ContinueWe use cookies to ensure that you get the best experience on our website; if you continue without changing your settings - or dismiss this message - we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies on Forums.Football Web Pages.co.uk

Borochat

Super proud sponsors of Alex Revell IDST

Return to front page

Newest article: Re: The Gary Smith era by SFCfoxYesterday 23:36Yesterday at 23:36:11view thread

Oldest article: Joel Byrom Podcast by nr200120/12/2020 08:03Sun Dec 20 08:03:07 2020view thread

MenuSearch

Next thread: University Questionnaires for Stevenage FC fans by Ed House16/2 12:44Tue Feb 16 12:44:22 2021view thread

Walsall match thread

By Boro3220/2 14:06Sat Feb 20 14:06:16 2021

Views: 1601

Todays starting 11
Cumming
LJW
TVC
Prosser
Coker
Pett
List
Osborne
Aitchison
Norris
Lines

Todays subs
Johnson
Vincelot
Cuthbert
Newton
Read
Martin
Stevens

Stockdale returns to Wycombe.

Edited by Boro32 at 14:07:46 on 20th February 2021

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By Themessiah20/2 17:19Sat Feb 20 17:19:36 2021In response to Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 880

Most dominant display I seen from us in a long while just a shame there keeper was top class today

reply to this article | return to the front page

3 people like this 3 people

Re: Walsall match thread

By AgentEves20/2 17:23Sat Feb 20 17:23:05 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 867

Yeah, another day and that could easily have been 4-1.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By Copeysaurus (CDawg)20/2 16:58Sat Feb 20 16:58:28 2021In response to Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 955

Poor result. Walsall probably the worst team I’ve seen so far.

Lines was on the pitch for 20 minutes too many.

Why’d we take List off?

reply to this article | return to the front page

1 person likes this 1 person

Re: Walsall match thread

By AgentEves20/2 17:26Sat Feb 20 17:26:05 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 847

I disagree that it was a poor result. We probably should have won, but I think their keeper's performance shouldn't be ignored. We didn't create enough chances in the second half, and I'm not sure why we seemed to start the second half with a different tactic (playing it long) than what was working so well in the first half.

I thought, overall, it was a good performance. Like I said above, another day and that could have been 4-1. Their keeper pulled off some absolute blinders. His save from List's header was outstanding, and the save from Newton's shot was also brilliant. The latter we've seen go in before (Newton's last goal) so credit where it's due.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By Owen B20/2 17:32Sat Feb 20 17:32:56 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 834

That's one of our best performances of the season for me Clive.

reply to this article | return to the front page

1 person likes this 1 person

Re: Walsall match thread

By AgentEves20/2 20:04Sat Feb 20 20:04:12 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 690

That's my view of it too. I was thoroughly entertained, too. Some really great performances, although Lines was well off his usual game, and Prosser had a nightmare from start to finish and played much more how I remember him being. Martin coming on was a sensible sub, especially as he set up the goal.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By Bumble20/2 21:14Sat Feb 20 21:14:44 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 632

It's funny how people see games differently
We actually thought Prosser had a solid game
Some miss passing but no more than Lines
I thought Coker had his best game
Really enjoyed the game

reply to this article | return to the front page

1 person likes this 1 person

Re: Walsall match thread

By Copeysaurus (CDawg)21/2 00:52Sun Feb 21 00:52:04 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 587

Yep Prosser was absolutely fine. Walsall had very few attacks and the attacks they had were nullified. I don’t understand how He could have had a poor game

Edited by CDawg at 00:53:13 on 21st February 2021

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By AgentEves21/2 05:50Sun Feb 21 05:50:53 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 584

I don't suppose Revs/Wilkins took him off for a laugh.

His passing was woefully bad. Ben Nugent level bad. When there's not much defending to be done, then the defenders will get judged on their distribution. Prosser came up well short.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By Copeysaurus (CDawg)21/2 10:29Sun Feb 21 10:29:41 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 498

He’s an ageing league 2 defender, not John Stones. He done an adequate job yesterday even if his passing was off .

reply to this article | return to the front page

1 person likes this 1 person

Re: Walsall match thread

By Number Ninja21/2 09:38Sun Feb 21 09:38:30 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 532

I think Prosser substitution was tactical. Bring on a more attacking defender in Joe Martin. Walsall had gone down to 10 men and attacking threat was reduced via Walsall protecting their lead.

Prosser is a good league 2 defender. Has a presence, experience but slow and distribution good over short distances or keeps it simple l (on the whole). Over longer distance suspect.

Our best long distance passer from defence is Cumming imo.

reply to this article | return to the front page

2 people like this 2 people

Re: Walsall match thread

By AgentEves21/2 23:42Sun Feb 21 23:42:17 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 358

An attacking defender at Centre Back?

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By Taz22/2 00:05Mon Feb 22 00:05:02 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 363

I'd prefer a defensive striker.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By AgentEves22/2 05:09Mon Feb 22 05:09:34 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 364

I think you'll find they're called 'Pressing Forwards' now ;)

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By Taz22/2 14:16Mon Feb 22 14:16:06 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 329

Total football! If we hit a cycle here, in about 5 years time we'll see some pretty robust tackling again.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By jayess21/2 10:08Sun Feb 21 10:08:42 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 518

I agree. If Walsall still had 11 on the pitch then Prosser would have stayed on. In the event the substitution was an attacking move.
AE claimed the signing of Martin was proof that the management didn't think Coker was good enough, but I think it was more about giving us options. His dead ball kicking is good and he can play left centre back or left midfield as well as full back.
Coker's recent 'improvement ' has much to do with the fact that he is no longer playing behind the likes of Marsh, who offered him zero protection. We are much stronger down the left now.

reply to this article | return to the front page

5 people like this 5 people

Re: Walsall match thread

By SFCfox21/2 10:54Sun Feb 21 10:54:21 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 518

AE either really rates somebody or they're absolute garbage, there's no middle ground.

