PLT has been saying that all season and I don’t think they are too negative. So PLT are a group? A trio? I always thought it was just one poster.
I said I'd prefer him to be our manager in xyz years because I think he'd be a much better, more experienced, more rounded and over all better manager and with his links to the club, his passion for the club and area. I think It would be a match made in heaven ( potentially). It's just a personal choice for me..... People I think have really read to much into it. *Edit* again for me, I would prefer a more experienced manager in with ana this squad, again that's just my personal choice. It's absolutely nothing personal against LR ( not matter who much people try to say it is ). But LR has and is improving
Maybe so. Opinions innit. Just pointing out there’s more to it than picking apart individual matches.
Definitely is...I've no issue at all with anyone agreeing or disagreeing with me and having a different opinion etc. We've improved under him, I'm just not sure his got enough in his locker this early in his career to take us up
It's an absolute stone wall certainty that we'll find out in 9 games time... I can't see why this topic and the subsequent arguments that surround it are cropping up every day.
I think there's a basic misunderstanding going on here. When things go badly on the pitch, it's the managers fault. When things go well, it's down to the players. Simples.
Rosenior is a proper manager of a proper team. I really enjoyed today, this Club have really turned things around.
Software predicting football matches being very loosely described as a "supercomputer" is something that bugs me a bit, and the current thing is to call everything 'AI'. From how that stats bot was described it sounds like it's just spitting out some headline stats that humans talk about anyway. Not that it's not interesting, just a bit generous to imply it's doing some sort of computational analytics based on how it was described here. Anyway, the stats make a lot of sense. Low creation of scoring opportunities, yep. Shots from crap areas, yep definitely (this is why I think our problem isn't as simple as us not shooting often enough; we often go too far the other way and repeatedly shoot way off target from crap positions, like Tuesday night). Ineffective crossing, again yes definitely, whether it's down to the quality of the delivery or the people attacking it, it's evident that we very rarely meet the balls we put into the box. I think it's a bit cheeky of a few posters to claim it as some kind of vindication that they've been right all along when their comments have been much more extreme than anything that bot has highlighted.
I don't. Some of us have been saying pretty much what the Ai bot came out with, albeit with different words, and including the other non attacking points that you didn't include in your post and that you haven't been harking on about. Not bragging, not claiming it's vindication, but it's incorrect to claim it isn't pretty much a spot on match to what a few of us have been saying for months.
We were right all along though. You’re too arrogant to admit that maybe you were wrong so you’ve shifted to ‘okay, so you might be right but you’re cheeky for saying it’
