The Official Accrington Stanley Match Thread (Sponsored by the Milk Marketing Board "for all your "who are they?" needs") | Page 11 | Vital Football

The Official Accrington Stanley Match Thread (Sponsored by the Milk Marketing Board "for all your "who are they?" needs")

Could not see "that incident" too well from where I was in the ground but subsequently watched it, over and over, on TV.

Now, i`m deffo no refereeing expert and maybe i`m just not looking at it correctly, but, what I see is Jack Tucker with his eyes firmly fixed on the ball, which is coming down from height, and moving toward the spot where the ball was going to land. With his eyes still firmly fixed in the air at the ball, the Accy player, Sykes, moves into Jack, from Jack`s left, and the two players then collide - or, as the ref said, there was simply "a coming together". As a result of the coming together, and Jacks total focus being on the ball, the momentum of the Accy lad carried both of them to the ground in an untidy fashion. No penalty IMV. I suppose if you`re an Accy fan - you don`t see it like that but, that`s how I see it.

TBH, I don`t care too much - it`s points that count. And, tbh, that Sykes fella had been a bit of an "Eric" several times in the first half, flinging himself to the ground for no apparent reason. Sykes was also responsible for some of the poor defending that allowed the Gills to score. Could have been worse for "Eric" though, one more goal conceded and he`d have had a Hattie of errors to think about.
 
Macc Gill said:
Back home in Macc - I was fan #255 today - the only Gills fan in Stanley’s new hospitality suite. Fantastic result and no one I was with thought Accy deserved anything.

A certain Mr Scally was sat in the hospitality at half time and full time with at least 3 be-suited colleagues, all with GFC ties - new investors perhaps? I did ask him as he was leaving if he’d saved a few quid to pay Bomber’s keeping us up bonus!

WASU
Click to expand...

Good stuff Macc. The suits were not investors - they is proper fanz though !
 
Captainreblue said:
Come on GBN, having just seen the Tucker 'incident', that's a penalty all day long, unless (thankfully) you're yesterday's ref.

As for Jacksons challenge, it was soft but why he even needed to get involved is beyond me.
Click to expand...

Agree with what is said, but surprise nobody is talking about Phillips’ role in the penalty. Ramming let the acct player just walk past him.
 
LancsGordoRoad said:
Could not see "that incident" too well from where I was in the ground but subsequently watched it, over and over, on TV.































Now, i`m deffo no refereeing expert and maybe i`m just not looking at it correctly, but, what I see is Jack Tucker with his eyes firmly fixed on the ball, which is coming down from height, and moving toward the spot where the ball was going to land. With his eyes still firmly fixed in the air at the ball, the Accy player, Sykes, moves into Jack, from Jack`s left, and the two players then collide - or, as the ref said, there was simply "a coming together". As a result of the coming together, and Jacks total focus being on the ball, the momentum of the Accy lad carried both of them to the ground in an untidy fashion. No penalty IMV. I suppose if you`re an Accy fan - you don`t see it like that but, that`s how I see it.































TBH, I don`t care too much - it`s points that count. And, tbh, that Sykes fella had been a bit of an "Eric" several times in the first half, flinging himself to the ground for no apparent reason. Sykes was also responsible for some of the poor defending that allowed the Gills to score. Could have been worse for "Eric" though, one more goal conand he`d have had a Hattie of errors to thin



k about.
Click to expand...
LancsGordoRoad said:
Could not see "that incident" too well from where I was in the ground but subsequently watched it, over and over, on TV.

Now, i`m deffo no refereeing expert and maybe i`m just not looking at it correctly, but, what I see is Jack Tucker with his eyes firmly fixed on the ball, which is coming down from height, and moving toward the spot where the ball was going to land. With his eyes still firmly fixed in the air at the ball, the Accy player, Sykes, moves into Jack, from Jack`s left, and the two players then collide - or, as the ref said, there was simply "a coming together". As a result of the coming together, and Jacks total focus being on the ball, the momentum of the Accy lad carried both of them to the ground in an untidy fashion. No penalty IMV. I suppose if you`re an Accy fan - you don`t see it like that but, that`s how I see it.

TBH, I don`t care too much - it`s points that count. And, tbh, that Sykes fella had been a bit of an "Eric" several times in the first half, flinging himself to the ground for no apparent reason. Sykes was also responsible for some of the poor defending that allowed the Gills to score. Could have been worse for "Eric" though, one more goal conceded and he`d have had a Hattie of errors to think about.
Click to expand...
"that Sykes fella had been a bit of an "Eric" several times in the first half, flinging himself to the ground for no apparent reason. "
Possibly another reason for the ref giving Jack the benefit of the doubt. Refs are only human and if they see someone trying it on time and time again, there will always be an element of "He's trying to have me over again." As a former member of the Centre Half's guild, I thought Jack was just standing his ground and they collided. Nothing to see here, carry on
 
LancsGordoRoad said:
And, tbh, that Sykes fella had been a bit of an "Eric" several times in the first half, flinging himself to the ground for no apparent reason.
Click to expand...

