Harps62 wrote:In the immortal words of Del Boy
Bush "what a plonker"

FFS tell Mrs Harps to up your medication

neilcork68 wrote:

Harps62 wrote:In the immortal words of Del Boy
Bush "what a plonker"

FFS tell Mrs Harps to up your medication

In the immortal words of Harps

DO ONE

Alan G Bryant wrote:Personally I would never criticise a player for being crap, but I would criticise a player for not trying. I have not seen Marlon not try and I find the witch hunt against a player blighted by injury really sad from some so called supporters.

It is not a witch hunt to be critical of a player who is simply not good enough. Being critical is not being abusive. Footballers are paid by us to do a job. It is perfectly acceptable to point out their inadequacies.
It is not fair to make the criticism personal for a player doing his best it is fair to make it personal where a player is not giving of his best.

As in, I know Stan Einstein is trying his best but not only is he 60 and slow, he was no bloody good in the first place and should never be picked for the team again. That is fair comment. If I do not play to the best of my ability you can also add that I am a cheat who in effect steals money from the paying fans.

Stan A. Einstein wrote: As in, I know Stan Einstein is trying his best but not only is he 60 and slow, he was no bloody good in the first place and should never be picked for the team again. That is fair comment. If I do not play to the best of my ability you can also add that I am a cheat who in effect steals money from the paying fans.

Some evidence might make the argument stronger though. Like "he's never played higher than back garden level against gnomes, gets out of breath climbing the stairs and the only step over he's ever done was when there was a puddle in the street". Or something like that. Otherwise it's just unsubstantiated criticism and that's barely above abuse.

Harps62 wrote:In the immortal words of Del Boy
Bush "what a plonker"

Sorry my fault we were playing at European level when we played on park pitches against players who got paid a tenner to play!

SJG99 wrote:

Stan A. Einstein wrote: As in, I know Stan Einstein is trying his best but not only is he 60 and slow, he was no bloody good in the first place and should never be picked for the team again. That is fair comment. If I do not play to the best of my ability you can also add that I am a cheat who in effect steals money from the paying fans.

Some evidence might make the argument stronger though. Like "he's never played higher than back garden level against gnomes, gets out of breath climbing the stairs and the only step over he's ever done was when there was a puddle in the street". Or something like that. Otherwise it's just unsubstantiated criticism and that's barely above abuse.

No, I don't agree.

X is no good is not abusive, A post that contains that remark alone is not capable of adding to a discussion but to be offended by that rather requires the type of mind that wants to be offended.

Bush wrote:

Harps62 wrote:In the immortal words of Del Boy
Bush "what a plonker"

Sorry my fault we were playing at European level when we played on park pitches against players who got paid a tenner to play!

Oi, I was only getting £20 plus transport in the LoW in 1996 (and despite much arguing that was slightly above parks level even then)...

Stan A. Einstein wrote:

SJG99 wrote:

Stan A. Einstein wrote: As in, I know Stan Einstein is trying his best but not only is he 60 and slow, he was no bloody good in the first place and should never be picked for the team again. That is fair comment. If I do not play to the best of my ability you can also add that I am a cheat who in effect steals money from the paying fans.

Some evidence might make the argument stronger though. Like "he's never played higher than back garden level against gnomes, gets out of breath climbing the stairs and the only step over he's ever done was when there was a puddle in the street". Or something like that. Otherwise it's just unsubstantiated criticism and that's barely above abuse.

No, I don't agree.

X is no good is not abusive, A post that contains that remark alone is not capable of adding to a discussion but to be offended by that rather requires the type of mind that wants to be offended.

Tbf I agree with you that unsubstantiated criticism isn't necessarily abusive. Which is why I said it was above that.

Well done Corky for starting this thread.
Marlon clearly read it and decided
Corky

"DO ONE"

Harps62 wrote:Well done Corky for starting this thread.
Marlon clearly read it and decided
Corky

"DO ONE"

You do make me laugh with your comments
Hasn't Mrs Harps taken your table off you yet so you can still post ?

Come on off to bed now . It will be medication time soon

I was a bit critical of Jacko at the start of this thread and had my head in my hands when introduced yesterday but won every header and created two good chances and if labs had been a bit quicker we could had won and marlon would have had an assist, shows MF knows his players a lot better than a lot of us on here

daftasfxxx wrote:I was a bit critical of Jacko at the start of this thread and had my head in my hands when introduced yesterday but won every header and created two good chances and if labs had been a bit quicker we could had won and marlon would have had an assist, shows MF knows his players a lot better than a lot of us on here

He did win most of his headers fair play. Problem is he is still the same striker that was outscored in the FL last season by 19 (NINETEEN) of our players (5 of which were defenders). Some on here said he was 'unplayable' in the cameos he had in the few games at the end of the season under Flynny, yet he failed to score then and, at the time, no one could even remember him even having a shot on target.

If, as it looks, he's going to be involved in the run in, I really hope he finally finds his scoring boots & gets amongst the goals.... I think his first goal will probably get the biggest cheer from our fans ever..

I really hope so but I am hoping he will be the target man getting the ball in the air and giving Padraig far more chances than he is getting currently.
Also Labs did miss a couple Saturday from Marlons headers.
If we win matches and he gets assists I am more than happy.
Got to start in front of Mcclousky and more chance of playing 90 minutes than Hayes who looks not up to it in Flynnys thoughts presently.
If he has a couple of mares a re think will be needed again.

I'd much prefer to play McCoulsky or Hayes instead and play football again, but Flynny likes Marlon and will no doubt continue with aerial bombardments as Marlon is not the best with the ball at his feet.
Other than a very debatable 'assist' for O'Brien's goal I don't recall any others he contributed.
I really want him to be a success, but if i was Brizzle City & saw Jackson getting more game time than Shawn, I wouldn't be looking at loaning Newport County any more players any time soon...

Got to be honest, doubt if he will get anywhere near first team squad at Bristol City.
Maybe in a couple of years.
Can see him being loaned out again next year.
Just gets brushed off the ball to often currently but hope he makes it.
Agree about playing football though.
We can do it so why not continue as hoof ball clearly does not work certainly with Padraig & McCoulsky.
If its an aerial bombardment daft as it sounds Hayes & Marlon should start.
If its football Padraig and McCoulsky every time.