Lincoln City: "Dark-hearted and cynical" | Page 2 | Vital Football

Lincoln City: "Dark-hearted and cynical"

  • Thread starter Deleted member 10554
  • Start date
That's fine. But never have I seen a thread on this board where the guy insulting our football club is defended, and a fan is shunned for his opposition to that insult.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
graemetheexile said:
That's fine. But never have I seen a thread on this board where the guy insulting our football club is defended, and a fan is shunned for his opposition to that insult.
Click to expand...

Christ almighty stop being so precious!

So what if other teams don’t like us? The vitriol directed towards us this season has been hilarious to hear and read. Especially as we know it’s purely based on jealousy.
 
graemetheexile said:
Main Road, this was not a team. But fair enough.
Click to expand...

Am I meant to be the one insulting the team, or daring to suggest that others are allowed to do it?

Just so you and I are clear about it, all I said is that other people not associated with the club, and therefore with no particular axe to grind, will have opinions about the team's style of play which you might not like.

If you don't want to hear those opinions you should steer clear of exposing yourself to them.

For what it's worth (ie, not much) I think it's better to win than lose. It's better to win with style than win ugly. But it's better to win first.

I don't know anything about you Graeme, nor you about me, but if you're going to get so het up every time someone has a view that contradicts your own, you're going to have to watch your blood pressure. Better to accept it and work out whether there's anything in it. Rightly or wrongly I reckon they had a point. That doesn't always make it an insult.
 
City are tough and uncompromising. So are a lot of teams.

Shrewsbury, for instance. They are only 26 points behind us in the FA fair play tables (372 v 346), and that includes ridiculous red cards for Knott and Waterfall (12 points each).
 
I do wonder if, in our glory and passion, we don't sometimes become a little tolerant of our own gamesmanship.

A work colleague said he would be watching the final on TV- I told him to watch out for the 2nd half injury break to our goalkeeper. He didn't understand until Allsop suddenly went down with cramp around the 65th minute (the ref clearly had previous knowledge as he almost sprinted over to Allsop who decided it had been too obvious, stretched and got up). A text from my colleague was incredulous that I knew this would happen.

I use this as an example because LCFC and DC use every single avenue to gain the smallest advantage. Every opposition player is scrutinised , strengths and weaknesses. Every piece of football science is used to gain the upper hand (gotta get 26 crosses in during a game because we score from a cross once in every 26 crosses).

My point?

We are not cynical but we are not angels either and it was mildly amusing when at Morecambe a couple of weeks ago to read the wrath on this forum about their time wasting antics (and see it at the game itself) when Morecambe were no worse, or better, than our traditional second half injury break- which incidentally I am certain we had at Morecambe as well.

Dark hearted? No

Cynical? No

Playing the "game"? Definitely

Pushing the limits? Absolutely

And finally (and I say this categorically that it was not as intended), I would not be surprised if Rheady had been told to put the young Shrews keeper under pressure, let him know he's in a game, force him to make a mistake or think twice about coming for a cross etc,. That Rheady poleaxed him would not have been in any discussion, that Rheady misjudged his attempt at "pressure" seemed pretty clear to me.

There are elements of the "Crazy Gang" in what we do when on the pitch and this detracts sometimes from some very good tactical knowledge and skills from DC/NC and the team.

IMHO anyway
 
StrangelyBrown said:
I do wonder if, in our glory and passion, we don't sometimes become a little tolerant of our own gamesmanship.

A work colleague said he would be watching the final on TV- I told him to watch out for the 2nd half injury break to our goalkeeper. He didn't understand until Allsop suddenly went down with cramp around the 65th minute (the ref clearly had previous knowledge as he almost sprinted over to Allsop who decided it had been too obvious, stretched and got up). A text from my colleague was incredulous that I knew this would happen.

I use this as an example because LCFC and DC use every single avenue to gain the smallest advantage. Every opposition player is scrutinised , strengths and weaknesses. Every piece of football science is used to gain the upper hand (gotta get 26 crosses in during a game because we score from a cross once in every 26 crosses).

My point?

We are not cynical but we are not angels either and it was mildly amusing when at Morecambe a couple of weeks ago to read the wrath on this forum about their time wasting antics (and see it at the game itself) when Morecambe were no worse, or better, than our traditional second half injury break- which incidentally I am certain we had at Morecambe as well.

Dark hearted? No

Cynical? No

Playing the "game"? Definitely

Pushing the limits? Absolutely

And finally (and I say this categorically that it was not as intended), I would not be surprised if Rheady had been told to put the young Shrews keeper under pressure, let him know he's in a game, force him to make a mistake or think twice about coming for a cross etc,. That Rheady poleaxed him would not have been in any discussion, that Rheady misjudged his attempt at "pressure" seemed pretty clear to me.

There are elements of the "Crazy Gang" in what we do when on the pitch and this detracts sometimes from some very good tactical knowledge and skills from DC/NC and the team.

IMHO anyway
Click to expand...
This ^
"Tolerant of our gamesmanship ", yep. Understanding that every other side does it when needed, yep. Understanding why other fans bleat about ours when they lost to us, yep, and it's bloody hilarious when they do!
 
