Calm down Dev. People are just making reasonable comments. I am not particularly beloved of Sellers or beloved of 44 bloody 2, but simply thought the players we had available were more suited to that formation given how poorly results were going and intrigued to know why the ginger boy isn;t given more gametime considering Woody's lack of form. That is all.
But the point about game time surely applies to Wood too. He is a proven quality at this level. Just needs (match) time to get match fit and confidence levels up. Just needs one of his wild strikes to fluke in and then he'll be fine. Class will always come through in the end. Look at Ian Bell in the cricket... Oh...
It never was explained to me how 442 was supposed to work given the players available.
Lets take the Newport game. Lets assume that GA doesnt feel Sellers is ready yet and accept that view as plainly he sees more than you do. Also accept Pierre only available on bench as again we dont know fully the circumstances. hayes and Wood are both returning from injury and fit enough only for the bench.
So you have available
Ingram, Lynch
Harriman, Jombati,Mccathy, JJ
Mcginn, Bloomfield, kretch, Bean,Onien
Thompson, Holloway, Ugwu
"the players available are more suited to 442" in your opinion. GA disagreed. How would you have set up the team in a 442.
I was talking about 442 in general Dev...and it seems to have worked against Carlisle and MAnsfield. But if you insist on me replaying Newport so you can slap your head in disgust and horror:
Beloved Sellers WAS available...so given I was perplexed by GA's decision not to play him and lacking (as you point out) any inside knowledge, against a team bottom of the table I would have played beloved 4 4 2 with Ingram, Bean, Jombati, McCarty, JJ, Sellers, Harriman, bloomfield, O'Nien with Thompson and Holloway up front. But as we did so well at Newport I am sure you can pour much scorn on that line-up. I know things have improved over the past couple of seasons and there are less real reasons to go all Old Gasroom on posters these days, but please take on board I am a GA fan.
(And I only offered up my Fantasy Team because you asked me to, not because I think they would have won it!)
It worked to an extent against Carlisle and Mansfield becuase different players were available - thats my point.
sellers was available but was started by GA. He never has been in a competitive match. GA who seems him train every day presumably judges him not ready for it. But you insist on playing him to fit in with ypour preferred formation. A formation that even then would only be possible by playing the seasons outstanding CM out of position at RB.
Who knows how your team would have performed. Maybe in retrospect that team would have won. But I back GA judgement to play 11 optimum players in a sub-optimum formation rather than playing players out of position and (in GA opinion) not yet ready just so you can confirm to the terraces latest received wisdom that only 442 can ever work (despite extensive evidence to the contrary from previous season and this).
Extraordinary stuff!! All anyone is saying is that it would be nice to see Ryan Sellers get a longer run-out (and I agree). Not sure @DevC whether you have seen Sammy Wood in action this season. He has not been "himself" and this was particularly noticeable in games where he had an inside role. He has been injured of course which obviously doesn't help. And did you know that Ryan Sellers has a secret weapon? Those of us that have seen him play will know what I mean!
@DevC you are being a little frustrating at the moment. You keep putting up this ridiculous straw man argument about excluding Sellers. Why challenge people to come up with a 4/4/2 of fit players against Newport and then demand the one left winger we know to be fit and available be specifically excluded? It smacks of someone who's not confident in his arguments.
I'm not one of the people who likes jumping on you for not watching many matches, but given you've seen a lot less of Wood and Sellers this season than many others, maybe you should show a little more trust in the 'wisdom of the crowds'?
Ainsworth is not infallible. Your argument that we should show blind trust in the manager is slightly infantile and not up to your normal standards of intelligent scrutiny.
Well said aloysius and if you are correct that DevC has not seen much action this season then this makes sense . Only someone in a world of ignorance in the matter and with no real knowledge of how Wood and Sellers have performed could blindly defend his point of view like he does .
Isn't the point that we were absolutely rubbish as 4-3-3? Regardless of who played where. I accept we may have been equally rubbish with 4-4-2 but we were unarguably crap when we did play 4-3-3 and hard to imagine us being any worse in any other formation. May as well have lined up 4-0-3
I do not claim to have any worthwhile opinion on whether Sam Wood has played well or badly this season. Many say the latter. I have no reason not to accept that view.
I also have seen very little of Sellers - in fact without checking the statistics it is very possible that I have seen more of him horizontal (at Exeter) than vertical.
As always with player matters I am ignorant of who should or should not be in the team. I am happy to accept and acknowledge that. I simply do not have the information.
