Carl Sagan

Just saying:

Wildsmith 6.5 Liked how he got the ball forward quickly. 

Chester 7.5 Looks impressive. Feels a good position for him.

Stearman 6 Unfairly singled out for the handball when it wasn't him.

Roberts 5.5 Didn't impact the game.

Cashin 7 Proper defender.

Mendez-Laing 7 Dangerous for the first hour and had a good attempt, before tiring.

Knight 6.5 Pleased to see him in midfield. Some strong runs but the winning goal was poor from him.

Bird 6 Needs to impose himself on the game more.

Sibley 6.5 Should have been given 2 pens, created 2 very dangerous attacks, got an opponent booked and would likely have scored if the ball had been laid back to him instead of a bad option to shoot by someone else. Not bad for 10+7 minutes.

Hourihane 4.5 Needs to impose himself on the game and WTF was that handball?

Barkhuizen 7 Brilliant run for the first goal and was dangerous running throughout. Shouldn't have waved his leg for the pen, but then he withdrew it and didn't touch the guy. Awful refereeing.

Dobbin 5 What does he do? A really easy overhead kick missed, then later our best chance of the half missed, for a 2-0 lead. You have to score those.

Collins 5 Great goal, but you don't leave your teammates in the lurch like that. Sending off (and then Hourihane's handball) cost us the game.

Osula 5.5 Ineffective.

FFS Stearman obviously did nothing wrong. A ref totally out of his depth with the game not under his control made the wrong decision and now we have a stupid thread that cements the mistake. It was clearly Hourihane who handled and, along with Collins, they are both very naughty boys.

A big shame Hourihane isn't suspended so we could change the midfield and start Sibley. A big shame Collins is suspended for three games, just as he was finding form. 

Definitely not the game to judge Warne on. 

21 minutes ago, Carl Sagan said:

I presume if I'm out of the country, I can pay separately from my audio subsc for a one-off video match pass for Port Vale? I can't seem to see any option to buy this at the moment. 

Thanks for any help. 

Sorted before the forum could rush to my aid! Come on you Rams! 

I presume if I'm out of the country, I can pay separately from my audio subsc for a one-off video match pass for Port Vale? I can't seem to see any option to buy this at the moment. 

Thanks for any help. 

According to their fans they've been getting worse every game, so I was hoping they'd keep him on at least to the World Cup so they would be further adrift. If they keep losing he will be fired, so this is good as presumably they will have to pay out additional compensation. It's an easy gig being a Premier League manager as you're in a win-win situation when it comes to the money.

Come on the Villa!

National League North (so tier 6) for those who don't know. Always good for young players to get a taste of men's football. 

1 hour ago, Betty Swollocks said:

I see that they have former Rams loanee, the instantly forgettable, James Wilson in their ranks..

You must be right, as I have no idea!

13 minutes ago, Scott129 said:

We're spoiled with how good this forum is compared to some of the others around in the EFL, but Port Vale have quite a nicely-designed one. Award-winning, apparently.

Their match thread is here.

Ta. Always interesting. Apparently they normally play wingbacks (so presumably a match up against us) and they have a long-throw specialist. That sort of thing always reminds me of when we had world-record holder Rory Delap at fullback but Jim Smith inexplicably refused to let him use the incredible weapon of his throw-ins, and we always took them short. When he went to Stoke, Rory's missiles would end up terrorizing the Premier League, with opponents not daring to kick the ball out against Stoke as his throw-ins were so dangerous. Madness!

23 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

The use of subs last night suggests who will start at the weekend. Tbh, it's difficult to change a winning team, so it's the same 11 as those who played vs Cambridge.

Wildsmith

Chester   Davies   Cashin

Mendez-Laing   Knight   Bird   Hourihane   Barkhuizen

Dobbin   Collins

Subs: Loach, Stearman, Forsyth, Roberts, Tommo, Sibley, Osula

I think this is very likely Warne's team. Hope Sibley gets half an hour for this game, to make his case, as I strongly believe we're better with him in the starting lineup.

Indeed we are - as I mentioned in the Paul Warne thread. The very best teams are also the most "professional". If Manchester City are on the ropes or facing a vociferous crowd away from home, Ederson knows to fall to the ground injured for three or four minutes to completely take the sting out of the game. With a keeper involved the ref has no choice but to go along with it and bring the trainer on. The Wycombe keeper did the same thing to us in the last game.

We hardly ever get penalties as our players are normally too embarrassed to appeal for them for some reason. The whole team has to go up for something, not a half-hearted appeal from an individual. And if you're fouled, cry out in pain to attract the ref's attention. 

