I understand the idea of standing defenders like two Greek columns, either side of the goalie and playing footsie — i.e. to bring their forwards out of formation, but it don't work. Often we put ourselves in a precarious situation and end up wasting time, knocking it into corners, giving it to the opposition on the edge of the box or just lumping it out of play.I actually find it a bit weird we are so reluctant to lift it even down the channels and mix it up. We are so intent on playing it around time and time again. It ridiculous how many pathetic goals we give away, its bad when even plymouth have sussed it to the point we could of conceeded 4 in the first half and had no complaints
Love this narrative from football fans.unfortunately they have something to play for
He does have a point though, Marv: If they lose, Stoke could be heading down the hole into the Third Division, which is pretty dire financially and a big problem keeping and attracting players. We certainly have “pride” to play for [as Carrick said on Thursday at his Media Conference]. We may still hold out for the miracle of the top six, but Stoke look likely to need more from the game than we do.Love this narrative from football fans.
I remember when we had 'nothing to play for' under Mowbray at the back end of one season and we ended up going to Hull, Cardiff and not only winning, but destroying them....Cardiff were in the auto promotion hunt (and we effectively crushed their auto chances, in their own back yard).
File it in the football cliche's box along with all the other nonsense that is spouted.
But all teams have something to play for.He does have a point though, Marv: If they lose, Stoke could be heading down the hole into the Third Division, which is pretty dire financially and a big problem keeping and attracting players. We certainly have “pride” to play for [as Carrick said on Thursday at his Media Conference]. We may still hold out for the miracle of the top six, but Stoke look likely to need more from the game than we do.
No. It's not about “narrative”. I certainly haven't suggested either Boro or Stoke have nothing to play for [cant speak for others], but threatened relegation for Stoke to the Third division is one hell of a driver when it comes to motivation. Already, Steven Schumacher, Stoke Manager, has spoke of being “aggressive” to steer away from relegation. Carrick mentioned playing for “Pride” in his own words in his Media Conference on Thursday. Those are his words. As for being further down the table making life “easier” — look no further than our two games against Rotherham.But all teams have something to play for.
It doesn't matter if it's for promotion, play offs, safety and survival or for pure pride.
Just because the points may seem more important to Stoke, doesn't mean they will play any better or with more dedication than if they were mid table.
In fact, them being lower down the table should effectively mean it's an 'easier' game for us, than if they were higher in the table.
It's just a very very lazy way of spinning a narrative
He's not the most liked man in the 5 Towns, that's for sure.
And Rotherham were easier opponents than most this season....1 off games can cause so many strange results, due to variance in 90 minutes, but over a season, the league rarely lies.No. It's not about “narrative”. I certainly haven't suggested either Boro or Stoke have nothing to play for [cant speak for others], but threatened relegation for Stoke to the Third division is one hell of a driver when it comes to motivation. Already, Steven Schumacher, Stoke Manager, has spoke of being “aggressive” to steer away from relegation. Carrick mentioned playing for “Pride” in his own words in his Media Conference on Thursday. Those are his words. As for being further down the table making life “easier” — look no further than our two games against Rotherham.
Totally agree with thisKevNot a great deal of options, but for me I would replace Thomas with Engel & anyone for Greenwood