Uddersfield (H) League 1- 06/10/07

[Magic Man Fan]

What you posted was a bunch of statistics, where there is NO proven correlation. Without a correlation (and I have a degree in the subject), they are NOT facts, but unsubstantiated supposition. That is a very, very dangerous thing to do. You HAVE to prove a link for any statistics to mean anything. You've just been stating your opinion.

Don't make assumptions, becuase you know what assume does.

I have no degree in this subject, but am i right in thinking that raw data is that collected by such means as opinion polls and surveys??

and these "figures" that have been quoted be facts as they show an event that has taken place and show the STATISTICS of the results? I only did one modular in completing my 3 years Economics degree on statistics but im sure im not far from the point in staing this. This giving credibility to the fact, that these figures can be researched and found to be true? making it a fact?

but hey 99% of statistics are all lies, damned lies!! :D

Quite right to be puzzled Womble. There seems to be some confusion between correlation and causation. There can certainly be a strong correlation between two variables without there being any causal connection between them. For example the sales of ice cream and sun cream have a positive correlation, but buying an ice cream does not cause someone to need sun cream, nor vice versa.

To say that without a correlation the statistics are not facts but unsubstantiated suppositions does not really make any sense at all. Perhaps what was meant was that if you merely have a correlation, but with no proven causal connection, then all you have is unproven speculation.

What Phil was trying to show was the existence of a correlation between Walsall doing well and Richard Money having assistance. I would say that to some extent he succeeded in showing a correlation, and that this gave him some evidence which did support his argument, but that the correlation would certainly not on its own be enough to prove it.

thats a much better summary from my understanding of it, it certainly seems that an assistant has worked out for the better for wfc, and i for one would not like to test the theory or correlation later down the line of being in a position of not having an assistant as im sure there is some credibility in the figures stated.

DD did a great job on his own, but its like looking a crossword puzzle, u can do well but when another set of eyes and brains come in they can spot the answer straight away for what u have been trying to figure out for a while. Walsall fc started off as a puzzle for many this season, heres hoping that the right answers have now been found

Big YGA cryptic responses! ;)

[Salop Saddler]

Tinned, you clearly have a point, and one with which I cannot argue. Sad init :?:

[womblesaddler]

What you posted was a bunch of statistics, where there is NO proven correlation. Without a correlation (and I have a degree in the subject), they are NOT facts, but unsubstantiated supposition. That is a very, very dangerous thing to do. You HAVE to prove a link for any statistics to mean anything. You've just been stating your opinion.

Don't make assumptions, becuase you know what assume does.

I have no degree in this subject, but am i right in thinking that raw data is that collected by such means as opinion polls and surveys??

and these "figures" that have been quoted be facts as they show an event that has taken place and show the STATISTICS of the results? I only did one modular in completing my 3 years Economics degree on statistics but im sure im not far from the point in staing this. This giving credibility to the fact, that these figures can be researched and found to be true? making it a fact?

but hey 99% of statistics are all lies, damned lies!! :D

Quite right to be puzzled Womble. There seems to be some confusion between correlation and causation. There can certainly be a strong correlation between two variables without there being any causal connection between them. For example the sales of ice cream and sun cream have a positive correlation, but buying an ice cream does not cause someone to need sun cream, nor vice versa.

To say that without a correlation the statistics are not facts but unsubstantiated suppositions does not really make any sense at all. Perhaps what was meant was that if you merely have a correlation, but with no proven causal connection, then all you have is unproven speculation.

What Phil was trying to show was the existence of a correlation between Walsall doing well and Richard Money having assistance. I would say that to some extent he succeeded in showing a correlation, and that this gave him some evidence which did support his argument, but that the correlation would certainly not on its own be enough to prove it.

thats a much better summary from my understanding of it, it certainly seems that an assistant has worked out for the better for wfc, and i for one would not like to test the theory or correlation later down the line of being in a position of not having an assistant as im sure there is some credibility in the figures stated.

DD did a great job on his own, but its like looking a crossword puzzle, u can do well but when another set of eyes and brains come in they can spot the answer straight away for what u have been trying to figure out for a while. Walsall fc started off as a puzzle for many this season, heres hoping that the right answers have now been found

Big YGA cryptic responses! ;)

Some describe him as a "penis" but his "wealth" of football knowledge could be key this season!!
:D :oops:

[Exile]

WHAT?! WHAT?! The words currant d'etre spring to mind.

