Not surprised at all.........

Quoted from Mariner_09

Andrew is a loss but we wanted to keep him and was clearly far too good for this level and Clarke doesn't look a sutiable replacement for Pearson.

Strange how your assessment of Danny Andrew has changed!

Yes, I admit that he was better than I first assessed. Would have him over Dixon any day

Quoted from Mariner_09

Yes, I admit that he was better than I first assessed. Would have him over Dixon any day

Give Dixon chance to settle in. He looked good at Chesterfield but obviously we have got 4th division full backs so it is no good expecting miracles.  

I'm not so sure location is the problem.

I'm going back a few years, but good players came here who were not cast offs.
I'm convinced that decent offers to these sort of players would get them here.

It's obvious to me that the current board are not ambitious.

Quoted from cannylad68

I'm not so sure location is the problem.

I'm going back a few years, but good players came here who were not cast offs.
I'm convinced that decent offers to these sort of players would get them here.

It's obvious to me that the current board are not ambitious.

I'm told location is a problem - I don't necessarily see it either. I don't think the board lack ambition, I think that the board don't want to increase the club's debt by increasing the playing budget. Whether you agree or disagree is your choice.

Quoted from MuddyWaters

I'm told location is a problem - I don't necessarily see it either. I don't think the board lack ambition, I think that the board don't want to increase the club's debt by increasing the playing budget. Whether you agree or disagree is your choice.

I think as much as we want to have better players it's important that we live within our means. That's the problem the country has with the National Debt going up month after month which in itself means more interest to pay so less money to spend without borrowing more - and then again and again increasing the debt and interest to pay.

We can moan about players all day, we were warned about Kelly and Hooper but the happy clappers weren't willing to listen. But Slade is the issue.

I wasn't happy when Slade was appointed, I just thought back to the hoof ball, his near suicide of our promotion push in the 2nd half of the season with his insistance to play his  Christmas signing. But then I was willing to give him a chance, first time round we were his 1st League club he then went on to manage some big name clubs. Maybe his tactics had changed, maybe he had learn't something managing in the Championship, his contacts had to of gotten better.

Sadley no. We have returned to hoof football this time to a loan striker who except for in the first half of the Chesterfield match has had zero support (not that it would of mattered at all with Hooper up front), or to our tiny pacey winger who is just muscled out of postion or beaten to the header (No real fault of Demebeles). Its simple, if he wants to persist with hoof ball he needs to play 2 up top. If he wants to play with 1 up front then he needs to play the ball on the deck and pass it round quickly either playing it to foot or into space for our wippet winger to run onto.

Quoted from 123614

People need to realise that Disley and Pearson are not Town players now.  It's pointless bringing them up on almost every post, they were both only wanted by non-league clubs and that's where they chose to go.  Three games in and 'doom and gloom' already, typical of some Fishy posters!

I have no problem with a new manager coming in and making his choice of the players he wants to keep and those he doesn't want, the point is if said manager releases players and then replaces them with players that are not as good.

That will be what sees RS either make a go of it here or JF sees that it isn't working then it is bye bye Sladey.

Quoted from Mariner_09

Andrew is a loss but we wanted to keep him and was clearly far too good for this level and Clarke doesn't look a sutiable replacement for Pearson.

Clarke has made some errors, but he has played hundreds of games at a higher level than Pearson will ever play. I loved Shaun Pearson, but Clarke is a class above his level, even if he isn't showing that in some respects. Meanwhile, Pearson is playing for a middling conference team in the prime of his career.

Quoted from sonofmadeleymariner

We can moan about players all day, we were warned about Kelly and Hooper but the happy clappers weren't willing to listen. But Slade is the issue.

I wasn't happy when Slade was appointed, I just thought back to the hoof ball, his near suicide of our promotion push in the 2nd half of the season with his insistance to play his  Christmas signing. But then I was willing to give him a chance, first time round we were his 1st League club he then went on to manage some big name clubs. Maybe his tactics had changed, maybe he had learn't something managing in the Championship, his contacts had to of gotten better.

Sadley no. We have returned to hoof football this time to a loan striker who except for in the first half of the Chesterfield match has had zero support (not that it would of mattered at all with Hooper up front), or to our tiny pacey winger who is just muscled out of postion or beaten to the header (No real fault of Demebeles). Its simple, if he wants to persist with hoof ball he needs to play 2 up top. If he wants to play with 1 up front then he needs to play the ball on the deck and pass it round quickly either playing it to foot or into space for our wippet winger to run onto.

Thought we played some decent football on Tuesday night and certainly didnt recognise the permanent hoofball  that some wish to pin on us. Still if it suits your agenda keep peddling!!