stay or go?

Post by Fish Supper
Burley - should he stay or go?
If Burley gets the chop, who should replace him.
Strachan. The only other serious contender would be Smith, but his return
to Rangers last time rules him out of a new gig with the SFA I'd say.

I'm undecided. When you look at the campaign as a whole, it's been pretty
dire. Two wins over Iceland and a win over Macedonia is far from acceptable.
There have been numerous problems with players too, not all Burley's fault,
but we currently have 4 players unavailable who would all be in the squad,
if not all starting, so questions have to be asked about his man-management.

Last night was a good performance, and I don't think Burley could have done
much more. Miller should have scored, Weir played great but made a costly
mistake, although if you watch the replay, Hutton was also guilty for the
goal for not tracking back. The likes of Caldwell and McManus also make
mistakes so let's not have a go at Weir for his age, it was just a mistake
and players of all ages make them.

The problem is, would we improve any by changing manager? Or are we better
to let Burley get on with it since he now has two years experience under his
belt and will have learned from all the problems that have come up?

Jonbhoy

2009-09-10 16:28:24 UTC

I'm undecided. When you look at the campaign as a whole, it's been pretty
dire. Two wins over Iceland and a win over Macedonia is far from
acceptable. There have been numerous problems with players too, not all
Burley's fault, but we currently have 4 players unavailable who would all
be in the squad, if not all starting, so questions have to be asked about
his man-management.
Last night was a good performance, and I don't think Burley could have
done much more. Miller should have scored, Weir played great but made a
costly mistake, although if you watch the replay, Hutton was also guilty
for the goal for not tracking back. The likes of Caldwell and McManus also
make mistakes so let's not have a go at Weir for his age, it was just a
mistake and players of all ages make them.

Burley should go BUT it should not be a case of the manager goes and new one
comes in and everythings rosey.Although Champagne Charlie can sometimes
waffle on i agree totally with what he said last night,there has to be a
total rethink including the role of the SFA.The SFA always reminds me of
those two old guys in the muppet show (Was it statler and waldorf?) that
moan and make little comments then step back without doing something
positive.We MUST get back to some form of grass roots system because its not
working right now.That involves the SFA,the manager and all the clubs in
scotland too.

As for the point i said about Weir,yes any player can fuck up but my point
is why should we have to play a 39 year old in the first place?Is Scottish
football that poor that theres no one younger that can play in his place?Its
pathetic if that is the case.

Post by Stevio
The problem is, would we improve any by changing manager? Or are we better
to let Burley get on with it since he now has two years experience under
his belt and will have learned from all the problems that have come up?

Its a two prong problem.Either we keep Burley who is just a yes man to the
SFA who are pretty worthless these days,or we get someone with balls that
will deal with the team the way he wants to but that might end up with the
SFA getting upset hes not a yes man and sack him!I didnt want Burley in the
first place but its going to be hard to get someone whos strong enough
minded to take the job on.Shame WS doesnt just hand Rangers over to McCoist
and takes the Scotland job again.

Stevio

2009-09-10 23:21:34 UTC

As for the point i said about Weir,yes any player can up but my point is
why should we have to play a 39 year old in the first place?Is Scottish
football that poor that theres no one younger that can play in his
place?Its pathetic if that is the case.

If you're good enough, you're old... or young... enough! AC Milan kept
Maldini going till about 40 because he was good enough. If Caldwell makes a
mistake, it's a mistake and people have a go at him, fair enough, but if
Weir makes a mistake, it's because of his age. I'm sure if you ask he'd tell
you he made the same mistakes 10 years ago too!

Maybe it's just cause I'm in my 30s now, but age shouldn't matter. We're not
well off enough for talent that we can discard people. Given Caldwell's
performances recently, and how well Weir has been playing, I think putting
Weir deserved his place in the team. If someone younger wants his place (who
exactly?), then they need to prove they are better.

Richard Gough could quite easily have played on for Scotland till his late
30s and he was a better player, were it not for his fall out with
Roxburgh/Brown. Unfortunately, Scotland are developing a habit of having
good players sitting at home watching on tele for non-footballing reasons.
Gough, Mo Johnstone, Duncan Ferguson, Weir himself for a time, Goram, Boyd,
Ferguson, McCulloch, McGregor. I'm sure there's more, I just can't think of
them.

Jonbhoy

2009-09-11 00:56:01 UTC

That is NOT the point i am making.I dont care how much people say you can
still play as well at nearly forty as you can in your 20's.My point is why
is it we have to put someone in at that age in the first place,mistake or no
mistake!Something is very wrong because Weir should not even be put in as a
make shift player.I am nearly the same age as him and im sure as heck i
couldnt play as well as i did in my 20's,its just the way it is.Is weir the
only one who can play that position?Of course not so its time to try out
some new young lads.No disrespect to Weir i think he has done very well
playing even at club level and keeping his fitness up at his age but lets
stop putting in makeshift players and look for younger guys as back ups even
if they are uncapped.I hope whoever is in charge takes a few gambles on new
caps in the friendlies we will have ahead.

Stevio

2009-09-11 02:01:11 UTC

Post by Jonbhoy
That is NOT the point i am making.I dont care how much people say you can
still play as well at nearly forty as you can in your 20's.My point is why
is it we have to put someone in at that age in the first place,mistake or
no mistake!

The reason why is that he is the best player available, simple as that. Age
shouldn't be a factor. It sounds like you're saying, "He's 39 so we must
play someone who's 29 cause 39 is too old and the 29 year old must be
better." Nonsense. If the 29 year old is better than the 39 year old than
put him in. Would you rather Steven Caldwell played, or an untried Falkirk
centre half, or whoever else there is, or do you want a guy who's proven at
the top level north and south of the border and plays week in week out as
captain of the biggest club in Scotland? :-)

If a 39 year old Maldini was Scottish, would you have rather had him in at
centre-half against the Dutch the other night, or would you have preferred
Steven Caldwell, Berra, Diamond or Anderson?

Post by Jonbhoy
Something is very wrong because Weir should not even be put in as a make
shift player.I am nearly the same age as him and im sure as heck i couldnt
play as well as i did in my 20's,its just the way it is.

Are you a professional who trains at the top level and looks after their
body like a top pro? Plenty of people have shown they can compete well into
their 30s in various sports, and there have been plenty of exampes in
football. Weir never had any pace to start with so he didn't have that to
lose lol. Teddy Sheringham was the same.

Post by Jonbhoy
Is weir the only one who can play that position?Of course not so its time
to try out some new young lads.

Not in a must win game against a top nation like the Netherlands.

Post by Jonbhoy
No disrespect to Weir i think he has done very well playing even at club
level and keeping his fitness up at his age but lets stop putting in
makeshift players and look for younger guys as back ups even if they are
uncapped.I hope whoever is in charge takes a few gambles on new caps in
the friendlies we will have ahead.

Berti Vogts took a few (many) gambles on young players and look where that
got us. Craig Brown on the other hand stuck with the same guys year after
year, and had success (by Scottish international standards). Brown's problem
was he stuck with them too long and never got the next set of players in.
You need a balance, but when it comes down to it, when it matters, in
competitive games, you should go with the best players available. By all
means try out other players in friendlies, but go with whoever's best when
it matters.

Jonbhoy

2009-09-11 03:01:10 UTC

Post by Jonbhoy
That is NOT the point i am making.I dont care how much people say you can
still play as well at nearly forty as you can in your 20's.My point is
why is it we have to put someone in at that age in the first
place,mistake or no mistake!

The reason why is that he is the best player available, simple as that.
Age shouldn't be a factor. It sounds like you're saying, "He's 39 so we
must play someone who's 29 cause 39 is too old and the 29 year old must be
better." Nonsense. If the 29 year old is better than the 39 year old than
put him in. Would you rather Steven Caldwell played, or an untried Falkirk
centre half, or whoever else there is, or do you want a guy who's proven
at the top level north and south of the border and plays week in week out
as captain of the biggest club in Scotland? :-)

Age shouldnt play a factor?So in that case we stick with him until he is 60
then?Sorry but age does play a factor in terms of speed etc,its a scientific
fact.Some do play on indeed but thats not what we should be doing,look where
its getting us with that mentality.Id rather play someone younger that a
scout pointed out than Weir,thats nothing against his age or skill.

Post by Stevio
If a 39 year old Maldini was Scottish, would you have rather had him in at
centre-half against the Dutch the other night, or would you have preferred
Steven Caldwell, Berra, Diamond or Anderson?

Would maldini have played that header?If so yes id have chosen any of the
others! ;-)

Post by Jonbhoy
Something is very wrong because Weir should not even be put in as a make
shift player.I am nearly the same age as him and im sure as heck i
couldnt play as well as i did in my 20's,its just the way it is.

Are you a professional who trains at the top level and looks after their
body like a top pro? Plenty of people have shown they can compete well
into their 30s in various sports, and there have been plenty of exampes in
football. Weir never had any pace to start with so he didn't have that to
lose lol. Teddy Sheringham was the same.

I was semi pro to a pretty good level but never good enough to be a pro then
had health problems late 20's onwards which cut sport short so cant really
say.As you said Weir had no pace before so whats he got now?Weir is not the
future and should stick to playing club level.

Post by Jonbhoy
Is weir the only one who can play that position?Of course not so its time
to try out some new young lads.

Not in a must win game against a top nation like the Netherlands.

Which we lost....due to a Weir mistake!But being fair i am by no means
blaming Weir for our failing to get to the WC,that goes way past the Holland
game.

Berti Vogts took a few (many) gambles on young players and look where that
got us. Craig Brown on the other hand stuck with the same guys year after
year, and had success (by Scottish international standards). Brown's
problem was he stuck with them too long and never got the next set of
players in. You need a balance, but when it comes down to it, when it
matters, in competitive games, you should go with the best players
available. By all means try out other players in friendlies, but go with
whoever's best when it matters.

Berti was a prick who never believed he made a mistake and should never have
been allowed to manage Scotland, and as you say Brown did stick with the
same players but the players seemed to have more faith in themselves (Much
like when WS was in charge).But this is what i am saying that now we have
only friendlies i would go full steam into picking out the best few then
pack it out with as many new faces as we can (The scouts and clubs need to
help out more with this).Fuck the scores,lets have say 4 games trying out
new faces maybe from the U21's cause we must have our own Theo Walcott out
there somewhere!

Stevio

2009-09-11 16:15:02 UTC

Post by Jonbhoy
Age shouldnt play a factor?So in that case we stick with him until he is
60 then?Sorry but age does play a factor in terms of speed etc,its a
scientific fact.Some do play on indeed but thats not what we should be
doing,look where its getting us with that mentality.Id rather play someone
younger that a scout pointed out than Weir,thats nothing against his age
or skill.

Yes age plays a factor in speed etc, but you do not automatically dump
someone when he is 30, 35, or 40 just because they've reached a certain age.
You ask if they still have it. Davie Weir still has it. To dump him because
of his age is ageist lol! If you think Diamond, Berra etc are better players
then fine, but not because they are younger. Sure try out younger players in
friendlies, but when it's competitive, you select the best players.

Post by Stevio
If a 39 year old Maldini was Scottish, would you have rather had him in
at centre-half against the Dutch the other night, or would you have
preferred Steven Caldwell, Berra, Diamond or Anderson?

Would maldini have played that header?If so yes id have chosen any of the
others! ;-)

Caldwell, McManus etc make mistakes. If you played any of the others I've
listed they would make mistakes too. Caldwell has made a number of mistakes
recently. If he was in his 30s people would say it's his age. It's not, he
just made mistakes.

Look at the goal again from Wednesday, who else was to blame? Hutton! One of
the youngest, fastest guys in our team. Why? Because he wasn't switched on
mentally. He should have realised Weir was struggling to get to that header
and covered, just like Weir does for other players.

Post by Jonbhoy
I was semi pro to a pretty good level but never good enough to be a pro
then had health problems late 20's onwards which cut sport short so cant
really say.As you said Weir had no pace before so whats he got now?Weir is
not the future and should stick to playing club level.

But up until Wednesday he was still the present.

Post by Jonbhoy
Which we lost....due to a Weir mistake!But being fair i am by no means
blaming Weir for our failing to get to the WC,that goes way past the
Holland game.

Also due to Hutton at the goal, Miller for his mistake, etc. It's a team
game.

Post by Jonbhoy
Berti was a who never believed he made a mistake and should never have
been allowed to manage Scotland, and as you say Brown did stick with the
same players but the players seemed to have more faith in themselves (Much
like when WS was in charge).But this is what i am saying that now we have
only friendlies i would go full steam into picking out the best few then
pack it out with as many new faces as we can (The scouts and clubs need to
help out more with this).the scores,lets have say 4 games trying out new
faces maybe from the U21's cause we must have our own Theo Walcott out
there somewhere!

This sounds very much like Berti's approach! We don't have a Walcott,
players that good are rare. We do have Fleck who might be the best teenager
coming through we know of, but he's not ready yet. We don't need to start
from scratch.

We have the basis of a good squad. We need to build on it and bring players
in gradually. Guys like Whittaker, Naismith, McCormack have all impressed in
recent games. Add to that McFadden, Brown, Fletcher, Fletcher, Gordon, Kevin
Thomson as well, and you have the basis of a good (and young) team. There
are plenty of centre halves about, the 2 at Celtic, Berra, Diamond,
Anderson, Wilkie, Webster etc, but they have to step up to the plate and
show they are good enough, otherwise we'll still need to call on the likes
of Weir if the others aren't good enough.

What do people think of Maloney? He's one who I don't think really does it
for Scotland, that I've noticed. Thoughts?

Jonbhoy

2009-09-11 17:27:00 UTC

Post by Jonbhoy
Age shouldnt play a factor?So in that case we stick with him until he is
60 then?Sorry but age does play a factor in terms of speed etc,its a
scientific fact.Some do play on indeed but thats not what we should be
doing,look where its getting us with that mentality.Id rather play
someone younger that a scout pointed out than Weir,thats nothing against
his age or skill.

Yes age plays a factor in speed etc, but you do not automatically dump
someone when he is 30, 35, or 40 just because they've reached a certain
age. You ask if they still have it. Davie Weir still has it. To dump him
because of his age is ageist lol! If you think Diamond, Berra etc are
better players then fine, but not because they are younger. Sure try out
younger players in friendlies, but when it's competitive, you select the
best players.

I never said automatically dump someone due to their age.As i have said the
body isnt as good as it was and by about 35 most players are turning it
in,sometimes younger.You have to admit a 39 year old is not going to be as
fast and agile as a 25-35 year old.

Post by Stevio
If a 39 year old Maldini was Scottish, would you have rather had him in
at centre-half against the Dutch the other night, or would you have
preferred Steven Caldwell, Berra, Diamond or Anderson?

Would maldini have played that header?If so yes id have chosen any of the
others! ;-)

Correct because age does play its part whether you like it or not!

Post by Stevio
Look at the goal again from Wednesday, who else was to blame? Hutton! One
of the youngest, fastest guys in our team. Why? Because he wasn't switched
on mentally. He should have realised Weir was struggling to get to that
header and covered, just like Weir does for other players.

Weir was to far forward and didnt have the speed to get back enough to head
it the opposite way,but yes he should also have had more coverage.

Post by Jonbhoy
I was semi pro to a pretty good level but never good enough to be a pro
then had health problems late 20's onwards which cut sport short so cant
really say.As you said Weir had no pace before so whats he got now?Weir
is not the future and should stick to playing club level.

But up until Wednesday he was still the present.

And look where we are at the present!

Post by Jonbhoy
Which we lost....due to a Weir mistake!But being fair i am by no means
blaming Weir for our failing to get to the WC,that goes way past the
Holland game.

Also due to Hutton at the goal, Miller for his mistake, etc. It's a team
game.

I agree,but as they say your only as strong as your weakest link.

Post by Jonbhoy
Berti was a who never believed he made a mistake and should never have
been allowed to manage Scotland, and as you say Brown did stick with the
same players but the players seemed to have more faith in themselves
(Much like when WS was in charge).But this is what i am saying that now
we have only friendlies i would go full steam into picking out the best
few then pack it out with as many new faces as we can (The scouts and
clubs need to help out more with this).the scores,lets have say 4 games
trying out new faces maybe from the U21's cause we must have our own Theo
Walcott out there somewhere!

No Berti did it during games that mattered,a very risky experiment.Im saying
do it now because we have fuck all to play for in the coming months so lets
use the friendlies as much as we can to see what we have.By a Walcott i mean
good young talent,but im sure we have some great young players that just
need to be found or given a chance.Fleck is one but im worried about his
attitude a bit,but i still think if they are able to play for a club they
are old enough to play internationals or at least be given the chance.

Post by Stevio
We have the basis of a good squad. We need to build on it and bring
players in gradually. Guys like Whittaker, Naismith, McCormack have all
impressed in recent games. Add to that McFadden, Brown, Fletcher,
Fletcher, Gordon, Kevin Thomson as well, and you have the basis of a good
(and young) team. There are plenty of centre halves about, the 2 at
Celtic, Berra, Diamond, Anderson, Wilkie, Webster etc, but they have to
step up to the plate and show they are good enough, otherwise we'll still
need to call on the likes of Weir if the others aren't good enough.
What do people think of Maloney? He's one who I don't think really does it
for Scotland, that I've noticed. Thoughts?

