Plan B - Long ball

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 875
  • Start date Start date

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?




Deleted Member said:
Watching the side over the last few games it is obvious that our style of play isn’t getting us the results that we want.

The stats are interesting, because we usually have a lot of possession but not much end product. There is an interesting concept called POMO (position of maximum opportunity) which correctly recognises that you can only score goals when the ball is in the POMO, unfortunately we don’t seem to be in the POMO a lot, and yesterday Rotherham was very effective at getting the ball in the POMO.

I think we need to be looking at going a lot more direct. We don’t play anywhere near as many long balls as we should, and I think we need a target man striker to launch balls up field to, and create chances with flicks and knock ons. We could also do with Freeman and Stevens advancing up the pitch when we have the ball and chasing balls in to the channels.

I think playing a lot more long ball would be in our benefit and get us the results we want, it is all well and good fannying about with the ball but it is pointless if it isn’t getting results, and I think by going long, and playing long ball it gives us an extra dimension to our play, and I think with a big physical target man it would make us a lot more difficult to play against.
Click to expand...

Just no. Simplistic, Pulis type none sense. Is it frustrating we aren’t winning games yes, but what we actually need to do is for the board to stick their hands in their pockets and get some money spent on players who are even better than what we currently have.
 
Deleted Member said:
Watching the side over the last few games it is obvious that our style of play isn’t getting us the results that we want.

The stats are interesting, because we usually have a lot of possession but not much end product. There is an interesting concept called POMO (position of maximum opportunity) which correctly recognises that you can only score goals when the ball is in the POMO, unfortunately we don’t seem to be in the POMO a lot, and yesterday Rotherham was very effective at getting the ball in the POMO.

I think we need to be looking at going a lot more direct. We don’t play anywhere near as many long balls as we should, and I think we need a target man striker to launch balls up field to, and create chances with flicks and knock ons. We could also do with Freeman and Stevens advancing up the pitch when we have the ball and chasing balls in to the channels.

I think playing a lot more long ball would be in our benefit and get us the results we want, it is all well and good fannying about with the ball but it is pointless if it isn’t getting results, and I think by going long, and playing long ball it gives us an extra dimension to our play, and I think with a big physical target man it would make us a lot more difficult to play against.
Click to expand...

POMO was created by Charles Reep in the 1920s and developed by Hughes in the 1960s! Whilst you might hear it in coaching scenario's it means nothing more than basically attempts in the 6 yard box (often in set pieces the space between the 6 yard box and back post) POMO isn't something you can accurately record or play tactics too. In essence it says get the ball in the box as often as possible to a certain area (haven't we already been through this in Warnock years)
We have the highest Expected Goals total in the league but only have enough shots per game for 13th in league. Yet we have the highest shots per game from in 6 yard box and 6th highest shots per game in penalty area. Which i would argue is POMO for attempts on goal right? We take most of our shots from the area's of maximum value. The issue for most Blades that you could use POMO for is perhaps we should cross earlier at times, getting the ball into the danger area and earlier where the defence isn't set.

I fully appreciate the view we need to "mix it up" a bit more, and if we bring in some variety in January perhaps that can happen. Yet we sit in 5th, higher than anyone would have thought we would be after 18 games. We play some great football and it suits the style of our players at the moment. Improvement and refinement is always required but i very much think the personnel is the factor in that, we don't have the physical big man up top or much pace so if we play long we completley negate players like fleck, norwood, duffy and our wing backs who would never be able to keep up with play if we went long more often. Earlier crosses? yes i can see that. Mixing the play up? yes absolutley.

Don't lose sight of where we are.
 
Last edited:
I think it just comes down to our crosses and passing have to be better , usually you cannot fault our general passing and play which is outstanding and a joy to watch but was very very poor ( by our now standards)

its the same issue that comes up allot Imo, of not having that quality final ball or taking too long to get the ball across

I felt Rotherham's crossing and general wing play was very good and saw several great chances for them which were only not goals because of our keeper being excellent

personally love the way we play and wouldn't change it
what i would love is 2 proper wingers available from the bench to change things when not working who will run down the byline and cross first time , who can come on and give us something different and go 4-4-2 ( you could you try Johnson on one wing and Freeman down the Right ( after a rest !) with Baldock behind him at RB )


easier said than done finding 2 wingers like that who obviously have no guarantee of starting many games at all as we play best as a 3-5-2 !

having said that , when you can't pass at all and play that badly like we did on Saturday it doesn't matter at all what formation you play !
 
