Shrimpsvoices

kettering have taken them to extra time after drawing 1-1. now thats just embarassing!

wel it was fun whilst it lasted

fletch_al wrote:kettering have taken them to extra time after drawing 1-1. now thats just embarassing!

Not so funny now 5 - 1

We should have been out of sight at half-time. 5 goals is ok until you consider the fact we had 44 shots on goal in the 120 minutes.

marky wrote:We should have been out of sight at half-time. 5 goals is ok until you consider the fact we had 44 shots on goal in the 120 minutes.

We? So you're a Leeds fan? Suddenly it all makes sense.

And your point is?

i also noticed leeds had 44 shots tonight - just wondering if this is a record for a match

bring on united, I personnally cannot wait...i just hope i can get tickets!!

The tactical substitutions by the Kettering No.2 in extra time have got him the sack!

If managers constantly got the sack for tactics in a game, where would we be

http://www.nonleaguefootballlive.com/ar ... ticle=4710

marky No.1 wrote:The tactical substitutions by the Kettering No.2 in extra time have got him the sack!

That's bizarre, surely there is something more to it than that?

Keith wrote:

marky No.1 wrote:The tactical substitutions by the Kettering No.2 in extra time have got him the sack!

That's bizarre, surely there is something more to it than that?

read about that Ketterings Manager has siad he won't continue without him

marky wrote:And your point is?

Some of the stuff you come out with is baffling, that is all. As you see, given that you also follow a team that is widely regarded as having fans that talk total bollocks, it now makes perfect sense. Sometimes you come across as deliberately argumentative and negative, despite hardly ever seeing us play. Typical Leeds IMO.

Indeed, because you can judge a person entirely on which football teams they support If one was to make such sweeping statements about the so-called typical Leeds fan, negative and argumentative wouldn't be amongst them. Over-inflated opinions of the club and of the 'size' would be more likely, neither of which are amongst my own views. You may think some of my posts are baffling (but maybe that's because they differ to your own) but linking that to the fact my second team is Leeds United more than equals what you accuse me of. Tell me, do you also believe that all Man United fans are glory hunting scum, that all Liverpool fans take great delight in stealing hub caps and that all Chelsea fans eat caviar for breakfast? Can you maybe see that judging my musings on the team I support on the fact I also happen to be a fan of a team in West Yorkshire is maybe equally daft?

Let me clarify something. I am naturally pessimistic and I make no secret of that. I'm finding some of the posts on here about promotion and the like utterly hilarious (especially as much of it is from the very people who were whinging a few short weeks ago about people getting carried away with too many draws and a couple of bad defeats). I said that if we didn't beat Lincoln then the manager should go. I said after the Lincoln win that it was just a start and that it would take more than one win to change my mind. Several wins later and you may have noticed I'm not calling for a change in management. That's not to say I'm suddenly Sammy's biggest fan because I'm not. I'm also not the kinda guy who bounces from one extreme to the other at the change of wind direction. I like to think I'm at least vaguely consistent.

We all have differing opinions because we're all different people. Kindly respect mine as I respect yours and don't judge me on such an elementary fact as who my second team happens to be.

I respect people's opinions based on what they see. I respect your opinion, but as you openly admit that you don't see that many games, how can you have retrospectively decided that Sammy should have gone after the Lincoln game? You couldn't, you were basing an opinion on what a few dry old men who are the pissed-off-about-no-roof-20-or-so-that-get-wet-brigade (POANRTOSTGWB, and hence why I'm often baffled) thought. Also known as, we are shit, we should be in the Prem, I've not been to see Leeds in years, sack the manager, moan x3, waaa x 3, where is my dummy, clean my bum crew . I agree, all Man Utd. Fans are glory hunting scum, especially if they reside in the resort.

I'm naturally optimistic, but I've not been shouting to high heaven about how good we are (I've actually stated on a few occasions that we've performed better in games that we have lost). Whilst we are on a crest I will ride with it, and long may it continue as I'm hopeful you'll agree.

I'll admit that you are consistent on negativity.

You at the Bournemouth game? If so I'll but you a pint.

There's a strange mentality amongst football fans in that many believe that you have to be at a game to have an opinion and pass judgement. I personally think that's total crap. It's akin to saying only MPs are allowed an opinion on expenses because only they have any involvement in the process. My opinions are based on many things. The games I do get to see. The opinions of members of family. A collated view of everything I read on here. The weekly highlights (such as they are). All this research leads to the opinions I have and the views I express. My natural pessimism also contributes, of course.

Hey great arguing, lads, really enjoying it - please do carry on.

Marky, so you'd have had Sammy sacked had we not beaten Lincoln, eh?

Fine line isn't it? I mean, why not after we lost at home so badly to Northampton? Or, say we'd lost by one goal (as we could have done) at Torquay and then at home to Northampton. Sack him?

That would be pretty consistent with your reasoning but, in my opinion (and, in fact, as it turned out - but hindsight's wonderful isn't it?), would have been totally the wrong decision based, even, on the evidence of what had gone before, never mind what has happened since.

Fact was we played really well at Torquay (but we could have lost it), as we did in a number of other games which we drew. So to say things like 'if we don't beat Lincoln he gets the sack' is really short-sighted IMO.

It ignores the many good performances the team had put in up to that point which, with respect, if you don't see many games and then rely on reports from people who may have a particular axe to grind (either way) then you wouldn't necessarily have appreciated.

This is the point about not seeing games. Fair enough to have an opinion but people will argue that the background that informs that opinion needs to be stronger for it to have more credibility.

General strength of performance, the way the players were really grafting for the boss, the way the manager was trying different tactics to fine-tune our system and our style to get an extra 10%, (ie the difference between playing well and drawing games or playing a little bit better, being slightly more effective and then starting to win games) - that's what you judge a manager on. Also, I'd argue, you need to consider his record with us so far in changing systems, changing players to get us back on track after a poor run or, in this case, in order to make a solid start get even better.

Sammy's not just some first-timer who had joined us at the start of the season.