Jump to content

philmpv

Members
  • Content Count

    1,081
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

philmpv last won the day on January 21

philmpv had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

110 Legend

About philmpv

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday 23/02/1979

Converted

  • Location
    Kidsgrove

Converted

  • Occupation
    Solicitor

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Completely agree. It's been the same with many players over the years, the most recent being Gavin bleeding Gunning, whom some on here seemed to consider that he was so crucial that he could write his own cheque
  2. Birchall said on the radio that we were stubbing over "a few hundred quid". If that's right we are mad to haggle with a player of his quality "a few hundred quid" can mean a lot of different things, particularly in such a limited context. Is it "a few hundred quid" a month? A week? A year? Is it £100? Or £900? Unwise the declare the Club 'mad' without knowing any of the facts (particularly given that Birchall's comments are hearsay). Trust in the Club to make offers they consider to be fair and reasonable, both for the Club and the player. It's not Norman in charge anymore you know?
  3. Hopefully Cullen has proven any doubters wrong as to whether he can play up top on his own. I thought he was excellent in his movement and hold up play. Also put in a few lovely crosses. Much better football as a team today. Amoo had the beating of their RB in the first half but seemed to lose confidence in the second. Hopefully monty not injured too badly. For once he didn't seem to want to come off after a bad challenge! We deserved it today on the balance of play. If that chance in the first couple of minutes had fallen to taylor I've no doubt it would have been put away. UTV
  4. Bizarre 'us poor players' whinge in the Sentinel from Tom this evening, stating that it's 'not fair' to criticise the players for losing at Morecambe, whilst in the same article admitting 'we weren't brilliant' and 'should have been better'!
  5. Smith rumour is interesting. Suppose we will see if he plays tomorrow. If he doesn't, that's usually a good sign that at least something is going on! Jake Taylor loan to the end of the season 'agreed in principle'.
  6. Only way that could be worse is if you substitute 'Crookes' for 'Pugh
  7. JA is doing a grand job on a lower budget than last season, with largely the same tools at his disposal. To put it in some context, if NA had remained in charge, I've next to no doubt that we would be fighting at the bottom again, lumping it up to Pope week in week out, not scoring, and conceding left right and centre despite being set up not to concede. The issues caused by the previous regime and managers cannot be sorted overnight, as some on here expect, and all realistic fans are pleasantly surprised with our league position and performances generally. There will always be games during the course of a season where, for whatever reasons, the players don't perform, either collectively or individually, but to lay the blame for that solely at the door of the manager is indicative of today's blame game culture. Sir Alex once presided over a United team who were beaten 6.1 by City. Do individual results make a man or a season? No, of course they don't. JA is in a no win situation really. If he changes it, and we lose, it's his fault (particularly so if we get battered). If he changes it and we win, accusations that he should have done it sooner will be made. Then we lose the next game playing the change of system, And lose. It's JA's fault. And repeat umpteen times. Who'd be a football manager in this day and age!
  8. Fair enough, completely misread what you were trying to say. Apologies
  9. I suspect that if we signed those 3 one of them would be expected by some on here to play second fiddle to Tom. Have I got this right? You're saying that we owe Tom by playing him? Like a favour?
  10. I'm one of Tom's biggest critics, as some of you know, and actually raised doubts over his overall contribution to the team over a year ago (predictably, I was roundly attacked for daring to criticise Tom 'God' Pope). Aspin saw fit to seek to build a team around him, and declared that he would never sub' Tom Pope. For the last 2 seasons, we have been terrible in the goalscoring charts, ever since Tom came back. Contributions from other players have been minimal until this season. We've seen numerous strike partners play alongside Tom and fail. Common denominator was Tom Pope. This season started exactly the same. Then, Askey saw fit to change it, bringing in Bennett. Suddenly we were playing much better football, other players were scoring, and the general consensus was that we were looking much better as a team, and it was quite exciting to watch. Our midfield was actually contributing to the goals tally, most notably Jake Taylor. I suspect that this is, to a large degree, down to the players having no confidence that Tom will actually win the ball when it's played to him. 9 times out of 10, he doesn't win the header, or it pings off his bonce with no direction and the oppo' pick up the second ball (meaning any players who have broken forward to support him know that they are likely to be caught out of position), or he is penalised for a foul. Then Pope came back in. 3 wins out of 9 followed (as opposed to 5 out of 9 before that without Tom starting the games). The difference in goals when Pope starts and when he doesn't isn't actually that much different, but the win ratio is (9 out of 19 when Tom doesn't start as opposed to 6 out of 15 when he does). Tom has a part to play, I don't think anybody can realistically argue that he doesn't. But, if we are, as a Club, going to move forward, we simply must look beyond him. His goals from open play record this season is shocking, particularly when compared to the likes of Cullen, and some of the chances he has missed have been criminal. By all means, seek to 'feed the Pope', but our crossing, by and large, is disgraceful and, with that, Tom is unlikely to score from open play in the majority of our games.
  11. Horrible Tuesday night away games in January clearly not fancied by the vale playing personnel
  12. We've had many players like that over the years, it's not that unusual. Michael Walsh, Lee Matthews et al spring to mind. It's part and parcel of any football club. The fact is that he is under contract for another season, at least, so the only options for the Club are to either let him see out his contract, or pay it up. Either way, the Club will be expending the same money, unless Manny agrees to a lower settlement (would you do that in these circumstances), or retires. He is a quality player, as we've all seen, so if he can get fit and stay fit he will be a real asset again. The long and short of it is that the Club on paper has nothing to gain from paying up his contract early.
  13. Ironic given how some on here were clamouring for both Adam Yates and Kjell Knopps to be given new deals, despite their serious injuries, to be 'fair' to the players involved. It appears that, at that time, the Club were expected to act as some kind of benevolent fund for crocked players. What's changed?
  14. Monty has largely been shocking in his alleged natural position so I personally wouldn't even consider that! Atkinson seems the most obvious replacement as I think conlon sits too deep and slows things down too much.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy