Post Match. Pies pipped by Port. All comments, please.

[The Boy Who Cried Wolf]

^ Nathan is a classic deflector - at first it was endless stat sheets, now its throw away lines like DNA or 'high water mark' and 'low water mark' or any other association of gobbledegook to make it look like he understands what's going on... its classic Nathan, he's basically a rabbit frozen in headlights with his outlook on tactical/strategic disposition.

[PyreneesPie]

^ Okay, I think you sort of answered my question by acknowledging that we are a bottom team, no matter how we play!! Why then send them to the slaughter, by insisting that play fast, risky football ALL the time???
I bet the next coach won't issue instructions to play on and play fast all through the game, if it becomes obvious that they just can't maintain it and are on course for a hiding! Der.
Anyway, we'll see.

Perhaps Bucks know his player's abilities better than anyone here. When their energy reserves are high at the start and the opposition hasn't got going yet, they can play attacking football and establish a lead, as often happens in our first quarters eg Sunday . Opposition amps up their pressure and the fast football at all costs starts to fall apart and fail, simply because our players are not skilled enough on the whole to execute it under extreme pressure.

Thank goodness we CAN play reasonably effective defense,
or shellackings would happen on a regular basis. I remain adamant in my belief that heavy losses are not productive in any way, whereas one point losses create hope, endorse what was done correctly and increase the intent to do that little bit better next time. Basic human psychology there!

You also seem to forget that there is another team on the ground that are trying their best to win too and prevent fast ball movement! Most of these teams above us have more talent to do this, as you acknowledge.

In conclusion, I reckon Bucks is doing a reasonable job with the "cattle" he has and a new coach, be it Clarko or anyone else, won't be able to transform
the team, until more top quality players are added to it.

You are deliberately misquoting me by saying ‘fast risky football all the time’, when if had have read my post it highlights taking opportunities to attack when they arise. Anything else you have written has zero credibility due to your irrational misquoting designed to sensationalise your point. This is a forum where everyone, not just you, has a right to an opinion, so if you want comment on someone’s opinion - read the post properly.

Er, I don't think I did quote you per se, but responded with my own thoughts, which I believe I have a right to express. I don't see any quote box in the message above, do you? Also, no point in continuing this discussion, because you fail to address the points I raise anyway.

[PyreneesPie]

All I can see is many posters trotting out generalisations like yours above, doing the usual sheep following act, without doing any analysis of the state of our team and what they are capable of. So be it.

How much more evidence from posters here and the media at large do you need to realise that Nathan Buckley is a self-centred narcissist, and an incompetent coach who is driving our team and club into the ground with his selfish mindset and controlling personality. FFS we're second last on the ladder and a basket case on the field. Players run around aimlessly as if with no purpose or sense of direction. I have zero confidence in my team and as much as I want them to win, I know we won't, or it'll end up a "hard fought" win.

We play a boring and predictable style of football that is passive and defensive and is centred around slow over use of the football. Our players are taught (by Buckley) to either go sideways or backwards and if you don't believe me then watch the passage of play of JDG receiving the ball on the d50 against port. He had two players running forward and into space who could have provided a scoring opportunity. He could have and bloody well should have, kicked it to one of them. Instead, he did what he was taught (by Buckley) and that was to go sideways. This is the first instinct of our players and has been for some time now. Our players want to attack and take the game on but can't because it's been coached out of them by Nathan Buckley.

The only one trotting out the same generalisations week in and week out, is Nathan Buckley. He's had ten years in the top job and has nothing to show for it. He either lacks insight and understanding of his inability to coach or he is in complete denial about how awful a coach he is. He gets an armchair ride from the media because he "speaks well" and his manager also manages many media personalities who are always going to take his side anyway. The only way we can move forward and improve is for Buckley to be weeded out. Unfortunately he won't unless his arse is booted firmly out the door by a competent board with the balls to do it.

But if you choose to support Buckley then that's your call. Many of us here don't and we're fed up and want a changes in the coaches box and club at large. This is the only way to save the club from further ruin.