Are you raisin hell again? :roll:

Saw your Lee comment too. Is it not fairer to say he performed admirably till Jeef pulled the plug?

[canadiansaddler]

Strange how Phil is now apparently right when his original argument was along the lines that DD was **** and deserved no credit for turning it round and we have only played well because of JM. This is not what any subsequent posts or display of stats show. They merely show that DD does better with an assistant which no one is apparently arguing.

The brief spurt of posts on Statistics and correlation and cause and effect was most enlightening and will be kept and used in my sons homework in years to come. :D

My question for Phil and any others would be how come DD turned things round in the spring without the help of any assistant, just maybe it is because he happens to know what he is doing

[Exile]

My question for Phil and any others would be how come DD turned things round in the spring without the help of any assistant, just maybe it is because he happens to know what he is doing

Did he? Just playing devil's advocate, because I can't be bothered to find some statistics to support my argument, but the way I saw it we just managed to muddle through. I'm not complaining, as I said all along that all we had to do last year was get out of the basement, and we did.

[Neil Ravenscroft]

Strange how Phil is now apparently right when his original argument was along the lines that DD was **** and deserved no credit for turning it round and we have only played well because of JM. This is not what any subsequent posts or display of stats show. They merely show that DD does better with an assistant which no one is apparently arguing.

The brief spurt of posts on Statistics and correlation and cause and effect was most enlightening and will be kept and used in my sons homework in years to come. :D

My question for Phil and any others would be how come DD turned things round in the spring without the help of any assistant, just maybe it is because he happens to know what he is doing

Sense at last! Of course he will benefit from having a first team coach (and Kinsella was NOT his assistant), as he will have one less job to do, no more, no less. It does not mean that Jimmy Mullen is some sort of miracle worker who can turn the fortunes of a club around in a week. That's Roy Race. Common bleeding sense.

[Plastic Hawk]

Yep, absolutely no doubt that DD benefits from having an assistant, so well done to him for identifying the right man, and well done to JB for appointing him.

What you say Phil? Good management all round from the powers that be at Walsall FC?

Yes, just a shame it took then 10 months to realise.

:roll:

Much of the good work spoiled...

What (long term) damage has not having an assistant in those 10 months done?

Couldn't you just have agreed and left it at that? No need for the dig at the club.

WHAT?! WHAT?! The words currant d'etre spring to mind.

Following on from phil's facts about an assistant....the only consistently good spells under Colin Lee came when he had an assistant manager. Discuss. :D:D:D

Speak English, damn you!!

If I knew what "currant d'etre" meant (Google suggests "currant to be"...) then I might know whether or not that was a serious point. :lol: :lol: :lol:

As for Lee, I almost brought up Dave Merrington on this thread yesterday - he certainly made a massive difference. On the other hand, Paul Bracewell's appointment coincided with the final meltdown in our performances under Lee. Maybe the lesson is that while a good assistant make a huge (positive) difference to performances, a bad one can be worse than the manager doing everything himself.

[Salop Saddler]

Strange how Phil is now apparently right when his original argument was along the lines that DD was **** and deserved no credit for turning it round and we have only played well because of JM. This is not what any subsequent posts or display of stats show. They merely show that DD does better with an assistant which no one is apparently arguing.

The brief spurt of posts on Statistics and correlation and cause and effect was most enlightening and will be kept and used in my sons homework in years to come. :D

My question for Phil and any others would be how come DD turned things round in the spring without the help of any assistant, just maybe it is because he happens to know what he is doing

Sense at last! Of course he will benefit from having a first team coach (and Kinsella was NOT his assistant), as he will have one less job to do, no more, no less. It does not mean that Jimmy Mullen is some sort of miracle worker who can turn the fortunes of a club around in a week. That's Roy Race. Common bleeding sense.

You're right Exile. We muddled through. At one point there was a sense of doom and gloom descending, People where calculating this that and the other, would we win it, would we blow it, would we win the play-off, would we MAKE the play-off's even. But one by one the challengers fell away. Hartlepool's great run juddered slightly and eventually we got there. A bit like a boxer almost out on his feet but with one more punch than his opponent left in his armoury. It wasn't pretty, but it was a job well done. By all concerned

I remember listening to some of DD's radio interviews at the time. You could hear the stress loud and clear. He needed an assistant then. Now he’s got one and overall we will be better for it. Now that IS common sense on the clubs behalf. And the FACTS as presented by Phil no more than underline it. Clearly, hard for some to swallow, but that’s the way it is. Now, of course, if Geordie had have presented that set of facts (seriously no disrespect GS) we’d have had a round of “great post Geordie” followed by a front page listing, but such is the way of things from time to time it seems.

[philthesaddler]

Yep, absolutely no doubt that DD benefits from having an assistant, so well done to him for identifying the right man, and well done to JB for appointing him.

What you say Phil? Good management all round from the powers that be at Walsall FC?

Yes, just a shame it took then 10 months to realise.

:roll:

Much of the good work spoiled...

What (long term) damage has not having an assistant in those 10 months done?

Couldn't you just have agreed and left it at that? No need for the dig at the club.

WHAT?! WHAT?! The words currant d'etre spring to mind.

Following on from phil's facts about an assistant....the only consistently good spells under Colin Lee came when he had an assistant manager. Discuss. :D:D:D

Speak English, damn you!!

If I knew what "currant d'etre" meant (Google suggests "currant to be"...) then I might know whether or not that was a serious point. :lol: :lol: :lol:

As for Lee, I almost brought up Dave Merrington on this thread yesterday - he certainly made a massive difference. On the other hand, Paul Bracewell's appointment coincided with the final meltdown in our performances under Lee. Maybe the lesson is that while a good assistant make a huge (positive) difference to performances, a bad one can be worse than the manager doing everything himself.

He was being witty, replacing 'raison' with 'currant'

[Plastic Hawk]

He was being witty, replacing 'raison' with 'currant'

:oops: :oops: :oops:

Too early in the morning for that kind of mental agility!!!

[Neil Ravenscroft]

Strange how Phil is now apparently right when his original argument was along the lines that DD was **** and deserved no credit for turning it round and we have only played well because of JM. This is not what any subsequent posts or display of stats show. They merely show that DD does better with an assistant which no one is apparently arguing.

The brief spurt of posts on Statistics and correlation and cause and effect was most enlightening and will be kept and used in my sons homework in years to come. :D

My question for Phil and any others would be how come DD turned things round in the spring without the help of any assistant, just maybe it is because he happens to know what he is doing

Sense at last! Of course he will benefit from having a first team coach (and Kinsella was NOT his assistant), as he will have one less job to do, no more, no less. It does not mean that Jimmy Mullen is some sort of miracle worker who can turn the fortunes of a club around in a week. That's Roy Race. Common bleeding sense.

You're right Exile. We muddled through. At one point there was a sense of doom and gloom descending, People where calculating this that and the other, would we win it, would we blow it, would we win the play-off, would we MAKE the play-off's even. But one by one the challengers fell away. Hartlepool's great run juddered slightly and eventually we got there. A bit like a boxer almost out on his feet but with one more punch than his opponent left in his armoury. It wasn't pretty, but it was a job well done. By all concerned

I remember listening to some of DD's radio interviews at the time. You could hear the stress loud and clear. He needed an assistant then. Now he’s got one and overall we will be better for it. Now that IS common sense on the clubs behalf. And the FACTS as presented by Phil no more than underline it. Clearly, hard for some to swallow, but that’s the way it is. Now, of course, if Geordie had have presented that set of facts (seriously no disrespect GS) we’d have had a round of “great post Geordie” followed by a front page listing, but such is the way of things from time to time it seems.

Because it's not what you post, it's the way that you post it. If you look back, you'll see the vast majority think that we are obvoiusly better off with some help, because it takes the pressure off. The difference is, Phil's whole implication is that our current success is down to Mullen, not down to appointing an assistant. ie, that Money hadn't anything to do with it.

[Salop Saddler]

As I understand it his appointment came about following RM's 'clear the air' meeting with Bonser after JB returned from holiday. Whose to say that it wasn't Bonser's Idea, or STM's come to that.. I don't know, in fact none of us do, and I don't really care, as to date it's been a success.

[Duke]

As I understand it his appointment came about following RM's 'clear the air' meeting with Bonser after JB returned from holiday. Whose to say that it wasn't Bonser's Idea, or STM's come to that.. I don't know, in fact none of us do, and I don't really care, as to date it's been a success.

as you say who know's , maybe DD wanted an assistant all along , but the right man was'nt available till now , who cares we are playing great football winning games and competing in league 1

[Kiansmom]

Ermm didn't we win this game 4-0?? :roll:

[Duke]

Ermm didn't we win this game 4-0?? :roll:

:D thanks for the reminder Linda , I was begining to think saturday a dream.

