Scapegoat Jay

[William Henry Foulkes]

In what way? I recall John Gannon got proper dog's abuse when he played for us - anything McEveley receives is a breeze in comparison. Seriously, I've never even heard a murmour of discontent when his name is read out.
Even with Gannon in the side, United somehow managed to stay in the top flight for 4 seasons so it can't have affected the Club that badly.

And if you think we're the only set of fans in the country who collectively have a player we all think is the worst... we're not. We're no better or worse than any other set of fans. Everyone is the same with the same gripes, the same favourites and the same not-so-favourites. The idea that we're this collection of nasty people who are the only people in the country to ever say anything bad about one of their own players is fanciful to say the least.

It's pretty clear from the posts here that Jay is receiving a lot of negative attention. And if things do go wrong I suspect he might really cop for it.

The second part of the quoted post is a big straw man.

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

The question is whether he has a good performance in him. It's ok for people to say he played no worse than others, but his good games are rare. We can't allow him to play CB at all, not even in emergencies. At left back he's not so bad because at least he can stay at home allowing Che to wander.

Morgan had many good games and I would probably compare Jay to Doyle, someone who shouldn't be in the team nevermind captain IMO. I think most of us knew we could have a good bash at this division when you replaced the likes of Doyle, Collins and Porter for example. Money needs to be spent, but a few victories will allow them to get away with not spending any.

Not even in emergencies. So who then?

 

[Pinchy]

The question is whether he has a good performance in him. It's ok for people to say he played no worse than others, but his good games are rare. We can't allow him to play CB at all, not even in emergencies. At left back he's not so bad because at least he can stay at home allowing Che to wander.

Morgan had many good games and I would probably compare Jay to Doyle, someone who shouldn't be in the team nevermind captain IMO. I think most of us knew we could have a good bash at this division when you replaced the likes of Doyle, Collins and Porter for example. Money needs to be spent, but a few victories will allow them to get away with not spending any.

Jay played consistently well prior to the Spurs away game. Of course he has a good performance in him, as evidenced by years of Championship football. You must be thinking of George Long...

Our owners want success. That's why they have got involved. They have no interest in "getting away" with not spending money. They spent well over a million pounds on new football pitches this Summer.

 

[Darthblade]

Is Jay McEveley the newest scapegoats recruit?

I believe last year it was Baxter.

I don't believe in "scapegoats" ...... but I do believe that if players regularly put in below par performances then they can legitimately be subject to criticism.

Last season, criticism focussed on Turner, McEveley, Doyle, Scougal and Baxter although Basham managed to pull himself out of it part way through the season and Howard dropped into this category towards the end.

If players don't like / want to be criticised by our supporters its quite a simple process really ....... give 100% every game and put in consistently good performances.
UTB & FTP

 

[Rodders]

It's pretty clear from the posts here that Jay is receiving a lot of negative attention. And if things do go wrong I suspect he might really cop for it.

The second part of the quoted post is a big straw man.

Which has happened long before the Internet at every football Club across the land. Of course, don't think I haven't spotted the underlying OFAC theme at play here.

 

[Pinchy]

It's pretty clear from the posts here that Jay is receiving a lot of negative attention. And if things do go wrong I suspect he might really cop for it.

The second part of the quoted post is a big straw man.

Internet fora are very insular. They don't always reflect wider opinion. In the outside world there was no great campaign to sack Nigel Clough and all hell did not break loose because Jamie Murphy was sold. There is no groundswell of hostility towards McEvely save for people on the internet with an agenda, and rightly so. Don't worry about it.

 

[sheffielder]

Not even in emergencies. So who then?

Basham

 

[Fulwood Blade]

There is no groundswell of hostility towards McEvely save for people on the internet with an agenda, and rightly so. Don't worry about it.

Indeed you are correct - the post is a troll post - but then we have seen it many times before.

UTB

 

[sheffielder]

Internet fora are very insular. They don't always reflect wider opinion. In the outside world there was no great campaign to sack Nigel Clough and all hell did not break loose because Jamie Murphy was sold. There is no groundswell of hostility towards McEvely save for people on the internet with an agenda, and rightly so. Don't worry about it.

The king wum and troll himself.

 

[Pinchy]

Indeed you are correct - the post is a troll post - but then we have seen it many times before.

UTB

What, me being correct?....

 

[Fulwood Blade]

What, me being correct?....

of course.........................................................this time

UTB

 

[S1268blade]

We always have one. I personally don't think players play better when the crowds on their back but if you pay your money you're entitled to voice your opinion.

 

[Kevincarterversion2.0]

Yes a little bit. Baxter has been for quite a while off and on. But with McEverley he did have a poor end to the season.

In his defence he isnt bad on the ball, just probably not aggressive enough to play centre back.

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

Internet fora are very insular. They don't always reflect wider opinion. In the outside world there was no great campaign to sack Nigel Clough and all hell did not break loose because Jamie Murphy was sold. There is no groundswell of hostility towards McEvely save for people on the internet with an agenda, and rightly so. Don't worry about it.

Don't really know how much this forum reflects opinion IRL - long queues at the ticket office after Murphy was sold indicated this wasn't a burning issue for many: in fact I was lining up and McCabe was flitting in and out (accompanied by some Chinese-looking people) without getting lynched, which was a good sign.

