Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker on our website.
I didn't say our defence was sub standard I said one player was. I think the defence has, mainly, coped well with the loss of Poole. Just like with any team there is a weak spot.
I am sure he is very pleased to be singled out for the attention, glad i dont work for you Walter, must have been fun doing good work for 51 weeks of the year, making a cock up and being lambasted and potentially replaced for it
We havent scored in a while, best buy a whole new front line too
As per usual a typical reply from your good self. I would think the player himself knows that he hasn't been a good full back. As for signaling him out that was done before he came here. Exeter dropped him from the team and replaced him with another left back. They then told him he was no longer required and they would not be renewing his contract. Whether our club signed him as an out and out left back I wouldn't know, although it does appear that as they didn't sign anyone else as cover for that position so it would appear they did. They may well have been attracted by his other attributes which I have noted in these posts.
So would I be wrong in your eyes to 'single him out' and say that I think he would make a good wing back at this level? Also could I ask you that do you think Sparkes is a good full back, as a specialist in this position in defending?
I didn't say our defence was sub standard I said one player was. I think the defence has, mainly, coped well with the loss of Poole. Just like with any team there is a weak spot.
I am sure he is very pleased to be singled out for the attention, glad i dont work for you Walter, must have been fun doing good work for 51 weeks of the year, making a cock up and being lambasted and potentially replaced for it
We havent scored in a while, best buy a whole new front line too
As per usual a typical reply from your good self. I would think the player himself knows that he hasn't been a good full back. As for signaling him out that was done before he came here. Exeter dropped him from the team and replaced him with another left back. They then told him he was no longer required and they would not be renewing his contract. Whether our club signed him as an out and out left back I wouldn't know, although it does appear that as they didn't sign anyone else as cover for that position so it would appear they did. They may well have been attracted by his other attributes which I have noted in these posts.
So would I be wrong in your eyes to 'single him out' and say that I think he would make a good wing back at this level? Also could I ask you that do you think Sparkes is a good full back, as a specialist in this position in defending?
I didn't say our defence was sub standard I said one player was. I think the defence has, mainly, coped well with the loss of Poole. Just like with any team there is a weak spot.
I am sure he is very pleased to be singled out for the attention, glad i dont work for you Walter, must have been fun doing good work for 51 weeks of the year, making a cock up and being lambasted and potentially replaced for it
We havent scored in a while, best buy a whole new front line too
As per usual a typical reply from your good self. I would think the player himself knows that he hasn't been a good full back. As for signaling him out that was done before he came here. Exeter dropped him from the team and replaced him with another left back. They then told him he was no longer required and they would not be renewing his contract. Whether our club signed him as an out and out left back I wouldn't know, although it does appear that as they didn't sign anyone else as cover for that position so it would appear they did. They may well have been attracted by his other attributes which I have noted in these posts.
So would I be wrong in your eyes to 'single him out' and say that I think he would make a good wing back at this level? Also could I ask you that do you think Sparkes is a good full back, as a specialist in this position in defending?
As for your suggestion that we bought a whole new front line I would answer that by our front line consists of one player. Sure Lane chips in with goals but not many assists. Sparkes is our highest assists provider and currently our only player that is shown in the top 6 charts for League One in goals scored and provided. I would put goals not being scored down to the way we play. Teams don't 'park the bus'against us which is something the top teams normally have to deal with. They attack us because of our frailties in defence and the lack of attacking threat once our midfield has been nullified. In short we need to change the way we play and become less predictable. Either that or go out and get the quality that can be predictable but still do the business.
I didn't say our defence was sub standard I said one player was. I think the defence has, mainly, coped well with the loss of Poole. Just like with any team there is a weak spot.
I am sure he is very pleased to be singled out for the attention, glad i dont work for you Walter, must have been fun doing good work for 51 weeks of the year, making a cock up and being lambasted and potentially replaced for it
We havent scored in a while, best buy a whole new front line too
As per usual a typical reply from your good self. I would think the player himself knows that he hasn't been a good full back. As for signaling him out that was done before he came here. Exeter dropped him from the team and replaced him with another left back. They then told him he was no longer required and they would not be renewing his contract. Whether our club signed him as an out and out left back I wouldn't know, although it does appear that as they didn't sign anyone else as cover for that position so it would appear they did. They may well have been attracted by his other attributes which I have noted in these posts.
So would I be wrong in your eyes to 'single him out' and say that I think he would make a good wing back at this level? Also could I ask you that do you think Sparkes is a good full back, as a specialist in this position in defending?
You keep saying this stuff about Sparked and that the club failed to recruit a proper left back in the summer:
Olgivie is our first choice left back is he not?
