No it involves not being the most fatalistic bunch of miserable people on the planet or thinking that we should be in the Premier League
It is the one thing I hate about this board. We are all entitiled to our own opinions. Unfortunately, there are some posters on here that think you're either thick, a knobhead, brainless, clueless, or all of them put together if your opinion differs from theirs. </p> The only advice I can offer to your son is to ignore the insults and carry on posting a very worthy view!</p>
Just miss the old debates on here when everytime a questions asked, like should so and so be playing, did we play well today etc is answered with everything in the worlds Davey's fault, has his fautls and deserves criticism if we lose at home to cov but not for losing away to a very good Birmingham team
I think we can rightly criticise him for starting with just Macken up front. It has never worked when we tried that Our only chance was to play 4-4-2 - its easily our best system. We are doing noticably better 2nd Half now we switched. True we were never likely to get anything from this game but that formation made it even more certain we will lose
I agree, but if he had started 4-4-2 he would have been blamed for using the same old tactics and for playing KO
Not sure about the blame for the tactics Agree about the comments on KO though. Trouble is if you keep losing you will get criticism Even though he has created 2 good chances some will still say he shouldnt be playing I got into trouble on here for saying he can be used as an impact sub
He never plays the 'same old tactics' though. I think he's trying to lose using every conceivable formation in his coaching manual. Can never understand trying to play to nullify another teams strength and, in doing so, weakening your own. By playing 5-4-1 we're inviting a good attacking team onto a team that everyone knows can't defend. Genius.