[Geordiesaddler]

As I understand it his appointment came about following RM's 'clear the air' meeting with Bonser after JB returned from holiday. Whose to say that it wasn't Bonser's Idea, or STM's come to that.. I don't know, in fact none of us do, and I don't really care, as to date it's been a success.

Totally agree Salop, which is what makes the negative spin so ridiculous.

So if Jb insisted on DD having an assistant we have a chairman who spends his money when it matters, is clearly hands on and proactive, and who has faith in his manager - brilliant chairmanship!!

If it was DD's idea - brilliant management.

If it was STM - brilliant consultancy, just what we want from him.

Either way the powers that be have conspired to find a recipe for success and a clearly working well as a team, but of course its far easlier to say "F Off STM, Money is stubborn, JB is a tight wad etc. etc. yawn".

Both JB and STM have a proven track recod of delivering success at this football club at this level, DD doesn't, so its only right and proper that those two should earn their money by supporting the manager as he finds his feet at the higher level, and the manager in turn supports the players.

The final piece in the jigsaw would be the fans showing some patience (as called for by DD) and supporting everyone as the situation unfolds and the club gets re-established before pushing onto better things, rather than call for the manager to resign after 7 games and slag off STM and JB at every possible opportunity.

[Bernie]

It was all very well for Richard Money to appeal for fans to be patient, but would it not have been better if he had realised what was wrong a little earlier?

The Oldham match was our 9th competitive match of the season, and followed about 8 first team friendly matches. Some of us had our patience tested very severely by some of the signings and the plan that DD had in mind for the season. Up until after the Oldham match Mr Money kept telling us to give the players time, and in particular to wait until we saw Butler and Mooney together up front. Many of us could see what was wrong and were very frustrated that we were being led down a very wrong path.

It was very sad at the Oldham match to see so much disappointment on the faces of the youngsters taking advantage of the cheap tickets. Unfortunately the dismal performance produced as a result of some inept signings, tactics and team selection (Sonner and Gerrard in midfield, Butler and Mooney up front) will probably have put some of them off Walsall Football Club for life.

I am really pleased that eventually Richard Money began to correct some of his earlier mistakes and am now pretty optimistic for the rest of the season - what a pity that he could not have changed direction rather sooner.

[Goose277]

It was all very well for Richard Money to appeal for fans to be patient, but would it not have been better if he had realised what was wrong a little earlier?

The Oldham match was our 9th competitive match of the season, and followed about 8 first team friendly matches. Some of us had our patience tested very severely by some of the signings and the plan that DD had in mind for the season. Up until after the Oldham match Mr Money kept telling us to give the players time, and in particular to wait until we saw Butler and Mooney together up front. Many of us could see what was wrong and were very frustrated that we were being led down a very wrong path.

It was very sad at the Oldham match to see so much disappointment on the faces of the youngsters taking advantage of the cheap tickets. Unfortunately the dismal performance produced as a result of some inept signings, tactics and team selection (Sonner and Gerrard in midfield, Butler and Mooney up front) will probably have put some of them off Walsall Football Club for life.

I am really pleased that eventually Richard Money began to correct some of his earlier mistakes and am now pretty optimistic for the rest of the season - what a pity that he could not have changed direction rather sooner.

You make some good points Bernie but how soon should he have changed it? He'd assembled a squad and he had to give them time to gel/prove themselves.

[Geordiesaddler]

Exactly, and the patience I was refering to was called for pre-season in relation to the youngsters and the new signings, especially Sonko as I recall.

I keep hearing about the "inept signings" from you and a few others Bernie, would you describe the signings of Sonko, Mooney, Boertien, and Weston as "inept" following on as they did from the extensions/re-signings of Ince, Ishy, Dann, McDermott etc? I think we have had the usual mixed bag of signings, some god some bad.

Looking back at the Oldham game it it obvious that is was just a blip, you wern't at Orient to see how well we played that day, we were also very good in the second half against Carlisle, and had been excellent the week before versus Millwall. By the time we played Oldham there was already evidence that this squad posessed ability to survive at this level, evidence that just hadn't translated itself into too many points at that stage, so a call for patience was not unreasonable, far from it. The win at Hartleppol the week after Oldham was also achieved with little tactical change from Oldham. The tactical change came about when DD deliberatley changed a winning team, much to the amazement of the majority of fans at Doncaster. It was a brave and calculated move, not one born of the desperation post Oldham - although this is the way the doom and gloom merchants seem intent to re-write the history of this season.