Would you, or would you not agree that at most clubs your second choice for any position is not going to be as refined as your first choice in any given position?
Would, or would you not agree that it is sensible to look for qualities in your back up there are different to your first choice in any given position?
Bearing in mind the above, do you not think that Sparkes, the back up left back has done an admirable job in his extended run in the side?
OR
Do you think the club should have two first choice players in each position? If this was the case how do you keep them both happy and sharp? How do you afford two first choices? How do you get two first choices to sign given that they are going to have to miss out more often than not?
I'm genuinely intrigued as to what you think we should have done? Who should we have signed that was better than Sparkes, and happy to play second fiddle to Ogilvie, or we need someone better than Ogilvie.
Currently the club has one fit right back - we are soon to have 3 fit left backs with a 4th (Vincent) in the building. Irrespective of what you think of their ability - do you not think that is a fairly well stocked position?
I didn't say our defence was sub standard I said one player was. I think the defence has, mainly, coped well with the loss of Poole. Just like with any team there is a weak spot.
I am sure he is very pleased to be singled out for the attention, glad i dont work for you Walter, must have been fun doing good work for 51 weeks of the year, making a cock up and being lambasted and potentially replaced for it
We havent scored in a while, best buy a whole new front line too
As per usual a typical reply from your good self. I would think the player himself knows that he hasn't been a good full back. As for signaling him out that was done before he came here. Exeter dropped him from the team and replaced him with another left back. They then told him he was no longer required and they would not be renewing his contract. Whether our club signed him as an out and out left back I wouldn't know, although it does appear that as they didn't sign anyone else as cover for that position so it would appear they did. They may well have been attracted by his other attributes which I have noted in these posts.
So would I be wrong in your eyes to 'single him out' and say that I think he would make a good wing back at this level? Also could I ask you that do you think Sparkes is a good full back, as a specialist in this position in defending?
I would say he hasnt been the god awful full back he is being made out to be, and the sole reason for our recent dip in form. I am sure that the other 10 on the pitch and any subs who come on have been having MOTM performances and just Sparkes has been responsible for all the goals we have been conceding. Has he not played in the games we won and kept clean sheets, or was that just pure luck ??
and please dont say that you havent "singled" him out, you stated that our defence wasnt sub standard, he was.
Statistics dam Statistics so look at how many goals we have conceded in the last games since Poole got injured think you’ll find that we have conceded a high amount and we continue to ship them in.
15 league games before chesterfield we conceded 10, and scored 25.
12 league games since chesterfield we have conceded 15, and scored 17. Almost half of those conceded were in two games, one when down to ten men.
It's hardly a defensive collapse when you think that for all of those games without Poole we have also been without the first choice left back.
It surprises me that we are not far off even on goals scored pre and post Chesterfield, after 30 games, we could be dead even. Spooky.
so what your saying is that we have had 2 really bad games, other wise conceded about the same rate ??
I dont disagree that we arent playing great at the moment, but that is accross the team,
Correct.
Individual errors at both ends if the pitch are proving problematic.
I didn't say our defence was sub standard I said one player was. I think the defence has, mainly, coped well with the loss of Poole. Just like with any team there is a weak spot.
I am sure he is very pleased to be singled out for the attention, glad i dont work for you Walter, must have been fun doing good work for 51 weeks of the year, making a cock up and being lambasted and potentially replaced for it
We havent scored in a while, best buy a whole new front line too
As per usual a typical reply from your good self. I would think the player himself knows that he hasn't been a good full back. As for signaling him out that was done before he came here. Exeter dropped him from the team and replaced him with another left back. They then told him he was no longer required and they would not be renewing his contract. Whether our club signed him as an out and out left back I wouldn't know, although it does appear that as they didn't sign anyone else as cover for that position so it would appear they did. They may well have been attracted by his other attributes which I have noted in these posts.
So would I be wrong in your eyes to 'single him out' and say that I think he would make a good wing back at this level? Also could I ask you that do you think Sparkes is a good full back, as a specialist in this position in defending?
I would say he hasnt been the god awful full back he is being made out to be, and the sole reason for our recent dip in form. I am sure that the other 10 on the pitch and any subs who come on have been having MOTM performances and just Sparkes has been responsible for all the goals we have been conceding. Has he not played in the games we won and kept clean sheets, or was that just pure luck ??
and please dont say that you havent "singled" him out, you stated that our defence wasnt sub standard, he was.
