Quote from: Villa in Denmark on April 25, 2016, 11:08:11 PMQuote from: PeterWithesShin on April 25, 2016, 10:59:31 PMAnd what if without those 4 or 5 players we see a bit of improvement rather than a total collapse? It's not as if it's guaranteed it will be three 8-0 defeats. Maybe one or two youngsters will step up, put a marker down to be included next season. What I will say is if we continue picking those 4 or 5 players we'll continue to have a 'toxic' atmosphere', we'll almost certainly finish the season with 13 straight defeats. To me we have more to potentially gain than lose. You could certainly start by binning Richards and Lescott who seem to be the targets for most of the stress relief.That would however entail bringing Okore back into the fold and pairing him with Clark, which I still think has been our best pairing over the last 2 seasons. Yes damning with faint praise. That still leaves you with 3 subs to try and do something with as the game progresses, and shifts 2 of the problem people out for players who aren't green, naive or as easily cowed as the youngsters he's worried about.Okay, let's say they're binned. Okore isn't going to get selected and that seems fair enough - whichever way you think you blame should fall for him being dropped - Clark was injured last week and Baker is on loan. So, for the next game, or even the game against Southampton would you have started with Toner and one of Lescott or Richards? For me that would be unfair on Toner - a player that has hardly warranted a mention to be included int he first team up until now.
Quote from: PeterWithesShin on April 25, 2016, 10:59:31 PMAnd what if without those 4 or 5 players we see a bit of improvement rather than a total collapse? It's not as if it's guaranteed it will be three 8-0 defeats. Maybe one or two youngsters will step up, put a marker down to be included next season. What I will say is if we continue picking those 4 or 5 players we'll continue to have a 'toxic' atmosphere', we'll almost certainly finish the season with 13 straight defeats. To me we have more to potentially gain than lose. You could certainly start by binning Richards and Lescott who seem to be the targets for most of the stress relief.That would however entail bringing Okore back into the fold and pairing him with Clark, which I still think has been our best pairing over the last 2 seasons. Yes damning with faint praise. That still leaves you with 3 subs to try and do something with as the game progresses, and shifts 2 of the problem people out for players who aren't green, naive or as easily cowed as the youngsters he's worried about.
And what if without those 4 or 5 players we see a bit of improvement rather than a total collapse? It's not as if it's guaranteed it will be three 8-0 defeats. Maybe one or two youngsters will step up, put a marker down to be included next season. What I will say is if we continue picking those 4 or 5 players we'll continue to have a 'toxic' atmosphere', we'll almost certainly finish the season with 13 straight defeats. To me we have more to potentially gain than lose.
So if you don't start Toner, Clark is injured, how can you then bin Lescott and Richards? At least one has to play? And as I said Okore simply is out of the equation. So, again, what options were open to Black at centre-half last Saturday?
Okore has refused to play and Bacuna hasn't. No hypocrisy there. He may not be great but he's no worse than most of what we have.
Quote from: peter w on April 26, 2016, 12:47:23 PMSo if you don't start Toner, Clark is injured, how can you then bin Lescott and Richards? At least one has to play? And as I said Okore simply is out of the equation. So, again, what options were open to Black at centre-half last Saturday?A cone?
Because I'd have brought Okore back in.In the absence of Clark, I'd have settled for ditching Richards and playing Lescott along side, as that pairing has looked probably our second best pairing over the last 18 months.I'm talking about what I'd have done. Not what could or couldn't be achieved within the straitjacket Black has tied himself up in.
Quote from: Villa in Denmark on April 26, 2016, 01:02:41 PMBecause I'd have brought Okore back in.In the absence of Clark, I'd have settled for ditching Richards and playing Lescott along side, as that pairing has looked probably our second best pairing over the last 18 months.I'm talking about what I'd have done. Not what could or couldn't be achieved within the straitjacket Black has tied himself up in.But what you would do is beside the point. Okore has made himself unavailable for selection. Saying you'd pick him doesn't change the reality of the situation.
Quote from: peter w on April 26, 2016, 01:07:51 PMQuote from: Villa in Denmark on April 26, 2016, 01:02:41 PMBecause I'd have brought Okore back in.In the absence of Clark, I'd have settled for ditching Richards and playing Lescott along side, as that pairing has looked probably our second best pairing over the last 18 months.I'm talking about what I'd have done. Not what could or couldn't be achieved within the straitjacket Black has tied himself up in.But what you would do is beside the point. Okore has made himself unavailable for selection. Saying you'd pick him doesn't change the reality of the situation.Okore disputes that
But the key thing is that the situation with Okore only exists because of Black deciding that playing Clark out of position on the right side of the pairing to accommodate Lescott starting. To then say he has no choice in selection is just plain wrong, he made a choice and created a situation where a player the fans like is out of the equation and 2 players who the fans want out of the club had to play. To diminish his responsibility in those events makes most of the rest of your argument look forced.