Howaythelads Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 He could have changed things by bringing Milner on sooner and he could have got a message on to Parker and Butt to get up and support the front two. Every time we went forward it was pretty much Duff or Rossi in the middle and no fucker else making any effort. He could have played Steven Taylor at right back instead of Stephen Cannonballhead Carr who is shit. I'll sgree with you on the Mlner piont should have been brought on earlier. However I'll say with the midfield it's pretty obvious Parker slightly damaged his knee early in the game and because of the lack of depth on the bench Roeder was forced to make Parker the holding midfield player and make Butt attempt to play Parker's role. As for Taylor/Carr I didn't think Carr played that bad today and Taylor looked slighly uncertain at RB on Wednesday. He could have brought on Milner for Parker if needed. Given up on using words again? Don't blame you at your age typing must be a bit of a struggle! There are no words to describe the stupidity of your suggestion, tbh. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 He could have changed things by bringing Milner on sooner and he could have got a message on to Parker and Butt to get up and support the front two. Every time we went forward it was pretty much Duff or Rossi in the middle and no fucker else making any effort. He could have played Steven Taylor at right back instead of Stephen Cannonballhead Carr who is shit. I'll sgree with you on the Mlner piont should have been brought on earlier. However I'll say with the midfield it's pretty obvious Parker slightly damaged his knee early in the game and because of the lack of depth on the bench Roeder was forced to make Parker the holding midfield player and make Butt attempt to play Parker's role. As for Taylor/Carr I didn't think Carr played that bad today and Taylor looked slighly uncertain at RB on Wednesday. He could have brought on Milner for Parker if needed. Given up on using words again? Don't blame you at your age typing must be a bit of a struggle! There are no words to describe the stupidity of your suggestion, tbh. Ironic... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEMTEX Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 Again I'll probobly get bashedfor this but oh well. What was he supposed to do today? For me he did everything he could have done. People blame him for the team not scoring a goal, the team is always going to be a struggle for us when we are missing 3 of our 4 strikers and 2 key midfielders (Dyer and Emre), I add Dyer there because you have to believe up until yesterday Dyer will have been involved in all the training and no doubt would have been part of our gameplan. Also some fans can't seem to accept what this time really is. It is a transition year. The club is in a very bad financial situation, Roeder has only been able to add 4 members to Souness's squad, he's lost Owen for the year and had to let argueably his favourite midfielder from last season, Bowyer, leave. My personal opinion is that from the start this season has been a write off. Get what we can, stay up, do as well in the cups as possible and then further build on the squad. What good is it going to do sacking Roeder? We'll have to pay him off which will cost the club more money, no doubt the new manager will cost a fair bit to bring in and then he'll revamp the squad again, and maybe some of the guys like Oba won't fit in with his plans and we'll have to spend more money on new players and we'll be right back where we were this summer. *is with you* Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 He could have changed things by bringing Milner on sooner and he could have got a message on to Parker and Butt to get up and support the front two. Every time we went forward it was pretty much Duff or Rossi in the middle and no fucker else making any effort. He could have played Steven Taylor at right back instead of Stephen Cannonballhead Carr who is shit. I'll sgree with you on the Mlner piont should have been brought on earlier. However I'll say with the midfield it's pretty obvious Parker slightly damaged his knee early in the game and because of the lack of depth on the bench Roeder was forced to make Parker the holding midfield player and make Butt attempt to play Parker's role. As for Taylor/Carr I didn't think Carr played that bad today and Taylor looked slighly uncertain at RB on Wednesday. He could have brought on Milner for Parker if needed. Given up on using words again? Don't blame you at your age typing must be a bit of a struggle! There are no words to describe the stupidity of your suggestion, tbh. Ironic... Obviously you've realised.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 He could have changed things by bringing Milner on sooner and he could have got a message on to Parker and Butt to get up and support the front two. Every time we went forward it was pretty much Duff or Rossi in the middle and no fucker else making any effort. He could have played Steven Taylor at right back instead of Stephen Cannonballhead Carr who is shit. I'll sgree with you on the Mlner piont should have been brought on earlier. However I'll say with the midfield it's pretty obvious Parker slightly damaged his knee early in the game and because of the lack of depth on the bench Roeder was forced to make Parker the holding midfield player and make Butt attempt to play Parker's role. As for Taylor/Carr I didn't think Carr played that bad today and Taylor looked slighly uncertain at RB on Wednesday. He could have brought on Milner for Parker if needed. Given up on using words again? Don't blame you at your age typing must be a bit of a struggle! There are no words to describe the stupidity of your suggestion, tbh. Ironic... Obviously you've realised.... A long time ago.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DONTOONER Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 Well less talk then since some of us are divided on Roeder. Personally i will give him 3 more games in the Premier League . I expect at least 3 points from it...Or else i cant see anyone still backing him. I do agree that he is not a clueless manager like souness but he might not be the one that brings the club success Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
