Yes there is. I'm sick of that prat pulling me up for objective comments. All I did was say Mayor was great and that he needs to show this form in L1. I then said we are playing Huddersfields kids and let's not get carried away. Every outfield player but 1 ranges from 17-22. If you observe that + league appearances, this is pretty much factually correct.

Then that prat as usual comes in and thinks he can call me this and that. Jog on.

Can you explain how a 22 year old is now a 'kid'? It's hardly Michael Owen against Argentina is it. If a 22 year old gets in trouble they don't get sent to young offenders. You are 5 years past being treated as a minor.

When David Beckham kicked Diego Simeone, and the country booed him, blamed him, spat at him, and burned effigies of him (encouraged by the media), he was 23.

When they play for Huddersfield against a League One side they are a child, apparently.

As I mentioned before, why does Fornah, Watts, Cooper, Jephcott and Opoku not get treated like 'kids' when they had a poor game or inconsistent patch? They get called sh1t and blamed for every bad result and poor performance.

You've really misunderstood the situation. If you read my post, I also referred to league appearances. I'd like to think you would have cottoned on.

The reason we give stick to Jepchott, Opoku, Fornah etc is because they are first team professionals at Argyle's level. That is, they are deemed as first team players. Then there are other players who are not deemed ready yet (and maybe discarded eventually), think Law & Lolos.

The Huddersfield team we played last night included nine 17-22 year olds, none of whom are considered first team players at Huddersfield. I'm surprised I have to explain this. We played a team last night, that really we should turn over every single time. We could have had 5/6. It's like putting out an Argyle team consisting of Law, Lolos, Pursall, Randell, etc etc. Those latter four have not been deemed ready for L1 standard, and maybe in some cases, not at all eventually.

I don't actually care. The history books will show we won 3-2.

Mayor was instrumental in our win. I'd rather he had a good game than an ineffective one.

My point remains their young players weren't all that much younger than ours, so there is no point using the word 'kids' to diminish the result repeatedly. It isn't our fault that we give our 19-23 year olds plenty of experience in the league as well, and as a result they are better.

Well noted MM,I have always wanted a defender on each post to defend corners,some tactics do not need to be changed just because the game has,
as you said,someone on that far post may have stopped that goal.

Perhaps Ryan Lowe deserves some credit for outwitting the Huddersfield manager, who probably thought Argyle would select quite a few non-regulars. He selects a team of kids and Argyle rock up with basically the full first team squad. Game set and match to Ryan Lowe in my book. Argyle are in the 4th round and Huddersfield aren’t. Simple.

Perhaps Ryan Lowe deserves some credit for outwitting the Huddersfield manager, who probably thought Argyle would select quite a few non-regulars. He selects a team of kids and Argyle rock up with basically the full first team squad. Game set and match to Ryan Lowe in my book. Argyle are in the 4th round and Huddersfield aren’t. Simple.

What would be the purpose of Argyle selecting an inexperienced team to play a side a division above us? I don't know why anyone would expect that.

Manchester City and Chelsea (who have European football to worry about) have fielded strong first teams this weekend, but Derby County and Huddersfield Town are messing about playing teenagers trying their best to get knocked out.

Argyle have made over £100,000 from the FA Cup at a time clubs are desperate for money. So I don't understand the logic in any lower league side messing about in the FA Cup at the moment.

Perhaps Ryan Lowe deserves some credit for outwitting the Huddersfield manager, who probably thought Argyle would select quite a few non-regulars. He selects a team of kids and Argyle rock up with basically the full first team squad. Game set and match to Ryan Lowe in my book. Argyle are in the 4th round and Huddersfield aren’t. Simple.

What would be the purpose of Argyle selecting an inexperienced team to play a side a division above us? I don't know why anyone would expect that.

Manchester City and Chelsea (who have European football to worry about) have fielded strong first teams this weekend, but Derby County and Huddersfield Town are messing about playing teenagers trying their best to get knocked out.

Argyle have made over £100,000 from the FA Cup at a time clubs are desperate for money. So I don't understand the logic in any lower league side messing about in the FA Cup at the moment.

Neither do I. Also, match fitness needs to be maintained so the 1st team should play regular football as in due course they will be knocked out and back to playing league football the next week.

Perhaps Ryan Lowe deserves some credit for outwitting the Huddersfield manager, who probably thought Argyle would select quite a few non-regulars. He selects a team of kids and Argyle rock up with basically the full first team squad. Game set and match to Ryan Lowe in my book. Argyle are in the 4th round and Huddersfield aren’t. Simple.

What would be the purpose of Argyle selecting an inexperienced team to play a side a division above us? I don't know why anyone would expect that.

Manchester City and Chelsea (who have European football to worry about) have fielded strong first teams this weekend, but Derby County and Huddersfield Town are messing about playing teenagers trying their best to get knocked out.