[Bernie]

Money did not make any "inept signings" and Oldham was a "blip." You are obviously having a laugh there so I am not going to rise to the bait.

[Geordiesaddler]

I didn't say he didn't make any inept signings did I?

I said quite clearly that the signings were a mixed bag, obviously you read my post the other week as you apparently did a "critique" of it and will have read that I described Caneiro and Sonner as poor siginigs.

Twisting someone's words is usually a sign of someone with a weak argument in my experience.

Yes Oldham was a "blip" we took 4 points from the 2 games before Oldham, and have taken 10 points from the 4 games since, so in our recent run of 1 defeat in 7 it stands out as the odd result.

In the context in which I have usd the word "blip" it is described in the dictionary as a "a small or brief interruption" are you seriously going to argue that this is not the case?? If so I think its probably time you were put to bed Bernie, both literally, and metaphorically.

[Plastic Hawk]

Exactly, and the patience I was refering to was called for pre-season in relation to the youngsters and the new signings, especially Sonko as I recall.

I keep hearing about the "inept signings" from you and a few others Bernie, would you describe the signings of Sonko, Mooney, Boertien, and Weston as "inept" following on as they did from the extensions/re-signings of Ince, Ishy, Dann, McDermott etc? I think we have had the usual mixed bag of signings, some god some bad.

Looking back at the Oldham game it it obvious that is was just a blip, you wern't at Orient to see how well we played that day, we were also very good in the second half against Carlisle, and had been excellent the week before versus Millwall. By the time we played Oldham there was already evidence that this squad posessed ability to survive at this level, evidence that just hadn't translated itself into too many points at that stage, so a call for patience was not unreasonable, far from it. The win at Hartleppol the week after Oldham was also achieved with little tactical change from Oldham. The tactical change came about when DD deliberatley changed a winning team, much to the amazement of the majority of fans at Doncaster. It was a brave and calculated move, not one born of the desperation post Oldham - although this is the way the doom and gloom merchants seem intent to re-write the history of this season.

Bernie may not rise to the bait, but I will...

I don't agree with the last paragraph at all to be honest. I think that the Oldham game was the last straw for the team that started the season. They'd pulled off a decent win away to a very poor Millwall side (who are still bottom) the week before, but only had two other points to show for the season. Oldham was their chance to show that they could compete consistently at this level - and they flunked it. Wholesale changes were called for - and they were made.

Sonner was bombed out (as was Butler effectively), Mattis brought in, an assistant appointed, the formation was changed and several fringe players were given a chance in place of older players who clearly couldn't cope with the pace in this division. Between Oldham and the games against Huddersfield and Tranmere there were four changes in personnel (Roper, Wrack, Butler and Sonner out - all over 30, Bradley, Mattis, Ishmel and Dobson in - three aged 21 or under), plus Gerrard and Fox (natural defenders) moved back from midfield to defence allowing attacking players to come in. They are major changes by any definition.

And the inconvenient truth for those who said "patience, this side will turn it around" is that almost all of those changes (and more) had actually been made by the Hartlepool game. Wrack played (but at right back where his limited mobility these days is less exposed) and Bradley didn't, but Deeney came in for Weston. So, in fact, the only changes in personnel between Hartlepool and tonight have been Weston in for Wrack (injured) and Bradley in for Deeney (who didn't play in the Oldham game).

I always had confidence that DD would turn it around - and I'm actually impressed he seems to have done it so quickly. But to claim that he's done it without making many major changes is, frankly, ludicrous.

For the record, I agree with you to a large extent on the signings.

[Geordiesaddler]

Exactly, and the patience I was refering to was called for pre-season in relation to the youngsters and the new signings, especially Sonko as I recall.

I keep hearing about the "inept signings" from you and a few others Bernie, would you describe the signings of Sonko, Mooney, Boertien, and Weston as "inept" following on as they did from the extensions/re-signings of Ince, Ishy, Dann, McDermott etc? I think we have had the usual mixed bag of signings, some god some bad.

