Forster back in squad

[¤DãŃn¥ §êãGüLL¤]

Hmmm.... so Dickinson goes and Forster wants to play again.

Coincidence?

 

[Guy Fawkes]

Yeah, great news....

Apart from having cost us 7 feckin points!!!!

At least it's over.

How did it cost us 7 points?

Wasn't Forster also playing during 4 of the 5 home matches in a row that we failed to score in, so how can you say that he would have definitely made the difference?

Its just good to have him back again.

 

[pork pie]

Happy days! :dance::dance:

 

[NMH]

From what I have seen, Nick Forster has always comported himself with decorum - and he maintained this attitude in this difficult time and in moments of duress.

I doubt anyone would have 'overheard him talking to his agent' or any such bullshit, and I found his explanation to be fairly reasonable.
Poyet had to take the managerial stance to the letter, and for a change with such events - I don't see that anyone has come out of this looking particularly bad.

Now we can get on with things.

Dickinson going out on loan isn't particularly untoward, really; he's not made much impression on oppositions, and after his initial 'going-to-ground' habit he's not making very telling contributions anyway. He wasn't Gus's buy, and GP has cast aspersions across the way we have transferred players to us (I mean a blind fool can see that a third of our playing staff aren't/weren't up to standard!).

 

[thejackal]

How did it cost us 7 points?

Wasn't Forster also playing during 4 of the 5 home matches in a row that we failed to score in, so how can you say that he would have definitely made the difference?

Its just good to have him back again.

Our forwards were pretty ineffectual in the two games that I saw (Hudds and Norwich) - all that was needed was a poacher's touch. We should've been 3:0 up against Norwich, but we were busy trying out inexperienced youth.

I just think we'd have come away with more than 2 from 9 if we'd had Fozzie up front.

 

[Monsieur Le Plonk]

Hmmm.... so Dickinson goes and Forster wants to play again.

Coincidence?

I wonder......
If I had to choose between the two of them it would be Forster every time. Pleased to see the back of Dickinson.

 

[8ace]

Our forwards were pretty ineffectual in the two games that I saw (Hudds and Norwich) - all that was needed was a poacher's touch. We should've been 3:0 up against Norwich, but we were busy trying out inexperienced youth.

I just think we'd have come away with more than 2 from 9 if we'd had Fozzie up front.

You could well be right but I'm not sure Forster would have managed all 270 minutes of football. On the plus side he should be relatively fresh for the Leeds game.

 

[les dynam]

some common sense at last! i assume this must have been agreed over the weekend before dickinson was allowed to leave on loan.

 

[Mendoza]

Let the plug see the socket!!!

 

[thejackal]

You could well be right but I'm not sure Forster would have managed all 270 minutes of football. On the plus side he should be relatively fresh for the Leeds game.

Fair points, those.

 

[Guy Fawkes]

Our forwards were pretty ineffectual in the two games that I saw (Hudds and Norwich) - all that was needed was a poacher's touch. We should've been 3:0 up against Norwich, but we were busy trying out inexperienced youth.

Funny, i've never though of Murray (who had 2 chances cleared of the line) as inexperienced youth.

I just think we'd have come away with more than 2 from 9 if we'd had Fozzie up front.

So not all 9 points then which is what you were implying?

 

[Questions]

Exactly. From this he is more than ever making his point over the way the club handles this sort of situation. I simply cannot believe that for the sake of a statement like this he was excluded for 3 very important games which possibly cost us 7 points.

I'm sure others will argue otherwise but I'm not sure I'm that impressed with the club's handling of this matter.

Precisely. Lets see how congratulatory everyone is if we go down by 1 point.

 

[Cabby]

It wouldn't surprise me if Poyet left him out at Leeds

 

[thejackal]

Funny, i've never though of Murray (who had 2 chances cleared of the line) as inexperienced youth.

So not all 9 points then which is what you were implying?

Firstly, did you actually attend any of the last three games?