Argyle have made over £100,000 from the FA Cup at a time clubs are desperate for money. So I don't understand the logic in any lower league side messing about in the FA Cup at the moment.

Only my opinion, I think Derby would have played a decent team, COVID permitting. A team can only really gain confidence from wins and, like us, that is what they need

BG gets on my nits if I'm honest, however he does (when times allow) attend and awful lot of matches and is therefore surely allowed a voice. The last person who got a reaction like him lived in Cyprus, had no inclination to attend games even when he came back home for a few weeks and delighted in winding Argyle fans up, which in turn, led to hijacks of most threads when he 'voiced his opinion'. He had to go and I'm certainly glad he's an ex poster.

Also BG does tend to argue with people more than anyone I've known and this is the part that could lead to his downfall. If only he could wind in the personal 'you are idiot' type posts, it would make the Mods life a lot easier, and that's all they are after.

I dunno Ian, I have been on the receiving end of BGs responses in the past, but I can't say I was that bothered by them. What I find with him, is that he questions what posters have written, often justifiably, even if a tad over zealously at times. But, as you say, BG is green through and through.
However, I would far rather that than some of the 'agenda' type posters who, no matter how well a player plays, will find ways of criticising them. Very tedious.
I would go as far as to say that BG is a victim of his own 'success' in winding people up. Some of the criticism he gets seems way over the top to me. As has been said, some people need to 'grow a pair'.
Free the Balham One!!!

Also BG does tend to argue with people more than anyone I've known and this is the part that could lead to his downfall. If only he could wind in the personal 'you are idiot' type posts,

He certainly contests their opinion and to be fair some people really do post some pretty idiotic stuff (usually the trolls). I find that if you are able to quantify what you say then invariably the keyboard tennis stops as it's recognised how you came to taking a particular view/stance. It may well be an alternative view but tbf to BG once that clarification has been provided he does seem to respect that. As I've said before, some people need to grow a set. Sticks and stones come to mind...

Yes there is. I'm sick of that prat pulling me up for objective comments. All I did was say Mayor was great and that he needs to show this form in L1. I then said we are playing Huddersfields kids and let's not get carried away. Every outfield player but 1 ranges from 17-22. If you observe that + league appearances, this is pretty much factually correct.

Then that prat as usual comes in and thinks he can call me this and that. Jog on.

Can you explain how a 22 year old is now a 'kid'? It's hardly Michael Owen against Argentina is it. If a 22 year old gets in trouble they don't get sent to young offenders. You are 5 years past being treated as a minor.

When David Beckham kicked Diego Simeone, and the country booed him, blamed him, spat at him, and burned effigies of him (encouraged by the media), he was 23.

When they play for Huddersfield against a League One side they are a child, apparently.

As I mentioned before, why does Fornah, Watts, Cooper, Jephcott and Opoku not get treated like 'kids' when they had a poor game or inconsistent patch? They get called sh1t and blamed for every bad result and poor performance.

You've really misunderstood the situation. If you read my post, I also referred to league appearances. I'd like to think you would have cottoned on.

The reason we give stick to Jepchott, Opoku, Fornah etc is because they are first team professionals at Argyle's level. That is, they are deemed as first team players. Then there are other players who are not deemed ready yet (and maybe discarded eventually), think Law & Lolos.

The Huddersfield team we played last night included nine 17-22 year olds, none of whom are considered first team players at Huddersfield. I'm surprised I have to explain this. We played a team last night, that really we should turn over every single time. We could have had 5/6. It's like putting out an Argyle team consisting of Law, Lolos, Pursall, Randell, etc etc. Those latter four have not been deemed ready for L1 standard, and maybe in some cases, not at all eventually.

I don't actually care. The history books will show we won 3-2.

Mayor was instrumental in our win. I'd rather he had a good game than an ineffective one.

My point remains their young players weren't all that much younger than ours, so there is no point using the word 'kids' to diminish the result repeatedly. It isn't our fault that we give our 19-23 year olds plenty of experience in the league as well, and as a result they are better.

You don't care, but you care enough to have replied in the 1st place, and then to have replied with another four paragraphs? Or just a really weak argument perhaps.

I never denied that we won 3-2 or that Mayor was instrumental. And yes, they were kids. Whereas our young players are playing at 1st team level in League 1, the Huddersfield players, much like Tafari Moore and ASB (Arsenal & Man City), will likely end up in non-league and out of football. As mentioned, and not just by myself either, we were facing perhaps the weakest opposition we will face all season. Nothing to get carried away about.

[GreenThing]

No one should have to justify why they do or do not like a player. Sometimes it’s just gut instinct or a personal opinion, yet we are often challenged to provide evidence or proof, then accused of making things up. It’s a football forum, not a court of law.

Perhaps Ryan Lowe deserves some credit for outwitting the Huddersfield manager, who probably thought Argyle would select quite a few non-regulars. He selects a team of kids and Argyle rock up with basically the full first team squad. Game set and match to Ryan Lowe in my book. Argyle are in the 4th round and Huddersfield aren’t. Simple.

