-
This site is sponsored by Lang & Potter.
For the Grant bashers
- Thread starter up the line
- Start date
What was Sonny gesturing at the end?Mark Pedlar":3nwei41r said:
Looked like he was coming over to say Don't Give Up, but thought he said something else?
He is the team's leader after all
the_corkscrew":1wsmfgmp said:
Something along the lines of "what me? You brave enough to come here and say that?"
The "supporters" were querying the lack of commitment.
The issue isn't not having Taylor, and the issue isn't that Joel Grant is a bad player, the issue is that we're using Joel Grant in exactly the same way that we use Ryan Taylor, that'll never work, watching Grant trying to jump and take down balls or get flick ons against huge CB's is painful and frustrating, we need to change our formation/tactics until Taylor's back, we can still be dangerous without Taylor, but not if we continue as we have been for the last two games.
Cobi Budge":1y9kgsyr said:
I agree Taylor's absence shouldn't be the problem but unfortunately I think it probably is. When a one trick pony manager (Yes, when it works it's very effective) finds the only fit personnal left available to him don't fit his one and only plan things can often go south. Witness yesterday's debacle and to a degree Pompey the previous weekend. Being as though Taylor is key to the plan then why we don't have a decent replacement for him remains to be answered.
Maybe UTL was out of order in apportioning blame to JB, the fact that Grant is unable to play the lone striker role is not his fault. The fact that he was told to play the lone striker role is not Grants` fault, in these circumstances we should have an alternative style of play to fall back on, one which accommodates the squad members called upon to substitute for say, Taylor; to this end the responsibility must surely rest with DA. We appear not to have learned the lesson of the first third of the season. To use an extreme analogy, it`s a little like asking Lameiras to sub for Sonny. Welcome back UTL, look forward to disagreeing with you in future. :twisted:
G
Greenskin
Guest
justanotherfan":3l1wqz6f said:
Why should Argyle change to "an alternative style of play" when the one using Taylor as a target man to bring Carey and Lameiras into the game propelled Argyle from rock bottom to 5th in the table? The issue is one of personnel not style,although admittedly in this case they are inextricably linked. Adams obviously had learnt the lesson of the first third of the season by signing a similar type of player to Taylor-maybe the real question to be asked is why a club on 10000 gates and which has garnered considerable income from transfers in recent seasons is unable to do better than a player with obvious injury problems which have stunted his career so badly.
Well obviously the need for an alternative style of play is in the fact that Taylor is not available and no one can play his role, DA has stated in the past week that Church was injured when he signed him, ergo, no Taylor and no substitute so play to the strengths of those available, seems simple really.
"Long question. Simple answer. Southend were godawful and also I got to mock anton Ferdinand in town so I was delighted"
So; ok to 'mock' opposition players in the street then? :think:
So; ok to 'mock' opposition players in the street then? :think:
Pogleswoody":2q6z4hx0 said:
A. He mocked me first. Took the rise out of my running trainers
B. It was playful banter. I asked if he played in slippers these days
C. I wasn't foaming at the mouth like the guys around me yesterday
