- This topic has 16 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 2 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Further evidence that we need to mix it up a little during games !
http://www.101greatgoals.com/blog/leaked-chelseas-official-scouting-report-on-wigan/?
The Mail’s take on it is slightly different due to the nature of the paper !
Further evidence that we need to mix it up a little during games !
Alternatviely, it seems Chelsea officials have been visiting Cockney Latic over the past weeks and found all they need to know on here.
Further evidence that we need to mix it up a little during games !
Alternatviely, it seems Chelsea officials have been visiting Cockney Latic over the past weeks and found all they need to know on here.
Well seeing as you mention it !! It is almost as if he has copied and pasted ! :) Funny how the guy feared Kone most yet RM thought a half an hour run out was the best option here !
Further evidence that we need to mix it up a little during games !
Alternatviely, it seems Chelsea officials have been visiting Cockney Latic over the past weeks and found all they need to know on here.
Well seeing as you mention it !! It is almost as if he has copied and pasted ! :) Funny how the guy feared Kone most yet RM thought a half an hour run out was the best option here ![/quote]
As I’ve posted elsewhere:Chelsea spot that Caldwell is slow, Scharner & Figueroa ball watch, & Wigan’s defence is poor. In other news, Titanic sinks.
Personally, I thought we were doing okay before Kone came on, but we were caught out with counter-attacks.
When Kone is fully fit – bearing in mind he’s played virtually f’ck all football for a month – I think he’ll make a huge difference.
I wonder how much that type of work pays?? :blink:
There is nowt that is written there that any Tom, Dick or Harry couldn’t write after watching Latics 3 or 4 times & the same goes for pretty much any team
Pretty much every Latics fan (even the most optimistic lightsiders) could have done that if askedIn fact he’s actually missed out a few things including Al Habsi’s habit of palming shots back into the danger zone & I think he’s been a bit harsh on McArthur’s defensive ability
I’m also sure that there are some Latics fans dismayed that he’s not mentioned Beausejour’s a bit of a chubber & did I read it right that one of our players (David Jones was it?) is 1000% fit – that’s some going that!!I wonder how much that type of work pays?? :blink:
There is nowt that is written there that any Tom, Dick or Harry couldn’t write after watching Latics 3 or 4 times & the same goes for pretty much any team
Pretty much every Latics fan (even the most optimistic lightsiders) could have done that if askedIn fact he’s actually missed out a few things including Al Habsi’s habit of palming shots back into the danger zone & I think he’s been a bit harsh on McArthur’s defensive ability
I’m also sure that there are some Latics fans dismayed that he’s not mentioned Beausejour’s a bit of a chubber & did I read it right that one of our players (David Jones was it?) is 1000% fit – that’s some going that!!He also missed out:
Di Santo is 6’4” but can’t head
Al Habsi can’t kick for toffee
Beausejour hasn’t got the pace to take a man on
Kone’s second touch is quite often a header
If you shout ‘shoot’ Figueroa usually does….and I’m on the Lightside!
Money for all rope springs to mind. He must have written his scouting notes while watching Match Of The Day.
He also missed out:Di Santo is 6’4” but can’t head
Al Habsi can’t kick for toffee
Beausejour hasn’t got the pace to take a man on
Kone’s second touch is quite often a header
If you shout ‘shoot’ Figueroa usually does….and I’m on the Lightside!
Money for all rope springs to mind. He must have written his scouting notes while matching Match Of The Day.
Apparently the one shown in the first link is only the first page coz the Daily Mail article mentions stuff that isn’t on the page shown of the report – which might also explain why his Paul Scharner bit cuts off mid sentence
Anyway it would appear that it does mention Di Santo doesn’t win many headers coz the Mail makes a point of saying that he won his first header of the day when Al Habsi went long for the first time despite what the report had saidFurther indication that a new career awaits me is that it states Scharner was ball watching last week against Soton which is exactly what I said ;)
What they have failed to identify is the inconsistency from every player on a match by match basis.
What they say is a frailty for one player one game, suddenly becomes a strength for the same player the week after and vice versa. :dry:
I will agree though with their summary of Ali Habsi. goodpost
From Matlock to ManU
What a journey!“some of the defenders’ assessments are particularly harsh although judging by Wigan’s league position and Chelsea’s easy win, not inaccurate.”
Chelsea wavered after Wigan’s goal. At 2-1, Cole blocked a shot with his arm. Another referee might have given a penalty – and the score could have been 2-2.
However, this referee did not give it. Wigan seemed to lose hope, surrendering two more goals – and increasing their negative goal difference.
It wasn’t a bad performance, but Wigan desperatley need points.
Whoever wrote this was clearly drunk. I’ve not seen Beausejour get up and down the flanks all season. He’s constantly out of position because he can’t get back quick enough.
Now it appears the Chelsea report was actually a fake:
Maybe RM should pin it up in the changing rooms. Might gee em up a bit.goodpost goodpost goodpost goodpost goodpost
Yep, that was my first thought to.
I would get the comments printed out in massive writing and get it stuck up in the changing room above their pegs……
….shouldn’t really need a team talk after that.
Oh, and if we stay up this season and play Chelsea again, I would DEFINITELY use the above methods plus probably more before we play them.
By all means, you expect clubs to do research how to beat you. But allowing it to slip into the public domain was highly disrespectful, and unprofessional in the extreme.
Now it appears the Chelsea report was actually a fake:No, I think it WAS genuine.
Just back-tracking now for legal reasons.
No, I think it WAS genuine.
Just back-tracking now for legal reasons.[/quote]
Yeah because when you are back tracking for legal reasons the best course of action is to immediately accept liability in written form even though you have no reason to doubt the information you had in the first place was anything other than genuine.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
