Post Match Peterborough 2 v Leicester 1

[Nottingham Fox]

The toilet situation was a joke too. One male toilet for the whole terrace end. Out of the 4000 crammed into that end I'd hazard a guess that 3000 were male. It was a nightmare trying to get into the poxy toilet and even then it was just one big pool of piss.

****ing disgusting!

 

[Matt_B]

What baffled me is as to why he replaced Vardy with Waghorn. I said to my dad at the time of the substitution, why has he replaced him with the same player? If you're going to make a change, at least make a change to differ the style of the play, after all, that's why you make changes, isn't it? With bringing Waghorn on, effectively it changed absolutely nothing, apart from maybe bringing on someone with a worse finishing rate. At the time we were 1-0 up, and pretty much in no danger. Bringing Funcats on would maybe have brought a slower tempo to gain a better control over the game. From what I've seen of Funcats, he holds the ball up well and has a good finish. If Nige had introduced Futacs, he would have possibly allowed Nuge to not have to do all the work up front, and introduced more players in the game. I wasn't surprised to see Vardy starting with Wood injured, but that change was silly IMO.

You don't have to change the style with a sub, you coild just be trying to bring on someone more effective at that style be it through being fresher or just better.

 

[Matt_B]

The toilet situation was a joke too. One male toilet for the whole terrace end. Out of the 4000 crammed into that end I'd hazard a guess that 3000 were male. It was a nightmare trying to get into the poxy toilet and even then it was just one big pool of piss.

****ing disgusting!

Like I said before the match, shithole

 

[camberwell fox]

You don't have to change the style with a sub, you coild just be trying to bring on someone more effective at that style be it through being fresher or just better.

In which case...?

 

[LeeCovFox]

I actually liked the ground. It was nice to watch a match in something other than a bowl shaped ground which looks and feels like every other bowl shaped ground. I just don't think they managed the away end particularly well.

 

[Matt_B]

In which case...?

In which case what?

 

[camberwell fox]

You can only assume that he was bought on to 'liven up' things or score a goal, one of which he may have done and the other he was very unlikely to do.

So his introduction was successful because?

 

[Matt_B]

You can only assume that he was bought on to 'liven up' things or score a goal, one of which he may have done and the other he was very unlikely to do.

So his introduction was successful because?

What are you on about? Where has anyone said that bringing Waghorn on was a successful substitution?

 

[camberwell fox]

King had a good game against Wolves so deserved to start. I've seen nothing from Futacs to show me he is any better than Waghorn or Vardy. The team selection made perfect sense to me. What staggers me is that you seem to think he shouldn't prefer players that he thinks add more to the team?

What are you on about? Where has anyone said that bringing Waghorn on was a successful substitution?

See 1st post above in response to the team selection.

 

[Matt_B]

See 1st post above in response to the team selection.

Still not seeing it? I said the selection of Vardy made sense, I said nothing about bringing Waghorn on.

 

[Lako42]

Still not seeing it? I said the selection of Vardy made sense, I said nothing about bringing Waghorn on.

The selection of Vardy in the Championship will never make sense.

I want to know from Pearson why his players who he speaks so highly of showed absolutely no desire, fight or will to win the game, our attitude at 1-0 and 1-1 was disgusting and actually very worrying.

This is what we should be hearing an explanation of from Pearson on Monday night, no doubt that if Stringer dares to do his job Pearson will evade the issue and act like he isnt accountable.

 

[LeeCovFox]

He isn't accountable. Not to us, anyway.

 

[camberwell fox]

I have stated that I thought the selection of King over James is flawed based on King having one good game and prior to that James having multiple good games. Added to this King is not renowned for getting stuck in and this has been the case where other posters have said he has gone AWOL in games where he has needed to step up.

You then claim that the selection of Vardy/Waghorn is sensible as they bring something different to the table. Vardy has done SFA to justify his inclusion and then to replace him with someone equally ineffective is staggering.

You justify this substitution by saying that his legs may be fresher and/or he brings something different to the team. I then explain that seeing as Waghorn scores about as often now as Jimmy Saville this argument is flawed.

