By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Same old Dawson... on 13:01 - Feb 20 by dingdangblue
Paddy Power just paid me out 8/1 Dawson score anytime. Bloke in the shop said "didn't Bolton score an own goal" - I just played dumd and said "I'm not sure mate"? - I did ring their customer services this morning to check they were paying out and they said yes. I presume they had already had to pay out any inplay 1st goal bets as the goal wasn't chalked off till after the game. Having not seen the goal - did Craig get anything on the ball and it was deflected in or was it a true o.g by Keogh? Not that it matters!
Had him at 16-1 with Bet Fred, but as there is no headline grabbing opportunity for them they won't pay out. Used some feeble excuse about going off what Press Association say. If it had been a United centre half involved might have been a different story. Time to switch my account.
0
Same old Dawson... on 19:40 - Feb 20 with 809 views
Had him at 16-1 with Bet Fred, but as there is no headline grabbing opportunity for them they won't pay out. Used some feeble excuse about going off what Press Association say. If it had been a United centre half involved might have been a different story. Time to switch my account.
Just seen Dawsons, ahem, 'goal' - I think I was closer to the ball than he was!
Its a BRILLIANT goal to cap a BRILLIANT start by Rochdale - Don Goodman 26/08/10
The issue with Hassell is that he was often used as a stick by some to beat Hill with, yet he hasn't featured any more in the league since Flitcroft took over, no point in pretending otherwise: It's 11 minutes of Championship action in 7 games.
This indicates, as mentioned before, that Hassell is merely a squad player at best, and that the last two managers hold a similar opinion. Similarly, they both appear to prefer using Wiseman ahead of Hassell on certain occasions, so maybe Hill was right on that choice too.
He wasn't used as a stick to beat anybody with.
Keith stated that Bobby was no longer able to play in defence. The fans found this bizarre, considering he was selecting people in defence who continually cost us games/goals.
We went months without a win, and fans justifiably questioned why Hassell was ignored time after time.
He then brought him back and we won, at last.
Then he dropped him again, before putting him at centre half against Zigic in a feeble attempt to make him look bad. Bobby was our best player that day, too.
He then dropped him for Wiseman against Blackburn who cost us two goals and the rest is history...
But yes, you're right about Flicker not selecting him in the league so far. But as I say, we weren't using Bobby as a stick to beat anybody with. We merely wanted him to be given a chance in a losing team/defence. At the moment we're winning games in the league without Bobby so we've nothing to moan about. We're not saying he must play no matter what. We just want a fair selection process and under Keith we seemingly weren't getting that.
It wasn't just Hassell who was ignored, as I've stated previously.
However, in the games he's played, at Hull and MK Dons, we won both, including a man of the match display in the 4th Round, as a defender, so as I say, we've nothing to moan about.
I don't know who your club legend/stalwart is right now, if indeed you have one, but imagine your manager won't play him, despite every other player failing in that position. I'm sure you'd ask questions.
As it is, the club/squad/management/fanbase are united right now.
The soundbites from each player suggest Hill was the problem. Obviously, Flicker won't say that himself, he's too nice a bloke. But he and Hill are nothing like each other in terms of tactics or persona.
He's already won as many games in 9 weeks that Keith managed in the whole of 2012. With the same players, minus Davies and Stones.
We never recovered a deficit to win a game in the whole of Keith's tenure. We've done it in back2back games under Flitcroft.
I think this is more than a 'purple' patch, and that Flitcroft is indeed his own man and has the potential to far outstrip his mate on a managerial level.
If he keeps us up, and other clubs come calling, I wouldn't blame him at all if he jumped ship. Our board treated him appallingly in the days after Keith's departure, and only gave him the job because the supporters wanted him appointed after the great display against Leeds.
They (our board) got lucky.
I hope that whatever division we are in next season that Flicker is still here.
No manager in our 125 year history has had a better first 10 games. And I'm loathe to even accept the Peterbro defeat as Flicker's.