I actually still like Maloney and i know plenty of Celtic supporters didnt
want him back but im pleased he came back to the club.Good speedy runs that
have worked a fair few times but he can blow a bit hot and cold.However not
sure any manager can get much more out of him than what he is giving at the
moment.

sme

2009-09-14 15:19:17 UTC

Post by Jonbhoy
Age shouldnt play a factor?So in that case we stick with him until
he is 60 then?Sorry but age does play a factor in terms of speed
etc,its a scientific fact.Some do play on indeed but thats not what
we should be doing,look where its getting us with that mentality.Id
rather play someone younger that a scout pointed out than Weir,thats
nothing against his age or skill.

Yes age plays a factor in speed etc, but you do not automatically
dump someone when he is 30, 35, or 40 just because they've reached a
certain age. You ask if they still have it. Davie Weir still has it.
To dump him because of his age is ageist lol! If you think Diamond,
Berra etc are better players then fine, but not because they are
younger. Sure try out younger players in friendlies, but when it's
competitive, you select the best players.

I never said automatically dump someone due to their age.As i have
said the body isnt as good as it was and by about 35 most players are
turning it in,sometimes younger.You have to admit a 39 year old is not
going to be as fast and agile as a 25-35 year old.

Jon you're way off on this one. An older player might not have the speed
or agility they once had but the important thing they do have is
experience. I give you Lennon. Neil Lennon barely broke into a jog when
playing in his latter days but his reading of the game had vastly
improved, which made him a first choice. Weir is the same. Usually he
reads the game a lot better than someone like Caldwell or.... ahem....
Caldwell and on Wednesday it was Hutton who read the game wrong and
didn't defend. Weir made a mistake but Hutton didn't cover the only
player up front.

Post by Stevio
If a 39 year old Maldini was Scottish, would you have rather had
him in at centre-half against the Dutch the other night, or would
you have preferred Steven Caldwell, Berra, Diamond or Anderson?

Would maldini have played that header?If so yes id have chosen any
of the others! ;-)

Correct because age does play its part whether you like it or not!

It doesn't unless its his age that's the problem and it only appears to
be a problem to you. Speed and agility can be balanced by skill and
ability.

Post by Stevio
Look at the goal again from Wednesday, who else was to blame? Hutton!
One of the youngest, fastest guys in our team. Why? Because he wasn't
switched on mentally. He should have realised Weir was struggling to
get to that header and covered, just like Weir does for other
players.

Weir was to far forward and didnt have the speed to get back enough to
head it the opposite way,but yes he should also have had more
coverage.

Wasn't Weir the furthest player back? Surely you could say the rest of
the defence were too far forward then? His header was just badly judged.

Post by Jonbhoy
I was semi pro to a pretty good level but never good enough to be a
pro then had health problems late 20's onwards which cut sport short
so cant really say.As you said Weir had no pace before so whats he
got now?Weir is not the future and should stick to playing club
level.

But up until Wednesday he was still the present.

And look where we are at the present!

Can't score goals I would say is our problem.

Post by Jonbhoy
Which we lost....due to a Weir mistake!But being fair i am by no
means blaming Weir for our failing to get to the WC,that goes way
past the Holland game.

Also due to Hutton at the goal, Miller for his mistake, etc. It's a
team game.

I agree,but as they say your only as strong as your weakest link.

Which is scoring goals.

Post by Stevio
What do people think of Maloney? He's one who I don't think really
does it for Scotland, that I've noticed. Thoughts?

I actually still like Maloney and i know plenty of Celtic supporters
didnt want him back but im pleased he came back to the club.Good
speedy runs that have worked a fair few times but he can blow a bit
hot and cold.However not sure any manager can get much more out of him
than what he is giving at the moment.

I think Maloney is definately not the answer. I didn't want him back at
Celtic, partly for his antics before leaving and partly coz I didn't
think he would improve the team. As for Scotland we need someone who
doesn't disappear in games and is willing to work back, which Maloney
doesn't do.

