Smoking Kills Dancing Doe We got relagated cause Coppell didn't bring in the players. Extra quality would have got us the points we needed.
Spot on, worked for Birmingham after all !!
by Roger the Rabbit » 09 Jul 2008 12:01
Smoking Kills Dancing Doe We got relagated cause Coppell didn't bring in the players. Extra quality would have got us the points we needed.
by Wycombe Royal » 09 Jul 2008 12:14
Roger the RabbitSmoking Kills Dancing Doe We got relagated cause Coppell didn't bring in the players. Extra quality would have got us the points we needed.
Spot on, worked for Birmingham after all !!
by Roger the Rabbit » 09 Jul 2008 12:21
Wycombe RoyalRoger the RabbitSmoking Kills Dancing Doe We got relagated cause Coppell didn't bring in the players. Extra quality would have got us the points we needed.
Spot on, worked for Birmingham after all !!
But it did work for Fulham, Bolton and Sunderland (eventually).
by Smoking Kills Dancing Doe » 09 Jul 2008 12:21
Roger the RabbitSmoking Kills Dancing Doe We got relagated cause Coppell didn't bring in the players. Extra quality would have got us the points we needed.
Spot on, worked for Birmingham after all !!
by Roger the Rabbit » 09 Jul 2008 12:24
Smoking Kills Dancing DoeRoger the RabbitSmoking Kills Dancing Doe We got relagated cause Coppell didn't bring in the players. Extra quality would have got us the points we needed.
Spot on, worked for Birmingham after all !!
We had a much, much better side to start with.
by Royalee » 09 Jul 2008 12:33
Roger the Rabbit
So in reality we didn't need to gamble on spending lots of money, we just needed to tease a small fraction more out of what we had.
Or have we been through this before !!
by Roger the Rabbit » 09 Jul 2008 12:36
RoyaleeRoger the Rabbit
So in reality we didn't need to gamble on spending lots of money, we just needed to tease a small fraction more out of what we had.
Or have we been through this before !!
Trying to explain things to you is like talking to a brick wall.
by Smoking Kills Dancing Doe » 09 Jul 2008 12:36
RoyaleeRoger the Rabbit
So in reality we didn't need to gamble on spending lots of money, we just needed to tease a small fraction more out of what we had.
Or have we been through this before !!
Trying to explain things to you is like talking to a brick wall.
by Royalee » 09 Jul 2008 12:40
Smoking Kills Dancing DoeRoyaleeRoger the Rabbit
So in reality we didn't need to gamble on spending lots of money, we just needed to tease a small fraction more out of what we had.
Or have we been through this before !!
Trying to explain things to you is like talking to a brick wall.
Just as I said all last summer.
Wanting to sign player makes you less of a fan!!
by Roger the Rabbit » 09 Jul 2008 12:42
Smoking Kills Dancing DoeRoyaleeRoger the Rabbit
So in reality we didn't need to gamble on spending lots of money, we just needed to tease a small fraction more out of what we had.
Or have we been through this before !!
Trying to explain things to you is like talking to a brick wall.
Just as I said all last summer.
Wanting to sign player makes you less of a fan!!
by Royalee » 09 Jul 2008 12:48
Roger the RabbitRoyaleeRoger the Rabbit
So in reality we didn't need to gamble on spending lots of money, we just needed to tease a small fraction more out of what we had.
Or have we been through this before !!
Trying to explain things to you is like talking to a brick wall.
Is that because you don't 'explain', you just shout ?
You really should ask someone to explain the concept of a discussion board, it's so much more than a place for people like you to post statements....
by Royalee » 09 Jul 2008 12:50
Roger the Rabbit When has anyone spoken out against signing players ?
It's the view that thinks signing a player is always going to be the answer that is wrong.
The same people claim Coppell has a poor record in the transfer market also seem to think that all that was needed to keep us up was for Coppell to dip into the transfer market...
I'd suggest it was much more likely that a couple of minor changes to selection policy using the players we already had would have been much more likely to have got us that extra point....
by Roger the Rabbit » 09 Jul 2008 12:51
Royalee
Right, I'll put it simply for you.
In our first season in the Premiership, our players were playing with confidence off the back of a superb season where we won the Championship by some distance. Nobody knew much about us and we had a good box to box midfielder in Sidwell and even though Seol covered in Little's absence, he was still a damn sight better than Oster. Convey was also fit for some of the season and we had momentum, which carried us through. There were still frailties to be seen during this time though and we needed one or two additions in the right areas, especially with Sidwell going and Little and Convey's injury problems and unfortunately these weren't made.
