Back from the Game - Coventry (H)

[Snowball]

i hope he plays all 17 games.

He'll have to drop someone, unless we keep having injuries

if he does it wont be because you said he would

Correct, my saying it, and why he's playing each correlate
to a third thing. namely that he is stand-out quality at our level
and deserves to be found a place in the side (and I believe will be).

i never mentioned support player-you did.

Incorrect

i looked at all of brians previous record in man man and team management and think hes unlikely to drop cummings
for the rest of the season, since hes been solid, and ever present, and that would be harsh.i believe this would be
uncharateristic.his best bet would be left back, but after hartes great perfromance on saturday id say that is even l
ess likely than cummings. and theres no way he gets in ahea of pearce and gorkss at teh moment- unless our form dips.

Well Cummings HASN'T been ever-present. He missed the first five games and had six minutes as sub in game 6
And YES he's done well (I've said I rate him) BUT I THINK CONNOLLY IS BETTER.

Of course it's harsh on Cummings, but that's football. If we signed Evra and Ashley Cole, I kind of think they'd start.
Half this squad will have to go if we go up, and had we got this money last summer many would have gone.

I agree about Pearce-Gorkss and I think Pearce must continue. That doesn't mean we might well be better if Pearce
WAS out and Connolly came in. Connolly-Gorkss was awesome last year and QPR did OK.

and the fact that you think brian has gone to sean cummings and said "im sorry sean,
i know you arent injured, but im dropping you, and telling everyone else that you are injured
so i can get this other player into your position" makes me think you are off your rocker.

Yeah, Yeah. I love it when people realise they are losing an argument so start impugning sanity.

Go back and check this thread. Have I accused you of ANYTHING.

How about this, FOR EXAMPLE


"Sean, I've had a talk with the physios and we think we should rest that ankle.
We have got a lot of games coming up. Have a couple of games off and get
the ankle 100% You know how much I think of you as a bloke and a player,
and you know you're in my long-term plans, that's why a rest right now is best for everyone."

Note I am NOT saying this happened, nor am I actually saying injuries are being made up.
But I AM saying, Connolly was going to play once he was fit...

[melonhead]

i disagree. i dont think thats what happened. im pretty sure, or at least as sure as you are of the opposite, that sean cummings picked up an injury in the week, and connolly was put in at right back to cover that injury.

he is quality i agree. did he do enough yetin his debut to cement that place in the side? im not sure, will he do so in the next couple of matches- definitely possible, possibly probable

he isnt an evra, or a cole though, or hed have been kept/played by two QPR managers.
youre going on about him like hes the second coming of maldini.
when actually hes a very good championship defender who is being let go by his premiere league club because two managers didnt fancy him, and he wanted a chance. hell get that here. and i hope he grabs it with both hands, plays 17 games and gets us to the premiere league.

now this is highly interesting, but ive got robots to tidy up.
good day to you sir.

[Snowball]

I never mentioned support player????

im not so sure why you suddenly make him shoe in as first choice every week, or why he would either.

hell play support until injury or loss of form gets him in the side, and he plays a blinder, then it will be down to the others to wait their turn like he did.

thats not all season, thats until he gets into the side and proves that he deserves that spot.
which is subtly different to saying hell step right in the side , right away, at the expense
of whoever brian wants to oxf*rd over, regardless of the form and fitness of those other players.
and also subtly different to saying hell only ever play if someone is injured.

You did say this AFTER he'd played v Coventry, right, and you DO expect Cummings to come back in, right?

You are surely not trying to say "he'll play support" means something else, are you?

I am saying he was brought in to play more or less immediately
I am saying he probably was told that and that is why he came here.
I am saying the manger was determined to play him.
I am saying that he was brought in on loan with a view to buy him.
I am saying that I fully expect him to play every possible league game, total 18.
I am saying that YES the manger WOULD drop a player to get Connolly in the first eleven.
I am saying that the injuries were extremely convenient and are more probably "political" to avoid publicly dropping someone

[Snowball]

i disagree. i dont think thats what happened. im pretty sure, or at least as sure as you are of the opposite,
that sean cummings picked up an injury in the week, and connolly was put in at right back to cover that injury.

