[Archived] The Boo Boy Thing....

[almuncle]

Beamo had an exclusive chant but the worst, most intimidating and most daunting crowd effect was the total silence that fell on the terraces when John Butcher was underneath a high, hanging cross from deep! Followed by either an audible gasp of relief or a groan in what seemed fairly equal measures.

From where I used to stand as a little kid surrounded by beer swilling codgers - it was more of an audible GAS of relief!

[Al]

WHY?

Because The pitch was WATERLOGGED. It was an attempt to keep the score down. Carlos would have been useless on that surface.

Anyone football fan would realise that bringing Carlos on at that particular juncture would almost definitely see us concede more goals and as a result dent his confidence.

It really was a case of damage limitation.

Damage limitation never gained a point. It is tantamount to giving in. Is that what you approve of?

[ABBEY]

WHY?

Because The pitch was WATERLOGGED. It was an attempt to keep the score down. Carlos would have been useless on that surface.

Anyone football fan would realise that bringing Carlos on at that particular juncture would almost definitely see us concede more goals and as a result dent his confidence.

It really was a case of damage limitation.

doh!!!! buckys new song for the players to come out to

Never heard so much crap in my life,damage limitation? stuff that "any football fan " isnt happy with giving in .Do teams not come back from 2 down anymore(who gives a hoot if its utd) ,i saw (cant remember which team it was ) a team in league one? at the weekend come back from 3-0 to draw 3-3.Did they give up ? did they bollux.Dent his confidence awwwwww deeeeeedums ,umpteen grand a week and his confidence will be dented.

[gumboots]

doh!!!! buckys new song for the players to come out to

Never heard so much crap in my life,damage limitation? stuff that "any football fan " isnt happy with giving in .Do teams not come back from 2 down anymore(who gives a hoot if its utd) ,i saw (cant remember which team it was ) a team in league one? at the weekend come back from 3-0 to draw 3-3.Did they give up ? did they bollux.Dent his confidence awwwwww deeeeeedums ,umpteen grand a week and his confidence will be dented.

Not only his confidence but that of the team. And yes, when your own fans are booing half the players on or off the pitch and looking for ways to get at the manager, confidence is that fragile, especially when you've already conceded 4 goals on 2 separate occasions this season. Also there's the risk of injury which was increasing all the time and if you asked me which player I'd rather risk then it would have to be andrews. It was a poor performance all round but I don't think we intended to let our heads go down. I don't think Ince intended throwing in the towel. I think he intended to do the best he could with what he had available in the circumstances. It may not be what we think would be best but since his reputation and ultimately his job depend on his getting it right more often than not, we have to respect his right to make that choice. And why this sudden "Mokoena was available" from so many posters when there has previously been so many people saying he is not worth a place on the bench let alone in the team and offering to drive him anywhere to any club who wants him? What would he have done different or better than what andrews managed?

[ABBEY]

Not only his confidence but that of the team. And yes, when your own fans are booing half the players on or off the pitch and looking for ways to get at the manager, confidence is that fragile, especially when you've already conceded 4 goals on 2 separate occasions this season. Also there's the risk of injury which was increasing all the time and if you asked me which player I'd rather risk then it would have to be andrews. It was a poor performance all round but I don't think we intended to let our heads go down. I don't think Ince intended throwing in the towel. I think he intended to do the best he could with what he had available in the circumstances. It may not be what we think would be best but since his reputation and ultimately his job depend on his getting it right more often than not, we have to respect his right to make that choice. And why this sudden "Mokoena was available" from so many posters when there has previously been so many people saying he is not worth a place on the bench let alone in the team and offering to drive him anywhere to any club who wants him? What would he have done different or better than what andrews managed?

thats bull gum.Name the 5 or 6 players then that the fans were booing and do tell what the fans were doing to get at Ince.Theres always a risk of injury every time they step on the pitch.I have not mentioned the Ax but yes I think it was needing someone like him to do a bit of hard tackling and stopping them from total domination.Also bringing carlos on would have been bad for his and the teams confidence ?why?I bet if you had asked him whether he wanting to come on or sit on the bench im sure which one he would have picked for his confidence.

[BuckyRover]

Whatever

Maybe you will shut up when we beat Bolton.

[ABBEY]

whats that supposed to mean ?

I herby apologise to bucky for wanting us win against utd ,a team we have no right to play or beat and when 0-2 down i should abandon all hope .

[den]

The "damage limitation" argument is plain daft. It has been forwarded as an excuse for a bad substitution decision, by one poster on here and no-one else.

I think that argument was put forward [by Bucky?] as a way of defending PI, - but if that were true and I don't for one minute think it was, he would be bringing on far more criticism than he's currently getting.

[Flopsy]

2. Dunno why but these days I just could not be arsed to boo. It's only 11 grown, massively overpaid men chasing a bag of wind after all.

ah, but admit it, you love it when they finally catch up with you

[gumboots]

I bet if you had asked him whether he wanting to come on or sit on the bench im sure which one he would have picked for his confidence.