I presume they account for the 7 penalties that Accy fan thought they should have had.

Only one Gills player booked, though, alongside 2 Accy players including Sykes.
 
Captainreblue said:
You really are a twat, a repetitive twat who for two years had not alot to justify your personal dislike of SE. I ddint want SE to be our manager, but for two years he did a decent job, regardless s of how he achieved it, under circumstances no other manager of GFC has had to work in our history, yet achieved two of our best placed finishes for years.

This season was a nitemare from the start, both in terms of recruitment and our covid affected pre season which then lead to injuries, which as you'd well know ( as Bradley's dad) can be very disruptive and a real issue and hampered us repeatedly. Was it tome for him to go yes, but for two years he did well.

NH has done a fantastic job since coming in but still you want to have a dig at a manager who left us over two months ago on a day when we've moved 4 points clear of the relegation places.

Move on and find some plaster to repair that chip you have on your shoulder regarding SE.
Click to expand...
total class reply -articulate as ever. You ridiculed my Responses to evans poor performance time and again yet he nearly took us down because his model is unsustainable with a club like ours. If you couldn’t see that then there really is only one numbskull pal . By the way I fathered most of the team at some point 🙄
 
kettners said:
total class reply -articulate as ever. You ridiculed my Responses to evans poor performance time and again yet he nearly took us down because his model is unsustainable with a club like ours. If you couldn’t see that then there really is only one numbskull pal . By the way I fathered most of the team at some point 🙄
Click to expand...

So if it was unsustainable with a club like ours how did he achieve our two consecutive top ten finishes?

On a thread on a great away victory that took us 4 points clear of the relegation zone you decided to have a pop at a manger who left 3 months ago.

If you look back through posts when SE was appointed I was one of the more critical posters but unlike you, I can actually concede that he did a decent job for two years and under really difficult circumstances this year it went pear shaped for I'd guess, and most agree it was more than just SE becoming a shit manager overnight, whilst you had to wait two years to finally get to say "he's a dinosaur blah blah blah."

As for "unsustainable with a club like ours" he was our longest serving manager since? (Mark Stimpson, 12 years ago). And longer than most on here predicted it would last
 
Last edited:
Not wanting to wade in on someone else’s debate but a high turn-over of players is sustainable at a club like ours (short term loans etc), but not once under the terms of our ‘not an embargo’, which has a limit on the number of players allowed in the first team squad.

Think I’ve agreed with both of you though, so yeah, carry on.
 
Rob_b100 said:
The way that fella used to go on and on about how great Garmston was I keep expecting him to feature for Barcelona any day soon.
Click to expand...

Not sure what Bradley is doing these days except for trying to flog some personalised vids on Cameo. Certainly hasn’t fulfilled his potential.
 
Archiepoptart said:
Begs the question; Is high turnover of players a good thing ? Discuss.
Click to expand...

Good question, I’m not really sure. It seems to work for certain managers though, Evans obviously springs to mind, but I wonder if the ‘up them at them’ act becomes less effective when you’re having to work with more or less the same squad for an entire season?
 
Last edited:
Trashbat said:
Not sure what Bradley is doing these days except for trying to flog some personalised vids on Cameo. Certainly hasn’t fulfilled his potential.
Click to expand...

Still only 28 but without a club since being released by Grimsby 2 years ago.

Being the son of the country's best female sprinter, not surprising that pace was his main asset but his body often seemed to let him down, apart from that golden half season when we were challenging at the top of the table.

I also think that whoever decided that he should play in defence did him no favours as he had no discernable defensive instincts and could not play in a flat back four. When someone ran at him, he just seemed to back off, however deep they ran. At some point you have to time a challenge or they will eventually shoot or play someone in on goal.
 
Archiepoptart said:
Begs the question; Is high turnover of players a good thing ? Discuss.
Click to expand...

Not good if you hope to make money on the sale of players.

I thought at one time Scally had the aim of selling one player a season in order to aid cashflow and break even.

If so, there have been pretty slim pickings recently with only modest tribunal compensation monies being on offer.
 
GillsBluenose said:
Not good if you hope to make money on the sale of players.

I thought at one time Scally had the aim of selling one player a season in order to aid cashflow and break even.

If so, there have been pretty slim pickings recently with only modest tribunal compensation monies being on offer.
Click to expand...

I think COVID has destroyed that model of selling one player a year. Don’t often see any fees paid in the lower leagues for the last 2 seasons.
 
Long way, but really good day out.

MOM for us was Chapman. Great presence in his box, and made 2 absolutely top saves, way beyond the 'expected to make' category. Without him, we may well have lost that game. This was the game that made us think he could definitely do a job for us next season.

Also credit to the back 3 who all had very solid games I thought.

Oliver also worked tirelessly and deserves a lot of credit. His attitude was certainly bang on, throughout Saturday.

We were sitting 5 metres from Oliver's challenge with Sykes. There was nothing in it. That Sykes spend the whole game complaining, at his team mates, our players, and the ref. As someone else said on here, he should have been moaning about himself. Definitely a weak link for them....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.