Peterborough Predictions.

[Selsey Bill]

I think we should lay off Morrell. He's a quality player and has an edge to his game. Yes he's going to pick up yellows and the odd red but I'd rather have that than not have him at all. His aggressive style is what makes him the player he is.

I understand what you are saying, but there is a fine line between this and recklessness. A classic example of the latter was when we were away to MK Dons in April. 1-0 up and absolutely cruising to an away win, and Morrell stupidly gets himself sent off just before half-time. They then battered us and inevitably equalised. I think that ended all chances of us sneaking into the playoffs, not that we deserved to be in them, let alone good be enough to win them.

[Mickemo]

Agreed…hope you’re not going soft on us Betelgeuse?

[phat_chris]

I'm going to lay off JM for now. I realise my failing is pure frustration on matchdays which leads me to post at times. We had a great result on Saturday and hopefully we've discovered a winning formula after a few tweeks. I reserve my right to continue posting stuff during games in October...

You can only post your point of veiw on how you see things. Obviously that veiw may not be to everyone's agreement but I don't see any sense in just posting posts that are just are not what you really think. Some people veiw a post that is not full of eulogies as simply wrong which, apparently, my veiws generally are seen on here. Of course your veiw, or mine, can be wrong just as any point of veiw is on any subject can be. Veiws can often be seen as subjectly wrong or right.

Saturday's game was a game where we could all see the positives, and failings, in an enjoyable way. We deserved to win and the manager and players can take full credit for that. It could have gone the other way but thanks to a couple of bad misses by the Peterborough forwards we got what we deserved. However, it was noticeable that this win was achieved with the kind of football we have been asking for. Some posters on here have been calling for the team to be fielded with more than just the lone striker, a veiw that was seen as wrong by some. We have the makings of a good team, in my veiw, but just lacking that bit of quality that I hoped would come in during the summer. Playing the way we did Saturday bridges that gap to a great degree and more displays like that should give us a decent season.

My advice to you is post your own veiws. Not what others think you should post, but respect opposing opinion.

In my VIEW your auto correct needs taking out back and shot

I don't really know what you mean, please explain.

i before e except after c!! VIEW not VEIW is what he means

Oh I see, thank you. I wonder why my grammar appears to be in the spotlight, although I do know it's not perfect.

I was mocking the technology, not you. I am assuming you may have mistyped view a few times and your technology's AI has learned from that and now auto-corrects to the wrong spelling. I know I'm constantly having to override my phone's AI with its intrusive auto correcting.

[Blue Walter]

I'm going to lay off JM for now. I realise my failing is pure frustration on matchdays which leads me to post at times. We had a great result on Saturday and hopefully we've discovered a winning formula after a few tweeks. I reserve my right to continue posting stuff during games in October...

You can only post your point of veiw on how you see things. Obviously that veiw may not be to everyone's agreement but I don't see any sense in just posting posts that are just are not what you really think. Some people veiw a post that is not full of eulogies as simply wrong which, apparently, my veiws generally are seen on here. Of course your veiw, or mine, can be wrong just as any point of veiw is on any subject can be. Veiws can often be seen as subjectly wrong or right.

Saturday's game was a game where we could all see the positives, and failings, in an enjoyable way. We deserved to win and the manager and players can take full credit for that. It could have gone the other way but thanks to a couple of bad misses by the Peterborough forwards we got what we deserved. However, it was noticeable that this win was achieved with the kind of football we have been asking for. Some posters on here have been calling for the team to be fielded with more than just the lone striker, a veiw that was seen as wrong by some. We have the makings of a good team, in my veiw, but just lacking that bit of quality that I hoped would come in during the summer. Playing the way we did Saturday bridges that gap to a great degree and more displays like that should give us a decent season.

My advice to you is post your own veiws. Not what others think you should post, but respect opposing opinion.

In my VIEW your auto correct needs taking out back and shot

I don't really know what you mean, please explain.

i before e except after c!! VIEW not VEIW is what he means

Oh I see, thank you. I wonder why my grammar appears to be in the spotlight, although I do know it's not perfect.

I was mocking the technology, not you. I am assuming you may have mistyped view a few times and your technology's AI has learned from that and now auto-corrects to the wrong spelling. I know I'm constantly having to override my phone's AI with its intrusive auto correcting.

Yes, I am not the greatest at technology and I have probably used the 'i, before 'e' rule incorrectly too many times and confused my AI, as you have suggested. I have been a bit slow here and I never picked up on your post with the VIEW in capitals letters meaning, which makes me a bit dim. I put that down to age as your post was a bit too clever for me so I do apologise for my tardiness.

I suppose I was a bit defensive really as I have been picked up on my grammar a few times on here, which I found a bit odd as there are far worse examples to be seen. There is a poster who uses text language to write his posts while others don't use capital letters, commas and so on. Often the wrong spelling of 'there' for 'their' is probably the most common, which is one of those words that that breaks the 'i' before 'e' rule.