Plymouth Argyle v Cambridge United match day thread

Graiser wrote:

I purposely never looked at ATD's website since Saturday's game as I was thinking there would be a lot of hysteria on here after that result and bugger I was right.

In regard to the Thread title, first half shit, second half a lot better but not good enough.


As for the rest of it, for instance over the season we've gone from Reid being a lazy bugger, to best striker in the league and now he's feigning injury.

Inevitably it's all Brent's fault because he's set the budget too low, well what is the budget so we can make an assessment

Brent's appointed Adams with an agreed budget (whatever that is)

Adams has brought in some quality players with I suspect (no evidence ) on decent salaries for L2, resulting smaller squad.

Injuries have without doubt affected us, are all these players feigning injury or was that leg brace Carey was wearing on Saturday imaginary ?

Another comment was the head of the tree sets the tone, well to some extent that is correct, however in my managerial experience I also place a great expectation on employees also being responsible and accountable for their actions.

Are the remaining players not trying ? I don't believe that to be true, there's a quality issue with the fit players and what appeared to me there's also a confidence issue.

Just to be clear I'm no Brent apologist nor for anybody else within our club, but if Adams is the manna from jock land we all seem to think he is then we'll see just how good our judgement is over the next few weeks.

Derek Adams made some comment at a fans meeting early in his reign that the Argyle budget was around about the 15th biggest [or 9th smallest if you look at it in a different way] in the division and that he had had to be "creative" in using it to the optimum-how do you know that the goalposts weren't moved between his appointment and receiving the budget allocation, which was not uncommon in my "managerial experience"?. Since that time, he has repeatedly drawn attention to the comparative lack of depth in the Argyle squad, the latest example being on Saturday when he said that Cambridge had "vast numbers" of players in the squad. It's all very well to talk of "jock from manna land" and imply that the situation should be resolved by Adams on his own but the small squad scenario and inevitable consequences is precisely the point that many on here have proactively argued even when Argyle were on a long winning streak. I believe you stated awhile back that Brent and the board deserved some credit for the position that Argyle were occupying at the head of the table-well that works both ways in my book, no hysteria, only an attempt to establish home truths about the Argyle situation.

I'll be very surprised if brent doesn't back Adams fully in January. This will be a seminal moment [calm down Porkie] in Argyle history, just as it was with Stapes and Holloway.

However, i get the feeling that the reluctant one is full of parsimonious shit and might still try to get something for nothing and f*ck adams right off.

Speculate to accumulate.........I don't think so. Like Stapes' n co , he wants his cake and eat it too..................and his ever growing list of sycophantic jamboys will let him get away with it because 'being someone' at their club in the lower leagues ,is better than being persona non grata at a serious club. That's why they'd be happy for the ground to be boxed in.

Wake me up when this nightmare is over.

Good grief...and so it goes on. Seems it not only me that takes things too seriously, and I've more than received my share of 'patronising' replies.

How do you know it was Bob who told me to be careful? 'Twas in fact a NON AFT member but who is on this forum, but you'll believe what you want anyway.

I have actually read through some of the old stuff before so have an incling of what went on, but I don't have the time to go through every last bit...

Going round and round in circles here, as I knew it would.

Back on topic, it's clear that the squad does need bolstering. Let's see what the new year brings. There probably will in outgoings as well as arrivals....which is what will happen at every club. Can't believe people think we'll be any different. I was extremely disappointed on Saturday, but I'm still far from the doom and gloom which suggests the season is over. 3rd place will do for me come May. Most clubs that are doing well have a bit of a lull period and I'm hoping we're coming to the end of ours. Saturday at Hartlepool will be a test to see who out of the current fit squad can step up to the mark.

We'll get slaughtered by the monkey hangers.

Well they're further down the league than Cambridge were but that, I suppose, on current form means nothing.

SteelCannon wrote:

Good grief...and so it goes on. Seems it not only me that takes things too seriously, and I've more than received my share of 'patronising' replies.

How do you know it was Bob who told me to be careful? 'Twas in fact a NON AFT member but who is on this forum, but you'll believe what you want anyway.

