@chairboyscentral said:
I'm still not sure Stockdale's error was all that bad. The kind of save you'd expect a 'keeper of his calibre to make but not a howler or cause for panic imo - the shot was hit with power and the bounce probably made it difficult. Some of his kicking yesterday was absolutely sublime.
As a fairly harsh if not that vocal critic of Alsopp, I'm conscious of being fair. If Rocky had let that in I'd count it as a howler, even with the tricky bounce.
Never thought of it before but can’t recall anyone ever criticising an outfield player’s kicking - and I say that in all seriousness.
Liked your comment though @Wendoverson.
Side note from yesterday: Some fans (guessing they didn't go to Posh) were immediately on Parkers back yesterday. Fact is, within a few minutes of coming on he provided more goal threat than Samuels did, who for all his good hold up work, would never attempt the front post run and flick, or overhead kick from a poor cross that Parker did. He is frustrating sometimes, but I'd like to see Parker given a go through the middle or in a front 2, got to be worth a try.
Parker has looked effective in his last three games, especially in a front two with Bayo against Rochdale, but I'd also like to see him in the middle of a three. At the end of the day, if a striker is doing what Samuel does and what Parker does, they probably won't be in League One, but I think we're very good at sharing the load depending on the situation. Bayo obviously comes into that as well.
His best times at Gillingham came when he was playing in a front two with Tom Eaves as the target man, so I reckon there's something in a partnership with Bayo if it's allowed to develop. Flat midfield four of Wheeler-Gape-Thompson-Fred?
Parker looked like he had Kashkets barely there shinpads on. Always fear for players with those.
Stewards actually barred entry to us to all but the "correct" block. And then sent towards the exact seats.
The hoodlum mob had all decided the very front was where they were going. And stood up for about 10 rows. Ignoring the usual "everyone knows we stand at the back" routine.
You then had a few unfortunate people behind them who can't have seen anything.
And then a more unfortunate couple of rows behind who had to stand to see, only to be told and in places grabbed to sit down!
It was fine to sit and see behind that though. Which was odd. Normally a few standers at the front force everyone to have to stand.
If we stay in L1 (probable) and Bayo retires (very possible), you would have to think Josh Parker is going to be vital going forward. To me, he looked really off the pace his first couple of appearances, but has gained confidence and sharpness as he gets game time. A lot of the early issues may have been rust.
If we have the necessary funds, I'd like to see us start moving away from our current style - next season could show us whether it is Gaz's style or the one he's been forced to play by financial constraints - but Bayo could still be the ultimate impact player.
@Username said:
On the other side of the fence there were a couple of older guys behind us who seemed more interested in moaning and tutting at the behaviour and standing up of our fans, than the game itself, to the point that they sat down without a view for 30 minutes despite 100s of free seats all around and plenty of people "swapping" seats for the first 5 minutes like sensible human beings.
You one of the selfish twats that were stood up in front of me and my son so we couldn't see one of the goals? Whoever it was, were asked politely by a few, more senior than I to sit, The response was to effectively be blanked. In the end we had to move along and a row down so we could see what we had paid good money to watch. Those three self centred individuals were asked again by a dad with three kids to sit and eventually they pouted off to stand with the rest of the lads who were standing, really not rocket science. When your team is having a bad day & you come across three a@&eholes like that it does make it the day even worse!
@Twizz said: @thecatwwfc although I clearly have no insider info on this I'm pretty certain that, if WWFC didn't allow Bayo to fulfil his other media commitments and attend the Superbowl, we wouldn't have his services for the other league & cup games.
You're correct in that we pay him to do a job for us - but without knowing the exact terms of the contract who can say if he's bunking off or doing something that's allowed within his contract?
Do you really believe that Bayo is at the Superbowl against the wishes of the club and GA?
You decide for yourself but I know where I stand.
I didn't say that he is doing it against the clubs wishes. Just saying that he shouldn't be allowed to do it. I agree with what you said.
@Username said:
On the other side of the fence there were a couple of older guys behind us who seemed more interested in moaning and tutting at the behaviour and standing up of our fans, than the game itself, to the point that they sat down without a view for 30 minutes despite 100s of free seats all around and plenty of people "swapping" seats for the first 5 minutes like sensible human beings.
You one of the selfish twats that were stood up in front of me and my son so we couldn't see one of the goals? Whoever it was, were asked politely by a few, more senior than I to sit, The response was to effectively be blanked. In the end we had to move along and a row down so we could see what we had paid good money to watch. Those three self centred individuals were asked again by a dad with three kids to sit and eventually they pouted off to stand with the rest of the lads who were standing, really not rocket science. When your team is having a bad day & you come across three a@&eholes like that it does make it the day even worse!
