roversfan99

Yes I would take a point after 80 but overall its an average result that does little to allieviate our position. Obviously its down to results. I dont get why people (in general, not just you) get so aggy or unwilling to say that they dont think a player looks up to standard. Obviously that might change in time, its not an opinion you habe to stick to. People get really defensive and attribute it wrongly to not backing the players, there is a preciousness about it. If you was talking to your mate, surely youd be able to bring yourself to say x looks like a good player or equally y looks poor. We have our first impressions of players, but some people act as if its a crime to say if a player looks poor.

I think youve maybe not factored in that a % of the new signings will just prove unsuccessful. In your head, I suspect all of the new signings will be successful once they bed in, the results so far are just a bedding in period and we will push on once they have settled. Are there any of the new signings made that you think will turn out to be poor? Just based on first impressions, for example Alebiosu I think we all think will be a good bit of business. Any you think the opposite of? You said its a good point. A point at home to Stoke leaving us still with less points than games played after a favourable opening run of fixtures and with Coventry away heading up some harder games to come, its not enough.

I think if you are being criticised for your performance then youve got more of a justification to give a bit back. If you were criticised for a lack of effort and desire then you havent really got a leg to stand on.

Evidence of our demise example 5000. Celebrating a home draw with Stoke as a good point.

Must have missed that.

Commenting on here is the equivalent of chatting to people down the pub. Its a safe space to give opinions as we go, positive or negative, game by game. The fans in the ground were simply not on his back today, the whole team was backed throughout even at 1 down. Even if you heard people muttering to the person next to them, thats basically on par with on here/down the pub. If you think the opinions you quoted are wrong, or irrational, then fine. If you think people should totally withold opinion until the player has been here for a period of time, again thats fine, although that only seems to work one way, as if a player starts well, take Alebiosu, you dont get people shutting them down by saying hold off, he might turn out to be rubbish in time. But none of the above means that the players wont be backed in the ground. Im not having that Gudjohnsen hasnt been backed in the ground. The aspect of your opinions that I dont agree with is that he isnt being backed. He is, and even if people criticise him either on here, down the pub or even muttering to the person next to him, thats not the same. Ive never seen the problem with discussing a player no matter how early he is into his time here, good or bad. Its ultimately based on first impressions. Take Miroshita, his performance v Watford in his first start got widespread praise, hes been invisible since. Sometimes a first impression will be wrong, thats fine, but it doesnt mean people shouldnt give them, IMO.

Your point was about backing him, getting behind him and not getting on his back. Even if you disagree with the opinion you shared or other opinions, it doesnt mean that the poster or indeed anyone doesnt back him when he puts on the shirt.

Again. That comment on a messageboard does not prove that the poster is not behind the player. You are confusing being criticial of a player on here with not being behind him.

Gardner Hickman is average, there is a reason why he was unable to establish himself at 3 previous clubs. That is still better than Tavares seemingly. And the other midfielder we signed, we cleverley did so knowing hes injured for months. Montgomery has looked miles off the standard and Cantwell is our best player where he is currently playing, hes never a deeper midfielder.

Of course there are examples of players who started slowly and then settled and thrived. But just as many if not more But the likelihood is that a % (however low or high) will simply prove to be not up to it. We cant just assume that they all will be slow burners like Tronstad. The fans are and will be behind Gudjohnsen. Saying he has looked crap in these 2 starts doesnt mean that they arent behind him.

Its not surprising no after the overhaul which comprises of letting go a series of key players and replacing them with cheapos from inferior leagues. You have that correct. I judged Gudjohnsen based on what I have seen so far, and made it pretty clear that I wasnt writing him off. But theres no point pretending that he hasnt been crap in the last 2 games. Tronstad started slowly and became very good. There are also countless players that started poorly and continued to be poor until they left so its pointless comparing.

Alebiosu and Kargbo are quick, not seeing much pace elsewhere.

Well I certainly wouldnt have taken a point before the game. Its a home game against a side thats nothing special, off the back of a dreadful start to the season. Unlike our overall start, its not terrible by any means, but we needed a win. On Gudjohnsen, had it been a player who had 2 really good first starts, people would be saying what a signing he looks and you wouldnt say a word. Im just speaking on what weve seen so far, hes looked crap, miles off it, has had 2 massive chances that hes totally fluffed and his poor touches have twice led indirectly to opposition goals. Im not writing him off, lets make that clear, its very early days, but he has also looked rubbish in his first 2 starts, lets not beat around the bush. Lets hope he improves and fast. Did I think Hedges was "very good" or man of the match? No to both. I dont recall anything he did going forward in terms of quality. Plodded up and down without threatening. Its been a really poor start to the season heading into the second international break. 2 wins, 6 losses and a draw. I dont see much to be optimistic about at the moment.

Ultimately its another poor result that leaves us with less points that games played in what is a start that at any other club would leave the manager in massive jeapordy. The fixtures we have had have been favourable and results very poor. For the first hour we were crap. Gudjohnsen looks like a dud of a panic buy and I dont know why he started again. The 2 wingers that came on made a difference. Fair play to Kargbo in particular. Hedges seems to now be someone that plays the full game regardless.

Ismael thought we played well v Swansea. Only he thought that, but still.

You are avoiding the question. If he only returned in April and played 5 games and did well, would that make it a good signing, according to your logic. The question is whether it makes sense to sign someone with a serious injury. Even if he is good, he misses a big chunk of the season. Tavares is crap. And the cup game doesnt count for you judging Ismael so im not sure what the rules are there. TGH is average.

But merely knowing something doesnt justify it. We knew Steve Kean was being appointed manager. We knew Owen Coyle was being appointed manager. We knew that Wharton was being bundled out of the door. Doesnt justify any of those. Im asking a simple question, do you think its sensible to sign a player (in a position where we have lost our captain) who we know in advance will be out for months?

No loss as he isnt a Championship standard player these days. But another really shrewd bit of business. Did we know he was injured when he signed?

You havent said your opinion on ("the plan of" signing a player out injured for months. You have done your usual routine of going round arguing with people who criticise the club, without committing to saying that you agree with the decision.

I also moan about the horrendous way in which the club is run regularly, because it is warranted. So to clarify, you have no problem with us signing him (a replacement for our captain) despite a long term injury, because they explained as such when he signed?

Again, the same points. What makes you so insistent that Ismael has specifically picked this bloke out from a relegated Swiss team as the specific player he wants? You cant possibly know that. But either way, thinking that the manager should pick which players he was doesnt mean that I have to agree with every individual player. Signing a player you know is out for months is an absolutely ridiculous move, whoever has decided it. I know they knew about the injury, I know that we were told about the injury, it doesnt mean that it any less ridiculous. Its only you that cant bring yourself to criticise it. You seem to think that because they knew he was injured, and because they told us, the deal is immune to criticism. If they knowingly signed a 60 year old and told us that they were doing so, that wouldnt be normal either.

I know we did. Which makes the deal an absolutely stupid one to do. Im guessing based on the above that you dont agree that signing a player with a long term injury in an area where we have lost our captain is stupid?

It doesnt really matter as the games are pointless. But Wharton in, Foden in, Bellingham in. Lots of players in there that dont deserve to be. Loftus Cheek a standout.

Baradji is doing well and in "10 days" we will have a timeframe. What a joke of a signing.

Obviously idiots shouldnt be abusing him online. But his effort levels in the lead up to the winner midweek were totally unacceptable. Play crap and people can let you off. Dont try, its hard to.