I have actually read through some of the old stuff before so have an incling of what went on, but I don't have the time to go through every last bit...

Going round and round in circles here, as I knew it would.

Back on topic, it's clear that the squad does need bolstering. Let's see what the new year brings. There probably will in outgoings as well as arrivals....which is what will happen at every club. Can't believe people think we'll be any different. I was extremely disappointed on Saturday, but I'm still far from the doom and gloom which suggests the season is over. 3rd place will do for me come May. Most clubs that are doing well have a bit of a lull period and I'm hoping we're coming to the end of ours. Saturday at Hartlepool will be a test to see who out of the current fit squad can step up to the mark.

I actually agree with some of what you say and there are people here who are as laughably biased one way, as the Pasoti stasi are the other. Agendas reign.

What I'd take task with is the highlighted part from your post. I'm seeing a lot of people who are arguing this way and it smacks of desperation. The truth of the matter is that there really don't seem to be any signs that we are coming to the end of it, do there? In fact, it's getting worse. People are also talking about the injuries clearing up but it seems fair to surmise that Reid, Carey and Boateng are out for a good while longer. Those 3 see our midfield nuts and bolts, creative flair and goal threat all scuppered.

Adams needs backing next month. If he doesn't get it, the season is going to go up in smoke and it won't be his fault. Very interested to see what happens.

This time last year (ish) we went steaming into the Christmas fixtures being well placed and with every chance of eventual automatic promotion. The squad was hit by injuries, in one game we couldn't even name a full set of subs if I recall properly, and lost 4 in a row. All momentum was lost. Automatic promotion became a pipe dream and we limped into the last play-off spot before once again injuries took their toll and we fell at the first (and second) hurdles.

And all of that was with what seems to have been a bigger squad than the quality rich one we have now.

Right now our run of results is comparable to those 4 defeats on the bounce and we are yet to hit the Christmas matches proper. Luckily this time our early productive endeavour had given us a bit of a cushion but any slack we once had is all but gone.

If ever a team needed strengthening in the next transfer period it is us because if we're not re-inforced all that early season promise will count for nought and we'll face yet another season in this God-awful division because as sure as eggs is eggs our starting XI (and subs) v Cambridge will not get it done.

SteelCannon wrote:

Good grief...and so it goes on. Seems it not only me that takes things too seriously, and I've more than received my share of 'patronising' replies.

How do you know it was Bob who told me to be careful? 'Twas in fact a NON AFT member but who is on this forum, but you'll believe what you want anyway.

I have actually read through some of the old stuff before so have an incling of what went on, but I don't have the time to go through every last bit...

Going round and round in circles here, as I knew it would.

I didn't say that Bob had warned you about this place (but I can see why you read it like that).

But the point is that your attitude to ATD stinks, and your approach will only continue to push people away from the Trust.

Greenskin wrote:

Graiser wrote:

I purposely never looked at ATD's website since Saturday's game as I was thinking there would be a lot of hysteria on here after that result and bugger I was right.

In regard to the Thread title, first half shit, second half a lot better but not good enough.


As for the rest of it, for instance over the season we've gone from Reid being a lazy bugger, to best striker in the league and now he's feigning injury.

Inevitably it's all Brent's fault because he's set the budget too low, well what is the budget so we can make an assessment

Brent's appointed Adams with an agreed budget (whatever that is)

Adams has brought in some quality players with I suspect (no evidence ) on decent salaries for L2, resulting smaller squad.

Injuries have without doubt affected us, are all these players feigning injury or was that leg brace Carey was wearing on Saturday imaginary ?

Another comment was the head of the tree sets the tone, well to some extent that is correct, however in my managerial experience I also place a great expectation on employees also being responsible and accountable for their actions.

Are the remaining players not trying ? I don't believe that to be true, there's a quality issue with the fit players and what appeared to me there's also a confidence issue.

Just to be clear I'm no Brent apologist nor for anybody else within our club, but if Adams is the manna from jock land we all seem to think he is then we'll see just how good our judgement is over the next few weeks.