I was obviously referring to Holroyd, who looked out of his depth and not strong enough to give their centre backs any trouble.

I think, with Forster on the pitch, we would've beaten Huddersfield by a couple of goals, and been three up against Norwich.

Forster is our top scorer for a reason; he's our most natural goal scorer; I honestly beleive that he would've put Murray's chances away.

So, maybe not ALL 9 points, if you want to be so feckin pedantic , but at least the 5 of them we dropped at home.

 

[Scoffers]

Hmmm.... so Dickinson goes and Forster wants to play again.

Coincidence?

Well, surely there is no way he would let Dickinson go if he was unsure about Forster

 

[KneeOn]

Firstly, did you actually attend any of the last three games?

I was obviously referring to Holroyd, who looked out of his depth and not strong enough to give their centre backs any trouble.

I think, with Forster on the pitch, we would've beaten Huddersfield by a couple of goals, and been three up against Norwich.

Forster is our top scorer for a reason; he's our most natural goal scorer; I honestly beleive that he would've put Murray's chances away.

So, maybe not ALL 9 points, if you want to be so feckin pedantic , but at least the 5 of them we dropped at home.

Holroyd, that guy that put the experienced forward that is Glenn Murray with a clear sight on goal with no keeper in the way to have Murray miss it? Yeah, the young guy didn't make any impact, doesn't cause any trouble does he... he looks fine, just a finding his feet, as any new player does first time ina new league. He looks fine.

 

[Guy Fawkes]

Firstly, did you actually attend any of the last three games?

Yes

I was obviously referring to Holroyd, who looked out of his depth and not strong enough to give their centre backs any trouble.

Strength, maybe not, but pace definitely caused them problems

I think, with Forster on the pitch, we would've beaten Huddersfield by a couple of goals, and been three up against Norwich.

conjecture, impossible to prove as the game would have been very different, Norwich, for example may have pushed us back further up the pitch without the breakaway threat of Holroyds pace and we might not have had anywhere near the amount of possession or opportunities as we had.

Forster is our top scorer for a reason; he's our most natural goal scorer; I honestly beleive that he would've put Murray's chances away.

Forster was very poor in the two games prior to his temper tantrum, he seemed to have lost his touch and pace which is his main assets so if he had played, would he have done any better - who knows? would he have been in the right place at the right time? Another day Murrays chances all go in, that game he was just unlucky due to some very good defending. and after all NF was playing in 4 out of the 5 home games we failed to score in recently, would he have made that much difference? impossible to say.

So, maybe not ALL 9 points, if you want to be so feckin pedantic , but at least the 5 of them we dropped at home.

You said originally it cost us 7 points from those 3 games, just pointing out it was highly unlikely

 

[NMH]

Some of the above intimate that there's a connection between NF coming back and Dickinson going, though I think GP deals with each player individually. He won't have 'cleared the decks' on Forster's behalf of that I'm certain.

I don't think GP can be held to ransom for any extenuating circumstances, though I'm sure he had to take the available squad into account before loaning a player.
Looking at it on past evidence though, Dickinson made almost zero perceivable difference or impact to the first team - so it's not as if he could be sorely missed!
We could play Cox up front and probably grab more goals.

 

[thejackal]

Holroyd, that guy that put the experienced forward that is Glenn Murray with a clear sight on goal with no keeper in the way to have Murray miss it? Yeah, the young guy didn't make any impact, doesn't cause any trouble does he... he looks fine, just a finding his feet, as any new player does first time ina new league. He looks fine.

He looks small, is what he looks like.

Yes he's still finding his feet - he's a young, inexperienced non-league player - but I don't think that's the only problem... At League 1 and - dare I say it - Championship level, you need strength as well as pace and skill, and he doesn't look big or strong enough.

I was also referring to the fact that Murray hasn't been finishing that well since his 4 at Wycombe, but don't let that get in the way of your spurious argument.

 

[fleet]

Not exactly a major apology is it?