BensGrandad
New member
Unfortunately I believe that OGH days as an automatic choice are over. He has never been the same since he broke his leg or rather his leg was broken I dont think he actually did it himself.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Darren Currie: Worse than David Lee?
- Thread starter fatboy
- Start date
Re: Re: Re: Re: Darren Currie: Worse than David Lee?
Yep. I agree too. Currie did waste a couple of crosses today but didn't hide when that happened. He ALWAYS wants the ball, and even though he rarely breaks into a canter, he looked pretty determined to me when he was trying to set himself up for a long range equaliser near the end. Neat step-over too.
Ernest said:
Yep. I agree too. Currie did waste a couple of crosses today but didn't hide when that happened. He ALWAYS wants the ball, and even though he rarely breaks into a canter, he looked pretty determined to me when he was trying to set himself up for a long range equaliser near the end. Neat step-over too.
Rangdo
Registered Cider Drinker
I just thought the McCammon bashers might want to look at this.
Uncle Buck
Ghost Writer
- Jul 7, 2003
- 28,071
Rangdo said:
I just thought the McCammon bashers might want to look at this.
Err this was after one game, McCammon has played a few now.
Wozza
Shite Supporter
Gareth Glover said:
Rangdo
Registered Cider Drinker
I knew you'd be firstUncle Buck said:
. Just making the point that everyone said he was shite but Mcghees better judgement came through. Just give the guy a chance to get fit and prove himself. He's only played 6.
Last edited:
Uncle Buck
Ghost Writer
- Jul 7, 2003
- 28,071
Rangdo said:I knew you'd be first
Not getting wanting on the McGammon thing again, but to compare the 2 is stupid, Currie showed signs of footballing talent. McGammon has played 5 or so games, so after that it should be fairly clear if he is half decent. If we go along the lines of give him time, maybe we should have retained Packham, Danny Davies, Phil Andrews etc, because although they showed little talent, they might have come good in the end.
What was the point of bouncing it? Or are you hoping for a Friday afternoon scrap online?
Last edited:
saltash seagull
New member
people very quickly changed there tune on currie as this thread shows mccammon has done nothing
Rangdo
Registered Cider Drinker
Uncle Buck said:
For the reason already stated.
Uncle Buck
Ghost Writer
- Jul 7, 2003
- 28,071
Rangdo said:
This was started after first game of the season, Trolley has played a few games, different circumstance, nothing to compare them by. If he comes good then great, however I am quite confident that he will score the odd goal, law of averages says he has to be in the right place now and then, but he will generally be average at best.
Uncle Buck said:
Glad after an unbeaten run with him in the team, McGhee gets his man (the same McGhee that took us up and got us nr mid table) , You still seem intent to knock despite claims from both player and manager that he is no-where near fit.
Average at best - I will reserve jusgement until his fitness is 100% and McGhee has worked his majic in confidence
Storer68
New member
But even DK and MM agreed with us in the end.
Only difference being is that they stuffed £250,000 into their back pockets before they got rid of him
Just goes to show - the management always does what NSC demands!
Only difference being is that they stuffed £250,000 into their back pockets before they got rid of him
Just goes to show - the management always does what NSC demands!
Last edited:
Soton Seagull
Well-known member
Soton Seagull said:Scapegoat. No worse than the rest of the pathetic Muppets playing last night.
Brighton Fans have gor elitist and have it in for him as he played for Wycombe last season and as such could never be good enough to play for the likes of us. get over yourselves
(Sorry, in a v.bad mood today!)
Tell you what, this bloke spoke a lot of sense
London Irish
Well-known member
Uncle Buck said:
Wasn't, actually. Currie played a fair few in pre-season and didn't really impress the onlookers there either. It was about after 3 or 4 pre-seasons and 3 regular season games that the tide of opinion began to turn - and even then, not straight away, it was only when we started winning games that the Currie witch-hunters finally disappeared.
Notice the comments about Reid too in this thread. Here's a guy who missed pre-season training and was rushed back because of our midfield crisis. He played very poorly. Why, Uncle Buck? Because, he was a rubbish player? No. Because he wasn't anywhere near match fit. It took him ages, the best part of two or three months in the reserves, to get back to the level of match fitness that allowed him to play as well as he did at the end of last season.
This is time you're not willing to grant McCammon, who your expertise on the fitness regimes of professional footballers deems must be fit after a month.
Take Chippy. How long did it take him to get back to peak match fitness after his lay-off? He looked very average when he came back and got dropped. Yet now his match fitness levels have returned and he can be judged properly.
McGhee's latest assessment is that it won't be until he's had Big Mac for a full period of pre-season training that we will see the best of Big Mac. That's the timescale we are looking at. Before that, we will see steady improvement. Not quick enough for you I'm sure, but that's too bad.
Great bounce, Rangdo. Educational and entertaining in equal measure
Uncle Buck
Ghost Writer
- Jul 7, 2003
- 28,071
London Irish said:Wasn't, actually. Currie played a fair few in pre-season and didn't really impress the onlookers there either. It was about after 3 or 4 pre-seasons and 3 regular season games that the tide of opinion began to turn - and even then, not straight away, it was only when we started winning games that the Currie witch-hunters finally disappeared.
Notice the comments about Reid too in this thread. Here's a guy who missed pre-season training and was rushed back because of our midfield crisis. He played very poorly. Why, Uncle Buck? Because, he was a rubbish player? No. Because he wasn't anywhere near match fit. It took him ages, the best part of two or three months in the reserves, to get back to the level of match fitness that allowed him to play as well as he did at the end of last season.
This is time you're not willing to grant McCammon, who your expertise on the fitness regimes of professional footballers deems must be fit after a month.
Take Chippy. How long did it take him to get back to peak match fitness after his lay-off? He looked very average when he came back and got dropped. Yet now his match fitness levels have returned and he can be judged properly.
McGhee's latest assessment is that it won't be until he's had Big Mac for a full period of pre-season training that we will see the best of Big Mac. That's the timescale we are looking at. Before that, we will see steady improvement. Not quick enough for you I'm sure, but that's too bad.
Great bounce, Rangdo. Educational and entertaining in equal measure
Afternoon.
Been out with Charlie, Mark and Ben?
Not going to bother as you are always correct oh great one.
Last edited:
London Irish
Well-known member
Uncle Buck said:
Afternoon!
Don't worry, I'm sure Richie'll be along in a minute.
Uncle Buck
Ghost Writer
- Jul 7, 2003
- 28,071
London Irish said:
Am sure he will.
Got an afternoon of patronising and belittling planned?
The Laughing Bluebird
New member
London Irish said:
Thought you'd like it......
London Irish
Well-known member
Uncle Buck said:
Only if you can assure me that your fake victimhood and haemophiliac levels of skin thickness are up for the challenge
You'd really prefer to trade stuff like this than discuss the fairly level-headed points I made about Reid, Chippy and Currie's fitness then? Oh well.