reply to this article | return to the front page

1 person likes this 1 person

Re: Walsall match thread

By AgentEves21/2 23:44Sun Feb 21 23:44:12 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 359

Not even remotely true. Pett, Read, Aitchison, Carter, Martin. All are what I would consider 'fine' players, but unremarkable.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By Bumble21/2 12:23Sun Feb 21 12:23:52 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 508

lol that's seems about right
He is entitled to his opinion though
Most of it is done for a reaction
He throws out the fishing line to see who he hooks
Common practise over the years
Banter though if taken the right way

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By Owen B21/2 15:21Sun Feb 21 15:21:36 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 464

I think he'll admit himself that he can be stubborn at times, but I find his posts thoughtful and v knowledgeable on the whole.

reply to this article | return to the front page

1 person likes this 1 person

Re: Walsall match thread

By AgentEves21/2 23:53Sun Feb 21 23:53:26 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 350

I'm not stubborn ;)

In all seriousness, some of the things people post on here just make absolutely no sense, and it just winds me up. Even though it shouldn't. I'm all for people having an opinion, and I enjoy debating it. But when people say that someone is good just because that's their opinion, there's no way to debate/discuss it. So if there's no way to discuss it, then what's the point in putting it on a message board? And then there are the other posts which, in my opinion, make no sense. Such as the idea that we brought a centre back on as an attacking defender. It's just devoid of all understanding of football. If Martin came on at left back, then fine (although I'd still argue he's no more attacking than Coker is), but he didn't. He played centre back, so therefore it makes no sense.

So yeah, I can be stubborn, but generally it's because I feel very strongly the opposite of what some people post. I try to admit when I have been wrong, I just don't consider someone having 2 good games as proving me wrong. It takes a little longer than that. I also like to think that I get it right more often than I get it wrong. It just usually takes some time (either way) for that to become clear (whether that's me being right, or being wrong).

I think I just need to learn to stop engaging with posts which I think are so far from my opinion that there's never going to be a middle ground. People are entitled to their opinion, and I should probably stop trying to prove everyone wrong.

reply to this article | return to the front page

1 person likes this 1 person

Re: Walsall match thread

By Freemo22/2 09:12Mon Feb 22 09:12:09 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 337

'Attacking defender' clearly meant 'ball-playing centre back' but you just jumped on the opportunity to carry on like a pub bore and poison the well.

reply to this article | return to the front page

1 person likes this 1 person

Re: Walsall match thread

By AgentEves22/2 17:34Mon Feb 22 17:34:53 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 313

OK, Chief.

EDIT: This just proves my point: Prosser was taken off because his passing was shit.

Edited by AgentEves at 17:36:32 on 22nd February 2021

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By Bumble22/2 18:05Mon Feb 22 18:05:13 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 302

Ooh
Sounds like you have bitten AE
Nothing more fickle than football Supporters lol
Judge not or be Judged my friend

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By AgentEves22/2 18:37Mon Feb 22 18:37:19 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 338

I bit because I just don't see how someone can completely change the argument mid-way through and then use that to try and prove me wrong.

To jump in and say that an attacking defender means a ball-playing defender and that I should basically shut up because I'm wrong is just moving the goal posts mid-way through the argument. There's no such thing as an 'attacking defender' playing at centre back. A ball-playing defender isn't an attacking defender. That isn't a term that's commonly used for a centre back. An attacking defender is a full back like James-Wildin.

And even if an attacking defender does mean a ball-playing defender, then saying that Martin was brought on for that reason completely proves my original point. If Martin was brought on to improve the distribution from the back, then it was presumably because the management team decided that Prosser's distribution was poor (whether that means in general, or in that game specifically, is irrelevant). That is exactly what I said originally: I didn't think Prosser had a good game because his distribution was terrible. When someone questioned whether he had a poor game, I then said that the management team didn't take him off for a laugh. The argument used to counter that was that Martin was brought on to improve distribution from the back... it's like someone has re-worded my argument, then used it against me as a way to prove I'm wrong. I literally said my reason for me saying Prosser had a bad game was cos of his poor distribution.

I appreciate that I've created an environment where a lot of people are hell-bent on proving me wrong, because a lot of my posts come across like I'm a know-it-all, but I'm not having someone telling me that I'm poisoning the well because someone has just invented an argument mid-way through and moved the goal posts.

Argue with me in a logical manner and I'll happily debate with you all day long, and will often try to see your point of view, even if it's different to mine. A great example of this is Taz and my discussion about Emma Hayes. Unfortunately, most people didn't read that because the replies were too long. But it proves that I'm not completely stubborn all the time and try to engage with people who are bringing forward logical and reasonable arguments. I actually think the conclusion of that argument was that I ended up agreeing with a lot of what Taz said, despite originally disagreeing with him.

reply to this article | return to the front page

1 person likes this 1 person

WARNING: DO NOT READ IF NOT AGENTEVES

By Freemo22/2 20:14Mon Feb 22 20:14:05 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 388

To reiterate, you said Prosser had a poor game, Number Ninja asserted that he was brought off to bring on Martin as an 'attacking defender'.

You object to this term and cited it as making no sense and 'devoid of all understanding of football'. By your own admission, you and Number Ninja were describing the same flaw in Prosser's abilities. You are denying that the term should be used for a centre back. Martin spent more time passing forwards than he did defending, but because he was stood behind the other outfield players, you refuse to accept that he was in any sense a defender doing any attacking.

When I pointed out this is pedantic, since you are not in charge of the English language and the point being made was perfectly bloody obvious and one that you agreed with in the first place, you have imagined an argument we were engaged in to then claim the goalposts were moved in it.

You are shooting walls of text at your own reflection in a hall of mirrors and it looks weird.

reply to this article | return to the front page

1 person likes this 1 person

Re: WARNING: DO NOT READ IF NOT AGENTEVES

By AgentEves22/2 21:01Mon Feb 22 21:01:28 2021In response to WARNING: DO NOT READ IF NOT AGENTEVESTop of thread

Views: 334

Using the term 'attacking defender' for a centre back is made up. Yes, I'm being pedantic, but there is no such thing as an attacking defender, unless you're talking about a full back. It's like how Americans call full backs 'outside backs'. It isn't a thing. It's made up.

