Shrimpsvoices

We never buy anyone , and our players are just, OK at best, apart from about 3 of them, this could have been an opportunity for Jim to finally after all these years to have a few bob to spend , a real pair of MFC fans at the helm in the boardroom, stability off the pitch, the stage was set for a real chance for real advancement and something to feel optimistic about.......the players let the club down and the long suffering fans down, the majority of them are lucky to have jobs.

So depressing, and worryingly, he mentions Oliver as doing well!!!!!! He’s not scoring any goals, giving away stupid fouls, first touch is like a squash court etc etc etc... Oswell needs a chance!
And what a way to motivate the players! Be drones for 5 minutes... though he didn’t even seem like he got the motivated and up for it in the first place... sort it out Jim, we are NOT in good form

I think it says it all if Jim really thinks Oliver is doing well. Heaven help us.

Notice he doesn't talk about players "walking through walls" for him anymore.

He still won't accept responsibility for team selection, formation, tactics nor substitutions will he? Always has to blame someone else.

Why start with Cranston when he has "proper" midfielders Kenyon and Tutte on the bench?

Why leave Mandy on the pitch when everyone agrees he was having a bad game and you have Thommo on the bench?

Sometimes, what Jim does just doesn't make any sense and then he blames everyone else!

KenH wrote:I think it says it all if Jim really thinks Oliver is doing well. Heaven help us.

Notice he doesn't talk about players "walking through walls" for him anymore.

He still won't accept responsibility for team selection, formation, tactics nor substitutions will he? Always has to blame someone else.

Why start with Cranston when he has "proper" midfielders Kenyon and Tutte on the bench?

Why leave Mandy on the pitch when everyone agrees he was having a bad game and you have Thommo on the bench?

Sometimes, what Jim does just doesn't make any sense and then he blames everyone else!

This interview just adds to the downward spiral and doesn't do anyone any favours. Yes, it was very honest but comes across as full of self pity, as if the players are holding him back. We were toothless against them at home so in his wisdom, he picks the same line up to play them away hoping it would be different? Barmy.

I am not sure where this form is that Jim speaks of or why any player should be proud of recent performances.

I wasn't there, unfortunately/fortunately, but from all the comments and reports I've heard, the team... under Jim and Ken's guidance... collectively blew a massive opportunity for our club to progress financially. This is happening time and time again under their stewardship and most of us (with the exception of a deluded, rose-tinted few) are getting pissed off with what we are seeing. Sure, the league performances have improved slightly, as have some of the results, but I'm afraid to say there has been a continuous decline under the present management team and that needs to change urgently to stop further rot setting in before the end of the season. If the board decide that it's time for Jim and Ken to depart, I'll be fully supportive of that decision, because no one person is bigger than the club and we need to give the club the best chance to thrive in future.

You would think that a manager whose job depends on results and those mean scoring goals wouldn't persist with a striker who has 2 league goals this season and 4 or 5 last season. Give Oswell a chance and also let's have a look at Florent Cuvelier in a League 2 game.
Just looking at the goal last night it appears that Old could have done a lot better before the scorer was anywhere near our box.

KenH wrote:Why start with Cranston when he has "proper" midfielders Kenyon and Tutte on the bench?

To be fair, Cranston has been one of our best players in the last three or four games, so didn't deserve to be dropped. Tutte is probably not fully fit yet either. The side that started yesterday *SHOULD* have been good enough to beat a struggling Conference side.

Keith wrote:To be fair, Cranston has been one of our best players in the last three or four games

He stood in out of position due to necessity, and yes, he did a competent job of that, but nothing special and his defending is pretty average, two silly mistakes in two games leading to goals against us. But he isn't a defensive midfielder in the same mould at Tutte or Kenyon who could (and at least on should) have started last night.

John L wrote:I wasn't there, unfortunately/fortunately, but from all the comments and reports I've heard, the team... under Jim and Ken's guidance... collectively blew a massive opportunity for our club to progress financially. This is happening time and time again under their stewardship and most of us (with the exception of a deluded, rose-tinted few) are getting pissed off with what we are seeing. Sure, the league performances have improved slightly, as have some of the results, but I'm afraid to say there has been a continuous decline under the present management team and that needs to change urgently to stop further rot setting in before the end of the season. If the board decide that it's time for Jim and Ken to depart, I'll be fully supportive of that decision, because no one person is bigger than the club and we need to give the club the best chance to thrive in future.

Big John L with post of the week

Gone_Shrimping wrote:Just looking at the goal last night it appears that Old could have done a lot better before the scorer was anywhere near our box.

As many miles I have watched Mandy run and chase around the whole pitch on occasions, he was nowhere near chasing their goalscorer back. Their (possibly) part time plumber, left our League full professionals for dead - how does that work 12 minutes into a game.

marky No.1 wrote:

Gone_Shrimping wrote:Just looking at the goal last night it appears that Old could have done a lot better before the scorer was anywhere near our box.