Breen Gin (RFC 52 Titles)

2009-09-11 17:16:43 UTC

--

Breen

RFC Scotland's most successful club
52 Titles
WORLD RECORD

_
/'_/
,/_ /
__ / /_
/'_'/' '/'_'7,
/'/ / / /"/-
('( ' ' _~/
\ ' 7
'\' \ _7
\ (
\ \.

Siempre Borracho

http://whatsyourview.net/forum/free_football.php

Since light travels faster than sound, is that why some people appear bright
until you hear them speak?

Post by Jonbhoy
That is NOT the point i am making.I dont care how much people say you
can still play as well at nearly forty as you can in your 20's.My point
is why is it we have to put someone in at that age in the first
place,mistake or no mistake!

The reason why is that he is the best player available, simple as that.
Age shouldn't be a factor. It sounds like you're saying, "He's 39 so we
must play someone who's 29 cause 39 is too old and the 29 year old must
be better." Nonsense. If the 29 year old is better than the 39 year old
than put him in. Would you rather Steven Caldwell played, or an untried
Falkirk centre half, or whoever else there is, or do you want a guy who's
proven at the top level north and south of the border and plays week in
week out as captain of the biggest club in Scotland? :-)

Age shouldnt play a factor?So in that case we stick with him until he is
60 then?

Now your just being silly. Would you, if you had teh choice, play skippy
before Henke in this weekends game ?

Post by Jonbhoy
Sorry but age does play a factor in terms of speed etc,its a scientific
fact

More silly talk, are you trying to say that no one can be faster than
someone younger than them ?

Post by Jonbhoy
Some do play on indeed but thats not what we should be doing,look where
its getting us with that mentality.Id rather play someone younger that a
scout pointed out than Weir,thats nothing against his age or skill.

Even if the person the scout ponted out was less skillful than Weir ?

Post by Stevio
If a 39 year old Maldini was Scottish, would you have rather had him in
at centre-half against the Dutch the other night, or would you have
preferred Steven Caldwell, Berra, Diamond or Anderson?

Would maldini have played that header?If so yes id have chosen any of the
others! ;-)

Nice bodyswerve

Post by Jonbhoy
Something is very wrong because Weir should not even be put in as a make
shift player.

Why ?

Post by Jonbhoy
I am nearly the same age as him and im sure as heck i

Post by Jonbhoy
couldnt play as well as i did in my 20's,its just the way it is.

In your 20's you probably couldnt play as well as Weir can now

Post by Stevio
Are you a professional who trains at the top level and looks after their
body like a top pro? Plenty of people have shown they can compete well
into their 30s in various sports, and there have been plenty of exampes
in football. Weir never had any pace to start with so he didn't have that
to lose lol. Teddy Sheringham was the same.

I was semi pro to a pretty good level but never good enough to be a pro
then had health problems late 20's onwards which cut sport short so cant
really say.As you said Weir had no pace before so whats he got now?Weir is
not the future and should stick to playing club level.

No one is saying weir is the future, but he's better than what we have
available elsewhere at the moment.

Post by Jonbhoy
Is weir the only one who can play that position?Of course not so its
time to try out some new young lads.

Not in a must win game against a top nation like the Netherlands.

Which we lost....due to a Weir mistake!

Was Weir, along with making the header, also tracking the player that scored
the goal ?

Post by Jonbhoy
But being fair i am by no means blaming Weir for our failing to get to the
WC,

Really ? ?
coz it sure as hell looks like you are.

Post by Jonbhoy
that goes way past the Holland game.

Berti Vogts took a few (many) gambles on young players and look where
that got us. Craig Brown on the other hand stuck with the same guys year
after year, and had success (by Scottish international standards).
Brown's problem was he stuck with them too long and never got the next
set of players in. You need a balance, but when it comes down to it, when
it matters, in competitive games, you should go with the best players
available. By all means try out other players in friendlies, but go with
whoever's best when it matters.

Berti was a prick who never believed he made a mistake and should never
have been allowed to manage Scotland, and as you say Brown did stick with
the same players but the players seemed to have more faith in themselves
(Much like when WS was in charge).But this is what i am saying that now we
have only friendlies i would go full steam into picking out the best few
then pack it out with as many new faces as we can (The scouts and clubs
need to help out more with this).Fuck the scores,lets have say 4 games
trying out new faces maybe from the U21's cause we must have our own Theo
Walcott out there somewhere!

Jonbhoy

2009-09-11 18:34:09 UTC