So to summarise he picks a midfielder who has played one competitive match in xxx weeks and plays well over someone who has performed consistently well over a sustained period of weeks.

He then chooses a forward who has no confidence and scores once in a blue moon and is clearly low on confidence and is playing above his station. Replaces him with Waghorn who [see Vardy} is the same and overlooks a natural replacement for Wood in Fuctas. Albeit a poor mans version BUT with no match time to prove himself.

You really can't see all of this as being a bit odd?

 

[Mawsley]

We had an escort at Peterborough in the L1 season but all the cops were fine and we had a good conversation with 2 of them on the way to the ground.

A large section of our fans, however, were complete cocks in the designated bar; throwing glasses around, breaking tables etc.

I slipped away from our escort then because I find the whole concept of being corralled into a pen ****ing insulting. We all went to a a few "Posh" pubs and, amazingly, no trouble was caused.

Where the **** do the police get off treating an entire trainload of supporters as hooligans? If I'd been herded into a designated pub maybe I would have behaved like an animal too.

 

[Mawsley]

The toilet situation was a joke too. One male toilet for the whole terrace end. Out of the 4000 crammed into that end I'd hazard a guess that 3000 were male. It was a nightmare trying to get into the poxy toilet and even then it was just one big pool of piss.

****ing disgusting!

Haven't you been before?

The last time I went to Peterborough there was a crowding and stewarding issue. Supporters were allowed to stand on walls and the crushing around the entrances was totally unacceptable.

I'm a supporter of safe standing but the shit stand at Peterborough doesn't offer it.

As I said, the stand is dangerous due to its access points and the lack of acceptable stewarding. The conditions for having a piss or getting a hot chocolate are impossible and the policing is ridiculous.

Our train was stopped for hours because some **** pulled the emergency cord before we had got there. The train was over-crowded and I swore I'd never go back to Peterborough again.

Absolute ****ing shithole.

 

[Matt_B]

I have stated that I thought the selection of King over James is flawed based on King having one good game and prior to that James having multiple good games. Added to this King is not renowned for getting stuck in and this has been the case where other posters have said he has gone AWOL in games where he has needed to step up.

You then claim that the selection of Vardy/Waghorn is sensible as they bring something different to the table. Vardy has done SFA to justify his inclusion and then to replace him with someone equally ineffective is staggering.

You justify this substitution by saying that his legs may be fresher and/or he brings something different to the team. I then explain that seeing as Waghorn scores about as often now as Jimmy Saville this argument is flawed.

So to summarise he picks a midfielder who has played one competitive match in xxx weeks and plays well over someone who has performed consistently well over a sustained period of weeks.

He then chooses a forward who has no confidence and scores once in a blue moon and is clearly low on confidence and is playing above his station. Replaces him with Waghorn who [see Vardy} is the same and overlooks a natural replacement for Wood in Fuctas. Albeit a poor mans version BUT with no match time to prove himself.

You really can't see all of this as being a bit odd?

I said the selection of Vardy and Waghorn was understandable. As was King. I don't see it as odd at all but it's fine that you do. You won't change my mind and I doubt you'd be bothering about it if we'd won.

 

[camberwell fox]

...we didn't win though, or draw.

 

[Matt_B]

...we didn't win though, or draw.

Well done. Is a selection only good or bad based on the result then?

 

[Durham Fox]

I said the selection of Vardy and Waghorn was understandable. As was King. I don't see it as odd at all but it's fine that you do. You won't change my mind and I doubt you'd be bothering about it if we'd won.

The selections weren't odd but I imagine most could see the selections of King and Vardy as misguided. Quite clearly James offers much more than King - who is largely ineffective and not robust enough. Vardy though clearly with some talent is miles away from being the right understudy for Wood, Futacs would have made far more sense.

Waghorn, as Vardy would benefit from a run of 10 or so starts but we really aren't in a position to offer them that currently and both should be loaned out and an experienced player loaned in.

 

[camberwell fox]

And while I'm about it you don't say understandable you said makes perfect sense.