So I'll accept I'm being pedantic, about that. And I'll accept that being pedantic is incredibly annoying, so I'll stop.

That said, I attempted to clarify when they first brought it up by saying "an attacking defender at centre back?" - which was perfectly reasonable. Given some of the posts on here, it makes you question whether the person actually watched the game. You see Joe Martin comes on, you might assume he is coming on at left back, and since he is good going forward and has a good cross, you may assume that it is an attacking substitution if he is coming on at full back. Fairly reasonable assumption, if you didn't watch the game. I can also tell from a lot of people's posts that they don't actually see the reality of what is going on. They see Joe Martin coming on, and just assume he's playing at left back, and don't watch the game closely enough to realise that he isn't.

So, like I say, I clarified how you bring on an attacking defender at centre back. I got no reply, other than from Taz.

I'm just annoyed by the fact that people are making arguments that proves my point (that Prosser's passing was shit) and trying to say that it means I was wrong. But I should care less, since it's only the internet, and there's enough people on here that I enjoy chatting with, so I'll just concentrate on chatting to them. I think I'm just fed up of all the countless times on here where people have made out I have no idea what I'm talking about for thinking the likes of Dale Gorman are shit, but never accepting that I am often right. The current examples are Coker and Norris. There's been countless before, and no doubt there will be countless in the future.

EDIT: P.S. I appreciate you calling me out on my bullshit for being pedantic, to be honest. It's an annoying trait and I should do it less, you're right.

Edited by AgentEves at 21:02:55 on 22nd February 2021
Edited by AgentEves at 21:03:10 on 22nd February 2021

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: WARNING: DO NOT READ IF NOT AGENTEVES

By Freemo23/2 10:03Tue Feb 23 10:03:52 2021In response to Re: WARNING: DO NOT READ IF NOT AGENTEVESTop of thread

Views: 236

Like jayess said, your posts are usually good, you've just seemed a bit edgy lately. I suppose most of us are at the moment.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: WARNING: DO NOT READ IF NOT AGENTEVES

By AndyC22/2 23:56Mon Feb 22 23:56:40 2021In response to Re: WARNING: DO NOT READ IF NOT AGENTEVESTop of thread

Views: 297

I'm pretty sure Darius Charles played as an attacking centre back :-)

As well as attacking full back and defensive forward

Edited by AndyC at 23:56:53 on 22nd February 2021

reply to this article | return to the front page

1 person likes this 1 person

Re: WARNING: DO NOT READ IF NOT AGENTEVES

By jayess22/2 22:10Mon Feb 22 22:10:12 2021In response to Re: WARNING: DO NOT READ IF NOT AGENTEVESTop of thread

Views: 299

Right, I would much sooner read your posts than most on here because (a they are well written and b) well reasoned (usually) even if I don't agree with them. Just lighten up a little.
You labelled my post Moronic after the Crawley game because I chose to illustrate my contention that Wildin and Coker are at least adequate by pointing out that our defensive record is up there with the best in this league.
Consequently, as they form 50% of our back four (and have actually played more games than any other outfield players this season) that is reasonable prima facie evidence that they are up to it.
Your opinion is...an opinion. Our goals against column is a fact, and what's more has largely been achieved without the 90 minute Farman heroics that characterised most of last season's clean sheets.
Now I'm aware that it isn't quite as simple as that, but moronic? I accept your apology when offered.
On to Norris. No, he isn't the next Morison or Godden, but he has a pretty sound pedigree at this level, with a reasonable goal return at Swindon and Colchester. And he offers something different.
Watch the highlights from the Crawley game and you will see he created our best two chances. At Bolton his near post back header would have brought a goal if the player behind him had gambled.
He is limited, but management new what they were signing, so cut him a little slack. Plan A (Newton) has had all season to work. The result is one moment of magic...and it's almost March.
What else are you wrong about? Pett average? No, he's better than that. He and Lines are comfortably our best centre midfield pairing, even if the latter looked like he had his boots on the wrong feet on Saturday.
Life is looking up. Osborne's return means we no longer have to pretend that List and Carter are wingers, and I'm actually looking forward to matches again instead of wondering whether to record them in case I have trouble sleeping later.
And keep on posting. Just leave the M word at home.

reply to this article | return to the front page

3 people like this 3 people

Walsall Match Thread

By AgentEves22/2 23:02Mon Feb 22 23:02:59 2021In response to Re: WARNING: DO NOT READ IF NOT AGENTEVESTop of thread

Views: 289

Fair enough. Can't argue with that.

I still don't think Coker is good, based on what I've seen him do as an individual. But your argument about our defence is a fair, and it's impossible to dispute our defensive record. There are facts to back it up. I just don't think a solid defensive record is specifically down to the defenders, and I think that replacing Coker is one of our more important requirements for next season, if we want to continue to improve from what we have put forward since Christmas. I have turned the corner somewhat on what Wildin offers, but that's largely due to his attacking ability. I still think he's a pretty mediocre defender, and looking for a new right back (and pushing Wildin to right midfield) should also be a priority for next season. I just think

I think we'll have to agree to disagree about Norris. I accept that Newton has been frustrating all season, but the logic I used in my other posts is why I think he should be ahead of Norris. I appreciate all of what you're putting forward here, and what you've said elsewhere, but I just don't think that what Norris brings to the table is enough to justify the low goal return. His goal return at Swindon and Colchester was 23% and 24% respectively (157 game period). You're right, that is reasonable, but nothing more than reasonable. For comparison, Newton's goal return with us is 22% (over 108 games), and it seems to be a general consensus on here that Newton's goal return isn't good enough. So I think either Newton's is reasonable too, or Norris' isn't good enough. I'm probably likely leaning towards the latter. (Another comparison is Beardo, who's goal return was 15% over 121 games, which is pretty terrible. But his work rate, determination and ability to win back possession was at least (if not better) than Newton's, and arguably justified the low goal return.)