At the end of our first season, we had the nucleus of an alright team - certainly far better than Birmingham (who finished second in a Championship which was in my eyes weaker than the one we destroyed the previous year). Birmingham went and signed players, but they needed to just in order to get to the level of our starting point. We needed to sign players in order to stay up as our midfield was severely weakened and was not in the same class as the one we had enjoyed in previous years. This was suggested at the time, although some of us trusted Coppell as he had reportedly tracked his main signed in Fae for a whole year, meaning he must've seen him several times in the flesh and known how to play him, along with Cisse.
Unfortunately, almost as soon as the season kicked off, we found that Coppell did not trust Fae enough to play him and Cisse, which puzzled a few of us somewhat. The confidence and momentum of the previous year had now diminished and teams had begun to find us out and double up on the likes of Kitson and Doyle, making it particularly hard when they had also been starved of Little and Convey's service and Sidwell breaking from midfield. Coppell himself admitted that we needed to sign players in December but chose not to do so in January, which is why we went down.
by Roger the Rabbit » 09 Jul 2008 12:52
RoyaleeRoger the Rabbit When has anyone spoken out against signing players ?
It's the view that thinks signing a player is always going to be the answer that is wrong.
The same people claim Coppell has a poor record in the transfer market also seem to think that all that was needed to keep us up was for Coppell to dip into the transfer market...
I'd suggest it was much more likely that a couple of minor changes to selection policy using the players we already had would have been much more likely to have got us that extra point....Royalee I think you'll find that Coppell changed his team selection quite regularly last season (granted he still managed to get it wrong 95% of the time).....
Thankyou for agreeing with my point.
Royalee And please can you tell me what point there is in having a manager who can't sign decent players?
by brendywendy » 09 Jul 2008 15:12
Royalee Right, I'll put it simply for you.
In our first season in the Premiership, our players were playing with confidence off the back of a superb season where we won the Championship by some distance. Nobody knew much about us and we had a good box to box midfielder in Sidwell and even though Seol covered in Little's absence, he was still a damn sight better than Oster. Convey was also fit for some of the season and we had momentum, which carried us through. There were still frailties to be seen during this time though and we needed one or two additions in the right areas, especially with Sidwell going and Little and Convey's injury problems and unfortunately these weren't made.
At the end of our first season, we had the nucleus of an alright team - certainly far better than Birmingham (who finished second in a Championship which was in my eyes weaker than the one we destroyed the previous year). Birmingham went and signed players, but they needed to just in order to get to the level of our starting point. We needed to sign players in order to stay up as our midfield was severely weakened and was not in the same class as the one we had enjoyed in previous years. This was suggested at the time, although some of us trusted Coppell as he had reportedly tracked his main signed in Fae for a whole year, meaning he must've seen him several times in the flesh and known how to play him, along with Cisse.
Unfortunately, almost as soon as the season kicked off, we found that Coppell did not trust Fae enough to play him and Cisse, which puzzled a few of us somewhat. The confidence and momentum of the previous year had now diminished and teams had begun to find us out and double up on the likes of Kitson and Doyle, making it particularly hard when they had also been starved of Little and Convey's service and Sidwell breaking from midfield. Coppell himself admitted that we needed to sign players in December but chose not to do so in January, which is why we went down.
by papereyes » 09 Jul 2008 15:36
by Roger the Rabbit » 09 Jul 2008 15:47
papereyes Royalee talks a lot of sense, a fair bit of the time. he just gets easily wound up and the rants detract from his more sensible postings.
Having someone say to a perfectly reasonable post "Didn't bother reading that but its rubbish" is only going to wind them up. Maybe that's what you want to achieve?
by Seal » 09 Jul 2008 15:50
by Roger the Rabbit » 09 Jul 2008 16:04
Seal I feel those who aired their greviances last season and were dismissed, have every right to be concerned !
Seal Oh, and a huge LOL at those people trying to suggest our lack of QUALITY new signings was not the fundemental cause of our relegation. How naive are you prepared to be? Or are you just that desperate to defend the club? Just accept they fcuked it up, and that they may be about to do it again unless they pull their finger out!
by Southbank Old Boy » 09 Jul 2008 16:10
Roger the Rabbit Whilst 90% of what he said was quite possibly correct it doesn't change the fact that come the final sentence it all falls apart - given that we DID sign players in January and the point had already been made that we did NOT get relegated purely becasue we didn;t sign the players Royalee thinks we should have done in January.
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], karbota and 219 guests