[Archived] Transfers Part 2

[Bigdoggsteel]

Just now, Mike E said:

Well watch them! First one, it's EASY to direct it away from goal or take under control. Second one, any striker would be genuinely proud of.

The second one does look a good finish. 

[47er]

2 hours ago, Stuart said:

Did you see them? That header was a bullet.

The bloke is on a wind-up and succeeding.

Duffy forced a move by the most unscrupulous methods I have ever seen.

He is a disgrace. No-one forced him out, he got what he wanted. Those "morons" are dead right but had nothing to do with him going.

[Athlete]

1 hour ago, chaddyrovers said:

I'm a Rovers fan not a PNE Fan.

Actually I dont want people to agree with me but have the own opinions. 

Who changed the mind? When I changed my mind by giving a full reasons why and btw I am allowed to. 

Support no action? Putting words in my mouth yet again to suit your opinion yet. SSDD. 

Did you do the 1875 

[chaddyrovers]

Just now, Athlete said:

Did you do the 1875 

Already answered this last year. But yet again lets keep going over the same thing time after time! SSDD!

[47er]

Just now, Athlete said:

Did you do the 1875 

Emphatically he did not! Obviously ran out of passion by then.

[Neil Weaver]

6 hours ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

On my point though,  we replaced Hanley and Duffy with Greer and Brown. Two frees with a combined aged of 73. I mean, looking back that was a disastrous series of events. 

And who was a major factor in that happening?  Hint - his surname begins with C.

[Bigdoggsteel]

Just now, Neil Weaver said:

And who was a major factor in that happening?  Hint - his surname begins with C.

No it was the owners and the players themselves who want to leave. Why would coyle want them to leave?

[tomphil]

I think he was referring to the ridiculous old age injury prone replacements for two 24 yr old internationals. Restrictions or not that was piss poor i doubt any other club at our level would've given them contracts and that's down to Coyle.

[Neil Weaver]

Just now, Bigdoggsteel said:

No it was the owners and the players themselves who want to leave. Why would coyle want them to leave?

“Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.”

Bye.

[Wing Wizard Windy Miller]

What's happened t this right back then?  I see the Argentinian lad signed for Mallorca, who are currently about 6th from bottom in the Spanish segunda.  I watch Mallorca on occasions as have a place out there.  Will be interesting to follow his progress.

[1arC]

14 hours ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

The second one does look a good finish. 

Its a quality header, I agree and one that any striker would be proud of. No matter how many times I have watched it, I can't help thinking it was not an accident. As someone else has pointed too, his black armband certainly didn't come off by accident.

 

[gazsimm]

so as Ambrose decided to not join the circus. Any player wanting to join a team managed by Coyle must be desperate

[Amo]

I don't think the OGs were deliberate. Duffy's a 50p head who needs a dozen headers before he gets a goal. He wouldn't have been able to execute that 2nd goal on purpose. However, a want-away defender with poor concentration levels would certainly be in the frame of mind to make such egregious errors.

[tomphil]

Most of the guys i know who support other teams and have no great fondness for Rovers said at one point or another around that time they thought Duffys OG's looked very suspicious.

[Blue blood]

I'm not sure there is much of a line of defence to say they aren't deliberate.

Let's think of the chances for both goals.

First one: what are the odds of a defender a) not taking a touch before controlling it/whacking it away and (b) assuming he doesn't want to take a touch thinking directing the ball that way (as oppose to the sides) is a good idea?

Second one what are the odds of a defender a) heading it down into the ground and (b) thinking that towards the goal rather than to the side is the way to head it?

Also what are the odds of doing the same kind of mistake twice in one match? I reckon most players would be paranoid after the first own goal to make sure that it didn't happen again and be extra cautious in ensuring the ball is played wide of the goal.

Add in the no armband as well, and you have to be pretty naïve imo to think it's all coincidental.  

[1arC]

33 minutes ago, Blue blood said:

I'm not sure there is much of a line of defence to say they aren't deliberate.

Let's think of the chances for both goals.

First one: what are the odds of a defender a) not taking a touch before controlling it/whacking it away and (b) assuming he doesn't want to take a touch thinking directing the ball that way (as oppose to the sides) is a good idea?

Second one what are the odds of a defender a) heading it down into the ground and (b) thinking that towards the goal rather than to the side is the way to head it?

Also what are the odds of doing the same kind of mistake twice in one match? I reckon most players would be paranoid after the first own goal to make sure that it didn't happen again and be extra cautious in ensuring the ball is played wide of the goal.

Add in the no armband as well, and you have to be pretty naïve imo to think it's all coincidental.  

Throw in the other own goal the previous game, against Wigan, plus the sending off against Cardiff too and you are talking serious odds against.

[AllRoverAsia]

Maybe Duffy and Bling had an accumulator on the go.

[speeeeeeedie]

40 minutes ago, Blue blood said:

I'm not sure there is much of a line of defence to say they aren't deliberate.

Let's think of the chances for both goals.

First one: what are the odds of a defender a) not taking a touch before controlling it/whacking it away and (b) assuming he doesn't want to take a touch thinking directing the ball that way (as oppose to the sides) is a good idea?

