|
Post by Long John Silver on Jan 14, 2011 8:34:53 GMT
These players must have all shown something good at previous clubs. Wilder is not a fool. Why do you think they play so well elsewhere and the are dog sh*te at Oxford? No manager of any team signs a player that he thinks is crap does he... even though plenty turn out to be so.
|
|
|
Post by baldy on Jan 14, 2011 8:38:16 GMT
I see that Marcus Kelly comes up quite a bit on people's lists. In fairness he was pants for us. But when he played against us for R&D earlier in the season he was absolutely superb. He looked like a championship player. He caused us loads of problems. So when he joined I was very happy. Wilder must have see the same thing too - but it is very risky to sign a player based on one performance I know. These players must have all shown something good at previous clubs. Wilder is not a fool. Why do you think they play so well elsewhere and the are dog sh*te at Oxford?[/quote] Expectation. You need players who embrace a big club, which we are in League 2 and were in the Conference. You can be a limited footballer but you need to stand up and be counted and handle the rumblings from the crowd if it starts going belly up. Players like Kelly, and I suspect Cole, just shrink. At Rushden Kelly might have been a sizeable fish in a smallish pond and fans would probably have been patient with him because they were a club with time on their side and not under the same pressure as us to reclaim league status. Here us fans were impatient and intolerant of mistakes and inconsistency and he just crumbled under the expectancy and couldnt recover from an indifferent start.
|
|
|
Post by barryspang on Jan 14, 2011 8:39:43 GMT
John Grant Alex Rhodes Marcus Kelly Lee Fowler Ashley Cain
|
|
|
Post by gottagetbetta on Jan 14, 2011 8:43:21 GMT
these assorted list "members" just prove the old tale that you have to sign a lot of frogs to find a prince!
|
|
|
Post by salaghaf on Jan 14, 2011 9:44:15 GMT
I see that Marcus Kelly comes up quite a bit on people's lists. In fairness he was pants for us. But when he played against us for R&D earlier in the season he was absolutely superb. He looked like a championship player. He caused us loads of problems. So when he joined I was very happy. Wilder must have see the same thing too - but it is very risky to sign a player based on one performance I know. These players must have all shown something good at previous clubs. Wilder is not a fool. Why do you think they play so well elsewhere and the are dog sh*te at Oxford?[/quote] Expectation. You need players who embrace a big club, which we are in League 2 and were in the Conference. You can be a limited footballer but you need to stand up and be counted and handle the rumblings from the crowd if it starts going belly up. Players like Kelly, and I suspect Cole, just shrink. At Rushden Kelly might have been a sizeable fish in a smallish pond and fans would probably have been patient with him because they were a club with time on their side and not under the same pressure as us to reclaim league status. Here us fans were impatient and intolerant of mistakes and inconsistency and he just crumbled under the expectancy and couldnt recover from an indifferent start. I agree that we are a much bigger club with higher expectation. We are less patient with players. Wilder is especially not patient with a lot of the players on this list. All football clubs now expect "instant" success. Just look at how many sackings there have been recently. Players are the same. I suppose that the working environment can play a big part as well. Some players might simply not get on with the other players. Comradery is important. They might not see eye to eye with some of the coaching staff - maybe they don't want to change their playing technique? They might not like the area. They might be homesick (Joey comes to mind). I see that Kelly is now at Kettering. So he obviously wanted to move back to the Rushden area. Maybe, some of these lower league players think that they have "made it" once they sign for Oxford and start to take things a bit too easy - they become complacent? I see no problem with signing lots of players that fail, as long as you get a few gems along the way. Look at the way Alex Ferguson operates at Man U.
|
|
|
Post by salaghaf on Jan 14, 2011 9:49:33 GMT
These players must have all shown something good at previous clubs. Wilder is not a fool. Why do you think they play so well elsewhere and the are dog sh*te at Oxford? No manager of any team signs a player that he thinks is crap does he... even though plenty turn out to be so. OK, fair point. Sometimes manager's re-sign players later in their careers when everyone else knows they are crap but the manager has "rose tinted (ostrich) spectacles" e.g. Campbell at Arsenal Nigel Jemson at Oxford
|
|
zeus
New Member
Posts: 30
|
Post by zeus on Jan 14, 2011 10:41:30 GMT
Oh I forgot Cook. He would defo be in the top 5. have you noticed, byt the way, how many of the signings mentioned on this thread were wide men: rhodes, kelly, cain, cook, and, to a certain extent, f green
|
|
|
Post by baldy on Jan 14, 2011 10:46:04 GMT
Oh I forgot Cook. He would defo be in the top 5. have you noticed, byt the way, how many of the signings mentioned on this thread were wide men: rhodes, kelly, cain, cook, and, to a certain extent, f green Wingers are generally regarded as the most inconsistent performers in a team so I suppose its not altogether surprising that CW has discarded a few especially given his level of patience with under performing players.
|
|
|
Post by druid on Jan 14, 2011 10:59:21 GMT
Length of contract should be a factor here -
Cole, Kelly, Cook - 2 year contracts, poor signings. Cain, Futcher - 4 week loan, hardly a disaster.
|
|
|
Post by Long John Silver on Jan 14, 2011 11:14:28 GMT
Oh I forgot Cook. He would defo be in the top 5. have you noticed, byt the way, how many of the signings mentioned on this thread were wide men: rhodes, kelly, cain, cook, and, to a certain extent, f green Wingers are generally regarded as the most inconsistent performers in a team so I suppose its not altogether surprising that CW has discarded a few especially given his level of patience with under performing players. I suppose it's also not surprising if the manager seems averse to playing the formation that best suits wingers. Probably more surprising that he actually signs them in the first place.
|
|
|
Post by paulpowellspint on Jan 14, 2011 12:03:19 GMT
Cook's goal against Luton means there is no way he is or was a bad signing. For that he should be immune. He also got a few other goals.
