Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 92
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Aye, and we should encourage half the team to be alcoholics and the rest to have pie and chips 30 mins before kickoff on a match day. You know, how it used to be back in the day.

Quite right - if we are trying to be more professional, then increasing the backroom staff goes hand in hand with that. If we want to run ourselves as a Sunday League team then let's not bother with a

I presume that your tongue was pressed firmly against your check as you typed it? 

Posted Images

2 hours ago, Walt Jabsco said:

I presume that your tongue was pressed firmly against your check as you typed it? 

Walt, you’re right on that one. To see Gaza now, he is the perfect example of what not to do when you are given a gift and then choose to waste the opportunity he had to be an inspiration to thousands of young players for years during and after he finished playing 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Walt Jabsco said:

I presume that your tongue was pressed firmly against your check as you typed it? 

Why eye man?? Me and me best mate 5 Bellies lived on Kebabs in Italy, good English food!! None of that foreign muck for us ya na??? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, bazza45 said:

I'm with Tommy H72.  Things get far too complicated.  A staff of seven non players.  One staff for 2.4 players.  How the hell much do these people cost?  How many extra players could we get without them.

We need one manager and one general jack of all trades.  How it used to be back in the day

I do get it...to a degree. But football isnt 'how it used to be back in the day'. Diets have changed, fitness has changed, technical ability has changed. Whilst there isnt a science to how the game is played, there is to an individuals skill and fitness. If it was as simple as you are trying to make out, then no club would have a backroom staff of depth.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Bubba said:

I do get it...to a degree. But football isnt 'how it used to be back in the day'. Diets have changed, fitness has changed, technical ability has changed. Whilst there isnt a science to how the game is played, there is to an individuals skill and fitness. If it was as simple as you are trying to make out, then no club would have a backroom staff of depth.

It used to be called the scientific game :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Bubba said:

I do get it...to a degree. But football isnt 'how it used to be back in the day'. Diets have changed, fitness has changed, technical ability has changed. Whilst there isnt a science to how the game is played, there is to an individuals skill and fitness. If it was as simple as you are trying to make out, then no club would have a backroom staff of depth.

I accept that football, along with most things in life is different from how it was 'back in the day'.  Some of life's changes are for the better, others less so.

But back to the current subject and I still can't see how 17-20 grown ups need 7 men to supervise them.  At school 20+ 4-5 year olds are kept honest by a teacher and a TA

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, bazza45 said:

I accept that football, along with most things in life is different from how it was 'back in the day'.  Some of life's changes are for the better, others less so.

But back to the current subject and I still can't see how 17-20 grown ups need 7 men to supervise them.  At school 20+ 4-5 year olds are kept honest by a teacher and a TA

Who cares really? I'm assuming PW thinks having a slightly smaller squad alongside a bigger part-time support staff will reap bigger rewards than having 1-2 extra players with fewer coaches would. If it works, fantastic, if it doesn't then he'll have to answer for that. If the club can afford it and we're up fighting for a play-off spot at the end of the season, it will all be money well spent.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Hoddie said:

It used to be called the scientific game :)

I still prefer to think of it as the “beautiful game”. The whole point is it should be spontaneous and exhilarating not the subject of a scientific experiment. You can analyse anything you want in search of improvement in performance but you cannot measure the size of a players desire to compete and desire to win. 

If we want scientific perfection then we might as well have a bunch of robots playing 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bazza45 said:

I accept that football, along with most things in life is different from how it was 'back in the day'.  Some of life's changes are for the better, others less so.

But back to the current subject and I still can't see how 17-20 grown ups need 7 men to supervise them.  At school 20+ 4-5 year olds are kept honest by a teacher and a TA

7 is still light or at least comparable to teams in our league (quick look at Wrexhams website shows 8, Hartlepool 10, Notts County 10 ish).

So whilst you may dream of times gone by, if everyone else has staff and feels it gives them an advantage then you have to compete or be beaten.

If people like the old days of one grumpy man shouting at a bunch of hungover blokes, plenty of football on the Moor on Sundays

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Wilder Bollox said:

Some of us remember the days of school classes of 32 and no training assistants . One thing we did learn was many hands makes light work (as long as they all know what they're doing)

Small classes then 42 in our class but teacher ruled with an iron fist and taught respect.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, shaymandownsouff said:

7 is still light or at least comparable to teams in our league (quick look at Wrexhams website shows 8, Hartlepool 10, Notts County 10 ish).

So whilst you may dream of times gone by, if everyone else has staff and feels it gives them an advantage then you have to compete or be beaten.

If people like the old days of one grumpy man shouting at a bunch of hungover blokes, plenty of football on the Moor on Sundays

These teams may "Feel" that it gives them an advantage but I don't see any proof yet (at this level).   The money spent on non players could be used to sign a couple of extra players, or maybe up an offer to someone who will otherwise turn us down.  At the end of the days its all speculation, we can argue as long as we want but the proof will be whereabouts in the league table we are come next April/May

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ITMAN said:

I still prefer to think of it as the “beautiful game”. The whole point is it should be spontaneous and exhilarating not the subject of a scientific experiment. You can analyse anything you want in search of improvement in performance but you cannot measure the size of a players desire to compete and desire to win. 

If we want scientific perfection then we might as well have a bunch of robots playing 

Wasnt there a guy hanging around about 80yrs ago tried to create Scientific perfection? Dont think that ended to well really.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...