• limpid

      Just visiting?   27/12/16

      Please click "Sign Up" and login to use the full functionality of the site.

peterms

Full Members
  • Content count

    7,390
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    15

peterms last won the day on October 4

peterms had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

4,124 Excellent

About peterms

  • Rank
    Star Player

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    Embra

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://

Recent Profile Visitors

1,465 profile views
  1. Steve Bruce

    I'm quite taken with the "winter is upon us" theme he's developed. Not quite as full of foreboding as "winter is coming".
  2. U.S. Politics

    We're going to need a bigger shirt.
  3. Tony Xia

    For me, it's not the money, in the sense of demanding more like a spoilt brat wanting more sweets. It's more that the story doesn't work for me. I don't know who he is, where his money comes from, whether he is doing this for domestic commercial purposes, whether he is fronting something on behalf of others, why he chose to get involved with the dodgy people he did during the takeover, why he lied about their involvement on the board, and therefore what he wants, how long he will be here for, and how dependable he will be. The internet furnishes me with no reliable answers to any of this, and I've spent a few hours searching. I'm deeply unimpressed by the yawning chasm between the PR bollocks about top five in the world, and appointing a manager and signing a squad which have mid-table-second-division written all over them. The lack of transparency about money isn't the problem, it's more a symptom, an illustration of the problem that we don't have a scooby about what is going on here. I mist declare a prejudice. I really, really don't like the way the game has become a plaything for rich kids to mess about with a real life version of a computer game, and I hate to see us becoming part of the problem.
  4. Steve Bruce

    It would be helpful if journos would press him a little more. When he makes comments about not being interested in tactics, they should press him about whether that's just a throwaway remark aimed at blocking further discussion of his tactics, or whether he actually means it, and if so, exploring that further. Instead, interviews come across as banal and superficial. What did you think of the game? When will so-and-so be fit again? They seem to make poor use of a valuable opportunity to explore things in a bit more depth.
  5. Steve Bruce

    If he gets sacked, I'll be honking alongside you. But seriously, people make the point that changing managers would be disruptive and unsettling, yet the public perception is that he's a game or two away from the sack, and apparently he rang Harry to discuss his concern that he would be sacked. I can't imagine it's anything other than unsettling for him and for the club as a whole to be in that position, yet it's the reality. It seems we have an unsettling situation either way.
  6. Tony Xia

    Yes, I've seen that figure a few times. Once printed, it gets reprinted. I haven't seen anything explaining it. Does it mean net personal worth? The total assets of the company? Or is it like Trump's claims, wildly exaggerated, or the claim that Xia was responsible for the Birds Nest Stadium, which turned out to be false? I have no idea. But if you have access to verifiable information, rather than endlessly reprinted assertions, it would be great if you could share the links.
  7. 17/18 Promotion Charge

    An average of 2 points a game. So far, we have done that against teams in the lower half of the table, and just 1 point a game agaisnt teams in the upper half. Quite. It requires a step change in performance, not just an odd result nicked here and there. And then if we somehow reach the playoffs, the teams we play are in the upper part of the upper half...
  8. Steve Bruce

    I don't have a problem with it, in principle. For example against Wolves, having Whelan in front of the back four and, say, Hourihane and Onomah in front of him would look more balanced, would relieve them of some defensive work, would give someone to win the ball and play the simple short pass to them to build an attack. One df and one player like Hourihane, against a decent team with a strong midfield, is a different proposition. And ths idea of playing Whelan and Jedinak together suggests we think we are reenacting the battle of Stalingrad.
  9. Steve Bruce

    Yes. It's not always easy when fixtures coincide, but we weren't playing on 27 Sept, and he could have nipped up to Sheffield to see a team dominating possession against Wolves and winning the game. Might have given him some ideas about how to approach the game, beyond "stick with a winning lineup".
  10. Tony Xia

    Sorry if the point wasn't sufficiently obvious. The point is that talking about 5 points off an automatic promotion place is an unrealistically optimistic way of looking at where we are with a quarter of the season gone. We have to achieve and maintain a significantly better points-to-games ratio to be promoted. Win two games while our rivals lose two, and then maintain that position relative to them over the course of the season as a whole. That suggests something more like a step change than a minor impediment.
  11. Steve Bruce

    Surprise surprise, after winning games against the weakest sides in the division we play one of the better sides, we are outclassed and show little sign of forethought, tactics, or adaptation during the game, and people note that these are the problems which have been seen before. I wonder, did people actually think we would go through the season facing only clubs in the bottom half of the table?
  12. Tony Xia

    Reminds me of Alfred Hatchplot. Of course he was known for presiding over horror shows, so it's a good job the resemblance is only physical.
  13. Steve Bruce

    Because what works against the weakest teams may not work against the better teams? Because as he apparently said (haven't seen the remarks myself but others have reported them here) he acknowledged that 442 wasn't suited to playing Wolves? His comments after the game were dismissive of tactics and formations having anything to do with it. (Here) So just down to the players then, nothing to do with him. Right. It's been remarked several times that he doesn't try to apply tactics or change formations to suit a particular match. If he had changed the system, could explain why, if we had put up a decent performance and lost, I think most people would accept that. The feeling persists that he sticks to a formation on the same basis that some people prefer to wear a lucky pair of underpants, while other managers seek to plan, adapt, and anticipate.
  14. Steve Bruce

    I think Bruce said something about when he took over, the priority was to stop losing. Quite right too. BUt we seem still to be at that stage, and the possession stats and the results against better teams suggest there's a long way to go to build a more assertive and positive style of play. We won't get promoted by carrying on like this. Sometimes it looks as though things are improving, then we slip back again. Improvements don't seem to be sustained.