"Community Club"

[London Irish]

Game over at 3-1 down where we, and I quote: "came out in the second half with 10 men and our pressure saw us hit the post"

Well, we might as well pack the whole season in there then hadn't we?

"It's ok lads, we're a bit behind and you're playing well but let's knock it on the head now, it's game over.@

The gripe wasn't with an individual goal, it was with the performance in general. If we had pulled it back to 2-2 (the goal had gone in and they wouldn't have scored) do you really think we would have held on for 2-2? Or would we have lost?

And if it was 'game over' then the implication here was that we didn't try for the last half hour or so - and if that's the case then the manager is at fault. We should at least be playing with pride, tickets cost enough these days FFS.

No the "game over" comment was not a suggestion that we didn't try in the last half hour, that's again you wasting a lot of words on something that didn't happen, it was a comment by me that we were never realistically going to get anything with 2 goals down and ten men, but carry on with the cheap debate if you want.

Yes, if we had got it back to 2-2, then we had a great chance of battling on to hold a point. We successfuly defended a lead at Rotherham with ten men for far longer. Remember back that far?

 

[Dave the OAP]

trying to haul this back on track as i sence a "my willy is bigger than your willy" type spat coming on,


I think we all agree to a point that the sacking of McGhee was a bolt from the blue ( timings wise), however why does DK keep going on about us being a "community club".

is it just something to deflect from DK's autocracy or is it said to keep the Falmer Community Stadium idea alive?

 

[London Irish]

Millwall lost 2-0 and McGhee left straight after. It doesn't take much of a stretch of imagination to envisage a similar conversation taking place after the Crewe game does it?

And where are Millwall now? Let's hope your parallel doesn't keep on going, eh?

 

[Dandyman]

trying to haul this back on track as i sence a "my willy is bigger than your willy" type spat coming on,

Think of the children.

 

[Trigger]

And where are Millwall now? Let's hope your parallel doesn't keep on going, eh?

Oh I dunno, wouldn't mind an FA Cup Final myself.

 

[Seagull73]

No the "game over" comment was not a suggestion that we didn't try in the last half hour, that's again you wasting a lot of words on something that didn't happen, it was a comment by me that we were never realistically going to get anything with 2 goals down and ten men, but carry on with the cheap debate if you want.

Yes, if we had got it back to 2-2, then we had a great chance of battling on to hold a point. We successfuly defended a lead at Rotherham with ten men for far longer. Remember back that far?

The first two results of the season papered over some huge cracks that already existed, and hadn't even come close to being repaired during the summer.

Blame the chairman? Blame the manager? Does it matter? Something had to give, because the place had become like a morgue, even not knowing the ins and outs, didn't take a genius to work that out.

Did you think that it would go on like that forever, because hardly anybody thought it would. It was only ever a question of when rather than if.

 

[aftershavedave]

I think we all agree to a point that the sacking of McGhee was a bolt from the blue ( timings wise), however why does DK keep going on about us being a "community club".

is it just something to deflect from DK's autocracy or is it said to keep the Falmer Community Stadium idea alive?

a bit of both.

 

[Albion Rob]

No the "game over" comment was not a suggestion that we didn't try in the last half hour, that's again you wasting a lot of words on something that didn't happen, it was a comment by me that we were never realistically going to get anything with 2 goals down and ten men, but carry on with the cheap debate if you want.

Yes, if we had got it back to 2-2, then we had a great chance of battling on to hold a point. We successfuly defended a lead at Rotherham with ten men for far longer. Remember back that far?

Oh my god, you're so rude when someone doesn't agree with you.

Please explain how it is game over just becuase we have gone an extra goal down. With half an hour to go, we were 3-1 down. If we had scored with 10 minutes to go to pull it back to 3-2 then perhaps Crewe would have been worried and we could have snatched a draw.

Had we have carried on the pressure then Crewe may have been breahced once and that would make it possible to snatch a draw.

you saw what I saw - a team who didn't play well when they were down to 10 men and could have got seriously tonked as a result. To suggest otherwise would only be to deny what went on out on the park on that cloudy Sunday.

Whether we were 'realistically going to get anything' or not, we shouldn't have got to the stage where we were relying on three excellent saves from Henderson to keep the score down. Goal differences are made or broken by games such as that.

