Luggy

Apparently his book will be published this year and I for one hope it gives some of the details during his 2nd stint.
Over on the farm Graham Clark reported that at the Meet Luggy night he asked the board to sack Seip because he refused to sit on the bench.
The boards response was to extend his contract and triple his wages.
Nepotism anybody??

Run by family, for family.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

gasser9 wrote:

Apparently his book will be published this year and I for one hope it gives some of the details during his 2nd stint.
Over on the farm Graham Clark reported that at the Meet Luggy night he asked the board to sack Seip because he refused to sit on the bench.
The boards response was to extend his contract and triple his wages.
Nepotism anybody??

That'll certainly be an interesting read and hopefully will give some insight into some of the rather bizarre happenings in Luggy's second spell. Also hopefully now that Holloway has a bit of time on his hands, his version of what transpired at Home Park will be made public. Was there not a book in the pipeline at one stage about the admin period? Seems to have gone very quiet on that front.

Perhaps waiting to see how it ends?

SwimWithTheTide wrote:

Perhaps waiting to see how it ends?

Maybe.

Powelly, your new username engenders such a feeling of pride and achievement in this neck of the woods.

Haha, I'd been contemplating a name change for a while. I liked the ring of your suggestion and thought it would be a little funny

No doubt he will skim the second stint to make sound favourable so half a chapter im guessing.

As for Seip he likes to ride bikes i hear.

From Clark on the farm, this

"Luggy felt we didn't score enough goals largely because we don't hold the ball up in the opposition half long enough and we don't get enough crosses in".

Jesus...

Hugh Watt wrote:

From Clark on the farm, this

"Luggy felt we didn't score enough goals largely because we don't hold the ball up in the opposition half long enough and we don't get enough crosses in".

Jesus...

He had his faults but this is what Trigger did for the team so well during Luggy Mk I, allowing the midfield to become far more threatening on goal.

That was over 10 years ago though.

Hugh Watt wrote:

From Clark on the farm, this

"Luggy felt we didn't score enough goals largely because we don't hold the ball up in the opposition half long enough and we don't get enough crosses in".

Jesus...

When you play long ball and release your two best holding midfielders in Nalis and Abdou its hardly a shock is it lol

I think he was referring to our present team Angry.

Les Miserable wrote:

I think he was referring to our present team Angry.

thhen i say to that if your chairman sells your best midfielder for peanuts and doesnt replace him what do you expect luggy

Angry wrote:

Hugh Watt wrote:

From Clark on the farm, this

"Luggy felt we didn't score enough goals largely because we don't hold the ball up in the opposition half long enough and we don't get enough crosses in".

Jesus...

When you play long ball and release your two best holding midfielders in Nalis and Abdou its hardly a shock is it lol

To be fair, how old was Nalis by the end? His first season was great, but his legs had gone by 2008.

Cornish Chris wrote:

Angry wrote:

Hugh Watt wrote:

From Clark on the farm, this

"Luggy felt we didn't score enough goals largely because we don't hold the ball up in the opposition half long enough and we don't get enough crosses in".

Jesus...

When you play long ball and release your two best holding midfielders in Nalis and Abdou its hardly a shock is it lol

To be fair, how old was Nalis by the end? His first season was great, but his legs had gone by 2008.

i understood why he let him go as he was shagged by the end of that season and wouldnt have lasted another season in the championship. It was his decision to let jimmy go aswell and didnt replace either with a like minded player and that hurt the midfield alot.

walton was meant to be the man to make the differnce surely ?

some fans have got to consign sturrock to history like dave smith, big mac etc we still have a good chance of promotion despite some dreaful results. isnt it said that sturrock is no fan of reid so if he did take over our 14 goal striker would be on the bench ????

Elias wrote:

walton was meant to be the man to make the differnce surely ?

some fans have got to consign sturrock to history like dave smith, big mac etc we still have a good chance of promotion despite some dreaful results. isnt it said that sturrock is no fan of reid so if he did take over our 14 goal striker would be on the bench ????

Probably he is that out of touch with modern football.

Angry wrote:

Hugh Watt wrote:

From Clark on the farm, this

"Luggy felt we didn't score enough goals largely because we don't hold the ball up in the opposition half long enough and we don't get enough crosses in".

Jesus...

When you play long ball and release your two best holding midfielders in Nalis and Abdou its hardly a shock is it lol

Abdou rejected the contract that was put in front of him and nalis legs had gone by then tbf.

according to Luggy then we're going wrong by Not lumping endless high balls into the box and not defending corners with no one outside the penalty box probably. He's not moved on in the past 10 years, it'd be tragic if he ended up managing the club again like the Bretites want

What are you talking about he didn't say anything about lumping endless high balls into the box.
He said our current team didn't hold the ball up long enough and therefore didn't get enough crosses into the box.
You are like Angry just make things up as you go along.

gasser9 wrote:

What are you talking about he didn't say anything about lumping endless high balls into the box.
He said our current team didn't hold the ball up long enough and therefore didn't get enough crosses into the box.
You are like Angry just make things up as you go along.

do keep up cornish chris already mentioned that.

now go finded your ladyboy and have somefun you sound like your missing being bottomed

gasser9 wrote:

What are you talking about he didn't say anything about lumping endless high balls into the box.
He said our current team didn't hold the ball up long enough and therefore didn't get enough crosses into the box.
You are like Angry just make things up as you go along.

Do you not understand what a cross is then?

Why do Reuben Reid and Alessandra whos skills are running at defenders, need to hold the ball up if they're not having the ball lumped up to them? Sturrock has come out and said we'd be better playing like his teams did 10 years ago.

The game may have moved on but it hasn't at this level. It's just as crap as it's always been.
It doesn't matter how you play in this league, it's about winning games and getting promotion.

steveinspain wrote:

The game may have moved on but it hasn't at this level. It's just as crap as it's always been.
It doesn't matter how you play in this league, it's about winning games and getting promotion.

If his style still worked in todays football Southend would have gone up or been nearer to achieving it. If i could be assured that he would have no say in football matters and the manager was the one in charge with the backing of the board i wouldnt have an issue with Luggy coming back as a director or even as a admin director of football over seeing a scouting network for example.

When he took over at Southend they had a transfer embargo and he struggled to get a first team squad together. In his second season they lost in the play offs. In his third season they had another transfer embargo but he took them to Wembley in the JPT (he was sacked just before it).