As I said elsewhere, since Norris and Newton's goal returns are essentially the same, I'd rather have Newton. Sure, he gives the ball away quite a lot, and his decision making is questionable, but his sheer persistence puts opposition players off, makes them give up possession and creates chances for us to win the ball back. Do I think he needs to be replaced with someone better down the line? Absolutely. I just don't think that player is Norris.

I'll try and stop banging the drum about Norris though. Everyone knows my stance on it now, so we'll just see how it plays out. I hope he proves me wrong and turns out to be a good signing. A 25-30% goal return, along with the other things he brings to the game, would be adequate, I think.

(Side note: I looked up Norris for the sake of these stats, and I did not realise he was only 27. When it said he was born in 1993, I assumed I had clicked the wrong link. I assumed he was a journeyman striker who was 30+).

Pett and Lines isn't comfortably our best midfield partnership. They are probably our best partnership, but I think that's maybe a little harsh on Read to say he's comfortably behind the other two. I think I prefer a midfield partnership where at least one of them offers a little more bite. IMO, Read & Lines or Read & Pett is a more balanced midfield pair. But I also think it really depends on the game and how much possession we expect to have. I think it was noticeable that Lines was missing for a few games, whereas I don't know that it's as obvious when Read and Pett aren't there, so it's just a case of who pairs with Lines. I think that's a pretty close contest.

When Pett is on his game, he is outstanding, but I think his top end performances are too inconsistent. There have been plenty of games where he has been completely anonymous. (In fairness, those games generally seem to be when he is on the wing. He's much more consistent in the middle.) So, all things considered, I think he's average. Actually, he's above average. But I only said he was average before in response to someone saying that I only ever rate players as exceptional or terrible. So Pett got thrown in as average. He isn't average, but he isn't exceptional, either. I was more just using him as an example rather than crticising him. One thing I was wrong about, though, was complaining when we re-signed him. He has far exceeded my expectations and I'm delighted we have him back in the team.

I too am excited by the return of Osborne. He's looked great in the last two games, and he was one of the signings at the start of the season that I was excited about. I think he is a little wasted on the wing (maybe less so on the left, cutting inside) but I also think displacing Read, Pett and Lines for Osborne is a little harsh on those three. Happy for Osborne to regain full fitness by playing on the wing, and am optimistic about his future as a solid central midfielder for us. I can certainly see the logic behind signing him and Vincelot and making them our primary partnership. On paper, they make a complimentary pairing. Obviously Vincelot hasn't turned out as good as maybe the management team hoped, and Osborne got injured.

For the first time in a long, long time, I'm actually excited about how we might be able to build on the squad we currently have, rather than feeling like the whole thing needs to be torn down. I think Read's contract expires in the summer, and if he can't secure a League One deal, I'd really hope we can sign him permanently. If we can add a new left back, a new right back, and a permanent left winger, I think we'll have the makings of a pretty good team. If we are patient with List as a striker, I really think he'll be a semi-consistent goal scorer, and I think Wildin could do a really great job on the right wing.

I accept your apology when offered.
You're right, saying your logic was moronic wasn't a reasonable response. I apologise, and I'll try to be more respectful in my responses.

Edited by AgentEves at 23:03:41 on 22nd February 2021

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall Match Thread

By Freemo23/2 10:09Tue Feb 23 10:09:22 2021In response to Walsall Match ThreadTop of thread

Views: 222

I thought Vincelot had a couple of decent games against Colchester and Grimsby and was surprised he hasn't featured lately (didn't see Exeter). With him, Lines, Read, Osborne and Smith I'm happy with the available selection there. Lines surely can't play every game with our fixture list. Osborne might be stuck in the Stacy Long role of being played wide because we need someone there and being just good enough to do it.

It would be great to get Read but I think he'd need to be properly crap for it to happen. We needed to get promotion to get Luke Freeman, albeit Read isn't on that level.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall Match Thread

By SFCfox23/2 07:59Tue Feb 23 07:59:19 2021In response to Walsall Match ThreadTop of thread

Views: 235

This is Stevenage FC, we don't add to the team at the end of the season we sign 20 new players and start all over again.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall Match Thread

By jayess23/2 00:41Tue Feb 23 00:41:28 2021In response to Walsall Match ThreadTop of thread

Views: 256

No problem. Happy to buy you a pint the next time I'm in Canada.
It would be illuminating to see what would happen if Wildin moved all the way forward. Barry Hayles was a full back when we signed him...

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall Match Thread

By AgentEves23/2 01:44Tue Feb 23 01:44:10 2021In response to Re: Walsall Match ThreadTop of thread

Views: 248

Really? Fascinating.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By Bumble22/2 19:03Mon Feb 22 19:03:33 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 316

Good Post

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By Freemo22/2 18:44Mon Feb 22 18:44:59 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 291

Jesus CHRIST

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By Sev22/2 17:42Mon Feb 22 17:42:28 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 304

I would say Prosser was taken off not because of what he did but because of what he can't do.

They've obviously decided we were going to start playing the ball long and Prosser isn't particular good at that. They brought on Martin to give us that option, and turned out a good move as he did just that for the assist for the goal. It was also probably to allow Coker to get forward more as Martin could cover left back (we didn't really need 4 at the back). The sub came after the red card I believe and I think it was tactical.

The defence had little to do, I didn't notice Prosser or TVc much at all during the game.

A nightmare is when you score an own goal and get sent off.

Prosser has a fine, quiet game imo.

reply to this article | return to the front page

1 person likes this 1 person

Re: Walsall match thread

By Bumble21/2 16:33Sun Feb 21 16:33:55 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 396

Agree

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By Freemo20/2 17:38Sat Feb 20 17:38:37 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 803

BETTER.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By Freemo20/2 17:03Sat Feb 20 17:03:32 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 874

Agree, can't get too excited about a good performance when it results in one goal, having been on top for 90 with a good chunk of it against ten men.

