Niall Maher

Hilarious. Boohoo a player showed a reaction....people need to get them over themselves....the quite direct and personal abuse players have got on here , undoubtedly on  "X " and from the stands is completely unwarranted.
By all means show frustration, be critical if you feel the need but some of the cr@p that gets shouted and posted then hardly surprising the players will circle the wagons and defend themselves.

Probably the same people who goad opposition strikers relentlessly and then complain when they get the shush 🤫 celebration.

If you can't take it don't give it.

Quoted from rancido

Of course it's right to criticise players but there are better ways than calling them " shite" , " get rid in the summer" ie sack him. I'm sure a lot of these keyboard warriors if exposed to that kind of criticism would react with many more expletives and abuse. I was brought up to treat people like I would want them to treat me but obviously that is outdated,, judging by quite a few posters on here.

Absolutely. Well said.

Quoted from rancido

Of course it's right to criticise players but there are better ways than calling them " shite" , " get rid in the summer" ie sack him. I'm sure a lot of these keyboard warriors if exposed to that kind of criticism would react with many more expletives and abuse. I was brought up to treat people like I would want them to treat me but obviously that is outdated,, judging by quite a few posters on here.

Fair point.

Quoted from tarka

So, it's OK for fans to be "critical" of players (and critical is being kind) but the players can't be critical of fans? Seems to me that people shouldn't dish it out if they can't take it.  

Critical of fans errr we get 6/7k gates playing total dog excrement every week , we take fantastic support to most places still even though we’re one of the four worst teams in the football  league. If the said player was putting his head on the line rather than pulling out of challenges I’d be slightly more sympathetic.

Quoted from Rodley Mariner

Thompson was absolutely copulated.

Agreed, but why not sub both? That's the point of subs, you freshen the playing team for all sorts of reasons.

Quoted from GrimPol

Agreed, but why not sub both? That's the point of subs, you freshen the playing team for all sorts of reasons.

Because we didn't have two obvious replacements. Wood looks more of a number 10 so it would have meant changing shape or moving Clifton. They hadn't had a single shot on target so why would you want to upset things too much.

Quoted from GrimPol

Agreed, but why not sub both? That's the point of subs, you freshen the playing team for all sorts of reasons.

This thing I see constantly. You have to replace with something you have on the bench. The options weren't great. What you replace with could be worse. Green has been hammered previously in the last few home games and described as a "non-league clogger", yet he's expected to replace Thompson, who while a solid player probably couldn't spell endurance right now. The only real option we had was Wood. While Andrews passing was not good yesterday. The gaffer probably felt that his off the ball was better than Wood and he could probably improve on the passing over the course of the game. The stats for him weren't dreadful off the ball. He was winning a reasonable amount of duels/recoveries. We conceded zero goals, so it cannot have been too bad. In football, players only ever have half the time on the ball (or yesterday, about a third), and the other side of the game is important. Yeah Andrews maybe isn't as brave as some, but at least he's getting close enough to the action for people to see that and it's harder to go forward with a player in your way.

I did previously suggest Smith and push Clifton central, but with Smith out last week and on the bench this week, I'm wondering if he was one of the players who were ill or in the car incident. Plus, taking Clifton away from the right could have been a massive risk. We've been getting hammered with crosses going in this season. Clifton works his balderdash off to get in the way and make that harder.

Quoted from ginnywings

Andrews seems to be getting singled out but he was no worse than any of the other midfielders. Thompson is a good player but I fancy my chances of beating him over 30 yards and I'm in my 60's. Holohan wasn't much better, but they all battled hard in what was a rearguard action and we kept a clean sheet with them having no shots on target, so job done.

Maher just defending his team mates as far as I'm concerned, but admit I haven't read his comments, and don't intend to. Storm in a teacup.

He is by a large distance worse. He is weak, cowardly, slow and not good enough with the ball to make up for that.

He had a shocker yesterday with the ball, but it's the half challenges and the bottling of other challenges that is a real worry. There was a moment in the second half when he had the opportunity to win an aerial challenge the ball bounced between him and an FGR player and you could see him clock the other player coming, he then didn't even challenge for the ball.
He could probably be a footballer, but he needs to get his finger out and stop being a fanny. He needs to throw everything at it to have a league career, he's not doing that.

Quoted from Rodley Mariner

Because we didn't have two obvious replacements. Wood looks more of a number 10 so it would have meant changing shape or moving Clifton. They hadn't had a single shot on target so why would you want to upset things too much.

  If the guy was that bad and could have lost us the points, Harry Wood was on the bench and he's a midfielder, isn't he?  From what I see on the pitch not many are a "perfect fit" anyway.

They hadn't had a single shot on target so why would you want to upset things too much.   If the team was holding its own, and they played "well enough",  then why all the abuse meated out to Andrews? Savour the points.

Pointing out somebody's poor play is one thing, basically abusing him on a forum is another thing, and just wrong.

Quoted from AncientExiledMariner

This thing I see constantly. You have to replace with something you have on the bench. The options weren't great. What you replace with could be worse. Green has been hammered previously in the last few home games and described as a "non-league clogger", yet he's expected to replace Thompson, who while a solid player probably couldn't spell endurance right now. The only real option we had was Wood. While Andrews passing was not good yesterday. The gaffer probably felt that his off the ball was better than Wood and he could probably improve on the passing over the course of the game. The stats for him weren't dreadful off the ball. He was winning a reasonable amount of duels/recoveries. We conceded zero goals, so it cannot have been too bad. In football, players only ever half half the time on the ball (or yesterday, about a third), and that side of the game is important. Yeah Andrews maybe isn't as brave as some, but at least he's getting close enough to the action for people to see that and it's harder to go forward with a player in your way.

I did previously suggest Smith and push Clifton central, but with Smith out last week and on the bench this week, I'm wondering if he was one of the players who were ill or in the car incident. Plus, taking Clifton away from the right could have been a massive risk. We've been getting hammered with crosses going in this season. Clifton works his balderdash off to get in the way and make that harder.

An awful lot of attacks got through our right, with some good crosses to follow. Our backs did put a shift in to protect a very reluctant Cartwright.