I think its time to stop...

[Ashtonsmashton]

With the McEveley critiscm for a while.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/34246234

 

[SwissBlade]

I think its time to give a hint of the thread content in the title....

 

[Digger]

With the McEveley critiscm for a while.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/34246234

Good idea but who should we direct our angst at then?
C'mon who's fault is it were not at the top of the table with a 100% record and a +40 goal difference?

 

[Alfreton14Blade]

I'd imagine the flak will stop if/when the performances improve. (Bit like at Swindon, by all accounts.)

Just checked the ratings for the Bury match. Jay's scoring 3.34 up to now: folks aren't criticising because they hate him personally, there's a reason for it.

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

Some of the attacks on McEveley have been pretty desperate.

I don't really understand the scapegoating mentality as it fails to address any real shortcomings the team and club may have, and replaces them with imaginary ones.

This failure to address real issues has to be counterproductive.

 

[blade too long]

Good idea but who should we direct our angst at then?
C'mon who's fault is it were not at the top of the table with a 100% record and a +40 goal difference?

the man city owner for not putting his money into us

 

[blade too long]

Some of the attacks on McEveley have been pretty desperate.

I don't really understand the scapegoating mentality as it fails to address any real shortcomings the team and club may have, and replaces them with imaginary ones.

This failure to address real issues has to be counterproductive.

yes surely having a scapegoat gives those with no idea on how football really works someone to focus on
brilliant strategy

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

I'd imagine the flak will stop if/when the performances improve. (Bit like at Swindon, by all accounts.)

Just checked the ratings for the Bury match. Jay's scoring 3.34 up to now: folks aren't criticising because they hate him personally, there's a reason for it.

I don't see how this can possibly be the case.

McEveley has been criticised for not releasing the ball in the run up to the first goal. He was fouled - and the referee didn't give it - but somehow he should have anticipated this, instead of doing what he is often good at which is playing a good forward pass.

This "reasoning" bears no scrutiny whatsoever.

There *is* a reason for the attacks on McEveley but that reason is not based (solely) on his performances.

 

[blade too long]

we were undone by a one in a million shot
shit happens , went through this scenario saying we WILL lose games
the trick is to pick our selves up and win the next
we can lose 15 games if we win 31 , and dont draw any

thats win 2 lose 1

93 points will do

dont get the panic after 6 games
6 games 12 points 2 per game luvvly jubbly
just got to keep doing that consistantly
be some losses but if we win 4 in every 6 who cares

 

[wizadry]

If any player deserves criticism then they will certainly get it on a football forum, as long as it's constructive then i see no harm in that, his performances have certainly deserved criticism because they haven't been good enough, it can't be any more simpler.

 

[SwissBlade]

Some of the attacks on McEveley have been pretty desperate.

I don't really understand the scapegoating mentality as it fails to address any real shortcomings the team and club may have, and replaces them with imaginary ones.

This failure to address real issues has to be counterproductive.

The club needed to address the problems at centre half and left back before the season started, not bemoan bad luck on the last day of the transfer window.

As for McEveleleleley, I don't rate him at all at left back, I rate him higher at centre half. I personally think we'll see a few teams attack us down our left whilst he's there.

I also think we'll be better off when Adams gets back fit as he offers an attacking threat for the opposition fullback and winger to worry about.

 

[Alfreton14Blade]

I don't see how this can possibly be the case.

McEveley has been criticised for not releasing the ball in the run up to the first goal. He was fouled - and the referee didn't give it - but somehow he should have anticipated this, instead of doing what he is often good at which is playing a good forward pass.

This "reasoning" bears no scrutiny whatsoever.

There *is* a reason for the attacks on McEveley but that reason is not based (solely) on his performances.

As I say, he's scoring 3.34 in the ratings. There's a consensus that he was pretty shit on Saturday.