Second one what are the odds of a defender a) heading it down into the ground and (b) thinking that towards the goal rather than to the side is the way to head it?

Also what are the odds of doing the same kind of mistake twice in one match? I reckon most players would be paranoid after the first own goal to make sure that it didn't happen again and be extra cautious in ensuring the ball is played wide of the goal.

Add in the no armband as well, and you have to be pretty naïve imo to think it's all coincidental.  

I'd not seen the aforementioned goals so I looked them up;

Here are the highlights; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vMalVmUpNE

I found this too; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Z8lUmkQ-pE

I'll go with not deliberate but clearly a player who wasn't concentrating on what he was supposed to be doing.

 

[AllRoverAsia]

I suggest you look again and/ or consult an optician

[speeeeeeedie]

Just now, AllRoverAsia said:

I suggest you look again and/ or consult an optician

I looked again. I'm not 100% convinced. My eyesight is fine too.

Goal 1. It came back off the post, he's a cart horse and tried to shank it wide and cocked it up. His reaction wasn't one of someone who did it deliberately.

Goal 2. He has a head like a 50p as has been mentioned on here many times. He rose well but somehow misjudged it. He lands facing nowhere near the direction that he headed it. If it did it on purpose; actually trying to head it down into the bottom corner, he'd have landed facing the goal.

I will say that both goals came about because he wasn't in the right frame of mind. Someone with proper concentration wouldn't have made those mistakes.

[Bigdoggsteel]

Just now, speeeeeeedie said:

I looked again. I'm not 100% convinced. My eyesight is fine too.

Goal 1. It came back off the post, he's a cart horse and tried to shank it wide and cocked it up. His reaction wasn't one of someone who did it deliberately.

Goal 2. He has a head like a 50p as has been mentioned on here many times. He rose well but somehow misjudged it. He lands facing nowhere near the direction that he headed it. If it did it on purpose; actually trying to head it down into the bottom corner, he'd have landed facing the goal.

I will say that both goals came about because he wasn't in the right frame of mind. Someone with proper concentration wouldn't have made those mistakes.

Don't bother. The loonies have spoken. 

[Blue blood]

Just now, Bigdoggsteel said:

Don't bother. The loonies have spoken. 

Don't you think that's a little patronising calling people loonies when they've put forward clear arguments? By all means disagree with the conclusion but loonies? You're not doing yourself any favours.

[Bigdoggsteel]

Just now, Blue blood said:

Don't you think that's a little patronising calling people loonies when they've put forward clear arguments? By all means disagree with the conclusion but loonies? You're not doing yourself any favours.

 

Speeeedie put forward a very clear point and was told to go to an optician or get his eyes checked. I also put forward my point clearly and was insulted in a number of ways. So ya, whilst I know that rolling around with the pigs will get me covered in s***, I am beyond playing nice with some of the mongs on here. 

[Blue blood]

29 minutes ago, speeeeeeedie said:

I looked again. I'm not 100% convinced. My eyesight is fine too.

Goal 1. It came back off the post, he's a cart horse and tried to shank it wide and cocked it up. His reaction wasn't one of someone who did it deliberately.

Goal 2. He has a head like a 50p as has been mentioned on here many times. He rose well but somehow misjudged it. He lands facing nowhere near the direction that he headed it. If it did it on purpose; actually trying to head it down into the bottom corner, he'd have landed facing the goal.

I will say that both goals came about because he wasn't in the right frame of mind. Someone with proper concentration wouldn't have made those mistakes.

Goal 1: He's not shanking anything it's more of a stab in the direction he wants it. Most other players would take the touch then welly it in that situation - after all he has plenty of time to do so. And even if he does decide to shank it, he's hardly wellying it away - it doesn't look like a clearance at all so doubt that was his motive. Plus the direction he is stabbing/kicking in is the direction of the goal - further evidence he's not clearing it.

Goal 2 I'd dispute he isn't a good header of the ball. In fact under Lambert when Hanley and Duffy were mainly facing high balls they did excellently - it's running at them/movement which they struggled with. The idea he is a useless header is a fallacy so not sure he's crap can be used as an excuse. Again heading it downwards is a huge no no - everyone knows that so why do it. It's so basic yet somehow this one time Duffy forgets this? Added to which he heads it really cleanly. Regardless of how he falls it is an excellent header. it doesn't skim off or slice somewhere he connects excellently and thus it goes where it is intended to - no mishit at all.

Now factor in the armband, sending off and circumstances of the time as well - hard to see it as not intentional.

[RevidgeBlue]

3 hours ago, Amarillo said:

I don't think the OGs were deliberate. Duffy's a 50p head who needs a dozen headers before he gets a goal. He wouldn't have been able to execute that 2nd goal on purpose. However, a want-away defender with poor concentration levels would certainly be in the frame of mind to make such egregious errors.

That's about right imo. For me he's a disgrace to the profession whether they were deliberate or not. Really hope Brighton miss out on the automatic places and promotion altogether. Would be nice to see Huddersfield make it instead.