Blades Analytics said:
POMO was created by Charles Reep in the 1920s.
Click to expand...

1950s not 1920s.

Reep trained as an accountant after leaving Plymouth High School in 1923. He won the first prize in an entrance competition for the newly formed Accountancy Division of the Royal Air Force in 1928. He achieved the rank of Wing Commander in the Royal Air Force and retired from the service in 1955.

Reep attended a series of lectures given by Arsenal right-half Charlie Jones in 1933 and became fascinated by manager Herbert Chapman's style of functional wingers and rapidly moving the ball forwards. Posted to Germany at the end of World War II, Reep returned to England in 1947 and was disappointed to find that with the exception of the W–M formation, none of Chapman's ideas had been adopted.Frustrated by what he considered slow play and marginalised wingers, he lost patience during a Swindon Town match at The County Ground in March 1950. After watching the home side fruitlessly attack in the first half, he decided to record notes during the second half.He surmised that with an average of 2 goals scored per game, only a small improvement was needed in the chance conversion rate to score 3 goals per game and all but guarantee promotion.

His analysis caught the attention of Brentford manager Jackie Gibbons and from February 1951 until the end of the season, he was employed part-time as an adviser. The club was in danger of relegation with 14 games to play but after his arrival, their goals-to-games ratio improved from 1.5 to 3 and they took 20 out of a possible 28 points, easily avoiding relegation.

In the 1950s, Reep shared his analyses in the News Chronicle. He concluded that most goals were scored from fewer than three passes: therefore he proposed it was important to get the ball forward as soon as possible.The quicker the ball was played to goal with the least number of passes the more goals would be scored. His theory became known as the long ball. Reep worked with Brentford in the 1950-51 season. Reep's analyses published in the News Chronicle attracted Stan Cullis' interest at Wolverhampton Wanderers.

Reep and Bernard Benjamin published a statistical analysis of patterns of play in football from 1953 to 1967 in the Journal of the Royal Statistical Society in 1968. Their paper analysed two sets of game data. The first set comprised 101 games (42 First Division matches in the 1957-1958 season; 12 First Division matches in the 1961-1962 season; 36 Miscellaneous matches in the 1965-1966 season; and 11 World Cup matches from the 1966 tournament). Data from the 1957-1958 season were derived from games involving Sheffield Wednesday. Data from the 1961-1962 season were derived from games involving Arsenal. The second set of data comprised an additional 477 games. Data from both sets of game data (578 games) were used in the paper to analyse passing move distributions. A subsequent paper reanalysed some of the passing data. Reep and Benjamin found that 5% of all moves consisted of four passes or more and only 1% of six passes or more. Reep concluded that possession football was therefore undesirable.

His ideas have been the foundation of the Norway national football team playing style
 
Silent Blade said:
His ideas have been the foundation of the Norway national football team playing style
Click to expand...

Yes, when they deployed Jostein Flo on the wing and as soon as they gained possession they launched diagonal balls at his head for him to propel in the general direction of the penalty area. It was horrific to watch, a real nadir for football, and a shame that they had a degree of success with it for a short period of time.
 
Blades Analytics said:
POMO was created by Charles Reep in the 1920s and developed by Hughes in the 1960s! Whilst you might hear it in coaching scenario's it means nothing more than basically attempts in the 6 yard box (often in set pieces the space between the 6 yard box and back post) POMO isn't something you can accurately record or play tactics too. In essence it says get the ball in the box as often as possible to a certain area (haven't we already been through this in Warnock years)
We have the highest Expected Goals total in the league but only have enough shots per game for 13th in league. Yet we have the highest shots per game from in 6 yard box and 6th highest shots per game in penalty area. Which i would argue is POMO for attempts on goal right? We take most of our shots from the area's of maximum value. The issue for most Blades that you could use POMO for is perhaps we should cross earlier at times, getting the ball into the danger area and earlier where the defence isn't set.

I fully appreciate the view we need to "mix it up" a bit more, and if we bring in some variety in January perhaps that can happen. Yet we sit in 5th, higher than anyone would have thought we would be after 18 games. We play some great football and it suits the style of our players at the moment. Improvement and refinement is always required but i very much think the personnel is the factor in that, we don't have the physical big man up top or much pace so if we play long we completley negate players like fleck, norwood, duffy and our wing backs who would never be able to keep up with play if we went long more often. Earlier crosses? yes i can see that. Mixing the play up? yes absolutley.