I think it’s unfair to single individuals out for criticism during this slump however the reason for my post is our defence are leaking goals which has to be rectified urgently. I mentioned Sparkes as he has been the weakest aspect of our defence however I believe Shaughnessy hasn’t been at his best. The whole defence hasn’t worked well as a unit although Rags has tried his best he hasn’t the quality of Poole if you combine all these factors together there are issues that need addressing. I think the absence of Ogilvie, Roberts and Poole all quality players has hit the team hard and shown up our deficiencies
Laughter is the jam on the toast of life. It adds flavor, keeps it from being too dry, and makes it easier to swallow.
-- Diane Johnson
I didn't say our defence was sub standard I said one player was. I think the defence has, mainly, coped well with the loss of Poole. Just like with any team there is a weak spot.
I am sure he is very pleased to be singled out for the attention, glad i dont work for you Walter, must have been fun doing good work for 51 weeks of the year, making a cock up and being lambasted and potentially replaced for it
We havent scored in a while, best buy a whole new front line too
As per usual a typical reply from your good self. I would think the player himself knows that he hasn't been a good full back. As for signaling him out that was done before he came here. Exeter dropped him from the team and replaced him with another left back. They then told him he was no longer required and they would not be renewing his contract. Whether our club signed him as an out and out left back I wouldn't know, although it does appear that as they didn't sign anyone else as cover for that position so it would appear they did. They may well have been attracted by his other attributes which I have noted in these posts.
So would I be wrong in your eyes to 'single him out' and say that I think he would make a good wing back at this level? Also could I ask you that do you think Sparkes is a good full back, as a specialist in this position in defending?
You keep saying this stuff about Sparked and that the club failed to recruit a proper left back in the summer:
Olgivie is our first choice left back is he not?
Would you, or would you not agree that at most clubs your secondutesu choice for any position is not going to be as refined as your first choice in any given position?
Would, or would you not agree that it is sensible to look for qualities in your back up there are different to your first choice in any given position?
Bearing in mind the above, do you not think that Sparkes, the back up left back has done an admirable job in his extended run in the side?
OR
Do you think the club should have two first choice players in each position? If this was the case how do you keep them both happy and sharp? How do you afford two first choices? How do you get two first choices to sign given that they are going to have to miss out more often than not?
I'm genuinely intrigued as to what you think we should have done? Who should we have signed that was better than Sparkes, and happy to play second fiddle to Ogilvie, or we need someone better than Ogilvie.
Currently the club has one fit right back - we are soon to have 3 fit left backs with a 4th (Vincent) in the building. Irrespective of what you think of their ability - do you not think that is a fairly well stocked position?
If Sparkes was signed as a full back then I don't think his was a good signing. Do I think the 'covering' player should be as good as the 'first choice'? Firstly Mousinho said the aim was to have two players for each position and no one is guaranteed a first team place, secondly there is absolutely no contest between Ogilvie and Sparkes who is first choice as left full back. Would players of Sparkes age commit to signing as a 'back up' player if they are ambitious. I do agree with you that it is sensible for the club to look for players that have other attributes not at the club already. Sparkes is better than Ogilvie going forward but nowhere near as good in defending. So what I am saying, to be clear, is that if Sparkes was signed as a full back then I believe the club is at fault. On the other hand if Sparkes was signed to give us a wider attacking threat choice then it was a good signing, but it left us weak in the defensive area. You never answered my question as to whether you thought Sparkes is a good full back but I will answer yours. No I don't think Sparkes has an admirable job at full back. When all the players are fit that play in the left back berth I am not so sure we will be reasonably stocked. We know we have Sparkes but we don't know how Vincent will cope. Until he is playing and tested we will not know.
I couldn't name names of who we should have signed as a left back. If the aim was to have two players for every position then players signing would be signing to fight it out with the present incumbant of any given position to become the first choice. I would dispute that we did actually have two players for every position anyway. You are right about the right back spot and we could well have a problem in that position, but then I think there are potential problems all around the team.
I didn't say our defence was sub standard I said one player was. I think the defence has, mainly, coped well with the loss of Poole. Just like with any team there is a weak spot.
I am sure he is very pleased to be singled out for the attention, glad i dont work for you Walter, must have been fun doing good work for 51 weeks of the year, making a cock up and being lambasted and potentially replaced for it
We havent scored in a while, best buy a whole new front line too
As per usual a typical reply from your good self. I would think the player himself knows that he hasn't been a good full back. As for signaling him out that was done before he came here. Exeter dropped him from the team and replaced him with another left back. They then told him he was no longer required and they would not be renewing his contract. Whether our club signed him as an out and out left back I wouldn't know, although it does appear that as they didn't sign anyone else as cover for that position so it would appear they did. They may well have been attracted by his other attributes which I have noted in these posts.
So would I be wrong in your eyes to 'single him out' and say that I think he would make a good wing back at this level? Also could I ask you that do you think Sparkes is a good full back, as a specialist in this position in defending?