As many miles I have watched Mandy run and chase around the whole pitch on occasions, he was nowhere near chasing their goalscorer back. Their (possibly) part time plumber, left our League full professionals for dead - how does that work 12 minutes into a game.

Big fan of Mande, but last night was his worst performace in Morecambe shirt since Crewe. For me, he was the player that failed to prevent their goal, gave up the chase too readily. Hopefully the team and Mande are back up for the Sat game.

Jim talks about a lack of quality in the final third.....and yet we still persevere with a so called striker who is incapable of scoring goals and it's not just with us, it's been the same at every other club he's been at.

I just wish Jim and Co would explain to us why they persist with him when (in the opinion of a large number of fans) he's simply doesn't provide the return that a centre forward should.

It's time for Jim and Co to give Oswell an extended run in the league. He's been with us long enough now to adapt to full time training. Interestingly Blackpool signed somebody from non league during the summer and he was put into their team early doors and is now getting rave revues about his performances. If only our Management team would do the same but history tells us that it took time before they gambled with Jack Redshaw....and we all know what the result was.

Yeah, Jack cant get in the Salford team, Happy Bithday Jack!!!

redrobo wrote:If only our Management team would do the same but history tells us that it took time before they gambled with Jack Redshaw....and we all know what the result was.

And with Mullen - he was usually brought on as a late sub, often out of position, and didn't really do much. It was only when necessity meant he became a regular starter that he started to score, often in a front 2 alongside Kev.

Insanity is said to be repeating the same action and expecting a different outcome. It happened with the team selection last night and it happens every week with the selection of Vadaine Oliver. I don't think you can deny his efforts for the club, however Oliver has proven to be ineffective as a L2 striker (5 goals from 51 L2 games) and he just doesn't cut the mustard in my opinion. So why do we persist with him?

If Jim and Ken genuinely believed that last night was a sackable performance, then why don't they walk away? Surely if you realise you are doing more harm than good, then you would put the interests of the club first? I genuinely believed that Jim was Morecambe through and through. The interview last night, for me, says he's more interested in taking his pay home every month than the long-term prospects of the club.

It pains me to say it, but that's the final straw for me. Jim & Ken's tenure has kept us in the FL, for which I'll always be grateful. You can't deny it's also seen a drastic drop in attendances and now they've missed the golden opportunity to put some much-needed cash in the coffers. If you can't motivate your players to score one goal in 180 minutes against a side in the bottom half of the league below, then you've lost your way and it's time to move on. What's more, if you believe you have "form" having only scored 4 goals in the last 8 games (P8 W2 D2 L4 GD-2) then you're deluded.

For those that question our ability to afford to sack the management team, my question is how can we afford not to?

Ntini wrote:Insanity is said to be repeating the same action and expecting a different outcome. It happened with the team selection last night and it happens every week with the selection of Vadaine Oliver. I don't think you can deny his efforts for the club, however Oliver has proven to be ineffective as a L2 striker (5 goals from 51 L2 games) and he just doesn't cut the mustard in my opinion. So why do we persist with him?

If Jim and Ken genuinely believed that last night was a sackable performance, then why don't they walk away? Surely if you realise you are doing more harm than good, then you would put the interests of the club first? I genuinely believed that Jim was Morecambe through and through. The interview last night, for me, says he's more interested in taking his pay home every month than the long-term prospects of the club.

It pains me to say it, but that's the final straw for me. Jim & Ken's tenure has kept us in the FL, for which I'll always be grateful. You can't deny it's also seen a drastic drop in attendances and now they've missed the golden opportunity to put some much-needed cash in the coffers. If you can't motivate your players to score one goal in 180 minutes against a side in the bottom half of the league below, then you've lost your way and it's time to move on. What's more, if you believe you have "form" having only scored 4 goals in the last 8 games (P8 W2 D2 L4 GD-2) then you're deluded.

For those that question our ability to afford to sack the management team, my question is how can we afford not to?

It is Deja Vu, it is the same old story. Dover was bad enough, not beating D&R with whitehawk next in the 2nd was awful and barely scraping a draw in a must win against Cov was terrible. How much longer can the club go on with Jim in charge? Like you say, the claims to be in form are crazy, that highlights the plight of the club under Jim for me.

BerlinWaller wrote:

Ntini wrote:Insanity is said to be repeating the same action and expecting a different outcome. It happened with the team selection last night and it happens every week with the selection of Vadaine Oliver. I don't think you can deny his efforts for the club, however Oliver has proven to be ineffective as a L2 striker (5 goals from 51 L2 games) and he just doesn't cut the mustard in my opinion. So why do we persist with him?