Looking back at the Oldham game it it obvious that is was just a blip, you wern't at Orient to see how well we played that day, we were also very good in the second half against Carlisle, and had been excellent the week before versus Millwall. By the time we played Oldham there was already evidence that this squad posessed ability to survive at this level, evidence that just hadn't translated itself into too many points at that stage, so a call for patience was not unreasonable, far from it. The win at Hartleppol the week after Oldham was also achieved with little tactical change from Oldham. The tactical change came about when DD deliberatley changed a winning team, much to the amazement of the majority of fans at Doncaster. It was a brave and calculated move, not one born of the desperation post Oldham - although this is the way the doom and gloom merchants seem intent to re-write the history of this season.

Bernie may not rise to the bait, but I will...

I don't agree with the last paragraph at all to be honest. I think that the Oldham game was the last straw for the team that started the season. They'd pulled off a decent win away to a very poor Millwall side (who are still bottom) the week before, but only had two other points to show for the season. Oldham was their chance to show that they could compete consistently at this level - and they flunked it. Wholesale changes were called for - and they were made.

Sonner was bombed out (as was Butler effectively), Mattis brought in, an assistant appointed, the formation was changed and several fringe players were given a chance in place of older players who clearly couldn't cope with the pace in this division. Between Oldham and the games against Huddersfield and Tranmere there were four changes in personnel (Roper, Wrack, Butler and Sonner out - all over 30, Bradley, Mattis, Ishmel and Dobson in - three aged 21 or under), plus Gerrard and Fox (natural defenders) moved back from midfield to defence allowing attacking players to come in. They are major changes by any definition.

And the inconvenient truth for those who said "patience, this side will turn it around" is that almost all of those changes (and more) had actually been made by the Hartlepool game. Wrack played (but at right back where his limited mobility these days is less exposed) and Bradley didn't, but Deeney came in for Weston. So, in fact, the only changes in personnel between Hartlepool and tonight have been Weston in for Wrack (injured) and Bradley in for Deeney (who didn't play in the Oldham game).

I always had confidence that DD would turn it around - and I'm actually impressed he seems to have done it so quickly. But to claim that he's done it without making many major changes is, frankly, ludicrous.

For the record, I agree with you to a large extent on the signings.

Well obviously I disagree. the much vaunted change in formation didn't come in after Oldham it came in after Hartlepool, and tonight DD said its something he had been toying with since pre-season, so it was a calculated tactical change, not a knee-jerk to the Oldham defeat.

Secondly, Wrack is injured and would almost certainly have kept his place post Doncaster, Roper likewise last few weeks So I don't see any huge significance in them being dropped. In order to make the quantum leap in terms of wholesale changes post Oldham you therefore have to conveniently miss out the Hartlepool game, and to some extent the Doncaster game. I simply don't feel the need to do this.

Also, I saw much in common with our performance at Orient, and the second half against Carlise at home and the later improved results.
What was needed was greater consistency and of course less sloppiness both in attack and defence. I don't see this as massive changes, merely fine-tuning. With improved results has come a huge injection of absolutely crucial confidence, vital to a team just promoted and one containing so many youngsters. DD seems to have seized upon this and seems keen to fan the spark of team-spirit to new levels.

Its not realy "inconvenient truth", because we have had to show patience with Sonko, Mooney, Ishy, Deeney, Bradley, Weston etc etc. For one reason or another these players have required time to grow into their roles and are still doing so. Thank heavens we didn't throw out the baby with the bath-water post Oldham, and chose instead to build on what we had with the addition of ONE signing.

[Bernie]

Since it seems that you were serious. . .

Our match against Oldham was our 9th competitive match of the season. We had previously lost to Swansea twice, Orient, Bournemouth and Gillingham. While we were not rubbish in all parts of the pitch in most matches - and indeed there were good aspects about our play quite a lot of the time - there were very obvious reasons why we kept on losing. These glaring problems had caused us to lose 5 of the 8 matches before Oldham, and draw two of them. Our only win had come against a dreadful Millwall team. When you include the two cup matches against teams from our own division, before Oldham we were averaging 0.625 points per game.

The signings that were inept were the marquee signings of Sonner, Hall and Carneiro. Mooney was also an inept signing in that Richard Money thought that he would make the ideal partner for Martin Butler. Mooney has done very well and could well turn out to be our player of the season, but signing him to play alongside Butler was truly inept. That was the plan that DD had in mind, he confirmed as much on WM immediately before the Oldham match. If Butler and Mooney had played together often this season I doubt if Mooney would be winning many fans.

The match against Oldham was the first time that Richard Money had been able to play his first choice strike partnership; and he chose Gerrard and Sonner together in midfield although Bradley and Dobson were both available. Frankly with the team that was chosen the result and performance were pretty inevitable.

