This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Parish Interview on HOL RADIO
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
Brentmiester_General  Front line in the battle against t... 26 Sep 17 8.50pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Rudi Hedman
No. We'll be saying he's been yet again incredibly lucky after taking liberties with this league. I don't think he will be that lucky again, but if he is, it'll be because Roy's excellence in dealing with this shower he's having to use and not because of any 'clever' move by Parish. Make no mistake, having one striker in any league, especially the richest and most competitive leagues over the whole season, is not clever. Negligent is what it is. The way I see it, Parish did what had to be done, being blatantly obvious to anyone who saw us with Sakho in the team last season. He went out and got Sakho on a permanent deal. That had to be done as the most important piece of transfer business. He did that at the expense of getting a striker and goalie in the summer transfer window and that to me, again, is obviously the right move to make. Had he left Sakho in favour of a new striker and goalie then we would have lost Sakho to another club and that would be the end of that. So he's seen to the most important piece of business first. Then he'll see to the other areas(hopefully) in the Jan transfer window. Yes it's a gamble, but it was a gamble that had to be taken one way or another, and it was the only logical way that I can see for him to have done it. And now he's getting slaughtered for executing the first bit of a very tricky, but potentially brilliant plan. All in the name of bettering our squad and furthering our club.
"We love you Palace, we f@cking hate Man U, We love you Palace, we hate the brighton too, We love you Palace we play in red 'n' blue, so f@ck you, and you ... |
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
 |
 Rudi Hedman Caterham 26 Sep 17 9.00pm |
  |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Brentmiester_General
The way I see it, Parish did what had to be done, being blatantly obvious to anyone who saw us with Sakho in the team last season. He went out and got Sakho on a permanent deal. That had to be done as the most important piece of transfer business. He did that at the expense of getting a striker and goalie in the summer transfer window and that to me, again, is obviously the right move to make. Had he left Sakho in favour of a new striker and goalie then we would have lost Sakho to another club and that would be the end of that. So he's seen to the most important piece of business first. Then he'll see to the other areas(hopefully) in the Jan transfer window. Yes it's a gamble, but it was a gamble that had to be taken one way or another, and it was the only logical way that I can see for him to have done it. And now he's getting slaughtered for executing the first bit of a very tricky, but potentially brilliant plan. All in the name of bettering our squad and furthering our club. So you're saying he can sign Sakho but not a striker at the same time? But he can sign a striker in January now the Sakho deal has already been done? He tried to sign a striker. He just left it too late. There was no plan of leaving it until January. He just, like always, left it too late. There is no excuse for this. It's an unforgiving league and there are no let offs for 1 striker. It was left too late, that's it, so as a result we could have paid another big transfer and wage on another player before we get relegated.
COYP |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
 |
| Username Horsham 26 Sep 17 9.06pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Rudi Hedman
If you want more possession, which is what Parish said, then that means a more passing game. It doesn't specify style but it's definitely more passing to keep possession. That whole wing back issue was a complete insult to our intelligence. Well I speak for myself. Not sure how anyone else viewed it. I would've had Frank answering what he's doing the moment he muttered 3-4-3. That was just stupid beyond belief and against 'gradual'. Thinking Campbell is good enough as a back up for an injured Benteke is stupid and reckless. If parish thinks Campbell is good enough to cover for Benteke for anything up to 4 months because of an injury until January then we have serious problems. The judgement there is so poor it's not worth going any further. And then there's this talk of £40 million, which I don't believe. But if it is true, why is he aiming to keep Campbell? Is it because the wad comes out in January windows when we're desperate and get overcharged, or is it because like all the ex pros employed at the club, its the norm to have a flick through that list first? To think and value Campbell at £8mil or 9 is so desperate for a reason for this it's untrue. Then finally the more modest sensible bids did come out. Just so late we were there to be taken advantage of.