It looked a bizarre set up yesterday though.
The stand behind the goal had the first 10-15 rows ALL standing, and then mostly everyone sitting behind.
The ones who seemed to be getting the most jip were the ones at the back of the standing - who of course only stood as everyone ahead was standing.
I thought all the "yoof" usually moan that the back of the stand is where you legitimately stand, and everyone who tries to sit back there knows what to expect.
But it seemed a total reverse this time.
Sounds just like my experiences of the Oxford game. I'm not going to pay good money in future to attend away games with a toxic atmosphere amongst our own fans AND no view of the game.
I'm not making excuses for rudeness or lack of consideration, but clubs don't help themselves when they allocate seats - completely pointless when you haven't chosen your seats.
There didn't seem any need for exact seats yesterday. The amount of seats far outweighed the amount of fans - totally unlike Oxford, and more like almost every away game of the season.
Still a bit bizarre though - don't get me wrong.
All the standers being at the front, did make it awkward for some people whose seats happened to be behind them.
I'm still waiting for one of the yoof posters to explain, as usually it's "oh if you try and sit at the back, it's your own fault" type sentiments.
I was on the front row of those that remained seated, having honoured the request to sit in our allocated seats. My son and I strongly prefer to stand and would have done so had it not caused inconvenience to those behind us. There was a certain amount of negotiating to be done with those in front in the first half hour to provide for a serviceable view, which was done reasonably good-naturedly. Our view was serviceable but we waited to go back in in the second so as to take up standing positions in a suitable place, which we did successfully and enjoyed the game more as a result.
As others noted, the problem was the allocation of seats. I think the majority of fans understand, when seating is not allocated, that the back rows will likely stand and position themselves accordingly. There was a fair amount of moving around, forward and backwards, in the first half in order to satisfy personal preferences.
The impression of inconsideration among those who wished to stand did not encourage goodwill.
@Username said:
On the other side of the fence there were a couple of older guys behind us who seemed more interested in moaning and tutting at the behaviour and standing up of our fans, than the game itself, to the point that they sat down without a view for 30 minutes despite 100s of free seats all around and plenty of people "swapping" seats for the first 5 minutes like sensible human beings.
You one of the selfish twats that were stood up in front of me and my son so we couldn't see one of the goals? Whoever it was, were asked politely by a few, more senior than I to sit, The response was to effectively be blanked. In the end we had to move along and a row down so we could see what we had paid good money to watch. Those three self centred individuals were asked again by a dad with three kids to sit and eventually they pouted off to stand with the rest of the lads who were standing, really not rocket science. When your team is having a bad day & you come across three a@&eholes like that it does make it the day even worse!
No, there were another 2 or 3 rows of standers behind us by 3 minutes in once a few sitters swapped with standers, and we weren't asked by anyone to sit. When the away end is full I completely understand the moaning, yesterday there was no reason really. Unless clubs do actual allocated seating (Where people can choose a seat or at least block) and don't just sell tickets with the next number, asking people to sit on their ticketed number will never work, especially for the younger groups who don't buy tickets in big groups a week in advance, people want to stand/ sit with their mates as much as anything.
No, there were another 2 or 3 rows of standers behind us by 3 minutes in once a few sitters swapped with standers, and we weren't asked by anyone to sit. When the away end is full I completely understand the moaning, yesterday there was no reason really. Unless clubs do actual allocated seating (Where people can choose a seat or at least block) and don't just sell tickets with the next number, asking people to sit on their ticketed number will never work, especially for the younger groups who don't buy tickets in big groups a week in advance, people want to stand/ sit with their mates as much as anything.
Oxford is the only one there's a real situation at.
And the club acted pretty well with that signing section idea.
We were told by a steward it was allocated seating, as such adhered to the instructions. It does make it galling when the 3 lads then chose to stand & us with little option but to suffer the first 20 minutes with a view of their backs, each time the ball was in the penalty area. It was for them to move and join the standing group near the back of the goal, not a dozen other spectators who choose to do precisely what they paid for and sit!
No, there were another 2 or 3 rows of standers behind us by 3 minutes in once a few sitters swapped with standers, and we weren't asked by anyone to sit. When the away end is full I completely understand the moaning, yesterday there was no reason really. Unless clubs do actual allocated seating (Where people can choose a seat or at least block) and don't just sell tickets with the next number, asking people to sit on their ticketed number will never work, especially for the younger groups who don't buy tickets in big groups a week in advance, people want to stand/ sit with their mates as much as anything.