Don't lose sight of where we are.
Click to expand...

I think a few of us should take heed of your last comment. In many respects it's understandable that we've gotten used to the quality of football that has become our signature. But in such a short time span we've gone from pretty clueless ball kickers to intelligent and accurate football based on a high degree of skill. This will have been arrived at as a result of many hours of repeated hard work, but just sometimes we let our guard slip to reveal human fragility. I know this is unacceptable to some, but you'd think we were mired in a mid-table position rather than in the promotion mix if we allowed some posters to take the higher moral ground. It's not a guarded secret that we need quality reinforcements, so please, some of you, do try and keep things in perspective before you make claims that have no basis in fact.
 
Silent Blade said:
1950s not 1920s.

Reep trained as an accountant after leaving Plymouth High School in 1923. He won the first prize in an entrance competition for the newly formed Accountancy Division of the Royal Air Force in 1928. He achieved the rank of Wing Commander in the Royal Air Force and retired from the service in 1955.

Reep attended a series of lectures given by Arsenal right-half Charlie Jones in 1933 and became fascinated by manager Herbert Chapman's style of functional wingers and rapidly moving the ball forwards. Posted to Germany at the end of World War II, Reep returned to England in 1947 and was disappointed to find that with the exception of the W–M formation, none of Chapman's ideas had been adopted.Frustrated by what he considered slow play and marginalised wingers, he lost patience during a Swindon Town match at The County Ground in March 1950. After watching the home side fruitlessly attack in the first half, he decided to record notes during the second half.He surmised that with an average of 2 goals scored per game, only a small improvement was needed in the chance conversion rate to score 3 goals per game and all but guarantee promotion.

His analysis caught the attention of Brentford manager Jackie Gibbons and from February 1951 until the end of the season, he was employed part-time as an adviser. The club was in danger of relegation with 14 games to play but after his arrival, their goals-to-games ratio improved from 1.5 to 3 and they took 20 out of a possible 28 points, easily avoiding relegation.

In the 1950s, Reep shared his analyses in the News Chronicle. He concluded that most goals were scored from fewer than three passes: therefore he proposed it was important to get the ball forward as soon as possible.The quicker the ball was played to goal with the least number of passes the more goals would be scored. His theory became known as the long ball. Reep worked with Brentford in the 1950-51 season. Reep's analyses published in the News Chronicle attracted Stan Cullis' interest at Wolverhampton Wanderers.

Reep and Bernard Benjamin published a statistical analysis of patterns of play in football from 1953 to 1967 in the Journal of the Royal Statistical Society in 1968. Their paper analysed two sets of game data. The first set comprised 101 games (42 First Division matches in the 1957-1958 season; 12 First Division matches in the 1961-1962 season; 36 Miscellaneous matches in the 1965-1966 season; and 11 World Cup matches from the 1966 tournament). Data from the 1957-1958 season were derived from games involving Sheffield Wednesday. Data from the 1961-1962 season were derived from games involving Arsenal. The second set of data comprised an additional 477 games. Data from both sets of game data (578 games) were used in the paper to analyse passing move distributions. A subsequent paper reanalysed some of the passing data. Reep and Benjamin found that 5% of all moves consisted of four passes or more and only 1% of six passes or more. Reep concluded that possession football was therefore undesirable.

His ideas have been the foundation of the Norway national football team playing style
Click to expand...
Reep trained as an accountant. That’s all you need to know really. You can’t quantify ‘entertainment’.
 
Pinchy said:
You know the sad thing is that many took brownie seriously. He and Les have a fishing match from time time. Even worse, one or two rather agree with his false viewpoint. For them, I despair.
Click to expand...

Funniest thing I've read since the weekends game is the number of Rotherham players we should be after. Michael Smith top of the shopping list cos 'he's a unit'.
 



itsinyerblood said:
I think a few of us should take heed of your last comment. In many respects it's understandable that we've gotten used to the quality of football that has become our signature. But in such a short time span we've gone from pretty clueless ball kickers to intelligent and accurate football based on a high degree of skill. This will have been arrived at as a result of many hours of repeated hard work, but just sometimes we let our guard slip to reveal human fragility. I know this is unacceptable to some, but you'd think we were mired in a mid-table position rather than in the promotion mix if we allowed some posters to take the higher moral ground. It's not a guarded secret that we need quality reinforcements, so please, some of you, do try and keep things in perspective before you make claims that have no basis in fact.
Click to expand...