I would say he hasnt been the god awful full back he is being made out to be, and the sole reason for our recent dip in form. I am sure that the other 10 on the pitch and any subs who come on have been having MOTM performances and just Sparkes has been responsible for all the goals we have been conceding. Has he not played in the games we won and kept clean sheets, or was that just pure luck ??
and please dont say that you havent "singled" him out, you stated that our defence wasnt sub standard, he was.
I think it’s unfair to single individuals out for criticism during this slump however the reason for my post is our defence are leaking goals which has to be rectified urgently. I mentioned Sparkes as he has been the weakest aspect of our defence however I believe Shaughnessy hasn’t been at his best. The whole defence hasn’t worked well as a unit although Rags has tried his best he hasn’t the quality of Poole if you combine all these factors together there are issues that need addressing. I think the absence of Ogilvie, Roberts and Poole all quality players has hit the team hard and shown up our deficiencies
I agree with most of what you say here but the thread was headed "Sparkes, should we keep playing him?" by the author. So the answers required were just that, do you agree or not. The player had been signalled out by the original question.
I didn't say our defence was sub standard I said one player was. I think the defence has, mainly, coped well with the loss of Poole. Just like with any team there is a weak spot.
I am sure he is very pleased to be singled out for the attention, glad i dont work for you Walter, must have been fun doing good work for 51 weeks of the year, making a cock up and being lambasted and potentially replaced for it
We havent scored in a while, best buy a whole new front line too
As per usual a typical reply from your good self. I would think the player himself knows that he hasn't been a good full back. As for signaling him out that was done before he came here. Exeter dropped him from the team and replaced him with another left back. They then told him he was no longer required and they would not be renewing his contract. Whether our club signed him as an out and out left back I wouldn't know, although it does appear that as they didn't sign anyone else as cover for that position so it would appear they did. They may well have been attracted by his other attributes which I have noted in these posts.
So would I be wrong in your eyes to 'single him out' and say that I think he would make a good wing back at this level? Also could I ask you that do you think Sparkes is a good full back, as a specialist in this position in defending?
You keep saying this stuff about Sparked and that the club failed to recruit a proper left back in the summer:
Olgivie is our first choice left back is he not?
Would you, or would you not agree that at most clubs your secondutesu choice for any position is not going to be as refined as your first choice in any given position?
Would, or would you not agree that it is sensible to look for qualities in your back up there are different to your first choice in any given position?
Bearing in mind the above, do you not think that Sparkes, the back up left back has done an admirable job in his extended run in the side?
OR
Do you think the club should have two first choice players in each position? If this was the case how do you keep them both happy and sharp? How do you afford two first choices? How do you get two first choices to sign given that they are going to have to miss out more often than not?
I'm genuinely intrigued as to what you think we should have done? Who should we have signed that was better than Sparkes, and happy to play second fiddle to Ogilvie, or we need someone better than Ogilvie.
Currently the club has one fit right back - we are soon to have 3 fit left backs with a 4th (Vincent) in the building. Irrespective of what you think of their ability - do you not think that is a fairly well stocked position?
If Sparkes was signed as a full back then I don't think his was a good signing. Do I think the 'covering' player should be as good as the 'first choice'? Firstly Mousinho said the aim was to have two players for each position and no one is guaranteed a first team place, secondly there is absolutely no contest between Ogilvie and Sparkes who is first choice as left full back. Would players of Sparkes age commit to signing as a 'back up' player if they are ambitious. I do agree with you that it is sensible for the club to look for players that have other attributes not at the club already. Sparkes is better than Ogilvie going forward but nowhere near as good in defending. So what I am saying, to be clear, is that if Sparkes was signed as a full back then I believe the club is at fault. On the other hand if Sparkes was signed to give us a wider attacking threat choice then it was a good signing, but it left us weak in the defensive area. You never answered my question as to whether you thought Sparkes is a good full back but I will answer yours. No I don't think Sparkes has an admirable job at full back. When all the players are fit that play in the left back berth I am not so sure we will be reasonably stocked. We know we have Sparkes but we don't know how Vincent will cope. Until he is playing and tested we will not know.
I couldn't name names of who we should have signed as a left back. If the aim was to have two players for every position then players signing would be signing to fight it out with the present incumbant of any given position to become the first choice. I would dispute that we did actually have two players for every position anyway. You are right about the right back spot and we could well have a problem in that position, but then I think there are potential problems all around the team.
I don't think Sparkes, or Hulme for that matter are bad choices as a left fullback or wing back in league one, and I think the results while he has been in the team demonstrate that.
Has he made some mistakes yes, but what league one player doesn't - Oglivie has made bad errors in the past. They all do.
