View Full Version : Mick is scared
Mick is scared to lose games so plays so negative with all his favs and as a result we all suffer.
How hard can it be to play your strongest team with postive tactics.
Are best team at the moment is something like this
wayne
collins
breen
craddock
elkobi
jarvis
olo
edwards
grey
blake
eastwood
with jay-keogh-potter-gibson-ward-foley among the subs on bench.
the back 4 would be solid as they have proved, collins on right for out of form foley, the cbs have proven already they are class at this level.
midfeild are attack minded olo-edwards to help creat chances, with wingers jarvis-grey who can actually cross a ball.
the fowards are proven goal scorers simple as.
if we play to our strengths we dont have to worry about the other team, as man for man we will have a better side all over the feild.
I just want mick out if he cant see or do something simple as this.
Dewsburywolf
05-03-2008, 14:45
Can't disagree with that too much. Keogh for Eastwood, Potter maybe for Olo, Foley ought to be better with a proper winger in front of him.
Just shows we DO have the players if only MM could see it too.
Decisions decisions. Who'd be a Manager?
Kenny-11
05-03-2008, 14:49
Mick is scared to lose games so plays so negative with all his favs and as a result we all suffer.
.
Before the Palace game, would you have been happy with 7 points from the 3 games coming up??
(this is in no way defending our "performance" last night)
MOOKWOLF
05-03-2008, 14:50
Mick is scared to lose games so plays so negative with all his favs and as a result we all suffer.
How hard can it be to play your strongest team with postive tactics.
Are best team at the moment is something like this
wayne
collins
breen
craddock
elkobi
jarvis
olo
edwards
grey
blake
eastwood
with jay-keogh-potter-gibson-ward-foley among the subs on bench.
the back 4 would be solid as they have proved, collins on right for out of form foley, the cbs have proven already they are class at this level.
midfeild are attack minded olo-edwards to help creat chances, with wingers jarvis-grey who can actually cross a ball.
the fowards are proven goal scorers simple as.
if we play to our strengths we dont have to worry about the other team, as man for man we will have a better side all over the feild.
I just want mick out if he cant see or do something simple as this.
I share your frustration but the simple fact is MM is an experienced manager with a certain degree of success and obviously sees certain players different to you or I and, dare I say it, knows more about the players and game than we EVER could. Missing out Foley from your team smacks of short termism and Keogh is a far better option than Eastwood as partner to Blake. Potter also showed why he's forced his way back in (though how certain people on here have shut the hell up about Henry since he's been found out - Tottenham 'in' for him - I ask you!)
Elephant Pyjamas
05-03-2008, 15:08
How you can say FE should be in our first 11 is beyond me.
How you can say FE should be in our first 11 is beyond me.
Because he's a proven goal scorer simple as. Apparently.
Dewsburywolf
05-03-2008, 15:29
Because he's a proven goal scorer simple as.
So was Steve Claridge before he came to us.
Not necessarily comparing the two.
Frankowski was a proven Goalscorer before he came here as well.
Wolv3nsam
05-03-2008, 15:30
No coincidence that once Keogh came on yesterday SEB looked miles better.
JR's Boots
05-03-2008, 16:25
No coincidence that once Keogh came on yesterday SEB looked miles better.
I think it was more down to the whole team looking better with Kyle and Henry no longer involved. We started to play football rather than hoofball.
SaleWolf
05-03-2008, 17:15
Potter maybe for Olo,
Are you joking?
Olofinjana i agree plays when he wants to but having been to both Palace and Colchester i can assure you that Potter is not having a good run of form.
He is the most ineffective midfielder we have on the books. He can't pass, tackle, he doesn't work hard, he's not combative, creative or quick.
Potter should be nowhere near the first eleven imo.
Wolv3nsam
05-03-2008, 17:18
He is the most ineffective midfielder we have on the books. He can't pass, tackle, he doesn't work hard, he's not combative, creative or quick.
He looked alright last night, admittedly though Henry was having a dreadful performance and even a toddler would have looked better than him last night.
Del Woppio
05-03-2008, 17:20
Are you joking?
