Ambition v Reality

Doesn't look good. Assuming no ligament damage I can see him being out until after November international break.

 

Just a quick update on another matter mentioned earlier in the thread.

After yesterday's result, the 67 pence cash out offered on my 20 quid bet on City making the top 6 has now gone up to £1.50 today.......

 

Drinks on you.

 

Just hoping it's not serious. Their keeper should have been sent off for that.

Hope Hoillet's injury is also nothing serious- looked bad - after 3 games in 8 days not surprising though. Bamba also looked like he had a leg strain.

 

Don't want to take our foot off the gas against Wigan just because they're bottom. Chamakh up front and Richardson on the left? Or pilks up front, noone on the left and harris on the right. Nice to have options.

I'm sure Colin will come up with the right answer.

 

It's a refreshing change to have options, especially with extensive Prem experience.

 

I think I'd play Pilks upfront and Richardson (if Hoilett is out).

 

I like Pilks a lot but we've said it befroe - he's no striker. In fact after those glaring failures in front of goal against Forest, he'd be lucky to get into the side in that capacity if we had anyone else.

If Le Fondre had missed those sort of chances (and he did), he'd be crucified on here (and he was).

Pilks should be in the side ahead of Noone but not leading the line. Warnock clearly hasn't got time for Fred nor Ken, so if Lambert is ruled out for the Wigan game, he's got to have faith in Chamakh to do his job or it was pointless paying him a wage to come here.

Keep it the same as the Forest starting lineup with Chamakh in for Lambert. If Peltier is fit I'd put him back in and leave Connolly on the bench. If Hoilett is knackered, play Richardson or maybe give Noone another shot at it.

All things considered, the only other player it's worth considering for a start is O'Keefe - but who do you drop fror him?

 

While Ralls scored on Saturday, he has been far from the player of the previous 2 seasons. Yes, he has a good motor, gets around the pitch and challenges but his passing has been poor and he has been easily knocked off the ball. O'Keefe has more grit and bite about him and gets in the faces of the opposition and gets chances in the opposing box, something Ralls rarely does - Saturday the exception. We would lose Ralls capacity to score from outside the box but when did we last see him do that? Leaving him out might create more room for Whitts to shoot more.

 

I take the point on Pilks and agree in the main. It's a coin toss between him and Chamakh for me. I thought Chamakh looked sluggish when he came on the other night.

I take it Warnock has concerns about his fitness/sharpness as he turned to Pilks rather than keeping with the game plan and bringing Chamakh on after Lamberts early injury. Maybe a week more of training will sharpen him up enough to start but I doubt it.

I think Ralls is one of Warnock's most important players in the system he's using. Ralls starts the press with his high energy, he almost defends in a number 10 position. I think O'keef can do the same job, but I've got a feeling Warnock is getting what he wants from Ralls and wont be in a hurry to change it. He knows O keef from is time at Palace and obviously prefers Ralls for whatever reason. You may have guessed from this post but I think Ralls is playing well, his passing was all over the place for 15 minutes against Forrest but I think he'd let the 1 on 1 miss get to him a bit.

 

Ralls = Macheda Stevo?

 

Our manager seems to agree with me on this one though!

 

For the first time in a few seasons I'm less inclined to question the managers decisions. I might not understand some of them but trust them to be the right ones.

 

.... And on the plus side, we've seen a hell of a lot less Jacks on our forum

 

Maybe they've got their own problems Jay? Big joke when we've had ours - not so funny now eh?

One half of my bet is on the cards - all I want now is for Leeds to go up under Monk.........

 

With you on that one Sparks!!!

 

100% matey. It's been a while since I've been patronized

 

Yon white birds have had their fun at our expense, especially related to owners... but ours has stood up to the test and is still supportive-ish, it seems. It will be interesting to see haw their owners respond an invest. Not much at the moment for sure and it will be interesting to see how they finance any investment they make INTO the club... loans or equity!?!?!?! I'm al interested in how their future plays out since they seem only able to survive by buying cheap and selling on. It needs a special manager who can keep in the Prem whilst finding cheap players... year after year after year. Otherwise the telly payment get sucked into more and more wages and result in losses with no assets as collateral. They've made a big thing about our debts but we do have SOME collateral and the loans are not being called in, rather being converted slowly.

 

Allegedly the 100 million pound investment included the 75.5 million needed to buy out the other shareholders, this meant that only 25 million would be invested into the club which has been spent on players already this season, this is why the club's books show a significant loss in the past year

 

Thought the yanks might be sticking to the Swansea way. Invest £100M at 10p in the pound.