Was that an improvement?

[Curryman]

​

Copied from a post, by me, on t'other board as I'm not sure which board people are using now. I wasn't there yesterday, but have seen the highlights on TV and on Jane's video as well as the stats on BBC and from Insider, thus, I feel it is not possible for me to be critical or indeed otherwise about the display and subsequent result. Therefore, my questions are: 1. Was the team set up better than previously? 2. Was the performance better than recently? 3. Is it now reasonable to look ahead with confidence? 4. Why has GM not been called crap, as Gnands, Nuttall or Hardie would have been, for missing that last-minute equaliser? The first three are serious the last one is tongue in cheek but appropriate under the circumstances.

 

[7YearCritch]

1. I'd say it was set up better but am still not sure the right players were starting. 7 days with the new players could change that
2. Depends on how you interpret performance. At least we scored, but 3 shots on target and another couple of poor goals would suggest not
3. I would say so purely because of who we have brought in and the fact they'll have another week there
4, I said exactly the same at the time Curryman - I just think he had a little bit too much time/was a bit rusty

 

[Miko]

1. No.
2. No.
3. No.
4. Didn't see it as switched off at half time in disgust but he's not making me enthuse.

The first three answers are all due to there seemingly being no tactics/formation/plan a/plan b and that is down to one man.

 

[Wee_Bob]

For me, on Saturday he had all the tools but had lost the instructions - still think he's sticking square pegs in round holes.