A point on the board and proof we do best with the maximum number of Elliot(t)s playing.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By Number Ninja20/2 22:15Sat Feb 20 22:15:11 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 601

It was certainly better. A chance missed to take all 3 points. Had them on the ropes when down to 10 men. Done well to get the equaliser but should have gone on to take all 3 points.

Yes better performance but a chance missed to move up the table.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By WASP (Original Mr Wasp)20/2 17:13Sat Feb 20 17:13:16 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 840

Agreed. Although a massive improvement over the last 12 months, still not good enough to get excited about.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By AgentEves20/2 16:43Sat Feb 20 16:43:07 2021In response to Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 948

Pett has a strong claim for MOM. Has been excellent today.

reply to this article | return to the front page

3 people like this 3 people

Re: Walsall match thread

By Sev20/2 17:17Sat Feb 20 17:17:17 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 828

I have often said I like to see Pett and Aitchison in the same team and preferably on the wings. Pett in the middle is a waste for me (although not sure I've actually seen a game this season when he has been CM).

I liked the lineup when I saw it today. Players like Pett, Lines, Aitchison, Osborne are all comfortable playing quick passing football and creating space and openings.

reply to this article | return to the front page

1 person likes this 1 person

Re: Walsall match thread

By AgentEves20/2 17:27Sat Feb 20 17:27:51 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 794

Pett is wasted on the wing, IMO. He was brilliant today. Has good drive from midfield, keeps it simple when necessary, and isn't sluggish in possession. I thought he played very, very well. Was much better than Lines, who was well below his usual today.

I also don't think I rate Aitchison all that much. He's ok, but nothing special. However, I don't know that we have a better alternative (maybe Roles, but it's too soon to tell).

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By RockyBottom20/2 16:44Sat Feb 20 16:44:34 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 927

Lines on the other hand has been poor.

reply to this article | return to the front page

1 person likes this 1 person

Re: Walsall match thread

By AgentEves20/2 16:47Sat Feb 20 16:47:43 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 913

Agree. Unusual off day for him.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By AgentEves20/2 16:36Sat Feb 20 16:36:10 2021In response to Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 932

Read on for Lines, Roles on for Aitchison. Get some fresh legs on and really push for a winner.

EDIT: just seen Roles isn't on the bench.

Edited by AgentEves at 16:36:53 on 20th February 2021

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By Owen B20/2 16:44Sat Feb 20 16:44:17 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 915

Not sure I'd have taken List off.

reply to this article | return to the front page

1 person likes this 1 person

Re: Walsall match thread

By AgentEves20/2 16:48Sat Feb 20 16:48:16 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 903

Me neither.

reply to this article | return to the front page

DON'T FOUL THEM!

By WASP (Original Mr Wasp)20/2 16:30Sat Feb 20 16:30:14 2021In response to Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 987

They will take 2 minutes for every free kick

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By Copeysaurus (CDawg)20/2 16:28Sat Feb 20 16:28:07 2021In response to Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 973

What a fucking goal. Joe Martin assist as well an inspired decision from Sampson

Edited by CDawg at 16:28:40 on 20th February 2021

reply to this article | return to the front page

So frustrating

By RockyBottom20/2 16:26Sat Feb 20 16:26:13 2021In response to Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 994

We have gone right off the boil this half.

reply to this article | return to the front page

GOAL! List aka Goal Machine

By AgentEves20/2 16:28Sat Feb 20 16:28:03 2021In response to So frustrating Top of thread

Views: 1007

Another clinical finish.

Turns out Wasp was right... just gotta shoot low!

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: GOAL! List aka Goal Machine

By RockyBottom20/2 16:29Sat Feb 20 16:29:44 2021In response to GOAL! List aka Goal MachineTop of thread

Views: 979

That's what he does. Pace, skill. Not seen a better finisher in League Two.

POTS for me with this points he has won us.

reply to this article | return to the front page

1 person likes this 1 person

Re: GOAL! List aka Goal Machine

By AgentEves20/2 16:32Sat Feb 20 16:32:25 2021In response to Re: GOAL! List aka Goal MachineTop of thread

Views: 962

He has to start every game up front, IMO. Unfortunately, he has one quiet game and then gets shoved back out to the wing.

With the players we have available, this is our best strike partnership.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: GOAL! List aka Goal Machine

By Owen B20/2 16:38Sat Feb 20 16:38:16 2021In response to Re: GOAL! List aka Goal MachineTop of thread

Views: 917

List has been excellent centrally.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: GOAL! List aka Goal Machine

By Freemo20/2 16:31Sat Feb 20 16:31:27 2021In response to Re: GOAL! List aka Goal MachineTop of thread

Views: 941

He does the things people imagined Cowley might do.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: GOAL! List aka Goal Machine

By RockyBottom20/2 16:32Sat Feb 20 16:32:03 2021In response to Re: GOAL! List aka Goal MachineTop of thread

Views: 936

Cowley, now there was a shit forward.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By AgentEves20/2 16:19Sat Feb 20 16:19:04 2021In response to Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 973

I'd bring Read on for Lines. Get some more urgency in the middle. Pett playing well but Lines and Pett as a combo is a little slow.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By AgentEves20/2 16:16Sat Feb 20 16:16:34 2021In response to Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 975

I honestly don't know what else we can do. Their keeper having the game of his life. Four absolutely top class saves.

reply to this article | return to the front page

1 person likes this 1 person

Re: Walsall match thread

By AgentEves20/2 16:15Sat Feb 20 16:15:38 2021In response to Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 986

With them down to 10, we MUST go back to the quick lateral passing.. best way to expose a team with 10 men. Make them run.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By WASP (Original Mr Wasp)20/2 16:19Sat Feb 20 16:19:14 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 975

Shoot low.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By AgentEves20/2 16:26Sat Feb 20 16:26:28 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 961

LOL. Fair.

reply to this article | return to the front page

RED CARD!

By AgentEves20/2 16:14Sat Feb 20 16:14:08 2021In response to Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 1074

That would have been criminal if he didn't send him off.

reply to this article | return to the front page

2 people like this 2 people

Re: RED CARD!

By Sev20/2 17:10Sat Feb 20 17:10:35 2021In response to RED CARD!Top of thread

Views: 837

Seen a lot worse. Just about a red.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: RED CARD!

By Freemo20/2 16:16Sat Feb 20 16:16:11 2021In response to RED CARD!Top of thread

Views: 1014

Dunno. On the floor, seemed to take the ball first.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: RED CARD!

By AgentEves20/2 16:17Sat Feb 20 16:17:27 2021In response to Re: RED CARD!Top of thread

Views: 1017

If you don't think that was a red card you don't understand the rules. It was two footed.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: RED CARD!

By Freemo20/2 16:19Sat Feb 20 16:19:27 2021In response to Re: RED CARD!Top of thread

Views: 995

iFollow won't let me screen cap so I'll never know.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Referee

By WASP (Original Mr Wasp)20/2 16:06Sat Feb 20 16:06:54 2021In response to Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 1024

Walsall players have figured out he's giving free kicks for falling over.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Referee

By RockyBottom20/2 16:15Sat Feb 20 16:15:23 2021In response to RefereeTop of thread

Views: 1000

Another red. Now let's make it count. We have been losing our way (since taking Norris off) and now have time to win this.

reply to this article | return to the front page

1 person likes this 1 person

First half

By Owen B20/2 15:50Sat Feb 20 15:50:08 2021In response to Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 1085

I think we've been decent, aside from the first 15-20 seconds.

reply to this article | return to the front page

4 people like this 4 people

Re: First half

By AgentEves20/2 16:02Sat Feb 20 16:02:55 2021In response to First half Top of thread

Views: 1014

Newton on for Norris. Astounding. Absolutely what this game is calling for.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: First half

By RockyBottom20/2 16:11Sat Feb 20 16:11:36 2021In response to Re: First half Top of thread

Views: 984

Unfortunately now we have lost everything that was good in the first half and gone big boot.

reply to this article | return to the front page

2 people like this 2 people

Re: First half

By Freemo20/2 15:54Sat Feb 20 15:54:05 2021In response to First half Top of thread

Views: 1036

Tale of two keepers.

Best attacking performance I've seen this season and losing.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: First half

By Ratman4620/2 15:53Sat Feb 20 15:53:50 2021In response to First half Top of thread

Views: 1041

Agree, lack of a goal is a real concern as we don't usually put 2 good 45 minutes together.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: First half

By Owen B20/2 15:54Sat Feb 20 15:54:50 2021In response to Re: First half Top of thread

Views: 1035

Their keeper made three superb saves, so at least we're creating chances even if we haven't scored yet.

reply to this article | return to the front page

1 person likes this 1 person

Re: First half

By WASP (Original Mr Wasp)20/2 15:56Sat Feb 20 15:56:52 2021In response to Re: First half Top of thread

Views: 1022

We would be winning this if it wasn't for that pesky keeper!

reply to this article | return to the front page

1 person likes this 1 person

Re: First half

By BasingstokeBoro20/2 15:59Sat Feb 20 15:59:34 2021In response to Re: First half Top of thread

Views: 1000

We would be drawing this if it wasn't for our pesky keeper!

reply to this article | return to the front page

1 person likes this 1 person

Re: First half

By Owen B20/2 15:57Sat Feb 20 15:57:48 2021In response to Re: First half Top of thread

Views: 1006

Completely agree. Ironically our best attacking performance of the season and we haven't bloody scored.

reply to this article | return to the front page

1 person likes this 1 person

Re: First half

By WASP (Original Mr Wasp)20/2 16:00Sat Feb 20 16:00:00 2021In response to Re: First half Top of thread

Views: 998

Hopefully we'll get three points for playing well.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By AgentEves20/2 15:42Sat Feb 20 15:42:00 2021In response to Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 1101

Anyone else's Borochat brutally slow to load?

reply to this article | return to the front page

1 person likes this 1 person

Re: Walsall match thread

By Specky (Mike H)20/2 15:50Sat Feb 20 15:50:49 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 1051

Yes it’s certainly slower

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By Owen B20/2 15:48Sat Feb 20 15:48:54 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 1062

Yes. Thought it was my Internet playing up!

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By Chet Manley (Paulio)20/2 15:48Sat Feb 20 15:48:17 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 1066

Think there’s issues on the server at the moment.

reply to this article | return to the front page

1 person likes this 1 person

Re: Walsall match thread

By RockyBottom20/2 15:42Sat Feb 20 15:42:48 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 1100

Yeah it seems to be struggling a bit today.

reply to this article | return to the front page

1 person likes this 1 person

Re: Walsall match thread

By AgentEves20/2 15:41Sat Feb 20 15:41:12 2021In response to Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 1101

Drackers saying (and this is no criticism of him) that everyone is expecting more goals from Norris, but that he is "not that kind of striker."

How many strikers are we gonna say that about? Just because a guy is a target man, does that mean we shouldn't expect them to score goals? I mean, I get that there is more to a striker than scoring goals, but they still need to score, or look capable of scoring, on a semi-regular basis. Beardo's game was about more than scoring goals, but he still chipped in with a fair contribution (and IIRC, was top scorer one season).

Being big and strong doesn't negate the need to still be a goal threat, IMO. Norris doesn't offer anywhere near enough, when you consider his all round game.

reply to this article | return to the front page

3 people like this 3 people

Re: Walsall match thread

By drackers20/2 21:55Sat Feb 20 21:55:18 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 564

I love other views. Please always add these im no pro.

For me, I was only saying that as he was brought in with an expectation as a striker who would bring alot of goals.

He, for sure as you'll see from his records is a player who will bring players into him.

Let's be honest, I'd rather he scored 15 goals a season. But that's not his game. Drop deep and get others involved.

Hence the half time sub I believe.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By AgentEves20/2 23:23Sat Feb 20 23:23:28 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 544

Like I say, I wasn't criticizing you for saying it.

I just don't think being good at other components of your game justifies a very low goal return. It justifies not getting a LOT of goals, but he never looks remotely like scoring.

Like I say, Beardo wasn't about goals, but he still chipped in with his fair share. Norris doesn't need to score 15 goals, but 5 might be a start...

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By Copeysaurus (CDawg)20/2 15:47Sat Feb 20 15:47:59 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 1091

There is a certain level of uselessness where you cannot be anymore useless IE Liburd, Burrow. You can’t say that one is more useless than other.

Norris can be added to that list

reply to this article | return to the front page

2 people like this 2 people

Re: Walsall match thread

By AgentEves20/2 15:21Sat Feb 20 15:21:24 2021In response to Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 1170

Walsall good at pressing, but I think are there for the taking.

The quick lateral passes and balls into the box is working. Just gotta keep doing what we are doing.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By Copeysaurus (CDawg)20/2 15:22Sat Feb 20 15:22:48 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 1161

That is one of the best saves I’ve seen at this level

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By Freemo20/2 15:24Sat Feb 20 15:24:23 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 1154

Beautiful cross and header

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By SFCfox20/2 15:25Sat Feb 20 15:25:48 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 1148

He was trying to pass back to Prosser but instead crossed in a beauty.

reply to this article | return to the front page

1 person likes this 1 person

Re: Walsall match thread

By AgentEves20/2 15:30Sat Feb 20 15:30:55 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 1113

Gonna need better bait than that, I'm afraid.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By RockyBottom20/2 15:25Sat Feb 20 15:25:33 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 1153

List already looking very dangerous playing further up the pitch.

reply to this article | return to the front page

1 person likes this 1 person

Re: Walsall match thread

By AgentEves20/2 15:30Sat Feb 20 15:30:11 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 1126

If only someone could have spotted that months ago...

reply to this article | return to the front page

2 people like this 2 people

Re: Walsall match thread

By Sev20/2 15:56Sat Feb 20 15:56:00 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 1015

Chuds did before the season started when you lot were saying we shouldn't have kept him...

reply to this article | return to the front page

1 person likes this 1 person

Re: Walsall match thread

By AgentEves20/2 16:09Sat Feb 20 16:09:42 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 977

I dont think I've ever said we should have gotten rid of him. I've always thought he was good, just never gets played in the right position.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By RockyBottom20/2 15:32Sat Feb 20 15:32:27 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 1114

What's behind him is better today. Actually think we are doing well, the first 14 secs ignored.

reply to this article | return to the front page

1 person likes this 1 person

Re: Walsall match thread

By AgentEves20/2 15:36Sat Feb 20 15:36:48 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 1093

Agreed. Two quality saves from the keeper the difference between us and being in front. Pretty happy with it so far.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By WASP (Original Mr Wasp)20/2 15:39Sat Feb 20 15:39:40 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 1100

Can we swap him for ours.

reply to this article | return to the front page

1 person likes this 1 person

Wankers!

By WASP (Original Mr Wasp)20/2 15:02Sat Feb 20 15:02:33 2021In response to Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 1373

Fucking clowns.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By Bumble20/2 15:00Sat Feb 20 15:00:40 2021In response to Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 1311

Can anyone confirm
I have just been told Wildin is Captain

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By Sev20/2 15:58Sat Feb 20 15:58:04 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 1010

Prosser is captain. Wildin was a couple of games ago.

reply to this article | return to the front page

WTF

By RockyBottom20/2 15:01Sat Feb 20 15:01:51 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 1379

Quickest goal ever conceded?

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: WTF

By AgentEves20/2 15:06Sat Feb 20 15:06:14 2021In response to WTFTop of thread

Views: 1275

What happened? My stream wasn't live and I didn't realise. Just assumed the game was delayed.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: WTF

By RockyBottom20/2 15:09Sat Feb 20 15:09:01 2021In response to Re: WTFTop of thread

Views: 1229

Ball came through to our defence. Prosser with a player on his back, instead of turning away from goal decides to run back towards the gk and pass him a horrible ball from close range. Cummings proceeds to slice it against their forward into the net.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: WTF

By WASP (Original Mr Wasp)20/2 15:08Sat Feb 20 15:08:20 2021In response to Re: WTFTop of thread

Views: 1222

Straight from kick off we back pass to our keeper as their striker is thundering down on him. Cumming kicks it straight against the striker for a rebound into the goal.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: WTF

By Copeysaurus (CDawg)20/2 15:07Sat Feb 20 15:07:34 2021In response to Re: WTFTop of thread

Views: 1225

Backpass. Cummins fucked about with it. Walsall player tackled it into the net.

reply to this article | return to the front page

2 people like this 2 people

Re: WTF

By RockyBottom20/2 15:10Sat Feb 20 15:10:51 2021In response to Re: WTFTop of thread

Views: 1202

He 'fucked about with it' to try and control the horrible ball right under his feet in the wind. Prosser was just as more to blame for not dealing with the situation properly.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: WTF

By Copeysaurus (CDawg)20/2 15:18Sat Feb 20 15:18:51 2021In response to Re: WTFTop of thread

Views: 1186

On absolutely no planet is Prosser more to blame than Cummins. Ridiculous.

reply to this article | return to the front page

5 people like this 5 people

Re: WTF

By Bumble20/2 15:15Sat Feb 20 15:15:39 2021In response to Re: WTFTop of thread

Views: 1180

How the fuck can you involve Prosser lol
The keeper had 2 touched before going to kick it

reply to this article | return to the front page

1 person likes this 1 person

Re: WTF

By Ratman4620/2 15:25Sat Feb 20 15:25:26 2021In response to Re: WTFTop of thread

Views: 1144

Cumming was playing in slow motion

reply to this article | return to the front page

Norris

By WASP (Original Mr Wasp)20/2 15:38Sat Feb 20 15:38:28 2021In response to Re: WTFTop of thread

Views: 1159

A passenger and a liability in this game. Get him off and put Stevens on.


(Hopefully this post will backfire on me)

reply to this article | return to the front page

2 people like this 2 people

Re: Norris

By Copeysaurus (CDawg)20/2 15:40Sat Feb 20 15:40:59 2021In response to Norris Top of thread

Views: 1137

Worst striker I’ve seen for us in a long time

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Norris

By SFCfox20/2 15:58Sat Feb 20 15:58:53 2021In response to Re: Norris Top of thread

Views: 1026

Did you not attend last season? Or even watch Effiong?

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Norris

By AgentEves20/2 16:10Sat Feb 20 16:10:44 2021In response to Re: Norris Top of thread

Views: 1001

At least Effiong could score a penalty.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Norris

By Specky (Mike H)20/2 16:24Sat Feb 20 16:24:24 2021In response to Re: Norris Top of thread

Views: 944

Apart from the one he missed?

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Norris

By AgentEves20/2 16:25Sat Feb 20 16:25:45 2021In response to Re: Norris Top of thread

Views: 945

Did I say "at least Effiong is 100% from the spot"?

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Norris

By SFCfox20/2 16:15Sat Feb 20 16:15:25 2021In response to Re: Norris Top of thread

Views: 963

Haha, good point!

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Norris

By Copeysaurus (CDawg)20/2 16:00Sat Feb 20 16:00:33 2021In response to Re: Norris Top of thread

Views: 1016

As stated above they’re both at the level where one cannot be more useless than the other.

You cannot state Effiong is worse than Norris because they are both that bad

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Norris

By Freemo20/2 15:57Sat Feb 20 15:57:03 2021In response to Re: Norris Top of thread

Views: 1015

I thought Parkhouse was worse

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Norris

By RockyBottom20/2 16:01Sat Feb 20 16:01:34 2021In response to Re: Norris Top of thread

Views: 995

Effiong was much worse than Norris. Couldn't even control the ball.

Edited by RockyBottom at 16:02:03 on 20th February 2021

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Norris

By AgentEves20/2 15:43Sat Feb 20 15:43:48 2021In response to Re: Norris Top of thread

Views: 1093

I was starting to think I was missing something that everyone else was seeing.

I just dont see what he brings to the game, other than a bit of a reputation.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Norris

By WASP (Original Mr Wasp)20/2 15:53Sat Feb 20 15:53:03 2021In response to Re: Norris Top of thread

Views: 1041

It's when he stops dead in a mini huff if he loses the ball that winds me up.

reply to this article | return to the front page

1 person likes this 1 person

Re: Norris

By Bumble20/2 15:55Sat Feb 20 15:55:42 2021In response to Re: Norris Top of thread

Views: 1033

Totalky agree
We said the same

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: WTF

By WASP (Original Mr Wasp)20/2 15:04Sat Feb 20 15:04:01 2021In response to WTFTop of thread

Views: 1273

On the youtube embarrassing football clips, that will top the list for many years to come.

reply to this article | return to the front page

1 person likes this 1 person

Re: Walsall match thread

By WASP (Original Mr Wasp)20/2 14:38Sat Feb 20 14:38:10 2021In response to Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 1344

Would be better to start Stevens over Norris, because I have him in my Boro fives.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By Specky (Mike H)20/2 14:22Sat Feb 20 14:22:12 2021In response to Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 1367

Surprised to see Norris starting after being subbed with a hamstring issue in the last game?

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By SFCfox20/2 14:11Sat Feb 20 14:11:32 2021In response to Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 1410

Thanks for everything Stocko!

Cumming is pretty bloomin' good too though.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By Bankerbob20/2 15:02Sat Feb 20 15:02:33 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 1264

You were saying...?

reply to this article | return to the front page

1 person likes this 1 person

Re: Walsall match thread

By SFCfox20/2 15:03Sat Feb 20 15:03:25 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 1235

I didn't mean our Goalkeeper.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By Hitchin Callling20/2 14:10Sat Feb 20 14:10:10 2021In response to Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 1411

Hope Smith just injured as does not desevre to be dropped.Roles lasted long plus no sign of the Derby lad again.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By BasingstokeBoro20/2 14:16Sat Feb 20 14:16:22 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 1376

You hope he is injured?

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By SFCfox20/2 14:18Sat Feb 20 14:18:55 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 1367

Sicko.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By Freemo20/2 14:20Sat Feb 20 14:20:06 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 1372

Just caught myself looking forward to the match. This doesn't end well.

reply to this article | return to the front page

2 people like this 2 people

Re: Walsall match thread

By Deltic 2120/2 15:58Sat Feb 20 15:58:53 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 1002

It hasn’t started well either!

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By BasingstokeBoro20/2 14:23Sat Feb 20 14:23:10 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 1371

Me too. It will all end in tears!

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By Freemo20/2 15:02Sat Feb 20 15:02:05 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 1259

KIN ELL

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By RockyBottom20/2 14:39Sat Feb 20 14:39:33 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 1336

Anyone watching the preview before the game on YouTube. Nice idea from the club. Would suggest it might be better running 2.15 - 2.45 as right up until kick-off won't suit some people?

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Walsall match thread

By Owen B20/2 14:47Sat Feb 20 14:47:04 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 1332

Good to see Ronnie involved.

reply to this article | return to the front page

1 person likes this 1 person

Re: Walsall match thread

By Freemo20/2 17:05Sat Feb 20 17:05:57 2021In response to Re: Walsall match thread Top of thread

Views: 831

It's a good idea with the current situation. Nice to see Matt earning his place after years of having the piss ripped out of him on here.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Previous thread: Newport by Copeysaurus21/2 21:04Sun Feb 21 21:04:45 2021view thread