The acid test will be when we inevitably lose a few. We'll learn a lot more about him then.
Oh, and no idea why the link failed last time.
I'll try again:
0
Same old Dawson... on 14:02 - Feb 21 with 757 views
Keith stated that Bobby was no longer able to play in defence. The fans found this bizarre, considering he was selecting people in defence who continually cost us games/goals.
We went months without a win, and fans justifiably questioned why Hassell was ignored time after time.
He then brought him back and we won, at last.
Then he dropped him again, before putting him at centre half against Zigic in a feeble attempt to make him look bad. Bobby was our best player that day, too.
He then dropped him for Wiseman against Blackburn who cost us two goals and the rest is history...
But yes, you're right about Flicker not selecting him in the league so far. But as I say, we weren't using Bobby as a stick to beat anybody with. We merely wanted him to be given a chance in a losing team/defence. At the moment we're winning games in the league without Bobby so we've nothing to moan about. We're not saying he must play no matter what. We just want a fair selection process and under Keith we seemingly weren't getting that.
It wasn't just Hassell who was ignored, as I've stated previously.
However, in the games he's played, at Hull and MK Dons, we won both, including a man of the match display in the 4th Round, as a defender, so as I say, we've nothing to moan about.
I don't know who your club legend/stalwart is right now, if indeed you have one, but imagine your manager won't play him, despite every other player failing in that position. I'm sure you'd ask questions.
As it is, the club/squad/management/fanbase are united right now.
The soundbites from each player suggest Hill was the problem. Obviously, Flicker won't say that himself, he's too nice a bloke. But he and Hill are nothing like each other in terms of tactics or persona.
He's already won as many games in 9 weeks that Keith managed in the whole of 2012. With the same players, minus Davies and Stones.
We never recovered a deficit to win a game in the whole of Keith's tenure. We've done it in back2back games under Flitcroft.
I think this is more than a 'purple' patch, and that Flitcroft is indeed his own man and has the potential to far outstrip his mate on a managerial level.
If he keeps us up, and other clubs come calling, I wouldn't blame him at all if he jumped ship. Our board treated him appallingly in the days after Keith's departure, and only gave him the job because the supporters wanted him appointed after the great display against Leeds.
They (our board) got lucky.
I hope that whatever division we are in next season that Flicker is still here.
No manager in our 125 year history has had a better first 10 games. And I'm loathe to even accept the Peterbro defeat as Flicker's.
The acid test will be when we inevitably lose a few. We'll learn a lot more about him then.
Oh, and no idea why the link failed last time.
I'll try again:
It can't just be me who is bored of the Barnsley essays?...
Tangled up in blue.
0
Same old Dawson... on 14:15 - Feb 21 with 735 views
It's quite amusing that the lack of time a club legend is getting on the pitch is still nagging away at them a little bit.
Not that they're bothered while the team is winning. How very fair of them.
On the same subject - but entirely Dale-related - remember how virtually no-one on this forum moaned about Jonah being kept on the subs bench by the JK-Taylor partnership during a significant chunk of our promotion season?
It wasn't until the Accy (DaleTrust Walk) game that he made it back onto the pitch for any significant length of time, even though he'd been recovered from injury for several games. And being the legend he is, scored twice from 0-2 down to precipitate the 4-2 victory that virtually ensured we went up!
On the same subject - but entirely Dale-related - remember how virtually no-one on this forum moaned about Jonah being kept on the subs bench by the JK-Taylor partnership during a significant chunk of our promotion season?
It wasn't until the Accy (DaleTrust Walk) game that he made it back onto the pitch for any significant length of time, even though he'd been recovered from injury for several games. And being the legend he is, scored twice from 0-2 down to precipitate the 4-2 victory that virtually ensured we went up!
And the main debate surrounding Jones during his last season was whether he should be playing more of a bit-part role.