If everyone had the same opinions on here there wouldn't be many posts.
It was a bit strange of BT to have an ex Shrewsbury man as a pundit and another guy who had no connection to the imps as the other pundit. There are plenty of ex imps about so did they try and get somebody? Or did they assume the Shrews would win?
The simple facts are that Danny got his tactics spot on and that is why we won the match. Perhaps we should have tried to play like Brazil and lost. Only one team gets remembered from cup finals and that's the winners.
 
Ruskingtony said:
,,,,Or did they assume the Shrews would win?
Click to expand...

I have no inside knowledge of how they go about televised games, but it seems to me there's always an angle, and they're always looking for a new one.

This was kind of alluded to on the "Don Goodman" thread. My view is that City are last year's story as far as the media are concerned. It's a continuing one, but they have a new underdog upsetting the odds in Shrewsbury. They will have expected them to win as they were odds-on favourites for the game, so there's the story - Shrewsbury's unexpected progression reinforced by trophy success.

That the Imps upstaged them was not how they anticipated the script would go.

TBH I don't understand why they bother with ex-players of a team in the studio as it adds nothing to anyone's understanding of the game As it was I thought Dave Edwards was extremely fair-minded when it didn't pan out as intended.
 
If you saw the C5 highlights Colin Murray said to them he was sat close to the dug-out and wouldn't want to be 4th official, who Danny was in his ear all game. They remind me a bit of certain drivers, mild mannered & reasonable until they get behind the wheel. Same with once the whistle blows for them !
 
Ruskingtony said:
If everyone had the same opinions on here there wouldn't be many posts.
It was a bit strange of BT to have an ex Shrewsbury man as a pundit and another guy who had no connection to the imps as the other pundit. There are plenty of ex imps about so did they try and get somebody? Or did they assume the Shrews would win?
The simple facts are that Danny got his tactics spot on and that is why we won the match. Perhaps we should have tried to play like Brazil and lost. Only one team gets remembered from cup finals and that's the winners.
Click to expand...
Was the game not on sky rather than BT?
 
History of EFL winners. This is what everyone will read in years to come. We are the winners, the runners-up haven't even got a mention on this list. We played some good football on Sunday, mixed it up. Down the wings, high balls, low balls, players running with it. We weren't even that direct tbh.
 
We used the have the Guess the Farman/Rhead minute last season and for a bit this season, when I could be bothered....but now it'd have to be the Allsop/Rhead minute.

It was predictable as clockwork. When you make a team hard to beat, then it will not be pretty. Grit, application and application will be involved.


I have no issues with the podcast. Our main aim was to stop Shrewsbury playing. Like we did against Ipswich and Brighton. It's not for the faint hearted and neither is it good for neutral supporters, but if it means we perform well, then I don't care.

I don't want a return to the nice passing triangles of Alan Buckley. That's why I loved Beck at the club. He turned us into a very difficult team to beat and a team that the opposition hated to play.

Success brings jealously. As for media conspiracy....that makes us sound like Man City....For goodness sake.

We don't play attractive football. We play close to the wire, but we are attracting our biggest crowds in nigh over 50 years. Do I care what other fans think? Nope. Not one jot
 
Croozey said:
History of EFL winners. This is what everyone will read in years to come. We are the winners, the runners-up haven't even got a mention on this list. We played some good football on Sunday, mixed it up. Down the wings, high balls, low balls, players running with it. We weren't even that direct tbh.
Click to expand...

Quite. To my mind, it was a mix of measured passing, battling bloody-mindedness, excellent game management and organisation and an unshakeable will to win. All these attributes have contributed to our success over the last twenty months and they were all on display in this game. Superb.
 
Ruskingtony said:
It was a bit strange of BT to have an ex Shrewsbury man as a pundit and another guy who had no connection to the imps as the other pundit. There are plenty of ex imps about so did they try and get somebody? Or did they assume the Shrews would win?
Click to expand...

There aren't a massive amount of ex-Imps players that are media savvy and have done TV work previously. You've got Beevers who did a little bit for BT last year but beyond that and Preece, you can't think of many that have a link to the club and have done TV work like that before and not contracted to a broadcaster already. Even last season when we were on BT seemingly every other week, you didn't see many ex-Imps appearing on the coverage.

David Edwards has done TV work before and Keith Andrews has worked for Sky a fair bit as a pundit across football since retirement.
 
Seems to me most of the controversy surrounds just one decision. Rhead's challenge. It was an unpleasant challenge and not what I want to see from any of our players. Lets not forget that he took a smack in the face from the guy wearing the mask. Both the players booked for the Shrews could have had a 2nd yellow, both sides committed 17 fouls and had 2 yellow cards in a game where possession was 50/50. Not a dirty game by any stretch of the imagination. I find it incredible we are still discussing this 4 days later. Have folk forgot we won our first ever national cup competition. I am still euphoric and watching the highlights 2 or 3 times a day.
 
It feels very good knowing that no opposition team is viewing us a soft touch any more. We're an extremely fit, very well organised, physically strong, tough to beat side with a determination to win that is second to none and we demonstrated all of that on Sunday, long may it continue...
 
Preece
Click to expand...

Sadly Preece was on this podcast, and didn't really say much in Lincoln's defence. Earlier in the season he cocked up quite a bit on the Lincoln focus section as well, but there we are.

I'm beginning to suspect I'm not very fond of this podcast.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.