Olofinjana i agree plays when he wants to but having been to both Palace and Colchester i can assure you that Potter is not having a good run of form.
He is the most ineffective midfielder we have on the books. He can't pass, tackle, he doesn't work hard, he's not combative, creative or quick.
Potter should be nowhere near the first eleven imo.
That just goes to show that watching a lot football doesn't equate to understanding the game. Potter is, without question, the best passer we have at the club.
SaleWolf
05-03-2008, 17:23
That just goes to show that watching a lot football doesn't equate to understanding the game. Potter is, without question, the best passer we have at the club.
What competition does he have?
Henry, Olifinjana, Edwards, Gibson?
Thats like saying someones excretion is better than the others because it doesn't smell as much.
Del Woppio
05-03-2008, 17:26
No it isn't. It's saying that somebody suggesting the best passer at the club can't pass and should be nowhere near the first team knows less about football than Bryan Robson.
SaleWolf
05-03-2008, 17:31
No it isn't. It's saying that somebody suggesting the best passer at the club can't pass and should be nowhere near the first team knows less about football than Bryan Robson.
Anyone who could pass to a man in the same colour shirt would stand out in the Wolves midfield.
Potter plays the very occasional decent ball but far more often wastes possesion and gives the ball away. If all he can do is very rarely play an easy on the eye ball, is he really deserving of a starting place?
No i don't think so. Maybe if you went to watch more football, you'd understand where i was coming from and have a better all round opinion.
Before the Palace game, would you have been happy with 7 points from the 3 games coming up??
(this is in no way defending our "performance" last night)
YES kenny of course i would, but the perfermances are still useless and without luck we could of ended up with less then 3 points.
im tired of waiting for basic errors to stop.
Are midfeild are bad end off.
can i ask you all would henry or potter or elliot get into any other championship team in the top 12?
not a chance they offer nothing except for running around like headless chickens.
olo is a very very good midfeilder when played in favoured possition, and offers something the others dont (GOALS)
eastwood is like a puppet i agree but his not been given the chance to prove anything else, although blake is putting the goals in he is hardly running around all game, but he does his job like eastwood would if given the chance.
on subject of keogh i just dont know, i love him in the team because of his 100 percent effort, and the way he trys to link up with other players going foward, his goal scoring has improved recently but where does he play? for me blake/eastwood would score at least 35 goals a season between them with the right service, if possible would like to have keogh playing just bhind the front 2.
Evolution Wolf
05-03-2008, 20:47
How you can say FE should be in our first 11 is beyond me.
maybe because the one run he has had in the team he was prolific?
Maybe because hes a proven goal scorer
maybe because hes one of a few player we have who isnt scared to shoot
maybe because he can change matches
Woburn Wolf
05-03-2008, 21:58
Before the Palace game, would you have been happy with 7 points from the 3 games coming up??
(this is in no way defending our "performance" last night)
Or in the Palace and Colchester games??
Woburn Wolf
05-03-2008, 22:03
That just goes to show that watching a lot football doesn't equate to understanding the game. Potter is, without question, the best passer we have at the club.
I agree Del. Potter also has an excellent first touch but as he does not huff and puff for 90 minutes McCarthy and supporters don't rate him. With the right coaching and a bit of encouragement Potter could be very good.
Stewarton Wolf
05-03-2008, 22:07
That just goes to show that watching a lot football doesn't equate to understanding the game. Potter is, without question, the best passer we have at the club.
Agreed.
Stewarton Wolf
05-03-2008, 22:08
I agree Del. Potter also has an excellent first touch but as he does not huff and puff for 90 minutes McCarthy and supporters don't rate him. With the right coaching and a bit of encouragement Potter could be very good.
No chance whilst McCarthy is here.
ProudWolf
05-03-2008, 22:14
Potter was being slated on here last season and the beginning of this season and also was labelled a McCarthy 'favourite'. What happened?
Stewarton Wolf
05-03-2008, 22:22
Potter was being slated on here last season and the beginning of this season and also was labelled a McCarthy 'favourite'. What happened?
You have to read who was doing the slating!