I must rely on those better placed than I to judge.
And here's the rub. In respect of Sellers, you guys are little better placed than I. None of you have seen him play a full competitive game. Most of you are not seen him play more than a handful of minutes in any game. You too, like me, are not qualified to judge whether he should start and play for 90mins - you have nothing to base that judgement on. The manager does - he sees him train and play every day. He can judge his ability and readiness to start. Now obviously he is not infallible, of course he is not, but given his opinion is based on information and yours is based on guesswork, surely it is fair to conclude that on this subject his view is more likely to be correct than yours.
While 442 is in many cases the best formation, it is not the only formation that can win games. The best formation depends on the players available. GA has achieved wonders over the last 18 months in far exceeding what could reasonably be expected given the size and ability of the squad. I think he has earned a little bit of respect and trust. He does not deserve to be accused of being clueless, incompetent, tactically naïve, stubborn or whatever for exercising his informed professional judgement to leave out a player none of you have seen play a single competitive 90 minutes.
Garath Ainsworth has indeed done wonders but he is a human being and a manager learning his trade . He is capable of getting things wrong . I don't think I have heard anyone refer to him as being clueless or incompetent since the "brush with relegation season" where he made many mistakes and admitted as much at the end of that season . One person to my knowledge has referred to him as stubborn so I think this apparent attack on him is in your head and nobody else's. Maybe he is stubborn ? doesn't mean that this guy otherwise holds the up most respect for him . Here is the rub : many on hear have seen plenty of games this season where Wood being replaced by Sellers has made us more potent on the left wing , I would say in fact every game this has happened . Many on here have seen how ineffective
...... wood has been and continues to be . I believe this means that the collective opinion of so many people must carry some weight . I think you are being too defensive in your blind defence of the situation because you think if people dare to suggest the manager has got something wrong they automatically think he is not a good manager . What are you on ? do you think out manager is perfect and the fans are all clueless idiots ?
@DevC said:
It worked to an extent against Carlisle and Mansfield becuase different players were available - thats my point.
sellers was available but was started by GA. He never has been in a competitive match. GA who seems him train every day presumably judges him not ready for it. But you insist on playing him to fit in with ypour preferred formation. A formation that even then would only be possible by playing the seasons outstanding CM out of position at RB.
Who knows how your team would have performed. Maybe in retrospect that team would have won. But I back GA judgement to play 11 optimum players in a sub-optimum formation rather than playing players out of position and (in GA opinion) not yet ready just so you can confirm to the terraces latest received wisdom that only 442 can ever work (despite extensive evidence to the contrary from previous season and this).
I don't care massively about this topic, don't claim to have any inside info, and don't think Sellers is the new messiah.
But I'd be interested to know what makes you so certain that GA doesn't rate him and thus went with 433, rather than Sellers not fitting into GA's preferred 433 and thus not making the team.
As soon as we lost a couple of games on the bounce, he was being slated. I have no objection to informed criticism. Suggesting Sellers should start is by definition ill-informed criticism - you have nothing to base that opinion on - you have probably never seen him start, you have almost certainly never seen him play 90 mins, you have probably never seen him play more than 15 mins.
Anyway after Sunday this conversation may well be redundant. I would think he has a reasonable chance of starting at Halifax. I hope the expectation of the new Messiah (or at least the new Messi) don't become too much for him.
I think as a winger it's easier to impress coming on in the last ten minutes trying to equalise against a team set on defending than playing 80 minutes fulfilling both attacking and defensive roles.
I hope Sellers turns out to be a great player, but to decide from a few cameo appearances that he would be better in the team than Sam Wood who has been consistently solid over the last two years is flighty. I've never been a massive fan of Wood, but he's a good player at this level - things don't change that much over the off season.
So, Dev, if we signed Messi tomorrow you wouldn't suggest he should go straight into the team? In fact, really, you have no view on our formation or line-up in advance of a match because you simply don't have the same level of information as the manager at any given time?
I think you do Sellers a disservice by positing the argument that he's not fit enough to last a match. The man looks fit enough to run a marathon and strong enough to take on any full back in the league (just wait to you see one of his long throws for demonstration of upper body strength!). As for lack of talent? Not when I've seen him play. I can't judge on his mentality but he comes across as a nice, mature guy in the few interviews with him I've read. As far as I'm concerned, it's time I saw more of him. On this one I back my judgement over Ainsworth's.