I didn't say our defence was sub standard I said one player was. I think the defence has, mainly, coped well with the loss of Poole. Just like with any team there is a weak spot.
I am sure he is very pleased to be singled out for the attention, glad i dont work for you Walter, must have been fun doing good work for 51 weeks of the year, making a cock up and being lambasted and potentially replaced for it
We havent scored in a while, best buy a whole new front line too
As per usual a typical reply from your good self. I would think the player himself knows that he hasn't been a good full back. As for signaling him out that was done before he came here. Exeter dropped him from the team and replaced him with another left back. They then told him he was no longer required and they would not be renewing his contract. Whether our club signed him as an out and out left back I wouldn't know, although it does appear that as they didn't sign anyone else as cover for that position so it would appear they did. They may well have been attracted by his other attributes which I have noted in these posts.
So would I be wrong in your eyes to 'single him out' and say that I think he would make a good wing back at this level? Also could I ask you that do you think Sparkes is a good full back, as a specialist in this position in defending?
I would say he hasnt been the god awful full back he is being made out to be, and the sole reason for our recent dip in form. I am sure that the other 10 on the pitch and any subs who come on have been having MOTM performances and just Sparkes has been responsible for all the goals we have been conceding. Has he not played in the games we won and kept clean sheets, or was that just pure luck ??
and please dont say that you havent "singled" him out, you stated that our defence wasnt sub standard, he was.
I think it’s unfair to single individuals out for criticism during this slump however the reason for my post is our defence are leaking goals which has to be rectified urgently. I mentioned Sparkes as he has been the weakest aspect of our defence however I believe Shaughnessy hasn’t been at his best. The whole defence hasn’t worked well as a unit although Rags has tried his best he hasn’t the quality of Poole if you combine all these factors together there are issues that need addressing. I think the absence of Ogilvie, Roberts and Poole all quality players has hit the team hard and shown up our deficiencies
I agree with most of what you say here but the thread was headed "Sparkes, should we keep playing him?" by the author. So the answers required were just that, do you agree or not. The player had been signalled out by the original question.
The answer is obviously yes. He is the best fit left back at the club, and more than adequate.
I didn't say our defence was sub standard I said one player was. I think the defence has, mainly, coped well with the loss of Poole. Just like with any team there is a weak spot.
I am sure he is very pleased to be singled out for the attention, glad i dont work for you Walter, must have been fun doing good work for 51 weeks of the year, making a cock up and being lambasted and potentially replaced for it
We havent scored in a while, best buy a whole new front line too
As per usual a typical reply from your good self. I would think the player himself knows that he hasn't been a good full back. As for signaling him out that was done before he came here. Exeter dropped him from the team and replaced him with another left back. They then told him he was no longer required and they would not be renewing his contract. Whether our club signed him as an out and out left back I wouldn't know, although it does appear that as they didn't sign anyone else as cover for that position so it would appear they did. They may well have been attracted by his other attributes which I have noted in these posts.
So would I be wrong in your eyes to 'single him out' and say that I think he would make a good wing back at this level? Also could I ask you that do you think Sparkes is a good full back, as a specialist in this position in defending?
You keep saying this stuff about Sparked and that the club failed to recruit a proper left back in the summer:
Olgivie is our first choice left back is he not?
Would you, or would you not agree that at most clubs your secondutesu choice for any position is not going to be as refined as your first choice in any given position?
Would, or would you not agree that it is sensible to look for qualities in your back up there are different to your first choice in any given position?
Bearing in mind the above, do you not think that Sparkes, the back up left back has done an admirable job in his extended run in the side?
OR
Do you think the club should have two first choice players in each position? If this was the case how do you keep them both happy and sharp? How do you afford two first choices? How do you get two first choices to sign given that they are going to have to miss out more often than not?
I'm genuinely intrigued as to what you think we should have done? Who should we have signed that was better than Sparkes, and happy to play second fiddle to Ogilvie, or we need someone better than Ogilvie.
Currently the club has one fit right back - we are soon to have 3 fit left backs with a 4th (Vincent) in the building. Irrespective of what you think of their ability - do you not think that is a fairly well stocked position?
