Dean Smith - Confirmed

[LeeB]

I don't know who you are but you're boring the bollocks off me

x2

[Damo70]

Can't be stuart445, he was seen just 20 minutes ago with a couple of King Doners celebrating his Dad's victory last night. Which gets me thinking, what do they eat on Christmas Day in the Bruce family household?

Plenty judging by the look of Steve these days.

[dave.woodhall]

And yet plenty of people question stuff about Smith, but they don't post solely about him and vanish whenever we win. Same as plenty question Wes, Taylor etc but they still give praise where due and enjoyed our record winning run, promotion etc. And people get questioned all the time on here whether they are for or against someone/something. And again, where has anyone said you aren't entitled to post your opinion, you are fully entitled to post it, and others are fully entitled to question it.

I’ve answered your questions. And to whoever says it doesn’t matter about contributing to to the site, maybe not but I don’t expect to be sworn at by Dave Woodhall after I’ve just paid money to his site. You haven’t answered how calling me Stuart445 is acceptable either

You weren't sworn at, so less of the victim.

I was, and I’m not playing the victim. I’m not that pathetic. All of your posts to me yesterday and this morning have been slightly confrontational. If you think the tone of them is acceptable that’s fine, but it answers the questions as to why I don’t bother posting on here very often. It’s a complete waste of time but it’s your site and you can do whatever you want, I accept that

Just for the record your final post of last season wasn't at Christmas, it was after the Stoke match on 23rd February. Nobody as far as I can see replied to it, so you weren't shouted down, ganged up on or "not allowed my opinion". You stopped posting.

[john e]

I don't know who you are but you're boring the bollocks off me

x2

I’m sort of enjoying it

but then I am in bed with man flu

[ChicagoLion]

I think the Chelsea game is a case in point. We were getting torched down our left mainly by Willian and they score from our left. We have seen and Smith must have seen that Hourihane is pretty useless as a defensive midfielder against quick players that run. Target is not the strongest defensive full back either.We get level before half time and Smith has chance to try to prevent the obvious weakness.
He could either bring on Taylor for Target or A Stronger midfielder for Hourihane. He does neither and low and behold they attack down our left Target and a Hourihane are as useful as a couple of shop window dummies and they score, game over.
He then substitutes Luis for Hourihane and we have a lot less problems down our left.
Surely it is not heresy to ask why if people watching the game can see the issue Our coaching team don’t until it is too late.

but it's not that simple. If we'd got a freekick 10 minutes into the 2nd half and Hourihane had smashed it into the top corner it would've been the right decision to keep him on, despite the defensive vulnerability. On top of that Hourihane does a very good job running beyond Jack and creating space, again something we have seen be effective at times. Smith decided he wanted to have a midfield to put pressure on their back 4 but they kept the ball too well for us to really take advantage of that choice (other than our goal), in hindsight he got it wrong but given how Chelsea had been playing I can see why he did it and why he wanted to give it more of a chance to work.

You don't need hindsight to see the same thing happening in just about every single away game.  Start off quite well, then get overrun and concede lots of goals in the second half.

Exactly, there could be reasons, fatigue, not having suitable replacements but the fact that our second half performances away from home have been woefull suggests that something is not right and the only person that can change this is the manager.

[Damo70]

I don't know who you are but you're boring the bollocks off me

x2

I’m sort of enjoying it

but then I am in bed with man flu

Is Man Flu your Thai 'pen pal'? 

[Drummond]

I don’t know why people get upset about other posters giving them shit about something they don’t agree with

I live for that on here

nothing better than having a rare up with someone you don’t actually know about something you’ll never agree on

Bollocks, no there isn't.

[Drummond]

I don't know who you are but you're boring the bollocks off me

x2

I’m sort of enjoying it

but then I am in bed with man flu

Is Man Flu your Thai 'pen pal'? 

I'll never use that expression again.