With the greatest possible respect to Sellers, I don't think he is a Lionel Messi - not yet anyway!
If I had seen the players play a number of games, I may well have a view on the formation and team. I wouldn't on players I had not seen play, (or had seen a handful of cameos). Even then if my favourite player was unexpectedly dropped, I would accept, while disappointed, that more than likely there was a good reason for it, as yes even if I see every game home and away, the manager still invariably has more information than I do - that's why he is paid to do the job and I am not.
I am NOT saying Sellers is not fit, is not skilful or anything else. I don't know. Nor do you. You have never seen him play 90 mins. There is a reason why Ainsworth judges him not ready to start yet. With the greatest and genuine respect, if you are seriously saying you think your judgement of whether a player you have never seen play 90 mins
(and very possibly have never seen play more than 15) should start is worth more than a professional football manager who sees that player in action every working day, I have to say on this one I think you are seriously deluded.
The point is how would even the manager know without trying him for 90 minutes? . I feel that I and the others on here who think it is worth trying him are in a far more educated position than you as you have not even seen what we are talking about . Yes one would rightly assume the manager is far more educated in sphere of football than me or anyone on here but this does not mean he will always be correct 100 percent of the time . Other good managers have had their favourites over the years and once they have left another equally qualified manager comes in and does not see the quality in them that the previous manager did and releases them . To think that no one on here can think the manager could do something differently and express this point because they know less about football in general is complete bollocks . Ainsworth is a good manager but he makes mistakes like anyone in any walk of life . I and few on here think he may be making one by consistently picking Wood , we think this from our own observations unlike you , who is stubbornly sticking to an argument that the manager knows best . If it were just me saying this like you have suggested above ,then maybe you could say I am deluded , but it is not is it ! it is a lot of people saying the same thing and from a position of seeing what we are talking about on a consistent basis unlike yourself . When plenty on here were saying we should change to 442 as 433 was not working you used the same uneducated argument then . You even had us imagining situations where it was not possible to play a 442 when it certainly was possible and you had blind faith that the manager knew better than all of us by selecting the failing and boring to watch 433 . Well guess what ? he changed it to the 442 we all craved and the good in this move that we all saw has come about and bore fruit . My guess is that Sellers will be given his chance before long if Wood continues in this vein and not just in cups and what we have observed in this area may well happen . Be careful DevC you already look a bit silly in my opinion after you blindly backed him over 433 saying that no one on here could possibly be right in a tactics related opinion and then he obviously realised the same thing we had been saying for several games thus showing our observations were correct . Sometimes you get a better picture of things from the stands and when you don't have to deal with all aspects of managing a team and have to continuously balance plates like the manager . When lots of people start thinking the same thing it is my opinion that it then may be worth exploring it and that it may be correct . When people like you like to label it just a delusion just because you believe the manager cannot be wrong and you do it from a position of not even seeing the very thing we are talking about I do not respect this position one bit. How about you get down and see some games ?
Bourne70 - if you stopped throwing insults around then it might be possible to take your rant a little more seriously. In this instance DevC has constructed a superior and more closely argued case. I saw Sellers play in the "Paint Pot thingy" and he was ok in the first half, then faded in the second and was subbed. Gaz knows what he is doing and using the lad as an impact sub late(ish) in the game, while trusting the experienced Woody to start, is probably the better percentage move. The point I would concede is that it might be good, sometimes - and particularly if we are chasing the game, to give Sellers a little more than 5/10 minutes at the end.
Algernonfugebucket . I think if you look back over all of the previous pages on this topic you will observe several things : 1. you are in the minority of those who think the argument of DevC is superior to mine or any of the others who disagree with him . 2 any " insults" used by myself are comparably measured to the "insults " directed at me by DevC. 3 if you cannot conclude that DevC is in a less informed position having seen none of the performances in question then I can not help you there. 4 the reason I have had a "rant" is only due to and equally recognised "rant" from DevC ...I am tired of this argument now , I have made my point and I am now moving on .
@DevC said:
I am NOT saying Sellers is not fit, is not skilful or anything else. I don't know. Nor do you. You have never seen him play 90 mins. There is a reason why Ainsworth judges him not ready to start yet. With the greatest and genuine respect, if you are seriously saying you think your judgement of whether a player you have never seen play 90 mins
(and very possibly have never seen play more than 15) should start is worth more than a professional football manager who sees that player in action every working day, I have to say on this one I think you are seriously deluded.