I'm partly going on messages to Jim on fb, which, even after a great night on Tuesday, were largely:

Great win...but McEveley is crap.

Something I pretty much agreed with - till Bergen posted his analysis, which made me reconsider. I'm still not totally convinced, but I'll try and watch him with "fresh eyes" on Satdi.

UTMB

 

[Houston_Blade]

I think using Facebook as a barometer for the thinking of right minded individuals is dangerous. How can anyone think that going on the internet being "friends" with people they probably disliked at some point in life and sharing their warped views with said people is a sensible thing to do?!

People who troll the likes of Jim Phipps (who is going far beyond the call of duty by being "friends" with these idiots) are morons, quite simple. Unfortunately we live in an age where people who have these ridiculous views get a forum on Facebook and Twitter and abusing people becomes sport to them.

That said I think Mceveley is a poor player and doesn't deserve a berth in the team never mind being captain. I don't scapegoat him but I think players like him (and Doyle, Collins, Porter etc) are a large part of why we remain in league 1.

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

I think using Facebook as a barometer for the thinking of right minded individuals is dangerous. How can anyone think that going on the internet being "friends" with people they probably disliked at some point in life and sharing their warped views with said people is a sensible thing to do?!

People who troll the likes of Jim Phipps (who is going far beyond the call of duty by being "friends" with these idiots) are morons, quite simple. Unfortunately we live in an age where people who have these ridiculous views get a forum on Facebook and Twitter and abusing people becomes sport to them.

That said I think Mceveley is a poor player and doesn't deserve a berth in the team never mind being captain. I don't scapegoat him but I think players like him (and Doyle, Collins, Porter etc) are a large part of why we remain in league 1.

Do you use fb?

 

[Houston_Blade]

No. Never have never will. Used Twitter as a news source for a while but gave up on it fairly quickly. I'm a bit of a miserable sod when it comes to things like that I figure that if I'm mates with someone I'll tell them my view face to face or on the phone so don't need to broadcast my thoughts to a wider audience. I can see why people use it but the number of conversations I hear that start with "did you see on Facebook?" makes me want to cry.

 

[Pinchy]

I think using Facebook as a barometer for the thinking of right minded individuals is dangerous. How can anyone think that going on the internet being "friends" with people they probably disliked at some point in life and sharing their warped views with said people is a sensible thing to do?!

People who troll the likes of Jim Phipps (who is going far beyond the call of duty by being "friends" with these idiots) are morons, quite simple. Unfortunately we live in an age where people who have these ridiculous views get a forum on Facebook and Twitter and abusing people becomes sport to them.

That said I think Mceveley is a poor player and doesn't deserve a berth in the team never mind being captain. I don't scapegoat him but I think players like him (and Doyle, Collins, Porter etc) are a large part of why we remain in league 1.

I agree wholeheartedly with the vast majority of that. Well said. Take issue slightly on J-Mac. He's better then the others you mention but No, I don't see him as a fixture in the team once NA has completed his recruitment for the season and players recover fitness.

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

No. Never have never will. Used Twitter as a news source for a while but gave up on it fairly quickly. I'm a bit of a miserable sod when it comes to things like that I figure that if I'm mates with someone I'll tell them my view face to face or on the phone so don't need to broadcast my thoughts to a wider audience. I can see why people use it but the number of conversations I hear that start with "did you see on Facebook?" makes me want to cry.

Facebook is largely what you make it. I can understand the description in #45 but I'm not sure it's fair. Some very angry voices were very out of order on fb after the Murphy sale - but there was a balance. I think it was roughly 50/50.

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

I agree wholeheartedly with the vast majority of that

Are you on fb?

 

[Pinchy]

Are you on fb?

No mate. I dont Twit either. I prefer real social intercourse with real people. A football forum is different. If we all met every night in the boozer to have these discussions the less assertive members, like me, would not get a word in....

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

No mate. I dont Twit either. I prefer real social intercourse with real people. A football forum is different. If we all met every night in the boozer to have these discussions the less assertive members, like me, would not get a word in....

All I'd say is fb and Twitter are largely what you make them. In a way they're not massively different from this forum, which I think probably qualifies as social media.

 

[Houston_Blade]

All I'd say is fb and Twitter are largely what you make them. In a way they're not massively different from this forum, which I think probably qualifies as social media.

Agreed it's social media but it's relevant to something I'm interested in. It's hard work finding people who want to talk about the Blades in day to day life for someone who lives and works outside of Sheffield. Plus I don't see tonnes of nosey bastards on here checking out who you're married to and whether you post your holiday snaps, maybe a simplistic view of Facebook but that's all I see it as.

 

[Revolution]

Internet fora are very insular. They don't always reflect wider opinion. In the outside world there was no great campaign to sack Nigel Clough and all hell did not break loose because Jamie Murphy was sold.

All hell did not break lose when Jamie Murphy was sold because we beat Chesterfield the following day..

Had we lost that game I fancy the crowd's behaviour might have been somewhat different.

 

[Revolution]

Your saying McEveley was the reason we lost 4-0?

Not our strikers that scored a big fat zero?

Wow.

Do you also blame our strikers for only drawing 5-5 at Swindon?

(Actually, Clough did...)