Del Woppio
06-03-2008, 08:50
maybe because the one run he has had in the team he was prolific?
In Nov/Dec he started 6 out of 7 games. We scored 4 goals, none being his.
Maybe because hes a proven goal scorer
No he isn't.
maybe because hes one of a few player we have who isnt scared to shoot
He's not scared to shoot, from anywhere, irrespective of the other options. It's all he does.
maybe because he can change matches
No he can't.
...
Essex Wolf
06-03-2008, 10:14
There is much said about the Wolves fans negative attitude when playing at Molineux but has McCarthy ever wondered if his negativity may be a major factor or can't he accept he might be wrong?
The starting 11 Tuesday night was all wrong, again, and how Wolves were ever 2-1 up was a miracle because they didn't deserve to be.
To start a game with no pace in central defence, Elliott the uninspiring and even less impressive on the wing and Kyle from the start was terrible but even though those there who witnessed such horrible hoofball football will not see change because McCarthy isn't good enough to see the mess he has made and lacks the ability to change it.
Del Woppio
06-03-2008, 10:20
There is much said about the Wolves fans negative attitude when playing at Molineux but has McCarthy ever wondered if his negativity may be a major factor or can't he accept he might be wrong?
The starting 11 Tuesday night was all wrong, again, and how Wolves were ever 2-1 up was a miracle because they didn't deserve to be.
To start a game with no pace in central defence, Elliott the uninspiring and even less impressive on the wing and Kyle from the start was terrible but even though those there who witnessed such horrible hoofball football will not see change because McCarthy isn't good enough to see the mess he has made and lacks the ability to change it.
But Essex, we have no pacey central defenders (not that eithe of Tuesdays goals were as a result of pace), and Elliot is, in light of the injury situation, the best option for the right wing. There were 6 players who started that game who were less effective than Kyle.
Essex Wolf
06-03-2008, 10:32
But Essex, we have no pacey central defenders (not that eithe of Tuesdays goals were as a result of pace), and Elliot is, in light of the injury situation, the best option for the right wing. There were 6 players who started that game who were less effective than Kyle.
DW, much of the reason for what you rightly point out though is because of McCarthy not bringing in cover. He has caused the problem instead of doing what a good or even decent manager should have done and resolved it.
The team was poor no arguments there but it is not helped by being so wrong so often. MM seems stuck in his mindset and no matter how many times certain players under achieve they still get picked again and again and again.
Del Woppio
06-03-2008, 10:37
Everybody is well aware we have no cover. But given the pool of players Mick had to choose from, and the insistance on playing 442 at home, the starting line up was pretty much as good as it good be.
Woburn Wolf
06-03-2008, 10:41
No chance whilst McCarthy is here.
Agreed
Dewsburywolf
06-03-2008, 10:44
Everybody is well aware we have no cover. But given the pool of players Mick had to choose from, and the insistance on playing 442 at home, the starting line up was pretty much as good as it good be.
Michael Gray left midfield, Jarvis right midfield would have been a better option. Was Gray injured or something? Two pretty good appearences then not in 16?
Del Woppio
06-03-2008, 10:45
I think it's more that he struggles to play Saturaday-Tuesday; that's why he was left out for the last midweek game.
Besides, I said the line up was 'pretty much as good as it could be' - not perfect!!
Woburn Wolf
06-03-2008, 10:46
Everybody is well aware we have no cover. But given the pool of players Mick had to choose from, and the insistance on playing 442 at home, the starting line up was pretty much as good as it good be.
Was Gray injured? If not, he should have played left wing (after 2 consecutive MOTM performances in that position) with Jarvis on the right. Keogh or Elliott should start ahead of Kyle.
Dewsburywolf
06-03-2008, 10:53
I think it's more that he struggles to play Saturaday-Tuesday; that's why he was left out for the last midweek game.
Besides, I said the line up was 'pretty much as good as it could be' - not perfect!!
Could be right re the age thing. He would have had a week to recover though prior to Preston.
Anyone who could pass to a man in the same colour shirt would stand out in the Wolves midfield.
Potter plays the very occasional decent ball but far more often wastes possesion and gives the ball away. If all he can do is very rarely play an easy on the eye ball, is he really deserving of a starting place?
No i don't think so. Maybe if you went to watch more football, you'd understand where i was coming from and have a better all round opinion.
Do you watch games on the radio or something? Potter gives the ball away the least out of our central midfielders and moves it the quickest because he's one of the few (if there's more than one) who knows what's around him and what's on before he actually receives the ball.
To the topic of the thread, I think that there's a difference between our strongest team (which I'm sure MM believes he's selecting:eek:), and our most adventurous team (which a large percentage of fans want to see and was illustrated in Kazzz's selection). The problem is that MM's selections are so uninspiring, that unless they pay off handsomely, which of course they're not doing, there are always major doubts about many of the players he picks and everyone has a valid argument when saying someone on the bench or outside the 16 could do better.
For me at the moment with the personnel available it'd be-
Hennessey
Foley
Breen
Craddock
Elokobi
Elliott
Potter
Edwards
Jarvis
Ebanks-Blake
Keogh
Bit optimistic in the middle perhaps without a proper tackler in there, but, is there really one at the club?!
On another note up front, I think Ebanks-Blake could play with pretty much any of our forwards and form a good partnership - except for Kevin Kyle. Now this isn't an attack on Kyle, it's just that he and Ebanks-Blake are both 'spearhead' strikers who won't go wide, won't drop deep and need someone to work off and around them. They don't work around people, they lead the line, and both of them up at the start of the game on Tuesday, was a mind boggling decision.
Harlow Wolf
06-03-2008, 22:21
Akaman, I think you make a great point about there being "major doubts about many of the players he picks". At the end of last year the team almost picked itself and everyone was pretty much agreed about the best 11. However this year I can only think of Henessey, SEB and perhaps Craddock that are unanimous picks (Kightly obviously if he was fit). Otherwise there's no pattern or consistency to our team and no-one, including Mick, seems to agree on our best midfield, and strike -force especially, and we lurch from one crisis to another.
As Kazzz says Mick seems to be scared and has lost the courage of his convictions. If one strike pairing doesn't work, try another, or one up front, then two up front - its become a shambles and will probably cost him his job because I think he's lost a lot of fans for good and it seems he's starting to lose the players too.
I've just wanted him to show some adventure and give it a go but it seems its not in his nature. Apart from the second half of last season then 3/4 of his time in charge has been epitomised by attritional one-dimensional football and we are going backwards on an almost daily basis.
Black Suit
06-03-2008, 22:28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evolution Wolf
maybe because the one run he has had in the team he was prolific?
In Nov/Dec he started 6 out of 7 games. We scored 4 goals, none being his.
Maybe because hes a proven goal scorer
No he isn't.
maybe because hes one of a few player we have who isnt scared to shoot
He's not scared to shoot, from anywhere, irrespective of the other options. It's all he does.
maybe because he can change matches
No he can't.
...
I beg to differ with you Del, I fully agree with Evolution Wolf. Goals per game, career wise? First or second in the club? Where's statto when you need one?
Atlas 1951
06-03-2008, 22:31
I like your point about the strikeforce, Akaman. I was sure Eastwood and Keogh was going to be the first-choice pairing at the start of the season, and it looked to be working well until Eastwood was dropped. Now SEB is here, SEB + Keogh looks like a good balance of styles and Tuesday seemed to prove this. Would be very dissappointed to see Keogh dropped after two assists.
Essex Wolf
07-03-2008, 10:03
Everybody is well aware we have no cover. But given the pool of players Mick had to choose from, and the insistance on playing 442 at home, the starting line up was pretty much as good as it good be.
Again I agree DW but is that not down to MM failing to have he cover the fans have been saying was needed most all season?
Kenny-11
07-03-2008, 10:08
Again I agree DW but is that not down to MM failing to have he cover the fans have been saying was needed most all season?
Certainly Mick has to take some blame for the lack of cover on the wings but I feel the deptarture of Barry Holmes indicated part of the problem.
How many players this season have been injured with slight problems and 3 months later still having treatment.