 

[Fiery Blade]

Unfortunately, as a professional footballer your career path and the success of your team are dependant upon performance levels and effort - whilst nobody can question his effort his performance levels have been very poor - part of this was the fact that he was playing centre back as against his favoured position of left full back but on Saturday he was woeful. The fact that Mr Adkins has given him the captaincy heaps more pressure on the player given his lack of consistancy and to be fair would not be in the team if we didn't have such a horrendous injury list.
On Saturday, he lost his man time and time again, his distribution was poor and his general all round play left much to be desired - When your team (who are recognised promotion favourites [rightly or wrongly] ) lose at home 1-3 to a side like Bury, who despite being a very workmanlike side have very limited resources and will probably finish the season mid table in front of a 20,000 + crowd they have a right to highlight the players that are not doing the business and letting both the club and the fans down and it is very difficult to defend the obvious - McEverely is simply not good enough whatever position he plays and fans have a right to make themselves heard - it's not about finding a scapegoat its about stating the bleeding obvious !

 

[Kev Gee]

Theres no point in scapegoating the lad. He is clearly trying his best but is just not good enough.
He needs to be shipped out asap with the rest of dross.
Maybe when the beard is back freeman will goto LB?

 

[BushBlade]

Nigel Adkins has denied suggestions that Jay McEveley has been hampered by being captain.
'Jay has always been a bit shit and I don't think he's been any shitter since I made him captain. I'm always protective of my players, even the shit ones like Jay, Fatty and the other one no one likes. That's what geese do and I base most of my philosophy on the motion of aquatic fowl'.

 

[Lord Bos of Eckington.]

With the McEveley critiscm for a while.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/34246234

Adkins is a good man manager with his players . What he says in the public domain , will be completley differant , to what he says behind closed doors , in private .

UTB

 

[Ashtonsmashton]

Good idea but who should we direct our angst at then?
C'mon who's fault is it were not at the top of the table with a 100% record and a +40 goal difference?

I don't think he's the complete problem

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

As I say, he's scoring 3.34 in the ratings. There's a consensus that he was pretty shit on Saturday.

Which, when viewed in the light of what actually happened, is pretty much the definition of a scapegoat.

Adkins is supporting him strongly and publicly. A vote on a fans forum is criticising him strongly and publicly.

One of these has substantially more authority than the other.

Fwiw I disagree that he should be captain. But he was definitely not at fault for the first goal, and my first impression - and WHF Jr Sr's strong impression - was that he was fouled for the second.

 

[Jonboy60]

As I say, he's scoring 3.34 in the ratings. There's a consensus that he was pretty shit on Saturday.

Not necessarily, I gave him 3 based on what I've read on here. Maybe wrong I know, but didn't go so that's all I have to go on.

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

Unfortunately, as a professional footballer your career path and the success of your team are dependant upon performance levels and effort - whilst nobody can question his effort his performance levels have been very poor - part of this was the fact that he was playing centre back as against his favoured position of left full back but on Saturday he was woeful. The fact that Mr Adkins has given him the captaincy heaps more pressure on the player given his lack of consistancy and to be fair would not be in the team if we didn't have such a horrendous injury list.
On Saturday, he lost his man time and time again, his distribution was poor and his general all round play left much to be desired - When your team (who are recognised promotion favourites [rightly or wrongly] ) lose at home 1-3 to a side like Bury, who despite being a very workmanlike side have very limited resources and will probably finish the season mid table in front of a 20,000 + crowd they have a right to highlight the players that are not doing the business and letting both the club and the fans down and it is very difficult to defend the obvious - McEverely is simply not good enough whatever position he plays and fans have a right to make themselves heard - it's not about finding a scapegoat its about stating the bleeding obvious !

There may be some truth in this but plenty of players had poor games on Saturday. This is ignored and McEveley is singled out.

Confirmation bias and scapegoating imhbco.

 

[Trigger Blade]

Fwiw I disagree that he should be captain. But he was definitely not at fault for the first goal, and my first impression - and WHF Jr Sr's strong impression - was that he was fouled for the second.

I think you mean first and third goals? Opinions are interesting, of the three of us, one thought JMc was fouled for the first one, I didn't and the other one didn't know

For the last one, it may have been a bit of a shove from Clarke, but JMc has to be stronger and his physical shape was all wrong. Morgs for example would have just attacked the ball and flattened Clarke....