That's the crux of it for me. I've seen most of Sellers appearances and whilst he showed a lot of promise in the Basingstoke game - and Wood has not been in great form yet this season - I don't feel I've seen enough to justify claiming that he should be starting ahead of Wood who has been one of our best and most important players over the last few seasons. We know that GA is not afraid to throw unproven youngsters in to the team so there must be a good reason (or reasons) why he hasn't done so with Ryan Sellers yet - which is why I'm happy trusting his judgement over mine and not joining in with the clamour that Sellers MUST be starting.
Interestingly, Sam Wood has started and played the majority of the game in 7 league matches this season and the results have been W4 D3 L0. The other 2 that he came on as a sub have both been defeats where we were already losing when he came on. The 6 he has missed have finished W3 D1 L2. So he can't be that 'ineffective' can he....?
(Or is that just a deliberate massaging of stats for a completely pointless purpose...?)
I do hope that Sellers gets a decent share of game time in the Halifax & Leeds games as it will be good to let him have a runout and get some experience - it's just a shame that we don't have a reserve side for exactly this purpose. Equally Sam Wood could do with as many minutes as possible to work himself back to full match fitness and to enable him to play his way back into the kind of form we know he is capable of.
Bourne, I am not sure you have quite grasped my point. Not sure there is much to be gained from going over and over old ground so here is last summary and then for me the end.
1) I am not claiming to be in any position to say who should be the starting 11. I do not see enough games to do so. So if the argument is should Thompson or Holloway partner Hayes upfront - my opinion is less informed (better choice of word than educated) than yours. The managers view is better informed than both of ours of course, but you will have seen enough of the two players to provide an informed judgement.
2) In Sellers case, you cannot have an informed judgement as you have never seen more than brief 10 minute cameos. I haven't either of course. The managers view in this case towers above either of ours as he has far more information in regards of this player than you (or I).
3) I have never argued that one formation is necesarily better or worse than any other.
433 can win matches, so can 442. it is the managers job to judge what formation suits best the players available to him and provides the best opportunity to win the game. He will not always get it right and hindsight is a wonderful thing. A different formation against Newport may have provided a different result - in hindsight it wouldnt have provided less points. 442 at Exeter may have provided less points, it wouldnt have provided more.
4) 433 against Newport for example would only have worked if Sellers had played and even then required other players out of position. IF GA believes that Sellers is not ready to start, then realistically 442 was not a serious option. Given you and I can have no informed view on whether Sellers should start, by definition we can equally have no informed view on whether 442 was appropriate against Newport (unless you are arguing for a CM to play out of position wide left).
5) The switch back to 442 came about when previously unavailable players became available again. That does not begin to prove that 442 would have been better when those players were not available.
6) Football fans like to secretly believe that they could do the managers job just as well and probably a bit better than the manager. Its part of the fun. But when we are really honest with ourselves, deep down we know we can't. GA has IMHO earned the respect and trust of the supporters over the last 18 years. of course he will not always be proven right but he deserves the understanding that his judgement is more likely to be right than we are, particularly over players he sees every day and we have never seen start. He does not deserve to be immediately quite strongly criticised when we lose a couple of games in a row. Given our relative financial status compared to our rivals, this should be expected from time to time.
DevC I am getting a little worn out by this now as I am sure you must be . We both have our views on the subject . I appreciate what you are saying but I doubt either of us is going to change our minds on each other point of view . We both want the best for our football club so lets just move on knowing this .
The majority of the discussion on here has moved to whether or not Sellers is good enough to start a game. If Wood had been playing anywhere near his form last year, then this point would not have arisen.
Gareth, seeing the players every day, is more qualified than any of us to make a decision on his starting eleven. I think he is hoping that Wood will play himself back into form, but as I see it, this is not happening and in most games Wood is unfortunately the weakest link.
Managers will always have their favourite players (as we all do) and as Waddock did with the likes of headless chicken Lewis and will tend to give them the benefit of doubt in terms of form. However if Wood doesn't start performing then I think Sellers or another loanee will replace him in January.
Bourne 70
1. I'm not sure I am in the minority here but, even if I am it really doesn't matter. Your argument is poor when set alongside the logic of Dev.
2 Your abusive tone (words such as "arrogant", "uneducated" and "complete bollocks" grace your earlier remarks) tends to rob your comments of any gravitas.