Oldham was not a blip - but the inevitable consequence of the failure of Richard Money's Plan A for this season. He spoke on WM of the need to react and make changes when things were not working out - and I give him full credit for doing that. I now think that with Money in charge we can make a genuine bid for promotion this season, as long as we either avoid injuries or bring in some back-up.

[Neuromantic]

Still not gonna admit Dobson is class then Bernie? :P

[Plastic Hawk]

Exactly, and the patience I was refering to was called for pre-season in relation to the youngsters and the new signings, especially Sonko as I recall.

I keep hearing about the "inept signings" from you and a few others Bernie, would you describe the signings of Sonko, Mooney, Boertien, and Weston as "inept" following on as they did from the extensions/re-signings of Ince, Ishy, Dann, McDermott etc? I think we have had the usual mixed bag of signings, some god some bad.

Looking back at the Oldham game it it obvious that is was just a blip, you wern't at Orient to see how well we played that day, we were also very good in the second half against Carlisle, and had been excellent the week before versus Millwall. By the time we played Oldham there was already evidence that this squad posessed ability to survive at this level, evidence that just hadn't translated itself into too many points at that stage, so a call for patience was not unreasonable, far from it. The win at Hartleppol the week after Oldham was also achieved with little tactical change from Oldham. The tactical change came about when DD deliberatley changed a winning team, much to the amazement of the majority of fans at Doncaster. It was a brave and calculated move, not one born of the desperation post Oldham - although this is the way the doom and gloom merchants seem intent to re-write the history of this season.

Bernie may not rise to the bait, but I will...

I don't agree with the last paragraph at all to be honest. I think that the Oldham game was the last straw for the team that started the season. They'd pulled off a decent win away to a very poor Millwall side (who are still bottom) the week before, but only had two other points to show for the season. Oldham was their chance to show that they could compete consistently at this level - and they flunked it. Wholesale changes were called for - and they were made.

Sonner was bombed out (as was Butler effectively), Mattis brought in, an assistant appointed, the formation was changed and several fringe players were given a chance in place of older players who clearly couldn't cope with the pace in this division. Between Oldham and the games against Huddersfield and Tranmere there were four changes in personnel (Roper, Wrack, Butler and Sonner out - all over 30, Bradley, Mattis, Ishmel and Dobson in - three aged 21 or under), plus Gerrard and Fox (natural defenders) moved back from midfield to defence allowing attacking players to come in. They are major changes by any definition.

And the inconvenient truth for those who said "patience, this side will turn it around" is that almost all of those changes (and more) had actually been made by the Hartlepool game. Wrack played (but at right back where his limited mobility these days is less exposed) and Bradley didn't, but Deeney came in for Weston. So, in fact, the only changes in personnel between Hartlepool and tonight have been Weston in for Wrack (injured) and Bradley in for Deeney (who didn't play in the Oldham game).

I always had confidence that DD would turn it around - and I'm actually impressed he seems to have done it so quickly. But to claim that he's done it without making many major changes is, frankly, ludicrous.

For the record, I agree with you to a large extent on the signings.

Well obviously I disagree. the much vaunted change in formation didn't come in after Oldham it came in after Hartlepool, and tonight DD said its something he had been toying with since pre-season, so it was a calculated tactical change, not a knee-jerk to the Oldham defeat.

Secondly, Wrack is injured and would almost certainly have kept his place post Doncaster, Roper likewise last few weeks So I don't see any huge significance in them being dropped. In order to make the quantum leap in terms of wholesale changes post Oldham you therefore have to conveniently miss out the Hartlepool game, and to some extent the Doncaster game. I simply don't feel the need to do this.

Also, I saw much in common with our performance at Orient, and the second half against Carlise at home and the later improved results.
What was needed was greater consistency and of course less sloppiness both in attack and defence. I don't see this as massive changes, merely fine-tuning. With improved results has come a huge injection of absolutely crucial confidence, vital to a team just promoted and one containing so many youngsters. DD seems to have seized upon this and seems keen to fan the spark of team-spirit to new levels.

Its not realy "inconvenient truth", because we have had to show patience with Sonko, Mooney, Ishy, Deeney, Bradley, Weston etc etc. For one reason or another these players have required time to grow into their roles and are still doing so. Thank heavens we didn't throw out the baby with the bath-water post Oldham, and chose instead to build on what we had with the addition of ONE signing.

