Independent Leyton Orient Forum

tuffers#1 wrote: ↑Sat Sep 05, 2020 7:00 pm

Dohnut wrote: ↑Sat Sep 05, 2020 6:53 pm

tuffers#1 wrote: ↑Sat Sep 05, 2020 5:59 pm

Because we had the chance to get a Prem' league Squad player on loan.
What L2 club wouldnt take an ex EPL squad player on loan ?

L2 players against championship/prem squad players ?
Even you shouldnt need that explaining
DOh .

If you believe that, well. The question is why did we feel the need to look for people in that position. Pretty obvious. Ling senior would even have done the deal. We have one loan player, happens to be RB. The clues are there.

More conspiracy Doh .

Norwich let clubs know a player is available.

Possibly to reduce a full wage during the pandemic & after a relegation .

Anything else said without proof , is just Hogwash fella

Keep trying. The truth is out there. Makes it more obvious if we are paying a wage. I’m sure many players are available but we went for a RB. Just because Norwich made him available don’t mean we must sign unless we feel there is a need. Obvious. Ling ain’t good enough. He is being replaced.

Dohnut wrote: ↑Sat Sep 05, 2020 8:21 pm

tuffers#1 wrote: ↑Sat Sep 05, 2020 7:00 pm

Dohnut wrote: ↑Sat Sep 05, 2020 6:53 pm

If you believe that, well. The question is why did we feel the need to look for people in that position. Pretty obvious. Ling senior would even have done the deal. We have one loan player, happens to be RB. The clues are there.

More conspiracy Doh .

Norwich let clubs know a player is available.

Possibly to reduce a full wage during the pandemic & after a relegation .

Anything else said without proof , is just Hogwash fella

Keep trying. The truth is out there. Makes it more obvious if we are paying a wage. I’m sure many players are available but we went for a RB. Just because Norwich made him available don’t mean we must sign unless we feel there is a need. Obvious. Ling ain’t good enough. He is being replaced.

Doh you must get up to speed with how Football clubs work these days .

Norwich had 22 out on loan last year .
Theyve started putting out on loan again


https://www.google.com/amp/s/theathleti ... ers/%3famp

See

https://www.google.com/search?ei=pdRTX7 ... s-wiz-serp

There is more info above .

Just so you know we had 3 players capable of being right back last year
Marsh Judd & Ling jnr , throw Turley in as an option thats 4 .
As our 3 are all injury prone .

The norwich kid is just another version of Marsh but slighty more rightback right mid than
marsh mid/rb . .

RedO wrote: ↑Sat Sep 05, 2020 5:02 pm

Smendrick Feaselberg wrote: ↑Sat Sep 05, 2020 4:33 pm

PoundhillO wrote: ↑Sat Sep 05, 2020 3:41 pm Ling at fault again, let man get past him who's shot was inches past the post.

Are you going to slate all of our players for their mistakes in this game or just Ling? It looks like you're mindlessly singling one player out.

Probably because he is by far the worst player in our starting XI, the one stand out weak link and had a mare today.

Great result tho, despite the performance.

By definition every team has a worst player. Doesn't mean people should single them out for criticism at every opportunity while at the same time ignoring shortcomings from other players.

This just smacks of a vendetta and Poundhill has a track record for lashing out and scapegoating rather than constructive criticism.

moonwalk19 wrote: ↑Sat Sep 05, 2020 5:03 pm

EliotNes wrote: ↑Sat Sep 05, 2020 4:57 pm Don't you just love supporting the O's.

1-0 down at half-time

No shots recorded in the first half.

score 2 goals in the first 7 mins of the 2nd half and come out the winners.

COYOs

According to the BBC we had 10 shots second half with 7 on target. Boss must have read the riot act at HT

I didn’t see the game nor hear any commentary and didn’t know we were winning till virtually the end of the game as our website said it was a 5pm kick on the countdown timer they had going on!

Anyway, I’ve listened to Ross’s interview post game and I’d have said he was calm, cool and collected in his half time team talk. I liked the way he laid out what was wrong, what he asked the players to do and tactically they carried out his instructions. I think calmness was required rather than a volcano blasting off and it’s telling by the comments on here we played well in the second half.

Not really mentioned much but i think Josh Coulson played really well today. In fact both central defenders had a good game considering how easy we made it for them to put crosses in from wide positions. We need to close opponents down and press them a bit more. Second half was better but on other occassions you could be 2 or 3 down.

Trouble is AA you can’t keep on allowing teams to wip in crosses all the time as you are asking so much of your centre halves to deal with. Not having seen the game or the way we played, we are either pressing so high space is being left in behind the full backs or they are just being run ragged either way it needs addressing.

Thor wrote: ↑Sat Sep 05, 2020 10:46 pm Trouble is AA you can’t keep on allowing teams to wip in crosses all the time as you are asking so much of your centre halves to deal with. Not having seen the game or the way we played, we are either pressing so high space is being left in behind the full backs or they are just being run ragged either way it needs addressing.

Statiatically aren't crosses a low percentage scoring opportunity?

If we are still second best at the end of the season doesn't that mean we will be promoted.

Smendrick Feaselberg wrote: ↑Sat Sep 05, 2020 10:47 pm

Thor wrote: ↑Sat Sep 05, 2020 10:46 pm Trouble is AA you can’t keep on allowing teams to wip in crosses all the time as you are asking so much of your centre halves to deal with. Not having seen the game or the way we played, we are either pressing so high space is being left in behind the full backs or they are just being run ragged either way it needs addressing.

Statiatically aren't crosses a low percentage scoring opportunity?

So they are a percentage, just remind me how did the OG come about for FGR.

Thor wrote: ↑Sat Sep 05, 2020 10:46 pm Trouble is AA you can’t keep on allowing teams to wip in crosses all the time as you are asking so much of your centre halves to deal with. Not having seen the game or the way we played, we are either pressing so high space is being left in behind the full backs or they are just being run ragged either way it needs addressing.

I''ve just seen the goals on Quest. I thought Happe was very unlucky to turn the ball into his own net after Ling had given the ball away in midfield. . It was a Lovely goal by Johnson for the equaliser and I also thought Wilkinson goal was extremely well taken.

AckneyAwks wrote: ↑Sat Sep 05, 2020 11:00 pm

Smendrick Feaselberg wrote: ↑Sat Sep 05, 2020 10:47 pm

Thor wrote: ↑Sat Sep 05, 2020 10:46 pm Trouble is AA you can’t keep on allowing teams to wip in crosses all the time as you are asking so much of your centre halves to deal with. Not having seen the game or the way we played, we are either pressing so high space is being left in behind the full backs or they are just being run ragged either way it needs addressing.

Statiatically aren't crosses a low percentage scoring opportunity?

So they are a percentage, just remind me how did the OG come about for FGR.

But that doesn't detract from them generally being a low percentage opportunity. You're biasing your view towards the cross that we conceded an own goal from rather than all the others where we didn't because that stands out more.

It goes without saying that alllowing more lower scoring opportunities than higher will result in you conceding fewer goals and therefore picking up more points.