If Sparkes was signed as a full back then I don't think his was a good signing. Do I think the 'covering' player should be as good as the 'first choice'? Firstly Mousinho said the aim was to have two players for each position and no one is guaranteed a first team place, secondly there is absolutely no contest between Ogilvie and Sparkes who is first choice as left full back. Would players of Sparkes age commit to signing as a 'back up' player if they are ambitious. I do agree with you that it is sensible for the club to look for players that have other attributes not at the club already. Sparkes is better than Ogilvie going forward but nowhere near as good in defending. So what I am saying, to be clear, is that if Sparkes was signed as a full back then I believe the club is at fault. On the other hand if Sparkes was signed to give us a wider attacking threat choice then it was a good signing, but it left us weak in the defensive area. You never answered my question as to whether you thought Sparkes is a good full back but I will answer yours. No I don't think Sparkes has an admirable job at full back. When all the players are fit that play in the left back berth I am not so sure we will be reasonably stocked. We know we have Sparkes but we don't know how Vincent will cope. Until he is playing and tested we will not know.
I couldn't name names of who we should have signed as a left back. If the aim was to have two players for every position then players signing would be signing to fight it out with the present incumbant of any given position to become the first choice. I would dispute that we did actually have two players for every position anyway. You are right about the right back spot and we could well have a problem in that position, but then I think there are potential problems all around the team.
I refer to my previous answer, I dont think he is the god awful full back he is being made out to be. He has played for a lot of the season and for a lot of the seaon we havent conceded goals, is that by luck even though he is in the team? Are all the goals we have conceded recently been directly attributable to Sparkes, was Shaugnessy playing out of the back and getting caught in the box and them scoring down to Sparkes? were the 2 goals from corners at the weekend down to sparkes??
you say there are potential problems all around the pitch?? not naming names as to who is sub standard on the rest of the pitch??
I didn't say our defence was sub standard I said one player was. I think the defence has, mainly, coped well with the loss of Poole. Just like with any team there is a weak spot.
I am sure he is very pleased to be singled out for the attention, glad i dont work for you Walter, must have been fun doing good work for 51 weeks of the year, making a cock up and being lambasted and potentially replaced for it
We havent scored in a while, best buy a whole new front line too
As per usual a typical reply from your good self. I would think the player himself knows that he hasn't been a good full back. As for signaling him out that was done before he came here. Exeter dropped him from the team and replaced him with another left back. They then told him he was no longer required and they would not be renewing his contract. Whether our club signed him as an out and out left back I wouldn't know, although it does appear that as they didn't sign anyone else as cover for that position so it would appear they did. They may well have been attracted by his other attributes which I have noted in these posts.
So would I be wrong in your eyes to 'single him out' and say that I think he would make a good wing back at this level? Also could I ask you that do you think Sparkes is a good full back, as a specialist in this position in defending?
You keep saying this stuff about Sparked and that the club failed to recruit a proper left back in the summer:
Olgivie is our first choice left back is he not?
Would you, or would you not agree that at most clubs your secondutesu choice for any position is not going to be as refined as your first choice in any given position?
Would, or would you not agree that it is sensible to look for qualities in your back up there are different to your first choice in any given position?
Bearing in mind the above, do you not think that Sparkes, the back up left back has done an admirable job in his extended run in the side?
OR
Do you think the club should have two first choice players in each position? If this was the case how do you keep them both happy and sharp? How do you afford two first choices? How do you get two first choices to sign given that they are going to have to miss out more often than not?
I'm genuinely intrigued as to what you think we should have done? Who should we have signed that was better than Sparkes, and happy to play second fiddle to Ogilvie, or we need someone better than Ogilvie.
Currently the club has one fit right back - we are soon to have 3 fit left backs with a 4th (Vincent) in the building. Irrespective of what you think of their ability - do you not think that is a fairly well stocked position?
If Sparkes was signed as a full back then I don't think his was a good signing. Do I think the 'covering' player should be as good as the 'first choice'? Firstly Mousinho said the aim was to have two players for each position and no one is guaranteed a first team place, secondly there is absolutely no contest between Ogilvie and Sparkes who is first choice as left full back. Would players of Sparkes age commit to signing as a 'back up' player if they are ambitious. I do agree with you that it is sensible for the club to look for players that have other attributes not at the club already. Sparkes is better than Ogilvie going forward but nowhere near as good in defending. So what I am saying, to be clear, is that if Sparkes was signed as a full back then I believe the club is at fault. On the other hand if Sparkes was signed to give us a wider attacking threat choice then it was a good signing, but it left us weak in the defensive area. You never answered my question as to whether you thought Sparkes is a good full back but I will answer yours. No I don't think Sparkes has an admirable job at full back. When all the players are fit that play in the left back berth I am not so sure we will be reasonably stocked. We know we have Sparkes but we don't know how Vincent will cope. Until he is playing and tested we will not know.
I couldn't name names of who we should have signed as a left back. If the aim was to have two players for every position then players signing would be signing to fight it out with the present incumbant of any given position to become the first choice. I would dispute that we did actually have two players for every position anyway. You are right about the right back spot and we could well have a problem in that position, but then I think there are potential problems all around the team.
I refer to my previous answer, I dont think he is the god awful full back he is being made out to be. He has played for a lot of the season and for a lot of the seaon we havent conceded goals, is that by luck even though he is in the team? Are all the goals we have conceded recently been directly attributable to Sparkes, was Shaugnessy playing out of the back and getting caught in the box and them scoring down to Sparkes? were the 2 goals from corners at the weekend down to sparkes??
you say there are potential problems all around the pitch?? not naming names as to who is sub standard on the rest of the pitch??
Although those goals may not be directly attributed to Sparkes you’ve got to look at the defence as a whole. Let’s be honest here we tolerated his defensive weakness’s because of his goal contributions. These have dried up now so hence my post can we really afford to play him ?
Laughter is the jam on the toast of life. It adds flavor, keeps it from being too dry, and makes it easier to swallow.
-- Diane Johnson
I didn't say our defence was sub standard I said one player was. I think the defence has, mainly, coped well with the loss of Poole. Just like with any team there is a weak spot.
I am sure he is very pleased to be singled out for the attention, glad i dont work for you Walter, must have been fun doing good work for 51 weeks of the year, making a cock up and being lambasted and potentially replaced for it
We havent scored in a while, best buy a whole new front line too
As per usual a typical reply from your good self. I would think the player himself knows that he hasn't been a good full back. As for signaling him out that was done before he came here. Exeter dropped him from the team and replaced him with another left back. They then told him he was no longer required and they would not be renewing his contract. Whether our club signed him as an out and out left back I wouldn't know, although it does appear that as they didn't sign anyone else as cover for that position so it would appear they did. They may well have been attracted by his other attributes which I have noted in these posts.
So would I be wrong in your eyes to 'single him out' and say that I think he would make a good wing back at this level? Also could I ask you that do you think Sparkes is a good full back, as a specialist in this position in defending?
You keep saying this stuff about Sparked and that the club failed to recruit a proper left back in the summer:
Olgivie is our first choice left back is he not?
Would you, or would you not agree that at most clubs your secondutesu choice for any position is not going to be as refined as your first choice in any given position?
Would, or would you not agree that it is sensible to look for qualities in your back up there are different to your first choice in any given position?
Bearing in mind the above, do you not think that Sparkes, the back up left back has done an admirable job in his extended run in the side?
OR
Do you think the club should have two first choice players in each position? If this was the case how do you keep them both happy and sharp? How do you afford two first choices? How do you get two first choices to sign given that they are going to have to miss out more often than not?
I'm genuinely intrigued as to what you think we should have done? Who should we have signed that was better than Sparkes, and happy to play second fiddle to Ogilvie, or we need someone better than Ogilvie.
Currently the club has one fit right back - we are soon to have 3 fit left backs with a 4th (Vincent) in the building. Irrespective of what you think of their ability - do you not think that is a fairly well stocked position?
If Sparkes was signed as a full back then I don't think his was a good signing. Do I think the 'covering' player should be as good as the 'first choice'? Firstly Mousinho said the aim was to have two players for each position and no one is guaranteed a first team place, secondly there is absolutely no contest between Ogilvie and Sparkes who is first choice as left full back. Would players of Sparkes age commit to signing as a 'back up' player if they are ambitious. I do agree with you that it is sensible for the club to look for players that have other attributes not at the club already. Sparkes is better than Ogilvie going forward but nowhere near as good in defending. So what I am saying, to be clear, is that if Sparkes was signed as a full back then I believe the club is at fault. On the other hand if Sparkes was signed to give us a wider attacking threat choice then it was a good signing, but it left us weak in the defensive area. You never answered my question as to whether you thought Sparkes is a good full back but I will answer yours. No I don't think Sparkes has an admirable job at full back. When all the players are fit that play in the left back berth I am not so sure we will be reasonably stocked. We know we have Sparkes but we don't know how Vincent will cope. Until he is playing and tested we will not know.
I couldn't name names of who we should have signed as a left back. If the aim was to have two players for every position then players signing would be signing to fight it out with the present incumbant of any given position to become the first choice. I would dispute that we did actually have two players for every position anyway. You are right about the right back spot and we could well have a problem in that position, but then I think there are potential problems all around the team.
I refer to my previous answer, I dont think he is the god awful full back he is being made out to be. He has played for a lot of the season and for a lot of the seaon we havent conceded goals, is that by luck even though he is in the team? Are all the goals we have conceded recently been directly attributable to Sparkes, was Shaugnessy playing out of the back and getting caught in the box and them scoring down to Sparkes? were the 2 goals from corners at the weekend down to sparkes??
you say there are potential problems all around the pitch?? not naming names as to who is sub standard on the rest of the pitch??