Top of my head - Breen, Craddock, Davies, Gobern, Kightly and even Rosa.
Micks comments about how he was annoyed that Kightly was having an op 3 months after he was injured seemed to point to him getting some bad info from the physio.
That said his failure to try and bring in a proper winger to cover for Kightly is shocking, especially as Gobern and Davies are still weeks away from being slightly fit.
Wolv3nsam
07-03-2008, 10:10
That said his failure to try and bring in a proper winger to cover for Kightly is shocking, especially as Gobern and Davies are still weeks away from being slightly fit.
What's more baffling is that he's just sent a winger to Northampton - meaning we technically only have two players capable of playing on the wings successfully (Gray, Jarvis) and one is 34!
Kenny-11
07-03-2008, 10:13
What's more baffling is that he's just sent a winger to Northampton - meaning we technically only have two players capable of playing on the wings successfully (Gray, Jarvis) and one is 34!
The Jones thing is fine. Like you said we have 2 players. Gray has been playing well there and is good back up for Jarvis. Obvious that Jones is 3rd choice at this moment in time and it makes sense he gets games. We benefit in the long run.
What is baffling is saying he won't bring anyone in and if he did he wouldn't get ahead of Elliot. Nothing against Elliot at all but he is limited out wide. A good option away from home but at home when we need to put the team on the back foot he struggles
Essex Wolf
07-03-2008, 10:24
So Kenny if MM isn't going to bring anyone else in why let Jones out on loan again?
Jarvis has shown how injury prone he is and Gray is 34yrs old so cover is all important I'd say.
Wolv3nsam
07-03-2008, 10:28
Jarvis has shown how injury prone he is and Gray is 34yrs old so cover is all important I'd say.
I wouldn't say Jarvis is injury prone - one serious injury at the beginning of the season and a little niggle that kept him out for two weeks. On that basis Kightly must be injury prone too..
Kenny-11
07-03-2008, 11:22
So Kenny if MM isn't going to bring anyone else in why let Jones out on loan again?
Jarvis has shown how injury prone he is and Gray is 34yrs old so cover is all important I'd say.
Injury prone? 1 long term injury with related niggles as is always the case.
Gray - Age is no worry if he is good enough and Gray has so far proved to be good enough on the left, infact getting a lot of shouts for MOTM when played there.
So 2 options for the left. Jones is the 3rd. Out on loan. Not a problem.
Now if you questioned why he hadn't got anyone in to cover for Kightly/Gobern/Davies..........then you would have a valid argument to which the answer would - "$$$$ knows"
Stewarton Wolf
07-03-2008, 12:30
Injury prone? 1 long term injury with related niggles as is always the case.
Gray - Age is no worry if he is good enough and Gray has so far proved to be good enough on the left, infact getting a lot of shouts for MOTM when played there.
So 2 options for the left. Jones is the 3rd. Out on loan. Not a problem.
Now if you questioned why he hadn't got anyone in to cover for Kightly/Gobern/Davies..........then you would have a valid argument to which the answer would - "$$$$ knows"
Jarvis has started 11 games and seven as sub out of 40 - how injury prone do you want it?
Wolv3nsam
07-03-2008, 12:32
Jarvis has started 11 games and seven as sub out of 40 - how injury prone do you want it?
Kightly has only started 17 games out of 40 - boooo, injury prone sod.
Del Woppio
07-03-2008, 12:32
Wth one injury. He played 78 games in the two years prior to that. $$$$ me Stewarton, is there anything about this club you will not moan about?
Stewarton Wolf
07-03-2008, 12:35
Wth one injury. He played 78 games in the two years prior to that. $$$$ me Stewarton, is there anything about this club you will not moan about?
Balti pies are nice...
Bumbamuffin
07-03-2008, 12:37
Balti pies are nice...
:D
Del Woppio
07-03-2008, 12:37
Balti pies are nice...
...when they've got them, the disorganised fools.
Kenny-11
07-03-2008, 12:38
Jarvis has started 11 games and seven as sub out of 40 - how injury prone do you want it?
Can you list the injuries that made him miss those games.