I accept that at 4-1 down it was game over.

I do remember Rotherham. Perhaps they were just a worse team than Crewe? Maybe they had less going on up front, this Maynard chap looks quite good so easy to see why Crewe were a threat.

 

[Albion Rob]

Oh I dunno, wouldn't mind an FA Cup Final myself.

Sorry, changed my mind, this wasn't in context.

 

[Sid James]

The first two results of the season papered over some huge cracks that already existed, and hadn't even come close to being repaired during the summer.

Blame the chairman? Blame the manager? Does it matter? Something had to give, because the place had become like a morgue, even not knowing the ins and outs, didn't take a genius to work that out.

Did you think that it would go on like that forever, because hardly anybody thought it would. It was only ever a question of when rather than if.

Which is why if this had to be sorted, it should have been done then rather than a paltry 6 games into the season.

 

[Seagull73]

Which is why if this had to be sorted, it should have been done then rather than a paltry 6 games into the season.

No, to be honest, I don't blame the chairman for fighting out, I really think that was the right thing to do because he needed to see what level we were really at in comparison with the rest of League One.

He got his answer in narrow wins over two sides that finished near the bottom of the table last season, and yet another home hiding, in a game that, ok got away from us because of circumstance, but one that we weren't playing very well in anyway.

 

[Dave the OAP]

No, to be honest, I don't blame the chairman for fighting out, I really think that was the right thing to do because he needed to see what level we were really at in comparison with the rest of League One.

He got his answer in narrow wins over two sides that finished near the bottom of the table last season, and yet another home hiding, in a game that, ok got away from us because of circumstance, but one that we weren't playing very well in anyway.

that is all well and good, but that is not what he came out and said was it....he said that the crowd had turned against MM, he looked a broken man and people were voting with their feet. he did not say he was having a look and see what transpired.....so deflecting the blame for everything at MM, when we all know that lack of funds is the problem. That was not MM's fault, especially when he got in over £2million in transfer fees and recieved hardly anything back from this for players!

By suggesting that its was all MM' s fault he has done MM a great disservice, no matter how shite you/we think his tactics were

 

[London Irish]

You were suggesting that DK was taking action because of a minority of fans. People leaving in droves, when there was a small enough crowd in the first place was the point DK was making.

It will happen, alas, even under our next manager, whoever he will be. We will lose a game badly and people will stream out way before the end. If the precedent is now set that the manager then goes?

It's not the first time the South Stand has turned on the manager at that stage of the season, it happened with Adams too in the late summer/early autumn of 2000, people back then thought he'd already had 18 months and the team were not progressing. We lost to Kidderminster 2-0 at Withdean and because of that only 5,800 turned up for the next game.

http://archive.theargus.co.uk/2000/9/1/189486.html

http://archive.theargus.co.uk/2000/8/29/189661.html

 

[Sid James]

No, to be honest, I don't blame the chairman for fighting out, I really think that was the right thing to do because he needed to see what level we were really at in comparison with the rest of League One.

He got his answer in narrow wins over two sides that finished near the bottom of the table last season, and yet another home hiding, in a game that, ok got away from us because of circumstance, but one that we weren't playing very well in anyway.

You can hardly call 6 games fighting out can you ? Two wins, an unfortunate home draw, an away defeat to the stand out team in the league and then the long run of TWO defeats.

I'm not too worried that McGhee's gone, managers come and go whether we like them or dislike them, but the timing of his departure just looks to me like the chairman decided to put out a fire before some of the smoke started coming into his office.

 

[Man of Harveys]

http://archive.theargus.co.uk/2000/9/1/189486.html

http://archive.theargus.co.uk/2000/8/29/189661.html

That is a good spot:

"The Seagulls are 21st out of 24 in the league.

But Adams said: "League tables don't bother me three weeks into the season."

 

[London Irish]

Oh I dunno, wouldn't mind an FA Cup Final myself.

Amazing that, that's exactly what all those Millwall fans who cheerily left the New Den on Saturday said too!

 

[London Irish]

Whether we were 'realistically going to get anything' or not, we shouldn't have got to the stage where we were relying on three excellent saves from Henderson to keep the score down. Goal differences are made or broken by games such as that.