peasepud Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 We don't look like staying up, but no half decent manager would come here in the current circumstances anyway. I think we're stuck with him, like it or not. He's been shafted good and proper by Shepherd. believe it or not though, football management isnt just about buying players, its the 90 mins of a game where a manager is meant to do his main work. In that time Roeder looks at his most clueless, he doesnt dictate the game, get messages out to the team and hasnt heard of changing a game by making substitutions. His one attempt was to replace a winger with another winger. Why have Luque sat on the bench? get him on and see if he can shake it up. You can virtually time a game on Roeders substitutions, when he replaces Nobby (as he does every game) then you know its nearly time for the 4th official to hold up his sign. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BottledDog Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 Personally i will give him 3 more games in the Premier League . I expect at least 3 points from it... Continue that level of acceptance until the end of the season and we will end up with bang on 36 points. Cutting it pretty fine there don't ya think. bluewink.gif Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DONTOONER Posted October 29, 2006 Share Posted October 29, 2006 Personally i will give him 3 more games in the Premier League . I expect at least 3 points from it... Continue that level of acceptance until the end of the season and we will end up with bang on 36 points. Cutting it pretty fine there don't ya think. bluewink.gif Well that is a statement for the Roeder Fan club... In the most ideal world....after loosing 3 games Roeder will come out to say he going to quit and ask the club to get a new manager. F**k Fred grows a brain and hires someone DECENT AND I REALLY MEAN some manager that can fit our ambitions Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads Posted October 29, 2006 Share Posted October 29, 2006 We don't look like staying up, but no half decent manager would come here in the current circumstances anyway. I think we're stuck with him, like it or not. He's been shafted good and proper by Shepherd. believe it or not though, football management isnt just about buying players, its the 90 mins of a game where a manager is meant to do his main work. In that time Roeder looks at his most clueless, he doesnt dictate the game, get messages out to the team and hasnt heard of changing a game by making substitutions. His one attempt was to replace a winger with another winger. Why have Luque sat on the bench? get him on and see if he can shake it up. You can virtually time a game on Roeders substitutions, when he replaces Nobby (as he does every game) then you know its nearly time for the 4th official to hold up his sign. Until you mentioned Luque I was on the same page. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest eyeball_tickler Posted October 29, 2006 Share Posted October 29, 2006 on the plus side, only 1 goal conceded in the last 4 games Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ryunufc Posted October 29, 2006 Share Posted October 29, 2006 Roeder gets the blame not because of the way we play. He is too patient with his first eleven and when he chooses not to make any changes while we cant get a goal, he is placing himself in difficult position. For weeks before last Wed, he kept rossi while we missed chance after chance. God knows when Luque gets a game. He is under pressure, but not as much as what Souness got. The circumtances we are in is largely because of Shepherd, but when Roeder does not do what he can he gets the blame as well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted October 29, 2006 Share Posted October 29, 2006 Why defend the indefensible? The bloke is fucking clueless. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