My facts are 6 points from 18, dropped from 1st to 5th, bitch slapped second half against Derby, failed to defend long balls v Stoke, insipid against an average forest, couldn’t break down a dire Wednesday side with 70% possession, put in an absolute turgid display last time out that appeared like a Sunday league side turning out after a stag do (again struggling with long throws & corners), the current midfield 3 misfiring, one of last season’s main goalscorers has basically spent the last 11 months & 3 weeks since he signed a new deal looking like he’s been anaesthetised with horse tranquilliser, we have 3 players on our books who do not fit into the current system of play one iota & would be better employed working in the club shop than taking a 1st team wage, the elder statesmen of the team are approaching their next birthdays and we’re more than likely going to get 1 point from the next 12 and find ourselves in mid table by the year end. Other than that I’m finding it a fucking hoot at the moment. :(
 
Nicolaus_Copernicus said:
My facts are 6 points from 18, dropped from 1st to 5th, bitch slapped second half against Derby, failed to defend long balls v Stoke, insipid against an average forest, couldn’t break down a dire Wednesday side with 70% possession, put in an absolute turgid display last time out that appeared like a Sunday league side turning out after a stag do (again struggling with long throws & corners), the current midfield 3 misfiring, one of last season’s main goalscorers has basically spent the last 11 months & 3 weeks since he signed a new deal looking like he’s been anaesthetised with horse tranquilliser, we have 3 players on our books who do not fit into the current system of play one iota & would be better employed working in the club shop than taking a 1st team wage, the elder statesmen of the team are approaching their next birthdays and we’re more than likely going to get 1 point from the next 12 and find ourselves in mid table by the year end. Other than that I’m finding it a fucking hoot at the moment. :(
Click to expand...

Nic, it's as if you're willing to approach this from a different but similar manner to the points I made. You must have noticed that I mentioned how some of us have become used to the quality of football that Wilder (mustn't forget Knill too) has instilled in the Blades. The fact that those standards have dropped (temporarily I'm sure) clearly impact on your overall appreciation of the team you support. Yes, not everything's rosey in our garden, but I'd hardly describe our current situation as the worst there's ever (not your description, but you did portray it as being pretty awful). Our biggest shortcoming is that we're not a wealthy club. No point going over this time and time again, but it's a fact that cannot be ignored if certain posters continue to look at every other angle rather than the central proposition that given healthy budgets Wilder might be able to add the missing quality we so desperately need. Had it crossed your mind that Wilder may have exhausted the relatively meagre funds he's provided with, so unable to buy the players he'd sorely love to purchase? You've made some unavoidable points Nic, yes, we do have an aging group of players, but that's Wilder's job, so we'll see what he can do in what is clearly a prickly situation with the club's owners.

Cheer up Nic, life could be a lot worse. There are kids suffering in hospital, some even have cancer, so football needs to be placed in an appropriate context, otherwise it becomes the single most important thing in some people's life, and that, in my view, is a completely unhealthy set of priorities by which to lead anyone's life.
 
itsinyerblood said:
Nic, it's as if you're willing to approach this from a different but similar manner to the points I made. You must have noticed that I mentioned how some of us have become used to the quality of football that Wilder (mustn't forget Knill too) has instilled in the Blades. The fact that those standards have dropped (temporarily I'm sure) clearly impact on your overall appreciation of the team you support. Yes, not everything's rosey in our garden, but I'd hardly describe our current situation as the worst there's ever (not your description, but you did portray it as being pretty awful). Our biggest shortcoming is that we're not a wealthy club. No point going over this time and time again, but it's a fact that cannot be ignored if certain posters continue to look at every other angle rather than the central proposition that given healthy budgets Wilder might be able to add the missing quality we so desperately need. Had it crossed your mind that Wilder may have exhausted the relatively meagre funds he's provided with, so unable to buy the players he'd sorely love to purchase? You've made some unavoidable points Nic, yes, we do have an aging group of players, but that's Wilder's job, so we'll see what he can do in what is clearly a prickly situation with the club's owners.

Cheer up Nic, life could be a lot worse. There are kids suffering in hospital, some even have cancer, so football needs to be placed in an appropriate context, otherwise it becomes the single most important thing in some people's life, and that, in my view, is a completely unhealthy set of priorities by which to lead anyone's life.
Click to expand...