God forbid if they actually let the benched legend leave.
Same old Dawson... on 14:02 - Feb 21 by AtThePeake
It can't just be me who is bored of the Barnsley essays?...
I think he's done quite well actually in that he managed to stay away from the forum for the best part of a couple of days. He's getting quite good now at all this non-posting lark!
The modern pioneer of mealy mouthed bollocks.
0
Same old Dawson... on 15:26 - Feb 21 with 661 views
Keith stated that Bobby was no longer able to play in defence. The fans found this bizarre, considering he was selecting people in defence who continually cost us games/goals.
We went months without a win, and fans justifiably questioned why Hassell was ignored time after time.
He then brought him back and we won, at last.
Then he dropped him again, before putting him at centre half against Zigic in a feeble attempt to make him look bad. Bobby was our best player that day, too.
He then dropped him for Wiseman against Blackburn who cost us two goals and the rest is history...
But yes, you're right about Flicker not selecting him in the league so far. But as I say, we weren't using Bobby as a stick to beat anybody with. We merely wanted him to be given a chance in a losing team/defence. At the moment we're winning games in the league without Bobby so we've nothing to moan about. We're not saying he must play no matter what. We just want a fair selection process and under Keith we seemingly weren't getting that.
It wasn't just Hassell who was ignored, as I've stated previously.
However, in the games he's played, at Hull and MK Dons, we won both, including a man of the match display in the 4th Round, as a defender, so as I say, we've nothing to moan about.
I don't know who your club legend/stalwart is right now, if indeed you have one, but imagine your manager won't play him, despite every other player failing in that position. I'm sure you'd ask questions.
As it is, the club/squad/management/fanbase are united right now.
The soundbites from each player suggest Hill was the problem. Obviously, Flicker won't say that himself, he's too nice a bloke. But he and Hill are nothing like each other in terms of tactics or persona.
He's already won as many games in 9 weeks that Keith managed in the whole of 2012. With the same players, minus Davies and Stones.
We never recovered a deficit to win a game in the whole of Keith's tenure. We've done it in back2back games under Flitcroft.
I think this is more than a 'purple' patch, and that Flitcroft is indeed his own man and has the potential to far outstrip his mate on a managerial level.
If he keeps us up, and other clubs come calling, I wouldn't blame him at all if he jumped ship. Our board treated him appallingly in the days after Keith's departure, and only gave him the job because the supporters wanted him appointed after the great display against Leeds.
They (our board) got lucky.
I hope that whatever division we are in next season that Flicker is still here.
No manager in our 125 year history has had a better first 10 games. And I'm loathe to even accept the Peterbro defeat as Flicker's.
The acid test will be when we inevitably lose a few. We'll learn a lot more about him then.
Oh, and no idea why the link failed last time.
I'll try again:
Just a couple of minor points, Your link didnt fail last time so no need to put in on again (was it BobbyHassellCam)? - Hilly didn't have O'Grady and Scotland who have both contributed massively towards your last 4 league wins, also Hillys Barnsley turned around the 1-0 deficit v us! The turnaround by Flitcroft is truly astonishing - uncannily like ours when Hilly took over in 06/07! http://www.statto.com/football/teams/rochdale/2006-2007/results
[Post edited 1 Jan 1970 1:00]
Its a BRILLIANT goal to cap a BRILLIANT start by Rochdale - Don Goodman 26/08/10
Micky Mellon thought he should be subbed last week. I heard he asked Flicker, "David. Hassell off?"
Pity we don't have him for next week's game at the Globe Arena. A trip to Morecambe Bay, watch the greatest benchwarmer in the English game, fish and chips, perfick.
Pity we don't have him for next week's game at the Globe Arena. A trip to Morecambe Bay, watch the greatest benchwarmer in the English game, fish and chips, perfick.
And if Sir Robert had a go on a donkey on the beach, would that make it Knight Rider?
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
