Scrap the Sponsor's Man of the Match?

[Pogue Mahone]

Dave was woeful yesterday, sad to see him sprinting off like he really couldn't wait to be off the pitch. Day to forget for him, pretty good banter from the sponsors to give him the award though. I had a chuckle.

Dave has been poor this season, especially remembering how good he was last year. But to call his performance yesterday 'woeful' suggests that you had decided on this analysis before the game, and would stick with it whatever happened.

He played several defence splitting passes, especially in the first half, and consistently linked up play with vision and intelligence. It was his best display of the season, along with the Leicester game.

I was not surprised with the Man of the Match award, but the reaction to it, especially from the North Stand, I found shocking.

 

[Official Old Man]

MoM is a laugh but a couple of things. Firstly we need the money so let it carry on (is it really 3 grand?). Next put yourself in their shoes. You've paid £3000 and get to meet the person you choose as MoM. I'm surprised Oscar has never won it!

 

[Brighton Mod]

If the phone reception was better they coud do a fans phone in one like x factor etc with a telephone number ending in the players squad number, oh sorry most people cant see the number or Jcl wont know it.

Phone reception very poor and numbers even worse, just can't read them!

 

[Pavilionaire]

Isn't it supposed to be just a bit of fun? Does anybody really care who the sponsors give man of the match too?

 

[Brighton Mod]

Dave has been poor this season, especially remembering how good he was last year. But to call his performance yesterday 'woeful' suggests that you had decided on this analysis before the game, and would stick with it whatever happened.

He played several defence splitting passes, especially in the first half, and consistently linked up play with vision and intelligence. It was his best display of the season, along with the Leicester game.

I was not surprised with the Man of the Match award, but the reaction to it, especially from the North Stand, I found shocking.

The reaction from some parts of the north stand says more about them and less about the MOM decision. Did you ever see Bridcutt send a defence splitting pass, scoring from a free kick, never missing a penalty, scoring goals, taking inch perfect free kicks and corners. No, because they are different players with different skill sets. Dave would not look out of place in a prem team which is why is regularly selected. Match sponsors got it right!!

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Isn't it supposed to be just a bit of fun? Does anybody really care who the sponsors give man of the match too?

The player just gets a bottle of bubbly, and the sponsors get a photo. It doesn't affect anyone else.

 

[banjo]

At least we have moved on from "goal scorer or Bridcutt"

I was surprised he didn't get yesterday.

 

[Kylies Stunt Arse]

Dave was woeful yesterday, sad to see him sprinting off like he really couldn't wait to be off the pitch. Day to forget for him, pretty good banter from the sponsors to give him the award though. I had a chuckle.

Sprinting because he couldn't wait to get off the pitch or because he was aware that we were losing and didn't have time to waste?

 

[Prince Monolulu]

From my point of view, as son as the winner of said award has been announced I have forgotten about it. Not being part of the hallowed audience at the prizegiving means my focus is on getting away. It is a PR procedure and so should not be taken too seriously nor should anyone get wound up if Player A wins over Player B.
Other posts show how differently we each see players' perfomance levels during any given game.
For what it's worth, I though Rodders did Ok yesterday.

 

[Goldstone Rapper]

If you are paying £3,000 surely you should get to meet who you want, not just who you've chosen as Man of the Match?

 

[FalmerforAll!**]

Dave has been poor this season, especially remembering how good he was last year. But to call his performance yesterday 'woeful' suggests that you had decided on this analysis before the game, and would stick with it whatever happened.

He played several defence splitting passes, especially in the first half, and consistently linked up play with vision and intelligence. It was his best display of the season, along with the Leicester game.

I was not surprised with the Man of the Match award, but the reaction to it, especially from the North Stand, I found shocking.

How on earth have you come to that conclusion? Think you've over analysed my simple statement, that or your justification for defending him stems directly from convincing yourself that anyone who criticises him must be anti-David.

Far from it, I'm generally speaking pretty tolerant with Oscar's decisions to pick him despite, as you say yourself, his poor form this season. But yesterday he was not good; the odd good ball over the top yes (from which we created very little, incidentally) but on the whole he was slow, lost the ball countless other times, and constantly bottled challenges. How he wasn't the first off the pitch when Oscar brought on Buckley I do not know.

Bottom line is he was shite, but if Oscar continues to pick him, I'll continue to support him. I won't ever pre-empt poor performances as you have suggested.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

How on earth have you come to that conclusion? Think you've over analysed my simple statement, that or your justification for defending him stems directly from convincing yourself that anyone who criticises him must be anti-David.

Far from it, I'm generally speaking pretty tolerant with Oscar's decisions to pick him despite, as you say yourself, his poor form this season. But yesterday he was not good; the odd good ball over the top yes (from which we created very little, incidentally) but on the whole he was slow, lost the ball countless other times, and constantly bottled challenges. How he wasn't the first off the pitch when Oscar brought on Buckley I do not know.