And before you can play you have to win your physical battles and that includes showing the opposition you're not going to be intimidated. And trying to physically intimidate your opponent. Also, I don't think our players have had sufficient protection from referees so far this season. Maybe that's a League One thing, but whatever the reason, when you're a team you make sure to protect each other. 

2 hours ago, angieram said:

I agree, Saffy. 

The interview and all the media around it has made me feel uncomfortable,  it's all overkill at this stage.

It went on too long - very complicated answers, thought Warne was trying too hard. My comment about the coffee was only partly in jest, he really needs to calm down a bit! Maybe the club could do the same. We've hardly signed up Fergie - and if we have he's more Darren than Alex! 

From where I sit, the fans were enjoying the fact we were trying to play football, weren't calling for the manager's head, so there's that bit of unease around the way Liam has been treated. He failed his target - so what was that? We were seventh after the start to the season we had, hardly dismissal material.

As for Warne, I didn't like him before, he's very aggressive on the touchline, a bit of a bully with the officials, I sit above the away dug out so see it every game. Seems to encourage his players in the dark arts, Crooks springs to mind as an example. A good footballer, but playing on the edge of legitimacy all the time - more bullying.

I think some players will respond well to him, but others? I don't know. I know I wouldn't want my boss texting me all hours with snippets - there needs to be boundaries, imo.

So, all that touchy feely stuff left me feeling a bit underwhelmed. 

However, what I did like, was when he started talking tactics. He suddenly grabbed my attention and I liked what I was hearing. My fears about the sort of football we're going to see have subsided somewhat, especially as we've not got those sorts of players available to him (currently).

If he can deliver what he says, and if he can tone it down a bit, I'll be happy. But I'm not in the fanclub yet! 

I've not watched the interview because the love-in is all a bit overkill. Let's have our football do the talking and keep expectations managed for now. But I actually don't mind what you say about Warne being a bit of a bully on the touchline and players being on the edge of legitimacy. Too often we are bullied as a team and not streetwise enough, hence we seem to have so many decisions go against us. I get many people won't like it, but as well as playing good football I'd like us to toughen up a bit. I do think this is partly what's needed to win promotion over a long season. Anything to gain an advantage as this will be a long hard slog.

On 27/09/2022 at 13:24, Wolfie said:

OK so who's sabotaging the gas pipelines, then?.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-63044747

I'm struggling to work out who gains from this. Is it just Russia underlining that there won't be any gas into the EU this winter?.

This Polish MEP has publicly thanked the Americans for it!

If you look at his profile, the banner pic is of him with Biden, he's chair of the USA-EU delegation and has a connection with Harvard Uni. If the Americans did do it, they won't thank him for this and it's a very dodgy and dangerous act.

Paul Warne at his first presser:

"I want to press, I want to get the ball back high, I want to stop counter-attacks, keep attacks going and for that you have to press, you have to be athletic but fundamentally you have to be really good on the ball and I think the lads have been really conducive to what we’re trying to do."

Athletic and a high press, being good on the ball and keeping attacks going are exactly how I want us to play. Let's hope we'll start seeing this on Saturday. We saw this sometimes under Lampard. I remember the Marriott goal at Old Trafford was the inevitable result of incessant pressure - we were unstoppable. They couldn't live with the waves of attacks.

I don't want to see us with the ball around the opposition box only to try to funnel it back to Wildsmith to start again. I don't want to see freekicks in the opposition half get funnelled back to Wildsmith to start again. Ditto throw-ins. If we're to be promoted we have to start looking in the right direction.

Much the best thing all round. Had he stayed Liam would have known it was undermining Warne's position. Plus we need to break away from the way of playing that has been ingrained in the players, and we couldn't do that with Rosenior remaining at the club.

He leaves amicably, with thanks, with his stock pretty high. I would argue Derby were his experimental project and we could not afford to be his experimental project, but I understand he will also have thought he was doing the best thing for the club.

Look forward to seeing where Warney takes the team, and following where Rosenior's career goes from here.

C Stand, C Stand give us a song

C Stand, give us a song!

5 hours ago, Archied said:

Not a jot of difference to those it is forced on , easy for those outside looking in to make one somehow better than the other , 

if someone does not want to pick up a gun to kill or be killed , forcing them is wrong wrong wrong , why is it wrong for someone to say a piece of land and a flag is not enough for them to kill or die for and they would choose to get out ?

Exactly. The only time I would consider taking up arms in some military conflict would be in response to an alien invasion or an AI takeover. I'm not prepared to kill a fellow Human Being who's been ordered by his or her leaders to fight and potentially die for some political cause. 