Sheffield United is important, but not the most important thing in my life, but as this is the general chat section of a blades message board, I do tend to dwell on them as opposed to kids with cancer or other such upsetting things. But point taken, I’ll try and balance every negative post about United out from now on, by putting into context with osteosarcoma or some global catastrophe that’s currently occurring. :)

I’m a reductionist. Don’t give a bugger about stats, expected goals, what other teams are doing, etc. I am unwilling to accept the crap that was served up on Saturday without comment and I don’t reference every continuing slip in standards against what we were doing 3 years ago or what are supposed budget is. I want us to get promoted and it’s the here & now that matters to me, and we are throwing away points. I doubt Norwich City are having an existential crisis at the moment, comparing their wage bill with others & asking themselves whether they’re punching above their weight.

The points I highlighted are due to poor footballing decisions, some on the pitch, some off the pitch, some of which are hangovers from last season that haven’t been addressed and seemingly can’t be. Most of which do not involve budgets or better players, just tactics, decision making and the like, things that some of the brains trust on here refer to as ‘guff’, but things that seem to reappear game after game and hold us back. Things like lack of pace, lack of flexibility in formation, lack of quality crosses into the box, overpassing it, lack of shots from distance, inability to break ultra defensive teams down, etc. We dominated games last year & didn’t win them and we failed to see out games last season in the last 10 minutes when we should’ve done. The same is true this season and have appeared in at least half our games already. These are footballing failings as opposed to budgetary.

Again, I don’t care what the budgetary constraints are, the signings of Washington, MJ & Woodburn are woeful. None of them are good enough and none of them fit into our shape or style of play and none of them, save for some kind club epidemic will have any role to play. I shudder to think what Woodburn is on and he’s played for Liverpool u23’s more times than us this season.

I’m getting tired of reading posts on here that constantly defend the team arguing one way in our favour one week and using the contrary argument in our favour the next if it suits. ‘We couldn’t be expected to beat Wednesday they sat back, we would’ve beat ‘em if they would’ve attempted to play, our quality, blah, blah’. ‘We couldn’t be expected to beat Stoke, they’ve got a bigger wage bill’. ‘We couldn’t be expected to beat Rotherham, they came at us, wanted it more, it disrupted our quality, we got a bigger wage bill but it means nothing, blah, blah f*cking blah’.

But then again, the above pales into insignificance when viewed in the comparison to the recent Californian wildfires. :)
 
Nicolaus_Copernicus said:
Sheffield United is important, but not the most important thing in my life, but as this is the general chat section of a blades message board, I do tend to dwell on them as opposed to kids with cancer or other such upsetting things. But point taken, I’ll try and balance every negative post about United out from now on, by putting into context with osteosarcoma or some global catastrophe that’s currently occurring. :)

I’m a reductionist. Don’t give a bugger about stats, expected goals, what other teams are doing, etc. I am unwilling to accept the crap that was served up on Saturday without comment and I don’t reference every continuing slip in standards against what we were doing 3 years ago or what are supposed budget is. I want us to get promoted and it’s the here & now that matters to me, and we are throwing away points. I doubt Norwich City are having an existential crisis at the moment, comparing their wage bill with others & asking themselves whether they’re punching above their weight.

The points I highlighted are due to poor footballing decisions, some on the pitch, some off the pitch, some of which are hangovers from last season that haven’t been addressed and seemingly can’t be. Most of which do not involve budgets or better players, just tactics, decision making and the like, things that some of the brains trust on here refer to as ‘guff’, but things that seem to reappear game after game and hold us back. Things like lack of pace, lack of flexibility in formation, lack of quality crosses into the box, overpassing it, lack of shots from distance, inability to break ultra defensive teams down, etc. We dominated games last year & didn’t win them and we failed to see out games last season in the last 10 minutes when we should’ve done. The same is true this season and have appeared in at least half our games already. These are footballing failings as opposed to budgetary.

Again, I don’t care what the budgetary constraints are, the signings of Washington, MJ & Woodburn are woeful. None of them are good enough and none of them fit into our shape or style of play and none of them, save for some kind club epidemic will have any role to play. I shudder to think what Woodburn is on and he’s played for Liverpool u23’s more times than us this season.