Thank you Warrenerra for responding to me with actual examples and without resorting to personal abuse, simply because my opinion is somewhat different to yours. I appreciate that at least.

[PeterD35]

<Please read this carefully - Thanks, Pies4shaw for BBMods:>
https://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/viewtopic.php?t=81247

[PyreneesPie]

^ If you read what I wrote, I insinuated sheep like behaviour because of a different reason altogether, so your statement above is not correct.

[What'sinaname]

I don't buy that. You called people sheep implying mindlessly and blindly following without thinking. That's an insult.

Just like calling someone a Karen. You can't backtrack and say I was implying you are like a Karen I know.

[PyreneesPie]

Yep, you're right - that's exactly what I was implying.

An aggressively worded, short, blanket statement is made to me, with no arguments to back it up, no indication of thoughtful analysis.. Then, tacked onto the end of it is an insult, insinuating that I am blind. Did you miss that bit? ???

I responded back with with my own thoughts regarding the calibre of that personal attack. Of course, I will defend myself against that. I was not objecting to the person's point of view, but the aggressive, personalised way in which it was delivered and the lack of reasoning behind it.

I don't expect anyone to agree with me, I realize that I have different approach to the coaching issue to many. So what- it's not the end of the world. I certainly shouldn't be personally attacked for holding a different perspective.

Plus, I did not call people sheep, I said one person (not people) was acting in a sheep like manner.

[PeterD35]

<Please read this carefully - Thanks, Pies4shaw for BBMods:>
https://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/viewtopic.php?t=81247

[Pies2016]

^ If you read what I wrote, I insinuated sheep like behaviour because of a different reason altogether, so your statement above is not correct.

I don't buy that. You called people sheep implying mindlessly and blindly following without thinking. That's an insult.

Just like calling someone a Karen. You can't backtrack and say I was implying you are like a Karen I know.

Any different to the insults hurled at the players in every second thread ?

[PyreneesPie]

<Please read this carefully - Thanks, Pies4shaw for BBMods:>
https://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/viewtopic.php?t=81247

[What'sinaname]

^ If you read what I wrote, I insinuated sheep like behaviour because of a different reason altogether, so your statement above is not correct.

I don't buy that. You called people sheep implying mindlessly and blindly following without thinking. That's an insult.

.

Yep, you're right - that's exactly what I was implying.

An aggressively worded, short, blanket statement is made to me, with no arguments to back it up, no indication of thoughtful analysis.. Then, tacked onto the end of it is an insult, insinuating that I am blind. Did you miss that bit? ???

I responded back with with my own thoughts regarding the calibre of that personal attack. Of course, I will defend myself against that. I was not objecting to the person's point of view, but the aggressive, personalised way in which it was delivered and the lack of reasoning behind it.

I don't expect anyone to agree with me, I realize that I have different approach to the coaching issue to many. So what- it's not the end of the world. I certainly shouldn't be personally attacked for holding a different perspective.

Plus, I did not call people sheep, I said one person (not people) was acting in a sheep like manner.

I frankly couldn't give a shit. I didn't see anything wrong in any of the banter, and I didn't even think either what you said or received was anywhere near personal abuse. You called it out as such.

As for calling someone a sheep or acting like a sheep.

If I say don't act like in a c*&^ like manner. Are you less offended than if I called you a c*&^? I'd say you would (and should) be equally offended by both.

Anyways. we've gone way off topic.

[schuey07]

<Please read this carefully - Thanks, Pies4shaw for BBMods:>
https://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/viewtopic.php?t=81247

[PyreneesPie]

<Please read this carefully - Thanks, Pies4shaw for BBMods:>
https://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/viewtopic.php?t=81247

[PyreneesPie]

<Please read this carefully - Thanks, Pies4shaw for BBMods:>
https://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/viewtopic.php?t=81247

[schuey07]

<Please read this carefully - Thanks, Pies4shaw for BBMods:>
https://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/viewtopic.php?t=81247