3. I'm not arguing that Dev is more informed than you; merely that he makes his point more convincingly and, may I say, more articulately.
4. A rant is rather different from a well argued comment.
5. Glad you are tired of this now. Perhaps you will move on.
AlgernonFudgebucket If having the last word makes you sleep better at night then I will take it on the chin like a man . I am not going to respond to you points as I have already said .
I do think Dev is missing the main point though. We were so dire against Newport that bringing on my lame cat at half time would probably have improved the spectacle
Comments
Calm down Dev. People are just making reasonable comments. I am not particularly beloved of Sellers or beloved of 44 bloody 2, but simply thought the players we had available were more suited to that formation given how poorly results were going and intrigued to know why the ginger boy isn;t given more gametime considering Woody's lack of form. That is all.
But the point about game time surely applies to Wood too. He is a proven quality at this level. Just needs (match) time to get match fit and confidence levels up. Just needs one of his wild strikes to fluke in and then he'll be fine. Class will always come through in the end. Look at Ian Bell in the cricket... Oh...
It never was explained to me how 442 was supposed to work given the players available.
Lets take the Newport game. Lets assume that GA doesnt feel Sellers is ready yet and accept that view as plainly he sees more than you do. Also accept Pierre only available on bench as again we dont know fully the circumstances. hayes and Wood are both returning from injury and fit enough only for the bench.
So you have available
Ingram, Lynch
Harriman, Jombati,Mccathy, JJ
Mcginn, Bloomfield, kretch, Bean,Onien
Thompson, Holloway, Ugwu
"the players available are more suited to 442" in your opinion. GA disagreed. How would you have set up the team in a 442.
I was talking about 442 in general Dev...and it seems to have worked against Carlisle and MAnsfield. But if you insist on me replaying Newport so you can slap your head in disgust and horror:
Beloved Sellers WAS available...so given I was perplexed by GA's decision not to play him and lacking (as you point out) any inside knowledge, against a team bottom of the table I would have played beloved 4 4 2 with Ingram, Bean, Jombati, McCarty, JJ, Sellers, Harriman, bloomfield, O'Nien with Thompson and Holloway up front. But as we did so well at Newport I am sure you can pour much scorn on that line-up. I know things have improved over the past couple of seasons and there are less real reasons to go all Old Gasroom on posters these days, but please take on board I am a GA fan.
(And I only offered up my Fantasy Team because you asked me to, not because I think they would have won it!)
It worked to an extent against Carlisle and Mansfield becuase different players were available - thats my point.
sellers was available but was started by GA. He never has been in a competitive match. GA who seems him train every day presumably judges him not ready for it. But you insist on playing him to fit in with ypour preferred formation. A formation that even then would only be possible by playing the seasons outstanding CM out of position at RB.
Who knows how your team would have performed. Maybe in retrospect that team would have won. But I back GA judgement to play 11 optimum players in a sub-optimum formation rather than playing players out of position and (in GA opinion) not yet ready just so you can confirm to the terraces latest received wisdom that only 442 can ever work (despite extensive evidence to the contrary from previous season and this).
Extraordinary stuff!! All anyone is saying is that it would be nice to see Ryan Sellers get a longer run-out (and I agree). Not sure @DevC whether you have seen Sammy Wood in action this season. He has not been "himself" and this was particularly noticeable in games where he had an inside role. He has been injured of course which obviously doesn't help. And did you know that Ryan Sellers has a secret weapon? Those of us that have seen him play will know what I mean!
Let's stop now before Dev explodes. Don't worry mate I will 'confirm that to the terraces' (?) for you from my seat.
@DevC you are being a little frustrating at the moment. You keep putting up this ridiculous straw man argument about excluding Sellers. Why challenge people to come up with a 4/4/2 of fit players against Newport and then demand the one left winger we know to be fit and available be specifically excluded? It smacks of someone who's not confident in his arguments.
I'm not one of the people who likes jumping on you for not watching many matches, but given you've seen a lot less of Wood and Sellers this season than many others, maybe you should show a little more trust in the 'wisdom of the crowds'?
Ainsworth is not infallible. Your argument that we should show blind trust in the manager is slightly infantile and not up to your normal standards of intelligent scrutiny.
Well said aloysius and if you are correct that DevC has not seen much action this season then this makes sense . Only someone in a world of ignorance in the matter and with no real knowledge of how Wood and Sellers have performed could blindly defend his point of view like he does .
Isn't the point that we were absolutely rubbish as 4-3-3? Regardless of who played where. I accept we may have been equally rubbish with 4-4-2 but we were unarguably crap when we did play 4-3-3 and hard to imagine us being any worse in any other formation. May as well have lined up 4-0-3
I do not claim to have any worthwhile opinion on whether Sam Wood has played well or badly this season. Many say the latter. I have no reason not to accept that view.
I also have seen very little of Sellers - in fact without checking the statistics it is very possible that I have seen more of him horizontal (at Exeter) than vertical.
As always with player matters I am ignorant of who should or should not be in the team. I am happy to accept and acknowledge that. I simply do not have the information.
I must rely on those better placed than I to judge.
And here's the rub. In respect of Sellers, you guys are little better placed than I. None of you have seen him play a full competitive game. Most of you are not seen him play more than a handful of minutes in any game. You too, like me, are not qualified to judge whether he should start and play for 90mins - you have nothing to base that judgement on. The manager does - he sees him train and play every day. He can judge his ability and readiness to start. Now obviously he is not infallible, of course he is not, but given his opinion is based on information and yours is based on guesswork, surely it is fair to conclude that on this subject his view is more likely to be correct than yours.
While 442 is in many cases the best formation, it is not the only formation that can win games. The best formation depends on the players available. GA has achieved wonders over the last 18 months in far exceeding what could reasonably be expected given the size and ability of the squad. I think he has earned a little bit of respect and trust. He does not deserve to be accused of being clueless, incompetent, tactically naïve, stubborn or whatever for exercising his informed professional judgement to leave out a player none of you have seen play a single competitive 90 minutes.
Garath Ainsworth has indeed done wonders but he is a human being and a manager learning his trade . He is capable of getting things wrong . I don't think I have heard anyone refer to him as being clueless or incompetent since the "brush with relegation season" where he made many mistakes and admitted as much at the end of that season . One person to my knowledge has referred to him as stubborn so I think this apparent attack on him is in your head and nobody else's. Maybe he is stubborn ? doesn't mean that this guy otherwise holds the up most respect for him . Here is the rub : many on hear have seen plenty of games this season where Wood being replaced by Sellers has made us more potent on the left wing , I would say in fact every game this has happened . Many on here have seen how ineffective
...... wood has been and continues to be . I believe this means that the collective opinion of so many people must carry some weight . I think you are being too defensive in your blind defence of the situation because you think if people dare to suggest the manager has got something wrong they automatically think he is not a good manager . What are you on ? do you think out manager is perfect and the fans are all clueless idiots ?
I don't care massively about this topic, don't claim to have any inside info, and don't think Sellers is the new messiah.
But I'd be interested to know what makes you so certain that GA doesn't rate him and thus went with 433, rather than Sellers not fitting into GA's preferred 433 and thus not making the team.
As soon as we lost a couple of games on the bounce, he was being slated. I have no objection to informed criticism. Suggesting Sellers should start is by definition ill-informed criticism - you have nothing to base that opinion on - you have probably never seen him start, you have almost certainly never seen him play 90 mins, you have probably never seen him play more than 15 mins.
Anyway after Sunday this conversation may well be redundant. I would think he has a reasonable chance of starting at Halifax. I hope the expectation of the new Messiah (or at least the new Messi) don't become too much for him.
I think as a winger it's easier to impress coming on in the last ten minutes trying to equalise against a team set on defending than playing 80 minutes fulfilling both attacking and defensive roles.
I hope Sellers turns out to be a great player, but to decide from a few cameo appearances that he would be better in the team than Sam Wood who has been consistently solid over the last two years is flighty. I've never been a massive fan of Wood, but he's a good player at this level - things don't change that much over the off season.
DevC you are obviously too arrogant to take the point so let us move on .
So, Dev, if we signed Messi tomorrow you wouldn't suggest he should go straight into the team? In fact, really, you have no view on our formation or line-up in advance of a match because you simply don't have the same level of information as the manager at any given time?
I think you do Sellers a disservice by positing the argument that he's not fit enough to last a match. The man looks fit enough to run a marathon and strong enough to take on any full back in the league (just wait to you see one of his long throws for demonstration of upper body strength!). As for lack of talent? Not when I've seen him play. I can't judge on his mentality but he comes across as a nice, mature guy in the few interviews with him I've read. As far as I'm concerned, it's time I saw more of him. On this one I back my judgement over Ainsworth's.
With the greatest possible respect to Sellers, I don't think he is a Lionel Messi - not yet anyway!
If I had seen the players play a number of games, I may well have a view on the formation and team. I wouldn't on players I had not seen play, (or had seen a handful of cameos). Even then if my favourite player was unexpectedly dropped, I would accept, while disappointed, that more than likely there was a good reason for it, as yes even if I see every game home and away, the manager still invariably has more information than I do - that's why he is paid to do the job and I am not.
I am NOT saying Sellers is not fit, is not skilful or anything else. I don't know. Nor do you. You have never seen him play 90 mins. There is a reason why Ainsworth judges him not ready to start yet. With the greatest and genuine respect, if you are seriously saying you think your judgement of whether a player you have never seen play 90 mins
(and very possibly have never seen play more than 15) should start is worth more than a professional football manager who sees that player in action every working day, I have to say on this one I think you are seriously deluded.
The point is how would even the manager know without trying him for 90 minutes? . I feel that I and the others on here who think it is worth trying him are in a far more educated position than you as you have not even seen what we are talking about . Yes one would rightly assume the manager is far more educated in sphere of football than me or anyone on here but this does not mean he will always be correct 100 percent of the time . Other good managers have had their favourites over the years and once they have left another equally qualified manager comes in and does not see the quality in them that the previous manager did and releases them . To think that no one on here can think the manager could do something differently and express this point because they know less about football in general is complete bollocks . Ainsworth is a good manager but he makes mistakes like anyone in any walk of life . I and few on here think he may be making one by consistently picking Wood , we think this from our own observations unlike you , who is stubbornly sticking to an argument that the manager knows best . If it were just me saying this like you have suggested above ,then maybe you could say I am deluded , but it is not is it ! it is a lot of people saying the same thing and from a position of seeing what we are talking about on a consistent basis unlike yourself . When plenty on here were saying we should change to 442 as 433 was not working you used the same uneducated argument then . You even had us imagining situations where it was not possible to play a 442 when it certainly was possible and you had blind faith that the manager knew better than all of us by selecting the failing and boring to watch 433 . Well guess what ? he changed it to the 442 we all craved and the good in this move that we all saw has come about and bore fruit . My guess is that Sellers will be given his chance before long if Wood continues in this vein and not just in cups and what we have observed in this area may well happen . Be careful DevC you already look a bit silly in my opinion after you blindly backed him over 433 saying that no one on here could possibly be right in a tactics related opinion and then he obviously realised the same thing we had been saying for several games thus showing our observations were correct . Sometimes you get a better picture of things from the stands and when you don't have to deal with all aspects of managing a team and have to continuously balance plates like the manager . When lots of people start thinking the same thing it is my opinion that it then may be worth exploring it and that it may be correct . When people like you like to label it just a delusion just because you believe the manager cannot be wrong and you do it from a position of not even seeing the very thing we are talking about I do not respect this position one bit. How about you get down and see some games ?
Bourne70 - if you stopped throwing insults around then it might be possible to take your rant a little more seriously. In this instance DevC has constructed a superior and more closely argued case. I saw Sellers play in the "Paint Pot thingy" and he was ok in the first half, then faded in the second and was subbed. Gaz knows what he is doing and using the lad as an impact sub late(ish) in the game, while trusting the experienced Woody to start, is probably the better percentage move. The point I would concede is that it might be good, sometimes - and particularly if we are chasing the game, to give Sellers a little more than 5/10 minutes at the end.
Algernonfugebucket . I think if you look back over all of the previous pages on this topic you will observe several things : 1. you are in the minority of those who think the argument of DevC is superior to mine or any of the others who disagree with him . 2 any " insults" used by myself are comparably measured to the "insults " directed at me by DevC. 3 if you cannot conclude that DevC is in a less informed position having seen none of the performances in question then I can not help you there. 4 the reason I have had a "rant" is only due to and equally recognised "rant" from DevC ...I am tired of this argument now , I have made my point and I am now moving on .
ZZZZZzzzzzz
That's the crux of it for me. I've seen most of Sellers appearances and whilst he showed a lot of promise in the Basingstoke game - and Wood has not been in great form yet this season - I don't feel I've seen enough to justify claiming that he should be starting ahead of Wood who has been one of our best and most important players over the last few seasons. We know that GA is not afraid to throw unproven youngsters in to the team so there must be a good reason (or reasons) why he hasn't done so with Ryan Sellers yet - which is why I'm happy trusting his judgement over mine and not joining in with the clamour that Sellers MUST be starting.
Interestingly, Sam Wood has started and played the majority of the game in 7 league matches this season and the results have been W4 D3 L0. The other 2 that he came on as a sub have both been defeats where we were already losing when he came on. The 6 he has missed have finished W3 D1 L2. So he can't be that 'ineffective' can he....?
(Or is that just a deliberate massaging of stats for a completely pointless purpose...?)
I do hope that Sellers gets a decent share of game time in the Halifax & Leeds games as it will be good to let him have a runout and get some experience - it's just a shame that we don't have a reserve side for exactly this purpose. Equally Sam Wood could do with as many minutes as possible to work himself back to full match fitness and to enable him to play his way back into the kind of form we know he is capable of.
Who'd be a football manager....
Bourne, I am not sure you have quite grasped my point. Not sure there is much to be gained from going over and over old ground so here is last summary and then for me the end.
1) I am not claiming to be in any position to say who should be the starting 11. I do not see enough games to do so. So if the argument is should Thompson or Holloway partner Hayes upfront - my opinion is less informed (better choice of word than educated) than yours. The managers view is better informed than both of ours of course, but you will have seen enough of the two players to provide an informed judgement.
2) In Sellers case, you cannot have an informed judgement as you have never seen more than brief 10 minute cameos. I haven't either of course. The managers view in this case towers above either of ours as he has far more information in regards of this player than you (or I).
3) I have never argued that one formation is necesarily better or worse than any other.
433 can win matches, so can 442. it is the managers job to judge what formation suits best the players available to him and provides the best opportunity to win the game. He will not always get it right and hindsight is a wonderful thing. A different formation against Newport may have provided a different result - in hindsight it wouldnt have provided less points. 442 at Exeter may have provided less points, it wouldnt have provided more.
4) 433 against Newport for example would only have worked if Sellers had played and even then required other players out of position. IF GA believes that Sellers is not ready to start, then realistically 442 was not a serious option. Given you and I can have no informed view on whether Sellers should start, by definition we can equally have no informed view on whether 442 was appropriate against Newport (unless you are arguing for a CM to play out of position wide left).
5) The switch back to 442 came about when previously unavailable players became available again. That does not begin to prove that 442 would have been better when those players were not available.
6) Football fans like to secretly believe that they could do the managers job just as well and probably a bit better than the manager. Its part of the fun. But when we are really honest with ourselves, deep down we know we can't. GA has IMHO earned the respect and trust of the supporters over the last 18 years. of course he will not always be proven right but he deserves the understanding that his judgement is more likely to be right than we are, particularly over players he sees every day and we have never seen start. He does not deserve to be immediately quite strongly criticised when we lose a couple of games in a row. Given our relative financial status compared to our rivals, this should be expected from time to time.
DevC I am getting a little worn out by this now as I am sure you must be . We both have our views on the subject . I appreciate what you are saying but I doubt either of us is going to change our minds on each other point of view . We both want the best for our football club so lets just move on knowing this .
The majority of the discussion on here has moved to whether or not Sellers is good enough to start a game. If Wood had been playing anywhere near his form last year, then this point would not have arisen.
Gareth, seeing the players every day, is more qualified than any of us to make a decision on his starting eleven. I think he is hoping that Wood will play himself back into form, but as I see it, this is not happening and in most games Wood is unfortunately the weakest link.
Managers will always have their favourite players (as we all do) and as Waddock did with the likes of headless chicken Lewis and will tend to give them the benefit of doubt in terms of form. However if Wood doesn't start performing then I think Sellers or another loanee will replace him in January.
Bourne 70
1. I'm not sure I am in the minority here but, even if I am it really doesn't matter. Your argument is poor when set alongside the logic of Dev.
2 Your abusive tone (words such as "arrogant", "uneducated" and "complete bollocks" grace your earlier remarks) tends to rob your comments of any gravitas.
3. I'm not arguing that Dev is more informed than you; merely that he makes his point more convincingly and, may I say, more articulately.
4. A rant is rather different from a well argued comment.
5. Glad you are tired of this now. Perhaps you will move on.
AlgernonFudgebucket If having the last word makes you sleep better at night then I will take it on the chin like a man . I am not going to respond to you points as I have already said .
I do think Dev is missing the main point though. We were so dire against Newport that bringing on my lame cat at half time would probably have improved the spectacle