Derek Adams made some comment at a fans meeting early in his reign that the Argyle budget was around about the 15th biggest [or 9th smallest if you look at it in a different way] in the division and that he had had to be "creative" in using it to the optimum-how do you know that the goalposts weren't moved between his appointment and receiving the budget allocation, which was not uncommon in my "managerial experience"?. Since that time, he has repeatedly drawn attention to the comparative lack of depth in the Argyle squad, the latest example being on Saturday when he said that Cambridge had "vast numbers" of players in the squad. It's all very well to talk of "jock from manna land" and imply that the situation should  be resolved by Adams on his own but the small squad scenario and inevitable consequences is precisely the point that many on here have proactively argued even when Argyle were on a long winning streak. I believe you stated awhile back that Brent and the board deserved some credit for the position that Argyle were occupying at the head of the table-well that works both ways in my book, no hysteria, only an attempt to establish home truths about the Argyle situation.

That may well be, but we still don't know what the budget is and if we choose to pay decent salaries for bleddy decent players then that accounts for a smaller squad and if that squad would have stayed injury free we probably wouldn't be having this debate.
I didn't imply that Adams will solve it, I'm saying that we'll see how good we all think Adams really is over this next few weeks.
Personally I thought the second half showed some of the good stuff returning and don't forget the "Gerard Slip" done for us on Saturday not a lack of effort.

But it's only my opinion and not seeking to turn anybody around to my way of thinking

Hartley not slipping might have gained us a point but it wouldn't have materially changed anything.

Perhaps I wasn't explicit enough in my last post but if the squad has been thinned out and the emphasis is on quality rather than quantity then that is fine is as far as it goes but this time last season with a squad based on quantity rather than quality (allegedly) we were still short.

Given that the number of players we have to start with is smaller this year than last ("quality" rather than "quantity" remember) then losing McCormick, Hartley, Boateng, Carey and Reid (and Simpson wasn't on the bench on Saturday so presumably him too) is little short of a full-blown crisis and last year's crisis ultimately cost us the chance of automatic promotion.

I think we're in a worse situation now than we were then and not significantly adding to the squad will result in another missed promotion shot.

And that's without potentially losing any of our star performers should they go in the next transfer window and I'm fairly certain that at least one probably will.

Everything about Adams suggests that he is savvy enough to know this with knobs on and that he is able to recruit players successfully; the big question is will he be enabled to do so?

Shezza got roundly whipped by some fans and the local media for not playing youth players, not using subs or leaving it too late, small squad reliant on loans, motionless on the sidelines and not Changing tactics

so whats del bhey doing that's different to that?

Angry wrote:

Shezza got roundly whipped by some fans and the local media for not playing youth players, not using subs or leaving it too late, small squad reliant on loans, motionless on the sidelines and not Changing tactics

so whats del bhey doing that's different to that?

Several weeks at the top of the charts?

I seem to remember Sheridan's edition of Argyle suffering vertigo if we ever got anywhere near the top 5.

There are no prizes for being top in November.

Les Miserable wrote:

There are no prizes for being top in November.

exactly

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Hartley not slipping might have gained us a point but it wouldn't have materially changed anything.

Perhaps I wasn't explicit enough in my last post but if the squad has been thinned out and the emphasis is on quality rather than quantity then that is fine is as far as it goes but this time last season with a squad based on quantity rather than quality (allegedly) we were still short.

Given that the number of players we have to start with is smaller this year than last ("quality" rather than "quantity" remember) then losing McCormick, Hartley, Boateng, Carey and Reid (and Simpson wasn't on the bench on Saturday so presumably him too) is little short of a full-blown crisis and last year's crisis ultimately cost us the chance of automatic promotion.

I think we're in a worse situation now than we were then and not significantly adding to the squad will result in another missed promotion shot.

And that's without potentially losing any of our star performers should they go in the next transfer window and I'm fairly certain that at least one probably will.

Everything about Adams suggests that he is savvy enough to know this with knobs on and that he is able to recruit players successfully; the big question is will he be enabled to do so?

I do take particular note of your football observations Sir fwank, as you explain clearly and rarely talk nonsense where the ball is concerned.
The emboldened bit I agree with. Of course, the Brent protectorate are already sharpening their knives and looking at Adams' gizzard, just as with Sheridan. They have no other choice....... a decline will have to be the fault of Adams, it cannot be St Jimmy.

THE Pasoti Crawl emerging myth seems to be that Adams has spent hugely on Carey, Jervis, Boateng etc, which has left us short on funds for the rest of the squad. There is not one shred of proof or logic in that. Maybe Carey et al just plumped to follow a manager they trusted in, at a very reasonable rate, with a view to dipping their toes into the English melee and putting their talents on show. The short contract lengths may well have helped them make that decision. That explanation holds just as much water as Adams paying big time on a couple of players, and now regretting it.

If you look at the significant factors throughout our recent years of under-achievement we have changed (nearly all) of the players at least once and we have replaced the manager twice. The only consistencies reside in the boardroom, on the terraces and the actual terraces themselves.

So it is either the fault of an inanimate object, the paying punters or the board. There's nothing else it could be, is there?

Innocent Egbunike wrote:

Angry wrote:

Shezza got roundly whipped by some fans and the local media for not playing youth players, not using subs or leaving it too late, small squad reliant on loans, motionless on the sidelines and not Changing tactics

so whats del bhey doing that's different to that?

Several weeks at the top of the charts?

I seem to remember Sheridan's edition of Argyle suffering vertigo if we ever got anywhere near the top 5.

There are distinct similarities between last season and this.One of the reasons why Argyle "got vertigo" last season was because at exactly the same stage [37 points and 5th position,not a million miles away from this year] people like Hartley and Nelson picked up injuries or suspensions and were replaced by an inexperienced,some would say callow,player in Aaron Bentley.Anyone who saw his "tackle"against Oxford when Argyle were a goal up and cruising would agree that it was a major turning point in the season-not blaming the bloke in particular,he shouldn't have been on the pitch in the first place for any club with serious aspirations to promotion.How many rookie centre backs played any part in Argyle's promotions under Sturrock, Warnock, Smith or Waiters? That's the whole point of all the attention drawn to the squad size and composition.Let's just hope that the vertigo experienced in the last six home games without a win proves to be acute rather than chronic.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

If you look at the significant factors throughout our recent years of under-achievement we have changed (nearly all) of the players at least once and we have replaced the manager twice. The only consistencies reside in the boardroom, on the terraces and the actual terraces themselves.

So it is either the fault of an inanimate object, the paying punters or the board. There's nothing else it could be, is there?

I'll give you an inanimate object. The pitch. We were so much more successful when we had that bog. Remember when we stuffed 4 ? past a top Reading side ? on an absolute quagmire. We're next to Dartmoor where ponies need huge feet to cope with the terrain. Nowadays prancing ponys come down with their dainty hooves dancing on our pretty carpet of a pitch. Big mistake. I've never known Argyle succeed at tippy tappy 5-a-side.

My own reasoning for the disastrous last 6 or 7 years ?
The spirit of the club. Deep down. It's taken a battering from fans for fans that let it down, a bunch of globetrotting executives with an eye for a wheeze, and now this latest boy wonder, who has totally missed the plot, thinking a divided fan base is a good thing. Only Holloway in all that time really captured a bit of the REAL Argyle.
I'm a long term fan, and I can only bear to go to away matches, such is m dislike of the present set up. That says it all. I'm sure when difference is so near the surface, the players must pick up on it. The old Argyle has gone.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Hartley not slipping might have gained us a point but it wouldn't have materially changed anything.

Perhaps I wasn't explicit enough in my last post but if the squad has been thinned out and the emphasis is on quality rather than quantity then that is fine is as far as it goes but this time last season with a squad based on quantity rather than quality (allegedly) we were still short.