Cole has not been given a chance so I can't pass judgement.
F Green, Kelly and Rhodes were bad.
|
|
|
Post by sihath on Jan 14, 2011 12:25:22 GMT
How can you have a 'TOP 5 WORST ANYTHING? That kind of phrase always winds me up. On the news "The worst snow for 20 years". Surely that would be a year without any snow. Should be the "most", "deepest", even "best". The "worst serial killer".... I've never killed anyone so I could lay claim to that title.
|
|
|
Post by tatabanya on Jan 14, 2011 12:27:53 GMT
Sandwith was not a particularly good player, but he certainly did not let anybody down and is no where near 'a worst signing'. The criticism I can only presume is through ignorance of not seeing him play. The rubbish about him not being able to pass is just that. want evidence? Go to the Wrexham home game from the 2008/9 season and the man who played a long raking pass to Yemi to cross for Constable? The man on the end of the cross to win the corresponding game the following season? Opinions are fine, but why bother posting when you are simply re-hashing ignorant tosh. I bet you all love Jack Midson. Ummm, opinions are fine but one shared my many but not you is rubbish? Interesting... I am a season ticket holder and go to every game, and many away. Saw Sandwith more than enough times to base a judgement thank you. One moment of magic does not make a player. I think Asa Hall is pretty poor but what a ball through to Super Jacky Midson for his second in a marvellous hattrick...
|
|
|
Post by The Fence End on Jan 14, 2011 12:41:39 GMT
Mitchell Cole easily the worst, we can't even send him out on loan!
|
|
|
Post by junior1 on Jan 14, 2011 12:55:04 GMT
Mitchell Cole easily the worst, we can't even send him out on loan! We can.... It's him who won't go!!!!
|
|
|
Post by captainox on Jan 14, 2011 13:03:44 GMT
depends how you want to define 'worst' here. Worst in terms of performances (if so, I can't see how Cole can be included as he hasn't started a league game, likewise Rhodes played minimal times) Worst in terms of contract given compared to time stayed (Kelly, Cole) Worst in terms of expectation then failure. (Cook)
For me: 1. Cook - the 12th man fee to sign him, the one goal v luton and then the apparant lack of desire to push on. 2. Futcher - seemed to be a case of he's available, lets get him. 3. Baker - given a short contract presumably to give him the chance to prove he deserved a longer one - didn't look interested in times I saw him play. 4. Lee Fowler - Wilder seemed to big him up when he came in, played once and off he went. 5. F.Green - never looked like a professional footballer but somehow kept being played.
Harsh to include Sappleton - he played 4 times (1 start,3 subs) and scored once. Likewise, Cain made on sub appearance.
|
|
|
Post by The Resurrection on Jan 14, 2011 13:13:11 GMT
Don't understand why people are invluding people like Cole and Cain who have barely played a game for us?
|
|
|
Post by oldabingdonian on Jan 14, 2011 14:20:55 GMT
For this to be a meaningful discussion about CW's judgment, you must distinguish between players he apparently had great confidence in (Cole, Kelly), and ones he brought in for a short period, probably on relatively low wages (Cain, Fowler, Baker, Grant), who 'might be able to do a job for us'. If he gets rid of a poor player quickly (Grant, Sappleton, Futcher), then the harm done is very limited.
I also believe it is very harsh to put Kevin Sandwith and Franny Green on the list. As baldy says, limited players, but played well on their day, and not obviously worse than the alternatives.
So: worst performance I saw: John Grant Worst error of judgment by CW: Mitchell Cole - but I think persevering with Asa Hall has probably been more costly.
|
|
OUFC Gav
Junior Member
www.mincheryfarmweb.co.uk
Posts: 94
|
Post by OUFC Gav on Jan 14, 2011 15:00:01 GMT
4. Lee Fowler - Wilder seemed to big him up when he came in, played once and off he went. Is a footballer with talent, but a recovering alcoholic. Was signed on a short-term low-cost deal to see if he could still hack it.
|
|
|
Post by Long Live Clarkey on Jan 14, 2011 18:09:30 GMT
Sandwith was not a particularly good player, but he certainly did not let anybody down and is no where near 'a worst signing'. The criticism I can only presume is through ignorance of not seeing him play. The rubbish about him not being able to pass is just that. want evidence? Go to the Wrexham home game from the 2008/9 season and the man who played a long raking pass to Yemi to cross for Constable? The man on the end of the cross to win the corresponding game the following season? Opinions are fine, but why bother posting when you are simply re-hashing ignorant tosh. I bet you all love Jack Midson. Ummm, opinions are fine but one shared my many but not you is rubbish? Interesting... I am a season ticket holder and go to every game, and many away. Saw Sandwith more than enough times to base a judgement thank you. One moment of magic does not make a player. I think Asa Hall is pretty poor but what a ball through to Super Jacky Midson for his second in a marvellous hattrick... Jamie Cook's goal at Luton, too. Matt Day's several spectacular efforts, Yemi's game changing moments didn't mean he didn't let us down towards the end of his time. While I'm not sure Sandwith is one of Wilder's absolute worst signings, he was a poor-to-average player, and there's just no escaping that. He played far too much considering his limited ability, which didn't help. Not only was he generally a rubbish passer, he didn't know when to go in for a tackle. His tackling itself wasn't so bad, and he positioned himself reasonably well, reasonable header, but when a player ran at him he'd either back off way too far or go in rashly. But compared to some of Wilder's signings, he definitely played a part and I don't necessarily dislike him. I'm just glad he's gone. Did people actually call him 'super kev'? I hope they didn't... it passed me by at least.
|
|