Scottish Nationalist MP Joanna Cherry (who's also a King's Counsel) suggests that the PayPal ban on providing services to the Free Speech Union (among others) is potentially discriminatory, breaking UK Law:

The dawn of a new era. Will it be evolution or revolution? We don't have a "Rosenior will pick such and such a team" element here, so I can just go with who I would pick:

Wildsmith

Chester     Davies     Cashin     Forsyth

Sibley     Knight     Hourihane

Mendez-Laing     McGoldrick     Barkhuizen

Subs: Loach Roberts Smith Bird Collins Dobbin Osula

On 18/09/2022 at 11:37, David said:

They have done Rodger’s dirty in the transfer window, yet you would have to say they have enough there to not be sat bottom.

Think he will be asked to clear his desk for that reason, lift morale with a new manager bounce. 

Rodger’s will be fine, next destination will be Newcastle. Stick a fiver on it.

Rodgers to Newcastle and Howe to England. And Southgate to Middlesbrough...

Only Rodgers will do well.

Looked a decent performer when we got to see him on trial earlier in the season. The academy feels as if it needs strengthening. Hopefully he'll help with that and be able to push on.

45 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

Which in no way did I advocate for. Yet you're accusing me of binary thinking? Clearly there are a multitude of sports with a multitude of physical characteristics which determine one's aptitude for a high performance level. And then a multitude of different stages of going through the process of transitioning gender, and within that a multitude of different physicalities of every human. So why should any of it be considered a binary choice?

I think it's fair to say - beware of anyone who wants to take either extreme position (ie ALL trans athletes should be allowed to compete in all gendered sports and NO trans athletes should be allowed to compete in all gendered sports)

I'm saying it should be legislated for by the individual sporting bodies according to each sport, and that's the end of it. I don't care what they decide, as long as it's about fairness. Literally the most middle ground position I could take, so interesting to see the reactions ?

Because you wrote "trans women are women", so with one part of your brain you're saying "sex is binary". While with the other you talk about "a multitude of different stages of going through the process of transitioning gender, and within that a multitude of different physicalities of every human", suggesting you think it's some kind of spectrum. The cognitive dissonance is impressive.

Western civilization has reached this point through the agricultural revolution, the Renaissance, the scientific revolution and the industrial revolution, but now risks being undermined by all this anti-scientific baloney, imagining biology isn't real.

3 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

is it though? What about Darts? What about Snooker?

It's not a black and white subject. It should be for every sporting body in charge of every sport to look into it and decide for themselves.

In every sport there will be different physical factors, and different thresholds that can be seen to make a difference. Let the experts decide and come to an independent agreement. This seems to be happening in most sports now thankfully

1) if she's going to express a public opinion on a sensitive subject, she should absolutely think about her wording

2) it's not about standing up for "women's rights" - and that's another problem with her wording. Trans women are women. So it's their rights too. It's about "standing up for fairness in sport" 

 

Steve, I'd suggest you're repeating the bizarre doublethink of people who might call themselves "liberals" and think they're all lovely and caring and nice but are actually the most illiberal bunch one might come across. I call them "wokists". On the one hand there is the claim that "sex is not binary" (and "how dare anyone claim that it is"?). On the other hand they make binary statements such as "trans women are women" and don't even notice the contradiction, collapsing their spectrum onto a binary result.

No. All you can factually say is "trans women are trans women" or that "trans women are biological men".

Scientifically, human sex is binary. You are either male or female. You are either a man or a woman. Yes there is a minuscule percentage of the human population (estimated at 0.018%) born with both sex organs and labelled intersex, technically in which chromosomal sex is inconsistent with phenotypic sex, or in which the phenotype is not classifiable as either male or female. But there is zero intersection between intersex people and the transgender community. 

There are those who wish they'd been born as the other sex and are labelled gender dysphoric, but the reality is that they weren't. Yes that's tough, and if those people want to live elements of their lives as the opposite sex when it doesn't impact negatively on others, no one is saying they shouldn't. But clearly it's wrong to remove the category of women's sports and allow anyone who wants (regardless of their sex) to compete in it.

42 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

I'm not an extremist and I wouldn't label her far right or fascist

All she wants to do is openly discuss why she thinks trans women should be banned from competing in women's sport. There's definitely an important and nuanced discussion to be had there around a very tricky subject. The problem people seem to have is that she comes across as transphobic in the way she puts her case forward. 

They label her "transphobic" because she believes people born as women should be allowed to compete in their own sports category. That's all it takes. And it really isn't a tricky subject. 

36 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

Is Sharon Davies a right winger? Does she still work for the BBC? If so she could end up getting cancelled. 

She's a campaigner for women's rights in sports, preserving women-only competitions. Extremists would therefore label her "far right" or "fascist" as they do anyone who disagrees with them. Speaking about her views risks her being cancelled by many services and organizations, quite possibly including PayPal and the BBC.