merlin Posted October 29, 2006 Share Posted October 29, 2006 How can you defend him? From 6, yes SIX, matches against mediocre/shit opposition (boro, charlton, fulham, everton, villa, bolton) we have scored 3, yes THREE, goals. 2 points from 6 games. Acceptable, or not? Not acceptable but how can a manager be judged on 6 games. Correct me if I'm wrong but weren't David Moyes's Everton bottom around this time last year, he managed to turn things round when given the chance. If we are still aorund the bottom 3 in mid-Feburary then that is the time to hit the panic button. How many teams have escaped relegation after being in the bottom 3 at Christmas....?? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Fox Posted October 29, 2006 Share Posted October 29, 2006 I dont think it matters how you tinker with the midfield its just not good enough to get us near the top. I dont blame Parker as such, he works very hard and is the sort of engine you need, is a better bet than Butt who is way past his best. Emre to me is disappointing, works hard, looks busy but does not create much. Dyer will not remain fit long enough to count on him. Parker/Dyer would be the best but failing that Parker/ N'Zogbia for me. Just my opinion. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebellious Posted October 29, 2006 Share Posted October 29, 2006 I noticed how Solano started to get tired by about the 60th minute, he stopped linking up with the front and lost the ball about 3 times in succession. I think any of us would have brought milner on by then. I missed who we actually had on the bench, was luque on there? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dev Posted October 29, 2006 Share Posted October 29, 2006 Yeah Luque was available but in truth none of us here knows whether he's been putting in at training. If he's still completely uninterested then I don't blame Roeder for leaving him on the bench. Roeder should never have been appointed in the first place but I don't see the point in sacking him now unless there's a really good manager lined up. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fraser Posted October 29, 2006 Share Posted October 29, 2006 There's absolutely no doubt that Roeder's appointment arose out of a combination of being in the right place at the right time and some good form and results. That allowed Shepherd the opportunity to appoint him. Without wanting to start the debate about who it should have been, he wouldn't have been my choice. He has had some bad luck: no Owen, inheriting Luque and an appalling defence but he did have the opportunity to at least begin to shape a squad in the summer and he largely missed out on that. Some good footballers went begging, (and we all know how long that list is). He's now responsible for the squad we have and how they perform, that's the bottom line in football management. What worries me is the thought that we don't improve before January and Shepherd acts. Who would come (player or manager)? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio Posted October 29, 2006 Share Posted October 29, 2006 He could have changed things by bringing Milner on sooner and he could have got a message on to Parker and Butt to get up and support the front two. Every time we went forward it was pretty much Duff or Rossi in the middle and no fucker else making any effort. He could have played Steven Taylor at right back instead of Stephen Cannonballhead Carr who is shit. I'll sgree with you on the Mlner piont should have been brought on earlier. However I'll say with the midfield it's pretty obvious Parker slightly damaged his knee early in the game and because of the lack of depth on the bench Roeder was forced to make Parker the holding midfield player and make Butt attempt to play Parker's role. As for Taylor/Carr I didn't think Carr played that bad today and Taylor looked slighly uncertain at RB on Wednesday. He could have brought on Milner for Parker if needed. Can you remember a game when Milner has SUCCESSFULLY been deployed at a central midfielder? He is a winger not a central midfielder. He could have put Milner out on the left and moved N'Zogbia into the middle. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads Posted October 29, 2006 Share Posted October 29, 2006 He could have changed things by bringing Milner on sooner and he could have got a message on to Parker and Butt to get up and support the front two. Every time we went forward it was pretty much Duff or Rossi in the middle and no fucker else making any effort. He could have played Steven Taylor at right back instead of Stephen Cannonballhead Carr who is shit. I'll sgree with you on the Mlner piont should have been brought on earlier. However I'll say with the midfield it's pretty obvious Parker slightly damaged his knee early in the game and because of the lack of depth on the bench Roeder was forced to make Parker the holding midfield player and make Butt attempt to play Parker's role. As for Taylor/Carr I didn't think Carr played that bad today and Taylor looked slighly uncertain at RB on Wednesday. He could have brought on Milner for Parker if needed. Can you remember a game when Milner has SUCCESSFULLY been deployed at a central midfielder? He is a winger not a central midfielder. He could have put Milner out on the left and moved N'Zogbia into the middle. Better that than Milner in the middle, course, whenever Zog has been in the middle he's looked poor as well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
STM Posted October 29, 2006 Share Posted October 29, 2006 What could he have done? 1. Started Taylor and Ramage instead of Carr and Bramble 2. Subbed Luque and Milner early in an effort to change the game. 3. Told Parker and Butt what positions they were playing. 4. Told Duff that Hollywood is in california. 5. Made sure Nobby stuck to the wing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elliottman Posted October 29, 2006 Share Posted October 29, 2006 He could tell Harper to release the friggin ball quicker and when i mean release i dont mean "lets see if i can kick it further than Shay"!!!!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted October 29, 2006 Share Posted October 29, 2006 Second half the movement was non-existent. Harper didn't have many other options but to twat it really. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now