Fine mate. No problem with your view. I just have a different one.

I do know there was no report of any injuries late Thursday.
Dellor was very definite about that and on radio and indicated he was "very surprised"
because McDermott had told him everything was fine. His phrasing almost
called McDermott a liar and Adie Williams joked about solicitors.

Has Cummings actual injury been mentioned anywhere? You know ankle, or whatever?

[melonhead]

im not so sure why you suddenly make him shoe in as first choice every week, or why he would either.

hell play support until injury or loss of form gets him in the side, and he plays a blinder, then it will be down to the others to wait their turn like he did.

thats not all season, thats until he gets into the side and proves that he deserves that spot.
which is subtly different to saying hell step right in the side , right away, at the expense
of whoever brian wants to oxf*rd over, regardless of the form and fitness of those other players.
and also subtly different to saying hell only ever play if someone is injured.

You did say this AFTER he'd played v Coventry, right, and you DO expect Cummings to come back in, right?

You are surely not trying to say "he'll play support" means something else, are you?

I am saying he was brought in to play more or less immediately
I am saying he probably was told that and that is why he came here.
I am saying the manger was determined to play him.
I am saying that he was brought in on loan with a view to buy him.
I am saying that I fully expect him to play every possible league game, total 18.
I am saying that YES the manger WOULD drop a player to get Connolly in the first eleven.
I am saying that the injuries were extremely convenient and are more probably "political" to avoid publicly dropping someone

[/quote]
if id just said that , yes. i dont think you are getting it though.or refusing to listen.
im saying he would play support until hed proven himself as better than our other options.
dont think hes done that yet, its possible he could- im saying Brian will only keep him in of he does so, and wont have had any preformed decision made about it like you seem to think.

i didnt say i expected, or knew anything , unlike you
in fact my exact words were- id be "mildly suprised if cummings doesnt come back if fit" in the next game
im hardly be in heart attack territory




you do still seem to be ranting about you you you alot on that post though.

[No Fixed Abode]

MOTM was Federici for me. Some good saves which kept Reading in the game.

Feds gets in NPower team of the week.

[melonhead]

i disagree. i dont think thats what happened. im pretty sure, or at least as sure as you are of the opposite,
that sean cummings picked up an injury in the week, and connolly was put in at right back to cover that injury.

Fine mate. No problem with your view. I just have a different one.

I do know there was no report of any injuries late Thursday.
Dellor was very definite about that and on radio and indicated he was "very surprised"
because McDermott had told him everything was fine. His phrasing almost
called McDermott a liar and Adie Williams joked about solicitors.

Has Cummings actual injury been mentioned anywhere? You know ankle, or whatever?

mcdermott was also pretty clear in that interview post match that he didnt see why he should share all the news with thje press, and preferred to keep it al close to his chest rather than tip of the opposition to anythig, rather than because of some great lets get connoly into the team NOW conspiracy

[Ian Royal]

Just watched the first half and really feel for Coventry. The worst team in our league made us look nothing but mediocre plodders in that half. They looked pretty limited, particularly upfront, but as usual a "lesser" side played much better and tidier football than us and we were reduced to hopeful punts forward and passing play so predictable even Stevie Wonder could see it coming a mile off. A flukey goal for us followed by traditional relegation material defending at a corner and it should effectively be game over for them.

Saying that, we have a very good defence, even considering how unsettled the full back positions have been in recent games. I find it very frustrating how deep our midfield sits though, can we not try and win the ball on the halfway line more and have two banks of 4 rather than one of 6 or 7? Karacan and Legs look like they're playing in defence half the time and I wish we'd show more movement and decent passing through the middle. Their performance so far can be summed by head tennis, nothing 6 yard passes and hoof.... At one point I couldn't help but shout "For f*cks sake bring it down you c*nt" when Legs hoofed it straight up and forward over his shoulder and out of play under absolutely no pressure. But, defensively the midfield is pretty darn effective on the whole.

Kebe was showing flashes of being very dangerous. Mills did alright as a left midfielder, but we need wingers in this system and there's a difference. Connolly was ok bar a few dodgy passes. Pearce immense and Gorkss solid.

Hunt chased everything but never really shows convincing quality. Roberts really disappointed me. Apart from his great back heel lay off for Kebe and being hit by Connolly's header he didn't seem to be able to control anything. But, a goal to his name so job done.

I really don't like McDermott's style, but it's effective so it's hard to get too upset. We need to play much better if we want to make the play offs and have a chance in them. We can though, so here's hoping it happens.

Don't have time to watch the second half now, so that's for tomorrow.

[Jinx]

I wouldn't bother - all you will see is a few Federici saves and more of the same aimless tripe from us

Jason Rodgers doesn't figure much either

[Ian Royal]

I wouldn't bother - all you will see is a few Federici saves and more of the same aimless tripe from us

Jason Rodgers doesn't figure much either

Oh GOD DAMN IT!!!! I can't bloody stop doing that.

I'll see how I'm going tomorrow, I shouldn't only watch the "good" bits. Everyone who went had to suffer through the shi'te, so I should at least try and get a similar experience.

Brendy... just leave him. He's clearly sinking further into his delusions and the way the both of you post if you keep arguing this thread'll take over the world. He certainly won't conceed an inch.

[Sarah Star]

I am saying he was brought in to play more or less immediately
I am saying he probably was told that and that is why he came here.
I am saying the manger was determined to play him.
I am saying that he was brought in on loan with a view to buy him.
I am saying that I fully expect him to play every possible league game, total 18.
I am saying that YES the manger WOULD drop a player to get Connolly in the first eleven.
I am saying that the injuries were extremely convenient and are more probably "political" to avoid publicly dropping someone

Or maybe Anton said "You know what you need Brian, put that Connolly in the team, he's from a premier league club... and play young Mills on the wing. After all, I have an encyclopaedic knowledge of football."

[Ian Royal]

We'll see how many games he plays and if they're all at right back, won't we.

[Snowball]

We'll see how many games he plays and if they're all at right back, won't we.

I haven't said he'd play RB, LB or CM, just that he'd play.

I know on radio it's tough to tell the difference.

[Ian Royal]

We'll see how many games he plays and if they're all at right back, won't we.

I haven't said he'd play RB, LB or CM, just that he'd play.

I know on radio it's tough to tell the difference.

The point being if it was "political" injuries to get him in the side it means he's favoured at right back over Cummings and Griffin. So if one of them ousts him at RB we know the "political" injury myth is, well, a myth. Even if he in turn ousts Mills and Harte for left back, which is reasonably plausible.

[winchester_royal]

Snowball's even managed to get Brendy angry

[Wimb]

Snowball's even managed to get Brendy angry

Snowball reminds me of Rick from the Young Ones tbh

[Snowball]

We'll see how many games he plays and if they're all at right back, won't we.

I haven't said he'd play RB, LB or CM, just that he'd play.

I.

The point being if it was "political" injuries to get him in the side it means he's favoured at right back over Cummings and Griffin. So if one of them ousts him at RB we know the "political" injury myth is, well, a myth. Even if he in turn ousts Mills and Harte for left back, which is reasonably plausible.

Strange logic. The point is, if the manager is desperate to play him, he finds a way.
The key "test" is not whether Cummings or Griffin comes back in but whether Connolly is dropped.
if Connolly played tonight instead of Cummings/Griffin, the the next four games instead of Harte,
then was in for Pearce, then in for Elwood... Geddit?

Personally, I think he'll keep his place at FB barring a calamity elsewhere.

[melonhead]

you think hes going to pretend that half the team is injured in succession when they arent for the rest of the season just to play him



im not denying it may happen due to actual injuries, or even due to connoly proving he is in fact more brilliant than half the team in positions that arent his actual one.
both of these are plausible or at least possible.

its the rest that is utter nonsense, imo

but you know i think that already, so ill shush now.

[melonhead]

A flukey goal for us

wasnt a fluke damnit

[Ian Royal]

A flukey goal for us

wasnt a fluke damnit

Come on brenders. there is no way on earth he intended that. He was trying to cross it and his body shape and movement floated and bent it into the corner instead of across the goal. Doesn't stop it being super play between him and Roberts.