Oxford is the only one there's a real situation at.
And the club acted pretty well with that signing section idea.
Agreed that Oxford is the biggest problem ground, the singing section is a good idea, can't see why the club can't go further and gave have two options, say "family" and "not family". Sell "family" ticket starting at A1 and "not family" from Z99, surely that would help?
Was there any placement choice when buying tickets? If the stewards are going to be strict with the seating it would make sense to have a simple higher or lower code for unofficial standing or sitting. Most fans will want their fellow supporters to have the best day out they can, yet all it takes is a few standing up at the front to wreck the whole system.
Such a shame that with their impessive facilities comes a seeming lack of organisation and forethought causing some fans to have regrettable experiences on what should be a good day out (scoreline not withstanding). A ridiculous policy to let some areas get on with it whilst other areas were policed the shit out of. Bunch of drinkstables.
No, there were another 2 or 3 rows of standers behind us by 3 minutes in once a few sitters swapped with standers, and we weren't asked by anyone to sit. When the away end is full I completely understand the moaning, yesterday there was no reason really. Unless clubs do actual allocated seating (Where people can choose a seat or at least block) and don't just sell tickets with the next number, asking people to sit on their ticketed number will never work, especially for the younger groups who don't buy tickets in big groups a week in advance, people want to stand/ sit with their mates as much as anything.
Oxford is the only one there's a real situation at.
And the club acted pretty well with that signing section idea.
Agreed that Oxford is the biggest problem ground, the singing section is a good idea, can't see why the club can't go further and gave have two options, say "family" and "not family". Sell "family" ticket starting at A1 and "not family" from Z99, surely that would help?
Why family and non family?
Singing and non is better. Makes it pretty clear.
@EwanHoosaami said:
We were told by a steward it was allocated seating, as such adhered to the instructions. It does make it galling when the 3 lads then chose to stand & us with little option but to suffer the first 20 minutes with a view of their backs, each time the ball was in the penalty area. It was for them to move and join the standing group near the back of the goal, not a dozen other spectators who choose to do precisely what they paid for and sit!
Except the standers were in the front 15 or so rows this time as well!
Comments
As a fairly harsh if not that vocal critic of Alsopp, I'm conscious of being fair. If Rocky had let that in I'd count it as a howler, even with the tricky bounce.
Sublime kicking by a goalkeeper (or by any other player, for that matter) is surely an original addition to the vocabulary of football journalism.
Some of the kicking of the front three yesterday was less than sublime.
Never thought of it before but can’t recall anyone ever criticising an outfield player’s kicking - and I say that in all seriousness.
Liked your comment though @Wendoverson.
Side note from yesterday: Some fans (guessing they didn't go to Posh) were immediately on Parkers back yesterday. Fact is, within a few minutes of coming on he provided more goal threat than Samuels did, who for all his good hold up work, would never attempt the front post run and flick, or overhead kick from a poor cross that Parker did. He is frustrating sometimes, but I'd like to see Parker given a go through the middle or in a front 2, got to be worth a try.
Parker has looked effective in his last three games, especially in a front two with Bayo against Rochdale, but I'd also like to see him in the middle of a three. At the end of the day, if a striker is doing what Samuel does and what Parker does, they probably won't be in League One, but I think we're very good at sharing the load depending on the situation. Bayo obviously comes into that as well.
Indeed. I would like to see parker tried as the middle of a front three as he looks like a striker! What have we got to lose?
His best times at Gillingham came when he was playing in a front two with Tom Eaves as the target man, so I reckon there's something in a partnership with Bayo if it's allowed to develop. Flat midfield four of Wheeler-Gape-Thompson-Fred?
Parker looked like he had Kashkets barely there shinpads on. Always fear for players with those.
Stewards actually barred entry to us to all but the "correct" block. And then sent towards the exact seats.
The hoodlum mob had all decided the very front was where they were going. And stood up for about 10 rows. Ignoring the usual "everyone knows we stand at the back" routine.
You then had a few unfortunate people behind them who can't have seen anything.
And then a more unfortunate couple of rows behind who had to stand to see, only to be told and in places grabbed to sit down!
It was fine to sit and see behind that though. Which was odd. Normally a few standers at the front force everyone to have to stand.
If we stay in L1 (probable) and Bayo retires (very possible), you would have to think Josh Parker is going to be vital going forward. To me, he looked really off the pace his first couple of appearances, but has gained confidence and sharpness as he gets game time. A lot of the early issues may have been rust.
I'd give Bayo another year if he wants it.
Definitely.