Argyle had all the available fit first team players in the match day squad, apart from recalling players currently out on loan or using U18 players there weren’t any other payers to pick.

For what it's worth, I've had a read through the entire Huddersfield match thread on their forum and the abuse and in-fighting is far worse than on here. Either they're always like that or Covid has made people a bit loopy.

The general consensus seemed to be:

-The ref was from the lower leagues and was shocking - letting all our fouls go and blowing up for everything they did
-We were very average and their first-team would have destroyed us, but we were deserved winners on the night
-We were too physical and canny for their kids and basically used dark arts and tactical fouls to win the game
-Their right-back had a terrible game and was at fault for all three of our goals
-Nouble should have been sent off for an elbow late on (one or two acknowledged their player should have gone for that crazy two-footed stamp early doors).
-Some don't care they're out of the cup as they've got a small squad, while others thought their manager disrespected the competition and it's a shame even second tier clubs play their reserves these days.

Thanks Woodsy. Always good to hear the other perspective and stops us getting carried away. In response to "them" I would say:

1) I didn't notice ref particularly which ought to be a good sign. And if he's from lower leagues - welcome to our world.

2) We were pretty average on balance. That's been apparent for a few months. If they want to progress in the competition, they need a few experienced first teamers. It would have made the difference.

3) Bring on the dark arts! About bloody time. I was loving the last five minutes, a glimpse into the Wycombe fan's world. Although we really didn't do anything 'out there' eg feign head injury etc.

4) Didn't notice their RB was particularly bad but almost all of them looked pretty young and therefore, by definition, inexperienced. It was their chance to catch the manager's eye and by and large most of them failed.

5) I didn't see either of these incidents. But Nouble in a manoeuvre is like turning a supertanker. I would stay well clear unless I was at least the same size.

6) Think I'm leaning towards the 'disrespect the competition' side of things, I don't know Huddersfield's story but they ought to have put out a half decent side. Smacks of entitlement, and a lack of desire. They're only one relegation away from playing the likes of us next season, and Prem looks out of reach for them for some time.

Yes there is. I'm sick of that prat pulling me up for objective comments. All I did was say Mayor was great and that he needs to show this form in L1. I then said we are playing Huddersfields kids and let's not get carried away. Every outfield player but 1 ranges from 17-22. If you observe that + league appearances, this is pretty much factually correct.

Then that prat as usual comes in and thinks he can call me this and that. Jog on.

Can you explain how a 22 year old is now a 'kid'? It's hardly Michael Owen against Argentina is it. If a 22 year old gets in trouble they don't get sent to young offenders. You are 5 years past being treated as a minor.

When David Beckham kicked Diego Simeone, and the country booed him, blamed him, spat at him, and burned effigies of him (encouraged by the media), he was 23.

When they play for Huddersfield against a League One side they are a child, apparently.

As I mentioned before, why does Fornah, Watts, Cooper, Jephcott and Opoku not get treated like 'kids' when they had a poor game or inconsistent patch? They get called sh1t and blamed for every bad result and poor performance.

You've really misunderstood the situation. If you read my post, I also referred to league appearances. I'd like to think you would have cottoned on.

The reason we give stick to Jepchott, Opoku, Fornah etc is because they are first team professionals at Argyle's level. That is, they are deemed as first team players. Then there are other players who are not deemed ready yet (and maybe discarded eventually), think Law & Lolos.

The Huddersfield team we played last night included nine 17-22 year olds, none of whom are considered first team players at Huddersfield. I'm surprised I have to explain this. We played a team last night, that really we should turn over every single time. We could have had 5/6. It's like putting out an Argyle team consisting of Law, Lolos, Pursall, Randell, etc etc. Those latter four have not been deemed ready for L1 standard, and maybe in some cases, not at all eventually.

I don't actually care. The history books will show we won 3-2.

Mayor was instrumental in our win. I'd rather he had a good game than an ineffective one.

My point remains their young players weren't all that much younger than ours, so there is no point using the word 'kids' to diminish the result repeatedly. It isn't our fault that we give our 19-23 year olds plenty of experience in the league as well, and as a result they are better.

You don't care, but you care enough to have replied in the 1st place, and then to have replied with another four paragraphs? Or just a really weak argument perhaps.

I never denied that we won 3-2 or that Mayor was instrumental. And yes, they were kids. Whereas our young players are playing at 1st team level in League 1, the Huddersfield players, much like Tafari Moore and ASB (Arsenal & Man City), will likely end up in non-league and out of football. As mentioned, and not just by myself either, we were facing perhaps the weakest opposition we will face all season. Nothing to get carried away about.

We are not getting carried away; we are just excited by the fact that we are in the 4th round of the FA Cup. If Huddersfield weren’t bothered, that’s their problem.