'I've got Man Flu'
'Where?'
'Erm, on the end of my cock'

[paul_e]

I think the Chelsea game is a case in point. We were getting torched down our left mainly by Willian and they score from our left. We have seen and Smith must have seen that Hourihane is pretty useless as a defensive midfielder against quick players that run. Target is not the strongest defensive full back either.We get level before half time and Smith has chance to try to prevent the obvious weakness.
He could either bring on Taylor for Target or A Stronger midfielder for Hourihane. He does neither and low and behold they attack down our left Target and a Hourihane are as useful as a couple of shop window dummies and they score, game over.
He then substitutes Luis for Hourihane and we have a lot less problems down our left.
Surely it is not heresy to ask why if people watching the game can see the issue Our coaching team don’t until it is too late.

but it's not that simple. If we'd got a freekick 10 minutes into the 2nd half and Hourihane had smashed it into the top corner it would've been the right decision to keep him on, despite the defensive vulnerability. On top of that Hourihane does a very good job running beyond Jack and creating space, again something we have seen be effective at times. Smith decided he wanted to have a midfield to put pressure on their back 4 but they kept the ball too well for us to really take advantage of that choice (other than our goal), in hindsight he got it wrong but given how Chelsea had been playing I can see why he did it and why he wanted to give it more of a chance to work.

You don't need hindsight to see the same thing happening in just about every single away game.  Start off quite well, then get overrun and concede lots of goals in the second half.

Exactly, there could be reasons, fatigue, not having suitable replacements but the fact that our second half performances away from home have been woefull suggests that something is not right and the only person that can change this is the manager.

I don't disagree with that but the list of possible reasons (and there are many others alongside the ones you've given) extends well beyond Smith not making subs when we'd like and/or changing the formation, which is the specific bit I don't like because I think it's far too simplistic.

[PeterWithesShin]

And yet plenty of people question stuff about Smith, but they don't post solely about him and vanish whenever we win. Same as plenty question Wes, Taylor etc but they still give praise where due and enjoyed our record winning run, promotion etc. And people get questioned all the time on here whether they are for or against someone/something. And again, where has anyone said you aren't entitled to post your opinion, you are fully entitled to post it, and others are fully entitled to question it.

I’ve answered your questions. And to whoever says it doesn’t matter about contributing to to the site, maybe not but I don’t expect to be sworn at by Dave Woodhall after I’ve just paid money to his site. You haven’t answered how calling me Stuart445 is acceptable either

No you haven't. All you've done is say you paid GM status so no one should question why you said nothing for months when we were winning and being promoted.

[Sdwbvf]

Deleted. Doesn't  make sense. I was on catch up.

[Ketzster]

It really doesn't matter to the questions i'm asking. I haven't said you aren't entitled to your opinion have I, I have asked why you stopped posting as soon as we started winning etc.

Because I’m not somebody who needs to post on a forum regularly. I enjoy reading the forum hence why I feel I should contribute my tiny sum each year. I posted after Chelsea because I’ve seen too many performances like it this year, and keep seeing everybody say they still love Smith when for me another manager would be being questioned. I kept seeing people saying nobody wants Smith out, when I’m sat there thinking I do want a change rightly or wrongly and have done since Wigan away. Even after promotion because I’d seen enough before Derby to have severe doubts that I can’t shake. We didn’t get up because of anything Smith changed after Stoke, we got up purely because he had the best player the championship has probably ever seen return. We were shockingly bad before that when we were reliant on Smith to do something. If people don’t want to question Smith that’s absolutely fine, but I’m entitled to post my opinions when I choose without people getting so annoyed about it. It doesn’t happen the other way around, people don’t get grief for saying they love Smith.

PWS, I answered you here

[PeterWithesShin]

It doesn't answer what I asked, but i'm in too good a mood to care.

[Ketzster]

It doesn't answer what I asked, but i'm in too good a mood to care.

Where doesn’t it answer what you asked? I don’t want to post regularly on a forum, that’s why I have rarely posted after defeats as well. I’m not sure what answer you’re looking for. Yes I have only posted after defeats, but why does that matter? And no, despite what Dave Woodhall says, nowhere did I say that I hadn’t posted since Christmas. I knew full well my last post was after Stoke. I probably won’t post again for years, but that doesn’t mean I am Stuart445 or somebody on a wind up. I haven’t once said I’m being hounded out like others have said I am saying, or played the victim, but I do think there is a way of responding to people that is unacceptable. I simply posted to say I don’t think Smith is good enough and people don’t like it. At no point was I looking for an argument

[dave.woodhall]

And no, despite what Dave Woodhall says, nowhere did I say that I hadn’t posted since Christmas.

No I admit I haven’t bothered posting on here for years, apart from briefly last Christmas

I haven’t once said I’m being hounded out like others have said I am saying, or played the victim,

unlike the others that got picked on for having a different opinion, I’m beginning to wish I hadn’t bothered.

I can’t be bothered with the grief you get for having a different opinion, so no I haven’t bothered posting. You’ve only got to look at what happened to others that did and it’s just not worth it.