Bottom line is he was shite, but if Oscar continues to pick him, I'll continue to support him. I won't ever pre-empt poor performances as you have suggested.

I came to that conclusion because your description of his performance was, in my opinion, so far off the mark, so wrong.

I was disappointed that he was starting yesterday as I don't think that his performances this season have merited him getting a starting place. But right from the start he was on it - a superb pass, inch perfect that Leo chested down and had a shot saved from. And there were many more like it.

Bottom line is that he was not shite - and you appear to be in a bit of a minority in thinking that he was, that's a rarity this season.

 

[Lady Whistledown]

Why anybody would be remotely bothered about this is beyond me. The sponsor's man of the match has, as long as the award has existed, been subject to the whims of a bunch of guys getting pissed on corporate hospitality.

People seem to be actually quite put out by it- it's nothing new! I can remember laughing at sponsors' MoM decisions when we played at the Goldstone, but I'm not sure I ever felt sufficiently distressed by it to write to the Argus and complain (the nearest 1980s equivalent to moaning on NSC).

Amazing. Who cares? It's just a laugh and a photo opportunity for some business types. Ridiculous thing to get in a twist about.

 

[brighton bluenose]

Perhaps more pertinent about the MoM is that out of a 27k crowd there is only about 100 people or so left in the BUPA to actually watch the presentation!

 

[dazzer6666]

MoM usually a joke, but on Saturday I thought it was a fair call (if not necessarily 100%, then better than some of the recent awards). Best Dave has played for ages. Still pulled out of too many 50/50 challenges though. Reaction from sections of us was very poor IMHO (did the NS really go into 'you don't know what you're doing' at the announcent ? If so that's pretty shameful.........)

 

[Bold Seagull]

How on earth have you come to that conclusion? Think you've over analysed my simple statement, that or your justification for defending him stems directly from convincing yourself that anyone who criticises him must be anti-David.

Far from it, I'm generally speaking pretty tolerant with Oscar's decisions to pick him despite, as you say yourself, his poor form this season. But yesterday he was not good; the odd good ball over the top yes (from which we created very little, incidentally) but on the whole he was slow, lost the ball countless other times, and constantly bottled challenges. How he wasn't the first off the pitch when Oscar brought on Buckley I do not know.

Bottom line is he was shite, but if Oscar continues to pick him, I'll continue to support him. I won't ever pre-empt poor performances as you have suggested.

I'm agreeing with [MENTION=19321]Pogue Mahone[/MENTION], I thought he played okay, better than Orlandi and Stephens in fact in terms of performance. Far from shite or woeful. He's got craft and that's why Oscar left him on.

 

[Badger]

MoM usually a joke, but on Saturday I thought it was a fair call (if not necessarily 100%, then better than some of the recent awards). Best Dave has played for ages. Still pulled out of too many 50/50 challenges though. Reaction from sections of us was very poor IMHO (did the NS really go into 'you don't know what you're doing' at the announcent ? If so that's pretty shameful.........)

I agree with this, I thought Spanish Dave had a great game. The trouble is, he's had a bad season and people (like the clueless BINT who sits next to me) just assume he is playing badly and are completely blind to the fact he's having a good game. He's never gone in hard for tackles, that's not how he plays, however he did win the ball back a fair few times and created some good chances.

What did make me chuckle was when clueless BINT shouted out "it's David, he's not going to get the ball back is he?" Then 2 seconds later he makes a fantastic tackle and goes storming forward with the ball.

 

[SittingbourneSeagull]

Sprinting because he couldn't wait to get off the pitch or because he was aware that we were losing and didn't have time to waste?

Exactly he tried to get off fast due to the scoreline, he played well I thought, but sadly where I sit in WSU there are far too many "fans" who have drunk too much (probably a half) and over react to every bad ball or missed tackle. Whilst we are moaning I also hate the ignorant shouts of WHO when the opposition make a sub. Makes us look pretty ignorant as a set of fans.

 

[keaton]

Dave 4th out of 5 in The Argus vote.

http://www.theargus.co.uk/sport/11030328.Who_was_your_choice_as_Albion_man_of_the_match_/?ref=mr

Dale Stephens got that many votes?
That makes the The Argus poll worse than any sponsor's man of the match.

The ony time I got annoyed was the season when Dean Cox got it very game presumably because the sponsor's kids liked him

 

[CheeseRolls]

I'm a big fan and think there is scope to extend this. I would like to see Sponsors choosing banner of the day and also Zany away supporter of the week.

Imagine the scene, the game stops on 85 minutes, the early risers head for the exit and the fan cam hones in on the chosen one proudly waiving his/her banner. Then as Oscar gives his final instructions for all out attack, the camera zooms round, briefly highlighting the top boy, flicking the Vs and pointing towards his backside, before focusing in on the pissed up bloke on a stag do, wearing a crazy wig.

Barber make it happen !