The reason why Hendo had to make those saves was because we were flooding forward even at 3-1 to try and rescue the game, and we were bound to leave gaps at the back given our numerical disadvantage.

Like every jaundiced critic, you want it both ways, you moan that you wanted us to get a 3-1 deficit back, and you moan about goal difference (in August?) when we concede a fourth trying to do precisely that.

 

[Albion Rob]

It will happen, alas, even under our next manager, whoever he will be. We will lose a game badly and people will stream out way before the end. If the precedent is now set that the manager then goes?

It's not the first time the South Stand has turned on the manager at that stage of the season, it happened with Adams too in the late summer/early autumn of 2000, people back then thought he'd already had 18 months and the team were not progressing. We lost to Kidderminster 2-0 at Withdean and because of that only 5,800 turned up for the next game.

Yes, but it's context, isn't it?

On your first point - people have been streaming out long before the end of games for some months now, let's not kid ourselves that Crewe was the first and only time in McGhee's reign.

On the second point, if I remember rightly, Adams had presided over a run that had seen us unbeaten for the last 14 games of the previous season and be in with a chance of the playoffs at the end of March for the first time in almost 10 years. I'd imagine the board were prepared to give him time but I also think if we had been dismal for another couple of months, it's not unreasonable to suspect that DK may have pulled the trigger on him. As it was, we lost about three games between then and the ned of the season and won the Championship.

Now, in context, McGhee presided over an appalling season where results were bad (excusable given the circumstances in my opinion) but performances were dreadful. He proved unable to capture enough good players through the transfer system and some good players (with questionable attitudes) left the club.

He was on his last legs going into the season and results and performances made it very hard for DK to defend his position. Then he got sacked.

To compare it to the Adams situation is revisionist at best, a downright abomination of the facts before us at worst.

 

[Albion Rob]

The reason why Hendo had to make those saves was because we were flooding forward even at 3-1 to try and rescue the game, and we were bound to leave gaps at the back given our numerical disadvantage.

Like every jaundiced critic, you want it both ways, you moan that you wanted us to get a 3-1 deficit back, and you moan about goal difference (in August?) when we concede a fourth trying to do precisely that.

I would put it down to us being tactically inept when we were 3-1 down.

I'm going through a hazy memory bank here and am struggling to remember any saves or decent efforts on the Crewe goal after the third went in.

What I do think I remember is a load of dispirited young men running round the pitch looking pretty much how we felt in the stands and Hendo making some great saves in a vain bid to atone for his earlier error that led to the equaliser.

Goal difference should always be an issue in any manager's mind - the amount of sides that suffer heartache for the sake of one goal is absurd and then we all go home saying: "Christ, if we hadn't let in that late third at Blackpool we'd be in the playoffs now." Early in the season, I know, but this is a professional club and when you're in the position we're in, you can't really leave things to chance.

But then again, it's all about opinions, isn't it?

 

[London Irish]

Yes, but it's context, isn't it?

On your first point - people have been streaming out long before the end of games for some months now, let's not kid ourselves that Crewe was the first and only time in McGhee's reign.

On the second point, if I remember rightly, Adams had presided over a run that had seen us unbeaten for the last 14 games of the previous season and be in with a chance of the playoffs at the end of March for the first time in almost 10 years. I'd imagine the board were prepared to give him time but I also think if we had been dismal for another couple of months, it's not unreasonable to suspect that DK may have pulled the trigger on him. As it was, we lost about three games between then and the ned of the season and won the Championship.

Now, in context, McGhee presided over an appalling season where results were bad (excusable given the circumstances in my opinion) but performances were dreadful. He proved unable to capture enough good players through the transfer system and some good players (with questionable attitudes) left the club.

He was on his last legs going into the season and results and performances made it very hard for DK to defend his position. Then he got sacked.

To compare it to the Adams situation is revisionist at best, a downright abomination of the facts before us at worst.

You have some cheek mentioning context, don't you? You fail to mention the pretty important context that Adams' failed play-off run was in League 2, a division where we were not only competing on a level playing field with other clubs, but actually had more than most. And the vast majority of McGhee's game were two leagues higher in the Championship, a division where the board never equipped him with money to compete in and who sold from under him the few players like Adam Virgo who managed to do well for us.

Context? Revisionism? Abomination?