Perhaps he might have wanted to come on but he doesn't get paid to make that decision. Ince does and for whatever reason he called it as he saw it on the day. I'm perhaps exaggerating when i say half the players but then I've just lost track of who it seems acceptable to boo and who is still ok to accept. Not everyone boos but enough do for it to be noticeable, and of course there are those who are trying to get at Ince. Of course I wanted us to beat United - I want us to beat every team we play by at least 5 goals. Reality however, tells me it's not going to happen. Sometimes we'll beat Utd. Sometimes we won't. This time we didn't. We played at under our best. They played the best they have this season. Whether that was because we allowed them to or whether they just genuinely were that much better we'll know better when we see if they continue to perform at that kind of level in future games. I'll say again, we were poor and I was hugely disappointed but I don't see that as indicative of the performances we're going to put in for the rest of the season. I don't see it as showing that we have little to look forward to but a relegation scrap. I don't even see it as us settling for mid table. I see it as what it clearly was - a poor performance from a team who can do better.

[BuckyRover]

It's not plain daft.

We had conceded 4 against Arsenal. We weren't playing well and have a big injury list.

It was into the second half, we had lost Roque, and barring divine intervention we weren't going to win.

It most definitely was a case of damage limitation. Conceding any more against Man Utd would have put us in a worse position that we are now.

If we had of brought Villaneuva or Mokoena on, the same people on here would be criticising the decision. (Why did we buy Andrews if he can't even play when all our midfielders are injured).

Did Martin O'Neill go gung-ho against Chelsea in the second half, of couse he didn't, Chelsea would have scored 10

[ABBEY]

so you would rather lose 0-2 than try and get a point ...wow.true rover .

[BuckyRover]

Wow.

I think that is the first (and last) time anybody has associated bringing the Axe on and going for a point in the same sentence.

Fair play

[LeChuck]

It's not plain daft.

We had conceded 4 against Arsenal. We weren't playing well and have a big injury list.

It was into the second half, we had lost Roque, and barring divine intervention we weren't going to win.

It most definitely was a case of damage limitation. Conceding any more against Man Utd would have put us in a worse position that we are now.

If we had of brought Villaneuva or Mokoena on, the same people on here would be criticising the decision. (Why did we buy Andrews if he can't even play when all our midfielders are injured).

Did Martin O'Neill go gung-ho against Chelsea in the second half, of couse he didn't, Chelsea would have scored 10

You make it sound like we had two choices - damage limitation or gung ho.

The reality is very different, there's a whole world of middle ground in there.

[ABBEY]

dont waste your breath chuck ,him and imy want an ince threesome on yuvu .

[gumboots]

so you would rather lose 0-2 than try and get a point ...wow.true rover .

I'd rather lose 0-2 than 0-4 though. We might have got a point - we might equally have conceded more goals. I don't know and nor do you. What I do know is that the manager made the move he, in his professional opinion, thought was right.

[Billy Castell]

I'd only consider booing a player if they did a Le Saux, and played crap until they got their transfer. Andrews does not deserve abuse-he's only just got here, and as far as I can make out he's not been Steven Hawking on the pitch. It's snobbery towards the lower leagues. Those who do turn up to boo him should just f__k off and support Man Utd, and get your glory fix over there.

[ABBEY]

id rather us TRY AND WIN or go for a point .Your right and will never know whether we could have fought back but for £35 a game Id have liked us to at least try.That game was lost before a ball was kicked,I dont care what arguments people have 1 up front doesnt do it for me.Id rather lose 4-3 than 1-0.Rather not lose at all and if we do as ive said earlier is for my team to show some balls and go down fighting.One of my best mates who goes to lots of games but all refused to pay £35 and said hes glad he hadnt and when I asked him about the boro game he said he wouldnt pay 17p let alone pounds after the utd game.

[den]

I'd rather lose 0-2 than 0-4 though. We might have got a point - we might equally have conceded more goals. I don't know and nor do you. What I do know is that the manager made the move he, in his professional opinion, thought was right.

Gumboots, Gumboots, IF he was only thinking about damage limitation [which he wasn't], then he was wrong. Think about what you're doing and saying lass.

[BuckyRover]

Your right.

I liked it more when we lost 4-0 and 6-2 to Arsenal, 4-1 to Coventry, 5-3 to Wigan etc etc.

I prefer it when we really go for it but concede loads of goals.

Those matches were there for the taking and we WENT for it.

[den]

Pardon? What's that meant to be about?

[BuckyRover]

Really taking the game by the scruff of the neck.

Bringing on attacking players on in the closing stages of games when all appears lost.

In hindsight I believe if we had brought Villanueva on he would have been superb on that surface. His dribbling skills and slight stature would suited that game to a tee.

Im surprised Ince didn't see it.

[den]

I'm bloomin' glad you're not the manager Bucky. We might as well go home at 0-2, - whenever that may be, 9 minutes or 90.

[BuckyRover]

Yeah, because we play Man Utd every week.

[ABBEY]

im bloomin' glad too den