|
|
Post by OldStokie on Jan 17, 2004 22:21:45 GMT
I wasn't at the game today or on tuesday. It's obvious to me though that we have a paper thin squad and will struggle if we have injuries and suspensions. A question for those who went to both games, just what made the difference between the two games? I know the result was reversed but it sounded as if we were the better side today which we obviously weren't on tuesday.
JimmyG did say that Russell on the right in place of Hooky would be better. Looks as though he was right.
Great result and I honestly think we can sit back and look forward to another season in this league without too much fear. I think injuries and suspensions will rule us out of the play offs but that doesn't mean I'm not hoping. Losing to Franchise in the cup may have dealt us a massive blow regarding strengthening the side and keeping admission prices down for next year. If we'd gone on to take a good slice of ackers from the Brum game, that would certainly have helped in some respects.
OS.
|
|
|
|
Post by smeegsSCFC on Jan 17, 2004 22:41:12 GMT
I think injuries and suspensions will rule us out of the play offs but that doesn't mean I'm not hoping. Losing to Franchise in the cup may have dealt us a massive blow regarding strengthening the side and keeping admission prices down for next year. If we'd gone on to take a good slice of ackers from the Brum game, that would certainly have helped in some respects. Spot on Mick, but i feel TPs plan is to get us ready for a playoff push next term, the squad simply isnt big and strong enough...yet, difference between today and Tuesday? we were IMHO missing key players and it showed, im still puzzled to why Clarke has the honour of wearing the capains armband, ive said it once and ill say it again, the bloke has no passion or intrest in SCFC, maybe a harsh critasism but you only have to watch his attitude on and off the pitch...it stinks smeegs |
|
|
|
Post by SidibeWithTheKiller on Jan 17, 2004 23:05:01 GMT
A question for those who went to both games, just what made the difference between the two games? OS. Mick Firstly the missing players. Today the presence of Taggart. Ade, GNW and Ed were all noticeable. They do make a difference Secondly, and much as it pains me to say it, ATTITUDE is a BIG difference between the two games. On tuesday in the cup, i would say Stoke showed the wrong attitude from the start, they looked lethargic and as though they didn't give a stuff. Today at MK they looked a team, particularly the last ten minutes of first half and most of second half the attitude was spot on. The players looked as though they cared for the club. I sincerely hope that they were given a rocketing after theri attitude on tuesday becasue they need to keep showing the attitude they showed today. Yes missing players play their part in poor performances but it is all too easy to blame absentees rather than those actually playing. Attitude is everything and if you go into a game tihnking you will lose or acting like you're not bothered, chances are you won't have a set of happy supporters at the end of the match |
|
|
|
Post by slangking on Jan 18, 2004 11:13:23 GMT
If only we'd won on Tuesday.. Then we could have looked forward to being battered by Birminghams reserves in front of what? 15,000 maybe? That really would have made a biiiiiig difference to the accounts. The league is what matters, the f.a cup is dying on it's arse.
|
|
|
|
Post by ChesterStokie on Jan 18, 2004 11:24:35 GMT
The one player who made a massive difference between Tuesday and yesterday was GNW. On Tuesday when the ball was played up to Little Chris he lost it 4 times out of 5, yesterday it stuck to GNW 4 times out of 5. That really does make the difference between losing and winning a football match. Yesterday it gave everyone the confidence to play football and keep and pass the ball, which just didn't happen at all in the first match.
Ade also added another dimension yesterday. Pace.
I don't think Taggart's presence actually made much of a difference. On Tuesday we lost because the midfiield and forwards were not performing, the defence were actually OK and didn't miss Taggart.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jan 18, 2004 11:40:17 GMT
The one player who made a massive difference between Tuesday and yesterday was GNW. On Tuesday when the ball was played up to Little Chris he lost it 4 times out of 5, yesterday it stuck to GNW 4 times out of 5. That really does make the difference between losing and winning a football match. There is simply no arguing that! The difference was so evident that I almost wanted to weep with joy. Mind you, it still didn't shut up a Gifton-hater sat in front of us, and neither did Clive Clarke's excellent game (in which he also set up the goal). I am more convinced than ever that some people go to the match looking only to pick fault with certain players and refusing to acknowledge (or grudgingly at best) anything good that they do. Back to the issue though - Gifton was excellent and showed yesterday exactly what it is that he gives to our team. We miss him when he's not there and should really appreciate his contribution to the side. |
|
|
|
Post by ChesterStokie on Jan 18, 2004 11:48:36 GMT
Still trying to work out Triffic Tone's tic tac of putting him out on the right wing for the last few minutes.
Was he cutting off the supply line from the left back or something very tictactical like that?
Whatever, it was totally beyond me and all the other Stokies tearing their hair out over it.
???
|
|
|
|
Post by JoeinOz on Jan 18, 2004 14:29:24 GMT
Sounds like one of those things that makes the manager look a plonker if it goes wrong but if it works and we win makes him look unfathomably wise!
|
|
|
|
Post by Anto1962 on Jan 18, 2004 14:58:54 GMT
The only reason I can think for sticking him out on the wing is that he is strong and holds the ball up well so when we are winning he can do the corner flag bit and not lose it easily but like you i'd much rather see him in the centre .
|
|