If Jim and Ken genuinely believed that last night was a sackable performance, then why don't they walk away? Surely if you realise you are doing more harm than good, then you would put the interests of the club first? I genuinely believed that Jim was Morecambe through and through. The interview last night, for me, says he's more interested in taking his pay home every month than the long-term prospects of the club.

It pains me to say it, but that's the final straw for me. Jim & Ken's tenure has kept us in the FL, for which I'll always be grateful. You can't deny it's also seen a drastic drop in attendances and now they've missed the golden opportunity to put some much-needed cash in the coffers. If you can't motivate your players to score one goal in 180 minutes against a side in the bottom half of the league below, then you've lost your way and it's time to move on. What's more, if you believe you have "form" having only scored 4 goals in the last 8 games (P8 W2 D2 L4 GD-2) then you're deluded.

For those that question our ability to afford to sack the management team, my question is how can we afford not to?

It is Deja Vu, it is the same old story. Dover was bad enough, not beating D&R with whitehawk next in the 2nd was awful and barely scraping a draw in a must win against Cov was terrible. How much longer can the club go on with Jim in charge? Like you say, the claims to be in form are crazy, that highlights the plight of the club under Jim for me.

Last night, to a man, nobody performed to their level. We are talking about pro footballers, who knew exactly how important the game was, and even if they went in to the match with no manager atall to motivate, then they should have had enough pride and self motivation to put in their all. It didn’t happen. Too easy to just blame the management.

Slanester is of course correct ,none of them did themselves any favours ,very unprofessional , some of them obviously need a career outside football.

If a Professional Footballer needs any motivating whatsoever for an FA Cup tie there is something seriously wrong.

redrobo wrote:
...but history tells us that it took time before they gambled with Jack Redshaw....and we all know what the result was.

Err, hang on! You're presumably saying that it was a success? Surely that means that you believe Jim handled Jack correctly? Or are you saying that if Jack had been thrown in to the mix sooner, he'd have still been a success? What about the season before, should he have played League Two then? Perhaps Jim should have got him when he was 14 years old and played him?

You can't say that Jack was a success, therefore Jim got it wrong!

Keith wrote:

redrobo wrote:
...but history tells us that it took time before they gambled with Jack Redshaw....and we all know what the result was.

Err, hang on! You're presumably saying that it was a success? Surely that means that you believe Jim handled Jack correctly? Or are you saying that if Jack had been thrown in to the mix sooner, he'd have still been a success? What about the season before, should he have played League Two then? Perhaps Jim should have got him when he was 14 years old and played him?

You can't say that Jack was a success, therefore Jim got it wrong!

In my opinion which isn't worth much, had Jim and Co introduced Jack sooner as other clubs do with former non league players then his influence on games would have been even greater. Problem is that they appear unwilling to gamble on Oswell preferring to go for the same old, same old which is simply not working.

jack played 120 games in less than 3 seasons and scored 36 goals ...he was handled fine...in the past Redrobbo you have advocated immediately chucking everyone new in from the start regardless of age ..fitness or wether you have ever seen them play.

Keith wrote:

KenH wrote:Why start with Cranston when he has "proper" midfielders Kenyon and Tutte on the bench?

To be fair, Cranston has been one of our best players in the last three or four games, so didn't deserve to be dropped. Tutte is probably not fully fit yet either. The side that started yesterday *SHOULD* have been good enough to beat a struggling Conference side.

Ive been impressed with Cranston and job he's doing, its not like we've better options for a ball winning midfielder to sit infront of the back four.

Ntini wrote:Insanity is said to be repeating the same action and expecting a different outcome. It happened with the team selection last night and it happens every week with the selection of Vadaine Oliver. I don't think you can deny his efforts for the club, however Oliver has proven to be ineffective as a L2 striker (5 goals from 51 L2 games) and he just doesn't cut the mustard in my opinion. So why do we persist with him?

If Jim and Ken genuinely believed that last night was a sackable performance, then why don't they walk away? Surely if you realise you are doing more harm than good, then you would put the interests of the club first? I genuinely believed that Jim was Morecambe through and through. The interview last night, for me, says he's more interested in taking his pay home every month than the long-term prospects of the club.

It pains me to say it, but that's the final straw for me. Jim & Ken's tenure has kept us in the FL, for which I'll always be grateful. You can't deny it's also seen a drastic drop in attendances and now they've missed the golden opportunity to put some much-needed cash in the coffers. If you can't motivate your players to score one goal in 180 minutes against a side in the bottom half of the league below, then you've lost your way and it's time to move on. What's more, if you believe you have "form" having only scored 4 goals in the last 8 games (P8 W2 D2 L4 GD-2) then you're deluded.

For those that question our ability to afford to sack the management team, my question is how can we afford not to?

so very very true, unfortunately