Shrimpsvoices

Who first to go
Ken McKenna for a start for me and let Jim sort out the dismal performances of late.....
and free up some much needed cash.

The present arrangement isn't working and the board have to act before the spectre of relegation looms! Feeble excuses are unacceptable and comments made on Radio Lancashire by Ken McKenna about "little lapses and little errors" are breathtakingly wide of the mark. Decisive action is required now.

Surprise, surprise....Ken for me....and bring in Kevin E to bring some enthusiasm to the role and certainly some passion and aggression.

Couple of points here.
Would Jim allow Ken to give instructions from the touchline if he didn't agree with them???? I doubt it.
If Jim agrees with instructions to play hoofball wouldn't he resign himself if Ken got the sack?
If there really is a difference of opinion over tactics, which I doubt, the board (Peter Mac) must step in and sort it out.

As far as i'm concerned they are a double act ( insert name of said act) and if they stay or go they do it together

stewart drummond should be number 2

They stay or go together. Sacking a number two while leaving the number one suggests that the number two was in charge anyway, in which case the number one's position is untenable.

Jim's time is definitely running out. He even said so himself after the FA Cup nightmare.

I actually think Jim needs to take a gamble now and set us up to entertain rather than 'win'. If he did so, I think the wins would follow. Ken (and therefore Jim) said on Radio Lancashire that we had gone to York 'set up to win', yet everyone watching has said we were dreadful against a dreadful team, so even if we'd got lucky and sneaked a win against a dreadful team, it would still have been a grim spectacle. If we were losing games while entertaining spectators, it would be easier to swallow. Instead we're losing dreadfully.

If Jim & Ken think that what they've served up in the last few months was anywhere close to acceptable, then we've got real problems.

Keith wrote:They stay or go together. Sacking a number two while leaving the number one suggests that the number two was in charge anyway, in which case the number one's position is untenable.

Jim's time is definitely running out. He even said so himself after the FA Cup nightmare.

I actually think Jim needs to take a gamble now and set us up to entertain rather than 'win'. If he did so, I think the wins would follow. Ken (and therefore Jim) said on Radio Lancashire that we had gone to York 'set up to win', yet everyone watching has said we were dreadful against a dreadful team, so even if we'd got lucky and sneaked a win against a dreadful team, it would still have been a grim spectacle. If we were losing games while entertaining spectators, it would be easier to swallow. Instead we're losing dreadfully.

If Jim & Ken think that what they've served up in the last few months was anywhere close to acceptable, then we've got real problems.

unleash the shackles and sack the guy that belongs to no frigging where

It's only personal but are some of us missing the point?
We did set up to entertain and attack at York, with a 4-2-3-1 system and plenty of flair, Wildig, Devitt and Moly all started with Miller.
However, we didn't compete, they were set up to do the simple things, win the ball and get it forward. They had pace in Oliver up front and as a result we sat back a little, giving them space to play. They pushed high up at the back, as we had nobody really running in behind.
Murphs was quiet and we didn't win many second a balls all game.
So, we need a balance of flair and grit, to establish a platform and then play.
Yesterday we didn't win the right to play, and despite Yorks perilous position, they rode their luck at the end and won!

This isn't a time for rational debate freeze, this is ''burn the witch time'', its about chucking out the baby with the bath water.

Freez wrote:It's only personal but are some of us missing the point?
We did set up to entertain and attack at York, with a 4-2-3-1 system and plenty of flair, Wildig, Devitt and Moly all started with Miller.
However, we didn't compete, they were set up to do the simple things, win the ball and get it forward. They had pace in Oliver up front and as a result we sat back a little, giving them space to play. They pushed high up at the back, as we had nobody really running in behind.
Murphs was quiet and we didn't win many second a balls all game.
So, we need a balance of flair and grit, to establish a platform and then play.
Yesterday we didn't win the right to play, and despite Yorks perilous position, they rode their luck at the end and won!

You were there and I wasn't so I except what you say BUT surely we sit back 'a little' every week giving the opposition space to play.....especially down the wings. Surely we've proved by now that we are no good at this 'defend the box' style and we need to change to pressurising the guy with the ball. York's statistics don't lie. They are a poor team and if we'd pressured them from the start they wouldn't have won.

If we cannot dominate posession against ghe worst team in the league, questions need to be asked by the directors who attended the match


Oh no, there were none.

They maybe have better things to do

shrimpnsave wrote:Who first to go
Ken McKenna for a start for me and let Jim sort out the dismal performances of late.....
and free up some much needed cash.

it won't happen, Jim is a decent bloke and will stand by Ken.

however I did start a topic about this last season and Shrimper and Freeze and others close to the Club went on the defencive.