 

[wizadry]

There may be some truth in this but plenty of players had poor games on Saturday. This is ignored and McEveley is singled out.

Confirmation bias and scapegoating imhbco.

This is a thread on McEveley, unless other threads are created to question other players on their inconsistent performances then players like McEveley will be the ones discussed, now i know that's unfortunate for the McEveley lovers but that's just how it is.

Whether he was at fault or not for the goals is irrelevant due to the fact his performances have not been very good on the whole, Swindon apart apparently, due to the fact i wasn't there so have gone on reports on here for that game.

 

[Living In a Fantasy World]

With the McEveley critiscm for a while.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/34246234

Only if he plays better, which I highly doubt he will.

 

[FTPE]

I don't understand the term scapegoat. When was the last time a good player, who performed consistently was made one? Isn't a scapegoat just a player that gets a lot of criticism from a large proportion of the fans?

 

[wizadry]

I don't understand the term scapegoat. When was the last time a good player, who performed consistently was made one? Isn't a scapegoat just a player that gets a lot of criticism from a large proportion of the fans?

A scapegoat is usually the worst player in the side.

I know mate, it's very hard to fathom sometimes

 

[HillmortonBlade]

I don't understand the term scapegoat. When was the last time a good player, who performed consistently was made one? Isn't a scapegoat just a player that gets a lot of criticism from a large proportion of the fans?

I think said player becomes a scapegoat when the criticism moves on from being evidenced and rational and on to vitriolic nonsense, associated with idiotic and childish comments with polls devoid of manners and humour.

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

I think you mean first and third goals? Opinions are interesting, of the three of us, one thought JMc was fouled for the first one, I didn't and the other one didn't know

For the last one, it may have been a bit of a shove from Clarke, but JMc has to be stronger and his physical shape was all wrong. Morgs for example would have just attacked the ball and flattened Clarke....

First and third. I do.

For the third, for now, I'm with Bergen that he was off balance and fouled, canny by the opponent, but crappy by the ref.

I don't get the has to be stronger line of reasoning at all. He played fairly, his opponent didn't, the referee failed.

Morgs was a different type of defender - and that approach may cost us in different ways. Attacking the ball and flattening the opponent will sometimes result in a penalty. I get the sense that McEveley is a modern full back: not so great defensively but can contribute going forwards. I think this applies to Bob, and also Freeman. Imagine the furore if McEveley had been turned inside out at Peterborough

Strangely I'm kind of anti-McEveley but for different reasons than everyone else.

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

I don't understand the term scapegoat. When was the last time a good player, who performed consistently was made one? Isn't a scapegoat just a player that gets a lot of criticism from a large proportion of the fans?

Unfairly and/or disproportionately gets criticism.

Plenty of players had below par games on Satdi, but we lost bc of McEveley?

The scapegoating also kicks in when one players errors are focussed on over others'.

 

[Pinchy]

Ah, the Morgan myth. I saw him outmuscled many times. I remember the following without a second thought:

Andy Carroll
Shefqi Kuqi
Kevin Kyle
Darius Henderson
Jamie Mackie.

 

[Pinchy]

First and third. I do.

For the third, for now, I'm with Bergen that he was off balance and fouled, canny by the opponent, but crappy by the ref.

I don't get the has to be stronger line of reasoning at all. He played fairly, his opponent didn't, the referee failed.

Morgs was a different type of defender - and that approach may cost us in different ways. Attacking the ball and flattening the opponent will sometimes result in a penalty. I get the sense that McEveley is a modern full back: not so great defensively but can contribute going forwards. I think this applies to Bob, and also Freeman. Imagine the furore if McEveley had been turned inside out at Peterborough

Strangely I'm kind of anti-McEveley but for different reasons than everyone else.

They were very disappointed when Nathan Byrne didn't run rings like him as predicted. They're happy now. We have to make room for Bladey Tel, if he's ever fit, so J-Mac has to be crap.

So simple; So transparent.