Jump to content

'suspicious' man outside Derby County's training ground


minesahartington

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
1 hour ago, Gritters said:

Just to clarify do people think Leeds gained an advantage by sending someone to look at us training? From what I saw on Friday night they must have put rohypnol in out drinks before the game which is far more concerning.

Yes, in terms of knowing that Wilson wasn’t playing. He would have known that Holmes/Wisdom were playing and hadn’t played together, meaning that putting Alioski at LB was less of a risk. He would have known a returning Lowe was LB and so putting Clarke in for his debut was less of a risk. None of this guaranteed victory, but it takes a lot of doubt out of your planning.

Been mentioned elsewhere too but I think it shows a huge lack of respect for the competition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TuffLuff said:

Yes, in terms of knowing that Wilson wasn’t playing. He would have known that Holmes/Wisdom were playing and hadn’t played together, meaning that putting Alioski at LB was less of a risk. He would have known a returning Lowe was LB and so putting Clarke in for his debut was less of a risk. None of this guaranteed victory, but it takes a lot of doubt out of your planning.

Been mentioned elsewhere too but I think it shows a huge lack of respect for the competition.

I did think about the left back with Lowe but the team isn’t announced until 1 hour before kick off so nothing is certain.

I think we are in danger of making ourselves look silly if we can’t move on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Curtains said:

Answer me this what is he doing it for. 

 

Why don't you listen to his own comments in the press conference, which I've already posted. 

My personal feeling is that he's just an obsessive collector of data. As he says, he has far more information than he can possibly analyse anyway. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, TuffLuff said:

He would have known that Holmes/Wisdom were playing and hadn’t played together, meaning that putting Alioski at LB was less of a risk.

Wasn't Alioski at LB because Douglas is injured? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wonder what would be said if it had been derby ladies he had been spying on.

Maybe that's what he was intending, perhaps thats why he had a spare pair of pants. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Gritters said:

I did think about the left back with Lowe but the team isn’t announced until 1 hour before kick off so nothing is certain.

I think we are in danger of making ourselves look silly if we can’t move on.

But no one is saying we lost because of it, the ones who are making a thing about it are actually the Leeds fans. 

The question doesn’t concern the match on Friday night, it’s whether it’s right or wrong and it’s a difficult question to answer. It’s a question about respect, or lack of, and whether it’s gaining an advantage because you are cutting down the amount of risk that you face in your decisions.

It’s not a ‘massive’ deal but if a club (Leeds will know that he does it, the person spying will be a club employee!) is trying to gain an advantage through pre meditated cheating then it needs dealing with to deter it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Gritters said:

Just to clarify do people think Leeds gained an advantage by sending someone to look at us training? From what I saw on Friday night they must have put rohypnol in out drinks before the game which is far more concerning.

No, I'm sure they'd of beaten us anyway. More to the point though, Bielsa must think it gives them an advantage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Lambchop said:

Wasn't Alioski at LB because Douglas is injured? 

Yes...but it was a risk he had to decide upon. Do we go defensive or can we get through 90 minutes there? If you know that Holmes is there, who’s been playing centrally a lot, and and not Waghorn, Wilson or whoever you are controlling how much of a risk that is. You aren’t having to be cautious over that decision, you are essentially in full control.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Lambchop said:

There is no level playing field in football, nor will there be while the game is dominated by money. 

Gaining a bit of extra information about the rival team pales into insignificance compared to the widespread corruption at every level.

It's almost endearing; someone who's still passionate enough to care about winning by outclassing, rather than outspending, the opponent. 

Endearing? What the duck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Lambchop said:

Bielsa's aren't.

He generally releases them a few days beforehand.

Why would he do that if it put him at such a disadvantage?

Because both he and other strange people like him can then offer this as excuse as to why his spying didn't offer him any advantage when he gets caught?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let me know if I’m goinng to far here, but I feel like starting a #metoo campaign for other clubs he’s been spying on. 

Seriously, does this not have more than a few parallels with a girl being touched up by a producer and being told to just let it go, it happens all the time dearly, don’t make a fuss and everyone gets along.

@Lambchop in your opinion we should be vilified for drawing attention to this more than shady practice, and expecting it to be appropriately dealt with. What will more than likely happen is that it will be brushed under the carpet and he’ll be free to continue doing it. You need to pick a side, cos you can’t have it both ways. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is a sad state of affairs that this has ended up with our fans disagreeing to the extent of some defending Leeds over Derby. Why are we somehow being made to feel in the wrong here. Madness.

Of course it is underhand, quite obvious Bielsa doesn't care that it isn't the done thing. He would not do it if it did not offer him some advantage and he will most likely keep doing so. The result of the match has no impact on my view of the spy saga.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BondJovi said:

It is a sad state of affairs that this has ended up with our fans disagreeing to the extent of some defending Leeds over Derby. Why are we somehow being made to feel in the wrong here. Madness.

Of course it is underhand, quite obvious Bielsa doesn't care that it isn't the done thing. He would not do it if it did not offer him some advantage and he will most likely keep doing so. The result of the match has no impact on my view of the spy saga.

 

I think the point being made by Lambchop is that we come across as bad losers if we keep banging on about it. The irony being, the only reason we're banging on about it is that in the absence of any Leeds fans here defending Bielsa, that same Derby fan has decided to advocate on Leeds' behalf.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whatever genuine info they got, its brilliant / dirty mindgames.

But make sure the spy is spotted, then let the psychological impact play out when the opponent thinks you have rumbled all their plans whether you did or did not.

don Revie would be proud of that one. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, RamNut said:

Whatever genuine info they got, its brilliant / dirty mindgames.

But make sure the spy is spotted, then let the psychological impact play out when the opponent thinks you have rumbled all their plans whether you did or did not.

don Revie would be proud of that one. 

He would indeed. Which says it all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...