I’m getting tired of reading posts on here that constantly defend the team arguing one way in our favour one week and using the contrary argument in our favour the next if it suits. ‘We couldn’t be expected to beat Wednesday they sat back, we would’ve beat ‘em if they would’ve attempted to play, our quality, blah, blah’. ‘We couldn’t be expected to beat Stoke, they’ve got a bigger wage bill’. ‘We couldn’t be expected to beat Rotherham, they came at us, wanted it more, it disrupted our quality, we got a bigger wage bill but it means nothing, blah, blah f*cking blah’.

But then again, the above pales into insignificance when viewed in the comparison to the recent Californian wildfires. :)
Click to expand...


But other than that, how are you in yourself ?

:rolleyes:
 
Pinchy said:
You know the sad thing is that many took brownie seriously. He and Les have a fishing match from time time. Even worse, one or two rather agree with his false viewpoint. For them, I despair.
Click to expand...

It was a post that worked in two ways.

In one way it was a bit of mischief making but it also had a serious point. Teams seem to find us out a little bit, play a high line up the pitch and press us which stops us playing a bit, and we don’t seem able to make the changes to counter balance that.
 
Deleted Member said:
It was a post that worked in two ways.

In one way it was a bit of mischief making but it also had a serious point. Teams seem to find us out a little bit, play a high line up the pitch and press us which stops us playing a bit, and we don’t seem able to make the changes to counter balance that.
Click to expand...

Anyone can suss out how to play against us, soak up the pressure, play pacey wingers, when we give the ball away, either twat it behind the wing backs, or onto the head of the 'unit' up top.
 
Man City come up against a parked bus most weeks but still run out 3 or 4-0 winners more often than not. If we're at our best we give ourselves a chance but it needs everyone to be at their best, if one or two drop off, or more as last Saturday, we tend to struggle, especially if it's our 'key' players under-performing. Our lack of a plan B is not so much tactics but the fact we don't have another Duffy, another Fleck or quality strikers who can make things happen on their own. We're not far off but as said elswhere, 2, maybe 3 quality signings would make all the difference to us being a nearly team to challengers.
 
Jim Chimmerney said:
Man City come up against a parked bus most weeks but still run out 3 or 4-0 winners more often than not. If we're at our best we give ourselves a chance but it needs everyone to be at their best, if one or two drop off, or more as last Saturday, we tend to struggle, especially if it's our 'key' players under-performing. Our lack of a plan B is not so much tactics but the fact we don't have another Duffy, another Fleck or quality strikers who can make things happen on their own. We're not far off but as said elswhere, 2, maybe 3 quality signings would make all the difference to us being a nearly team to challengers.
Click to expand...

We just need to sign Aguero, Silva and De Bruyne and we're laughing then.
 
Nick Jansky said:
Yes, when they deployed Jostein Flo on the wing and as soon as they gained possession they launched diagonal balls at his head for him to propel in the general direction of the penalty area. It was horrific to watch, a real nadir for football, and a shame that they had a degree of success with it for a short period of time.
Click to expand...

Bit harsh.

 
We deffo need a batterering ram of a beast up front that can battle, hold up and lay off chances for others when we do go plan B. Would Ched fill that role if required? Possibly, possibly not but buying one is a must no matter what the costs.

Being affective with both plans A and B will get a team promoted.

Still on course for a play off spot imo

UTMB
 
Every team who wins promotion from this league either has a team that is far better than anything else in the division (Wolves, Newcastle) or has Plan A, B and sometimes C to give them options to get the better of different setups.

We could do with a battering ram up top without a doubt, we were hitting it long just to get rid at times on saturday and it just ended up coming straight back at us. We need the option at least.
 



Nick Jansky said:
You can't have enjoyed watching it surely Bergen????? Granted it was successful for a while, but it was ugly.
Click to expand...

For a nation that was always among the poorest in Europe, a laughing stock which finished last in every qualifier, it was an amazing period. Maybe it can be compared to the Bassett's successive promotions, surely you enjoyed those?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Tony Currie
Points dropped from a lead
Replies
25
Views
1K
Old Programme seller
Old Programme seller
Deadbat
Derby 1 United 2 - report/ratings
2
Replies
57
Views
3K
Bell4
Bell4
Deadbat
United 1 Blackburn 3 - report/ratings
2 3
Replies
69
Views
4K
John Street West Terrace
John Street West Terrace
S
Post season
Replies
5
Views
705
Northernsoulblade
Northernsoulblade
Bergen Blade
Similar seasons
Replies
4
Views
737
Carlton Blade
Carlton Blade

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom