[Albion] Fabian I was wrong

[dazzer6666]

He's young - he's learning, he's made mistakes and who really knows the story (if there is one) behind the Ferguson issue.

Hopefully he's learnt that you can't play one central midfielder on their own, especially when said midfielder is 19 and was coming back from a long injury.

Certainly didn't look like he's lost the dressing room in that video from the Newcastle dressing room.

Morale clearly at an all-time low

 

[jimhigham]

Are you suggesting that all that hysteria was a load of b**-w****** horse shit?

Gosh.

Loving the use of the asterisks there.

Bat walking?

 

[Greg Bobkin]

Loving the use of the asterisks there.

Bat walking?

Bra-wearing?

 

[Machiavelli]

Forest was a Freak result.
But defensive lapses, where goals were given away cheaply wasn't.

We had concede 2 goals within 10 minutes of each other in 3consecutive games prior to those wins .
It would have been 4 if not for a fortuitous VAR call against Southampton.
This was following on from throwing away points against Wolves, with 2 goals in 4 minutes.

We headed the table of points lost from winning positions and it was a real problem.
Fabs decision to throw caution to the wind and experiment against Forest, was insane.

I am over the moon with the defensive displays since Forest, because it was a massive gap in the way we were playing.
But pretending that the issue was that we weren't trusting the process enough, is a little misplaced, IMO.

Agree with a lot of this.
You're OTT with 'insane' against Forest. We had three midfielders each of whom could play 45 minutes, and this explains the selection. When I heard the formation on the way up to Nottingham, I wasn't optimistic, and that's what transpired.
We hadn't seen that formation before and haven't seen it since. But, given the dire circumstances, I can understand why it was made.

 

[Uh_huh_him]

Agree with a lot of this.
You're OTT with 'insane' against Forest. We had three midfielders each of whom could play 45 minutes, and this explains the selection. When I heard the formation on the way up to Nottingham, I wasn't optimistic, and that's what transpired.
We hadn't seen that formation before and haven't seen it since. But, given the dire circumstances, I can understand why it was made.

I can't.
There were plenty of other options than "f*** it, let's see how 4-1-5 plays out, against one of the best organised teams in the league".

I thought we stood a chance of taking a beatingbefore I heard the team news.
When i saw the teamsheet I thought it could be 4 or 5.

If only.

 

[Machiavelli]

I can't.
There were plenty of other options than "f*** it, let's see how 4-1-5 plays out, against one of the best organised teams in the league".

I thought we stood a chance of taking a beatingbefore I heard the team news.
When i saw the teamsheet I thought it could be 4 or 5.

If only.

Name those options. I'm willing to change my mind if there was an obvious alternative.

 

[Uh_huh_him]

Name those options. I'm willing to change my mind if there was an obvious alternative.

How about start with 2 in midfield and then change it depending on how they're/we're holding up at half time?

Or get Rutter to play in midfield.
Or Webster, or Veltman

 

[dejavuatbtn]

Why does he repeat everything he says ?

Been listening to that orange idiot too much?

 

[sakooshi]

Why does he repeat everything he says ?

It's a well known oratorial technique, repeating the theme and building up to a crescendo. Some of the most outstanding orators in history were consummate exponents of it, like, well you know, there's been a few of them.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Loving the use of the asterisks there.

Bat walking?

Bog wading.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Been listening to that orange idiot too much?

You leave our Barbs alone

 

[Machiavelli]

How about start with 2 in midfield and then change it depending on how they're/we're holding up at half time?

Or get Rutter to play in midfield.
Or Webster, or Veltman

Webster just back from injury. The minutes he could have played very much open to question, throwing him back in a new role might have generated a load of abuse for the manager.
Veltman: who could have played FB, given we had none available on the bench?

I'll trust FH/the medical team on which of the 45 mins the 3 available CMers could play.
In terms of Rutter, I expected that he would play in CM when I saw the line-up. And I still think he should have played there, but there might be an explanation as to why it didn't happen (and hasn't happened since he's been here) that you and I are unaware of.

 

[Machiavelli]

You leave our Barbs alone

View attachment 197814

If he's an idiot, he's a mustard idiot, puh-lease.

 

[Iggle Piggle]

To be fair @Uncle Spielberg , there are far less mercurial Albion fans than you who were beginning to waver when it came to our manager.

Indeed. I didn't hear it but apparently Paul Samrah gave it both barrels on Radio Sussex after the Forest game (which my mate was gently ribbing him about on Sunday). He won football supporter of the year if I'm remembering it right FFS!

Fair play @Uncle Spielberg It's much easier to pretend you've never said anything.

 

[Uh_huh_him]

Webster just back from injury. The minutes he could have played very much open to question, throwing him back in a new role might have generated a load of abuse for the manager.
Veltman: who could have played FB, given we had none available on the bench?

I'll trust FH/the medical team on which of the 45 mins the 3 available CMers could play.
In terms of Rutter, I expected that he would play in CM when I saw the line-up. And I still think he should have played there, but there might be an explanation as to why it didn't happen (and hasn't happened since he's been here) that you and I are unaware of.

Well if you're going to bat away every suggestion, with "welll there must have been stuff we don't know" what's the point?

Bottom line, the option he picked wasn't the only option.
But it was the worst.
All of the players I mentioned were available to play, but he chose the weakest option to start the game. and it cost us.
We all knew it would.

Therefore it was an insane choice.

 

[Machiavelli]

Well if you're going to bat away every suggestion, with "welll there must have been stuff we don't know" what's the point?

Bottom line, the option he picked wasn't the only option.
But it was the worst.
All of the players I mentioned were available to play, but he chose the weakest option to start the game. and it cost us.
We all knew it would.

Therefore it was an insane choice.

You and I will just have to disagree.
Most importantly, you've claimed that I'm batting away every suggestion with 'there's stuff we don't know' when three out of four of the responses to your suggestions are drawing on things that we do know, and the other point was also indicating my concern with the selection prior to the game while also recognising that these concerns might not be taking into account stuff that we don't know.

From there, you've said that there were plenty of other options but haven't specified them.

And then you've very confidently asserted that it was the worst option available. Presumably you'll be able to share with us your penetrating analysis of selections, formations, personnel that you offered on here prior to the Forest game. If you can't, all of what you've said comes from the benefit of hindsight while also avoiding addressing issues related to player and minutes availability that we do know.

 

[Uh_huh_him]

You and I will just have to disagree.
Most importantly, you've claimed that I'm batting away every suggestion with 'there's stuff we don't know' when three out of four of the responses to your suggestions are drawing on things that we do know, and the other point was also indicating my concern with the selection prior to the game while also recognising that these concerns might not be taking into account stuff that we don't know.

From there, you've said that there were plenty of other options but haven't specified them.

And then you've very confidently asserted that it was the worst option available. Presumably you'll be able to share with us your penetrating analysis of selections, formations, personnel that you offered on here prior to the Forest game. If you can't, all of what you've said comes from the benefit of hindsight while also avoiding addressing issues related to player and minutes availability that we do know.

I suggested many options
Maybe you didn't read my post, but just responded with blind prejudice.

Seeing as your analysis is "the club know best, Huerzeler had no other choices".
There isn't really any point me going into any more details than I have.

Thanks for your time, it's been.....

enlightening.

 

[GT49er]

Morale clearly at an all-time low

Irrational and unreasonable, I know, but 'Guys', guys ....... and more 'guys' still grates for me!

Apart from that he's doing OK, I think.

 

[Not Andy Naylor]

Maybe not, I have a tendency to do this, I always have and no matter how much I am aware of it, and how much it annoys me, I still do it.

Paul Simon built a songwriting career on it.

 

[dazzer6666]

Irrational and unreasonable, I know, but 'Guys', guys ....... and more 'guys' still grates for me!

Apart from that he's doing OK, I think.

Bit of variety needed perhaps ?
Gentlemen ? Chaps ?