I would have liked Jim to have got an older experienced coach who sat in the background and over looked things with tactical know how, while Jim shouted orders.

George Dawes wrote:however I did start a topic about this last season and Shrimper and Freeze and others close to the Club went on the defencive.

Freez & Shrimper and Shrimper and "others close to the club" are entitled to have an opinion and that opinion doesn't have to agree with yours. Haven't you noticed that a few of those people don't bother posting on here any more, and haven't for a long time, in part because they got fed up with the accusation that if they are people who are willing to volunteer there own time, that is viewed by some people as a negative, or that they are somehow no longer able to think for themselves.

Also, those people who are 'defensive' are generally positive, optimistic people, rather than the negative, hang 'em high, cup half empty folk? Maybe that is why they are willing to volunteer there time in the first place, because they feel that they can make a difference?

black morse wrote:

Freez wrote:It's only personal but are some of us missing the point?
We did set up to entertain and attack at York, with a 4-2-3-1 system and plenty of flair, Wildig, Devitt and Moly all started with Miller.
However, we didn't compete, they were set up to do the simple things, win the ball and get it forward. They had pace in Oliver up front and as a result we sat back a little, giving them space to play. They pushed high up at the back, as we had nobody really running in behind.
Murphs was quiet and we didn't win many second a balls all game.
So, we need a balance of flair and grit, to establish a platform and then play.
Yesterday we didn't win the right to play, and despite Yorks perilous position, they rode their luck at the end and won!

You were there and I wasn't so I except what you say BUT surely we sit back 'a little' every week giving the opposition space to play.....especially down the wings. Surely we've proved by now that we are no good at this 'defend the box' style and we need to change to pressurising the guy with the ball. York's statistics don't lie. They are a poor team and if we'd pressured them from the start they wouldn't have won.

Yes i think you should ACCEPT what Freez said as that is pretty much what happened , BUT as you mentioned we give the opposition to much room and for me that is the underlying problem that has been the cause of our demise in the last couple of months .

Oh and we have run out of Grit too.

Keith it wasn't a pop, just stating loads of people went off it at me! when I started the topic.

I respect Shrimper and his input of games, in particular feedback of away games I don't get to, as a few on here.

I'm with you Dave, we did let them out too easy, and we have done for the past ten games. It's frustrating to watch as other teams get tight on us but we don't seem to do the same.

And as a point, Shrimper sat in front of me yesterday and agrees with what we reported and reported the same himself.

Perennial midtable league 2 side remains in mid table shock.

All this hate is because we thought we had the best squad we'd ever had. Jim was close to manager of the month in October and Miller couldn't stop scoring.

Ups and downs.......

goneshrimping wrote:Perennial midtable league 2 side remains in mid table shock.

All this hate is because we thought we had the best squad we'd ever had. Jim was close to manager of the month in October and Miller couldn't stop scoring.

Ups and downs.......

Long overdue for some ups...

goneshrimping wrote:Perennial midtable league 2 side remains in mid table shock.

All this hate is because we thought we had the best squad we'd ever had. Jim was close to manager of the month in October and Miller couldn't stop scoring.

Ups and downs.......

I dont think hate is the right word, for me and other fans i know its more like "Worry". Anybody watching us play Carlisle , Bury, Rochdale and Walsall could be forgiven for thinking we had the best squad ever because that's what they were playing like. After watching these recent displays what worries me is that we are not learning from our mistakes , i think you mentioned it yourself about how we sit back and give the opposition too much room , BUT that was as far back as the Luton & Bristol games and we are still making the same mistakes , not what i would call little lapses in concentration.
So what worries me that after changing formations and positions the outcome is still the same ,so has Jim lost the ability to motivate and have the players lost the desire . If some of these players want to put themselves in the shop window to move onwards to better things , then they're as sure as hell not doing themselves any favours . The big worry for me now is what is going to change to bring the spark back and where is our next win going to come from ,at the moment i honestly just cant see it. Please Jim i would love you to prove to me otherwise .

Some people do seem to gloat when the team do crap, others seem to ''toe the party line'', but in general, most folk on here, and at regular games, are fans that all want the team to do well,and are entitled th air their opinions, I find it a chore at the moment watching the team, but I still turn up, problem is, seeing certain players just ''turning up'', the club also seems slow to address off the field issues, and is obviously in financial meltdown losing up to half a million a year.

does anybody know how many fans we need to average in order to be self sufficient? sure it was said something like 2400?

yes , 2400, or 0.00003 percent of the population of shanghai where most of our fans live.

mrpotatohead wrote: and is obviously in financial meltdown losing up to half a million a year.

I would imagine the current season will show a loss far more than half a million. What with no income from cup runs, so few Saturday home games, no stadium sponsorship, etc., more like 3/4 million or more.