I agree - with his style he could play past 40. I just could see him wanting to throw himself into the media opportunities.
If we have the necessary funds, I'd like to see us start moving away from our current style - next season could show us whether it is Gaz's style or the one he's been forced to play by financial constraints - but Bayo could still be the ultimate impact player.
You one of the selfish twats that were stood up in front of me and my son so we couldn't see one of the goals? Whoever it was, were asked politely by a few, more senior than I to sit, The response was to effectively be blanked. In the end we had to move along and a row down so we could see what we had paid good money to watch. Those three self centred individuals were asked again by a dad with three kids to sit and eventually they pouted off to stand with the rest of the lads who were standing, really not rocket science. When your team is having a bad day & you come across three a@&eholes like that it does make it the day even worse!
I didn't say that he is doing it against the clubs wishes. Just saying that he shouldn't be allowed to do it. I agree with what you said.
It looked a bizarre set up yesterday though.
The stand behind the goal had the first 10-15 rows ALL standing, and then mostly everyone sitting behind.
The ones who seemed to be getting the most jip were the ones at the back of the standing - who of course only stood as everyone ahead was standing.
I thought all the "yoof" usually moan that the back of the stand is where you legitimately stand, and everyone who tries to sit back there knows what to expect.
But it seemed a total reverse this time.
Sounds just like my experiences of the Oxford game. I'm not going to pay good money in future to attend away games with a toxic atmosphere amongst our own fans AND no view of the game.
I'm not making excuses for rudeness or lack of consideration, but clubs don't help themselves when they allocate seats - completely pointless when you haven't chosen your seats.
There didn't seem any need for exact seats yesterday. The amount of seats far outweighed the amount of fans - totally unlike Oxford, and more like almost every away game of the season.
Fair enough @Malone, I wasn't at MKD yesterday.
Still a bit bizarre though - don't get me wrong.
All the standers being at the front, did make it awkward for some people whose seats happened to be behind them.
I'm still waiting for one of the yoof posters to explain, as usually it's "oh if you try and sit at the back, it's your own fault" type sentiments.
I've some sympathy with all parties.
I was on the front row of those that remained seated, having honoured the request to sit in our allocated seats. My son and I strongly prefer to stand and would have done so had it not caused inconvenience to those behind us. There was a certain amount of negotiating to be done with those in front in the first half hour to provide for a serviceable view, which was done reasonably good-naturedly. Our view was serviceable but we waited to go back in in the second so as to take up standing positions in a suitable place, which we did successfully and enjoyed the game more as a result.
As others noted, the problem was the allocation of seats. I think the majority of fans understand, when seating is not allocated, that the back rows will likely stand and position themselves accordingly. There was a fair amount of moving around, forward and backwards, in the first half in order to satisfy personal preferences.
The impression of inconsideration among those who wished to stand did not encourage goodwill.
No, there were another 2 or 3 rows of standers behind us by 3 minutes in once a few sitters swapped with standers, and we weren't asked by anyone to sit. When the away end is full I completely understand the moaning, yesterday there was no reason really. Unless clubs do actual allocated seating (Where people can choose a seat or at least block) and don't just sell tickets with the next number, asking people to sit on their ticketed number will never work, especially for the younger groups who don't buy tickets in big groups a week in advance, people want to stand/ sit with their mates as much as anything.
Oxford is the only one there's a real situation at.
And the club acted pretty well with that signing section idea.
We were told by a steward it was allocated seating, as such adhered to the instructions. It does make it galling when the 3 lads then chose to stand & us with little option but to suffer the first 20 minutes with a view of their backs, each time the ball was in the penalty area. It was for them to move and join the standing group near the back of the goal, not a dozen other spectators who choose to do precisely what they paid for and sit!
Agreed that Oxford is the biggest problem ground, the singing section is a good idea, can't see why the club can't go further and gave have two options, say "family" and "not family". Sell "family" ticket starting at A1 and "not family" from Z99, surely that would help?
Was there any placement choice when buying tickets? If the stewards are going to be strict with the seating it would make sense to have a simple higher or lower code for unofficial standing or sitting. Most fans will want their fellow supporters to have the best day out they can, yet all it takes is a few standing up at the front to wreck the whole system.
Such a shame that with their impessive facilities comes a seeming lack of organisation and forethought causing some fans to have regrettable experiences on what should be a good day out (scoreline not withstanding). A ridiculous policy to let some areas get on with it whilst other areas were policed the shit out of. Bunch of drinkstables.
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Drinkstable
Why family and non family?
Singing and non is better. Makes it pretty clear.
Except the standers were in the front 15 or so rows this time as well!