Although those goals may not be directly attributed to Sparkes you’ve got to look at the defence as a whole. Let’s be honest here we tolerated his defensive weakness’s because of his goal contributions. These have dried up now so hence my post can we really afford to play him ?
You mean we kept winning, and now we aren't some feel the need to blame someone?
I didn't say our defence was sub standard I said one player was. I think the defence has, mainly, coped well with the loss of Poole. Just like with any team there is a weak spot.
I am sure he is very pleased to be singled out for the attention, glad i dont work for you Walter, must have been fun doing good work for 51 weeks of the year, making a cock up and being lambasted and potentially replaced for it
We havent scored in a while, best buy a whole new front line too
As per usual a typical reply from your good self. I would think the player himself knows that he hasn't been a good full back. As for signaling him out that was done before he came here. Exeter dropped him from the team and replaced him with another left back. They then told him he was no longer required and they would not be renewing his contract. Whether our club signed him as an out and out left back I wouldn't know, although it does appear that as they didn't sign anyone else as cover for that position so it would appear they did. They may well have been attracted by his other attributes which I have noted in these posts.
So would I be wrong in your eyes to 'single him out' and say that I think he would make a good wing back at this level? Also could I ask you that do you think Sparkes is a good full back, as a specialist in this position in defending?
You keep saying this stuff about Sparked and that the club failed to recruit a proper left back in the summer:
Olgivie is our first choice left back is he not?
Would you, or would you not agree that at most clubs your secondutesu choice for any position is not going to be as refined as your first choice in any given position?
Would, or would you not agree that it is sensible to look for qualities in your back up there are different to your first choice in any given position?
Bearing in mind the above, do you not think that Sparkes, the back up left back has done an admirable job in his extended run in the side?
OR
Do you think the club should have two first choice players in each position? If this was the case how do you keep them both happy and sharp? How do you afford two first choices? How do you get two first choices to sign given that they are going to have to miss out more often than not?
I'm genuinely intrigued as to what you think we should have done? Who should we have signed that was better than Sparkes, and happy to play second fiddle to Ogilvie, or we need someone better than Ogilvie.
Currently the club has one fit right back - we are soon to have 3 fit left backs with a 4th (Vincent) in the building. Irrespective of what you think of their ability - do you not think that is a fairly well stocked position?
If Sparkes was signed as a full back then I don't think his was a good signing. Do I think the 'covering' player should be as good as the 'first choice'? Firstly Mousinho said the aim was to have two players for each position and no one is guaranteed a first team place, secondly there is absolutely no contest between Ogilvie and Sparkes who is first choice as left full back. Would players of Sparkes age commit to signing as a 'back up' player if they are ambitious. I do agree with you that it is sensible for the club to look for players that have other attributes not at the club already. Sparkes is better than Ogilvie going forward but nowhere near as good in defending. So what I am saying, to be clear, is that if Sparkes was signed as a full back then I believe the club is at fault. On the other hand if Sparkes was signed to give us a wider attacking threat choice then it was a good signing, but it left us weak in the defensive area. You never answered my question as to whether you thought Sparkes is a good full back but I will answer yours. No I don't think Sparkes has an admirable job at full back. When all the players are fit that play in the left back berth I am not so sure we will be reasonably stocked. We know we have Sparkes but we don't know how Vincent will cope. Until he is playing and tested we will not know.
I couldn't name names of who we should have signed as a left back. If the aim was to have two players for every position then players signing would be signing to fight it out with the present incumbant of any given position to become the first choice. I would dispute that we did actually have two players for every position anyway. You are right about the right back spot and we could well have a problem in that position, but then I think there are potential problems all around the team.
I refer to my previous answer, I dont think he is the god awful full back he is being made out to be. He has played for a lot of the season and for a lot of the seaon we havent conceded goals, is that by luck even though he is in the team? Are all the goals we have conceded recently been directly attributable to Sparkes, was Shaugnessy playing out of the back and getting caught in the box and them scoring down to Sparkes? were the 2 goals from corners at the weekend down to sparkes??
you say there are potential problems all around the pitch?? not naming names as to who is sub standard on the rest of the pitch??
Although those goals may not be directly attributed to Sparkes you’ve got to look at the defence as a whole. Let’s be honest here we tolerated his defensive weakness’s because of his goal contributions. These have dried up now so hence my post can we really afford to play him ?
You mean we kept winning, and now we aren't some feel the need to blame someone?
[/quote
That’s your interpretation!!
Laughter is the jam on the toast of life. It adds flavor, keeps it from being too dry, and makes it easier to swallow.
-- Diane Johnson