Given that the number of players we have to start with is smaller this year than last ("quality" rather than "quantity" remember) then losing McCormick, Hartley, Boateng, Carey and Reid (and Simpson wasn't on the bench on Saturday so presumably him too) is little short of a full-blown crisis and last year's crisis ultimately cost us the chance of automatic promotion.

I think we're in a worse situation now than we were then and not significantly adding to the squad will result in another missed promotion shot.

And that's without potentially losing any of our star performers should they go in the next transfer window and I'm fairly certain that at least one probably will.

Everything about Adams suggests that he is savvy enough to know this with knobs on and that he is able to recruit players successfully; the big question is will he be enabled to do so?

I think we're on similar lines, I also believe Adams is a good manager, the puzzling thing for me about the squad is the loaning out of Cox and if we're to understand Adams thoughts correctly on the local "talent" we have, why a CH was never loaned in from the outset because losing Nelson or Hartley is a full blown crisis for the team

Angry wrote:

Les Miserable wrote:

There are no prizes for being top in November.

exactly

Wasn't suggesting there are but the question begged a comparison between Sheridan and Adams. On the data available so far, Adams is looking the better manager. Time will tell and if he proves not be that good, we'll no doubt bin him, like we did the distinctly average Sheridan.

Innocent Egbunike wrote:

Angry wrote:

Les Miserable wrote:

There are no prizes for being top in November.

exactly

Wasn't suggesting there are but the question begged a comparison between Sheridan and Adams. On the data available so far, Adams is looking the better manager. Time will tell and if he proves not be that good, we'll no doubt bin him, like we did the distinctly average Sheridan.

Who managed to improve us year on year despite having his hands tied and who is now working wonders at Newport, yep, that's the fella.

Graiser wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Hartley not slipping might have gained us a point but it wouldn't have materially changed anything.

Perhaps I wasn't explicit enough in my last post but if the squad has been thinned out and the emphasis is on quality rather than quantity then that is fine is as far as it goes but this time last season with a squad based on quantity rather than quality (allegedly) we were still short.

Given that the number of players we have to start with is smaller this year than last ("quality" rather than "quantity" remember) then losing McCormick, Hartley, Boateng, Carey and Reid (and Simpson wasn't on the bench on Saturday so presumably him too) is little short of a full-blown crisis and last year's crisis ultimately cost us the chance of automatic promotion.

I think we're in a worse situation now than we were then and not significantly adding to the squad will result in another missed promotion shot.

And that's without potentially losing any of our star performers should they go in the next transfer window and I'm fairly certain that at least one probably will.

Everything about Adams suggests that he is savvy enough to know this with knobs on and that he is able to recruit players successfully; the big question is will he be enabled to do so?

I think we're on similar lines, I also believe Adams is a good manager, the puzzling thing for me about the squad is the loaning out of Cox and if we're to understand Adams thoughts correctly on the local "talent" we have, why a CH was never loaned in from the outset because losing Nelson or Hartley is a full blown crisis for the team

The Cox thing is a puzzle right enough. We've lost 2 central midfielders and we've seen how good Cox can be so letting him go rather than bunging him straight in the 1st XI is a strange one. There must be more to it than we know.

Or maybe Adams and Cox just don't get on? In which case it is always the player who has to go.

In some ways it's strangely reminiscent of the Purse departure. That made no sense at all until some time later at which point it became crystal clear as to why he left (whatever was said about it at the time).

Innocent Egbunike wrote:

Angry wrote:

Les Miserable wrote:

There are no prizes for being top in November.

exactly

Wasn't suggesting there are but the question begged a comparison between Sheridan and Adams. On the data available so far, Adams is looking the better manager. Time will tell and if he proves not be that good, we'll no doubt bin him, like we did the distinctly average Sheridan.

I Just wanted to know why out of interest why shezza got the heat from fans and media for the factors i already mentioned before but del bhey isnt when the situations and factors are the virtually the same.

The abilities of both managers compared to one another doesnt interest me atm and can be discussed further down the lie.

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

Oh dear Derek.

Czarcasm wrote:

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

Oh dear Derek.

Heh heh heh, it is so good to see the wheels well and truly coming off the Garg bandwagon.