I didn't "conveniently miss out the Hartlepool game".

I dealt with it in some depth in the paragraph from which you got the "inconvenient truth" quote - where I pointed out that there were as many differences in personnel (4) between the Oldham and Hartlepool games (three over 30's out, three youngsters in) as between the Oldham and Huddersfield ones, plus numerous positional changes. Only one of those dropped after the Oldham game (Roper) was injured - and there must be a good chance he'd have been axed anyway. If Wrack had kept his place post-Doncaster then it would have been at right back at the expense of Weston - not in the centre of midfield where he played against Oldham.

I've never said that it was a knee-jerk reaction to the Oldham defeat. I said that the Oldham game was the final straw for many of the old legs that played in it. I'm sure that DD had had the changes in mind for several weeks if things didn't turn around. If anything the win at Millwall probably put them off for one week longer, but the Oldham performance demonstrated that the Millwall result was the "blip". At that stage we'd just played Gillingham, Bournemouth, Vale, Millwall and Oldham (the five teams immediately above us at the time) and picked up one win (away), a draw (at home) and three defeats, with a -5 goal difference. In that context an away win was very much not the norm.

Confidence has been important and it's true that we didn't throw the baby out with the bath water after Oldham - but, to continue your metaphor, we very much did throw out the bath water. That's all I'm saying: changes needed to be made and they were made. The people who said they were necessary were right, but so were those who said we should be patient and trust in DD. He made the necessary changes when he could easily have stuck stubbornly to the side that started the season for another month or two.

[Geordiesaddler]

So now in order to add flesh to the dying horse that is your argument upon the ocassion of it being flogged to within an inch of its life you have to hedge your bets to the extent that:

"Mooney was an inept signing....who could turn out to be player of the season" :lol: :lol: That's it Bernie you nail those colurs to the mast like pub-bloke in the FastShow.

Also you now see fit to attribute points, or lack of them to cup matches?? Hmmm, interesting, maybe you could do the same with pre-season friendlies if it helps??

Crazy as it may sound, I tend to listen to what DD has to say about his own tactics and train of thought rather than believe the quasi-scientific mumblings of people on here who play dot-to-dot with a few rumours and third hand opinions about games they didn't even see.

Tonight he said quite clearly, in plain english that 4-5-1 was something he dabbled with in pre-season and had been considering for a while. I don't doubt for 1 minute as you say, that Butler and Mooney were his first choice, but so what??

The hysterical recollection of the Oldham game as though it resulted in some kind of cathartic moment in the history of Walsall FC is laughable when you listen to Money's cool analysis.

Believe what you want to believe Bernie and back it up with as much spurious logic and half-baked stats as you like if it flops your mop.

I havn't seen you post any stats lately regarding Ishy's starts last season and how this will prevent him being a regular starter at this level under DD??

What's happened? Did the argument/stats just disappear to be replaced by this latest fog of mumbo-jumbo?? Why can't you just have an opinion and describe it as "opinion" rather than present it as fact?

[Pedagogue]

Still not gonna admit Dobson is class then Bernie? :P

MS - I still don't particularly rate Dobson - in fact, I think that he is probably the weakest member of our first team squad. However, I thought that he was our "man-of-the-match", last night, at Tranmere, edging ahead of Deeney. I hope that it's not a flash in the pan, like last season (at home, against Barnet, was it?). If, relieved of the responsibility of captaincy and aided by the support of younger, fitter team-mates, in midfield, he can repeat this level of performance then it will be like signing a new player. I know that he has been affected by the recent death of his father but if he continues to respond in this way then more power to his elbow!

This is one fundamental reason why it is impossible to take your opinions seriously, MS. Whereas I am quite willing to give a balanced opinion, based on the evidence of my own eyes, your mind is always "pre-made up", i.e. your opinion remains steadfastly unchanged, irrespective of a player's performance, good or bad. I happen to share your opinion of Mark Wright, for instance, but even I recognise that he had the very occasional decent game and had a bit of ability. Life is NOT in black-and-white - there are shades of grey, in between! Stop being so bloody dogmatic!!!!

[Geordiesaddler]

I think that's the problem with several posters on this messageboard Leamore.

Interesting to read how well Deeney played in midfield tonight. Bearing in mind most people wanted DD carted off by the men in white coats after playing him in midfield against Oldham, it would appear that there was merit in this tactic yesterday evening. Refreshing to see the manager keeping an open mind about things.