Has he ever said that? He's said we need to have a different approach and he's right. We stayed up knicking away wins at Chelsea and Liverpool and beating Arsenal. That's not a recipe for success. To be an establish PL team, we need to be able to break down the likes of Swansea, Burnley, Bournemouth. Something we have failed to do too often and has left us with an abysmal home record. That's what he said he wants to change.
Employee of the month is a good example of how someone can be both a winner and a loser at the same time. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Brentmiester_General Front line in the battle against t... 26 Sep 17 9.09pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Rudi Hedman
So you're saying he can sign Sakho but not a striker at the same time? But he can sign a striker in January now the Sakho deal has already been done? He tried to sign a striker. He just left it too late. There was no plan of leaving it until January. He just, like always, left it too late. There is no excuse for this. It's an unforgiving league and there are no let offs for 1 striker. It was left too late, that's it, so as a result we could have paid another big transfer and wage on another player before we get relegated. We don't know how much is/was released at any given point in the season. Perhaps it is a case of the American's holding the purse strings until Jan to see if we can get to where we need to without the added expenditure. Maybe it's to do with FFP. Maybe the agents screwed things up. Maybe SP didn't think the players on offer represented good value for the money.
"We love you Palace, we f@cking hate Man U, We love you Palace, we hate the brighton too, We love you Palace we play in red 'n' blue, so f@ck you, and you ... |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Username Horsham 26 Sep 17 9.09pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Midlands Eagle
game and the only reason that Joel Ward was playing as a wing back was because Parish didn't buy a proper one. That is absolute nonsense. We spent the whole pre season playing Luka and Joel Ward in the back three. Then all of a sudden come the first game Luka is in a midfield four (who knows when the last time he played in that system, do Olympiakos and Serbia play that way?), and Joel Ward is suddenly at wing back where Townsend had been playing. That is nothing to do with Parish, and everything to do with a manager who had poorly prepared the team in pre-season.
Employee of the month is a good example of how someone can be both a winner and a loser at the same time. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Rudi Hedman Caterham 26 Sep 17 9.12pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Username
Has he ever said that? He's said we need to have a different approach and he's right. We stayed up knicking away wins at Chelsea and Liverpool and beating Arsenal. That's not a recipe for success. To be an establish PL team, we need to be able to break down the likes of Swansea, Burnley, Bournemouth. Something we have failed to do too often and has left us with an abysmal home record. That's what he said he wants to change. That implies passing through or around teams, does it not? It certainly doesn't mean having less possession, or playing direct. So please, if it doesn't involve possession or more passing football, what does it involve, because it involves something, so what is it and how is it done?
COYP |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Rudi Hedman Caterham 26 Sep 17 9.14pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Brentmiester_General
We don't know how much is/was released at any given point in the season. Perhaps it is a case of the American's holding the purse strings until Jan to see if we can get to where we need to without the added expenditure. Maybe it's to do with FFP. Maybe the agents screwed things up. Maybe SP didn't think the players on offer represented good value for the money. We had £10 mil ready to use. It could've been used a day before, 2 days before, a week before.
COYP |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Username Horsham 26 Sep 17 9.18pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Rudi Hedman
That implies passing through or around teams, does it not? It certainly doesn't mean having less possession, or playing direct. So please, if it doesn't involve possession or more passing football, what does it involve, because it involves something, so what is it and how is it done? That's not the point and you know it. 'He wanted a different style' is being used as a stick to beat Parish with, as if he was just upset we weren't pretty enough to watch, when in reality it was an assessment that was 100% accurate. How that is achieved is down to a manager to execute. Parish hasn't ever said he wants us to be pretty to watch, or that we should play with a back three. He's probably just fed up of us not being able to beat sodding Bournemouth at home.
Employee of the month is a good example of how someone can be both a winner and a loser at the same time. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Rudi Hedman Caterham 26 Sep 17 9.25pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Username
That's not the point and you know it. 'He wanted a different style' is being used as a stick to beat Parish with, as if he was just upset we weren't pretty enough to watch, when in reality it was an assessment that was 100% accurate. How that is achieved is down to a manager to execute. Parish hasn't ever said he wants us to be pretty to watch, or that we should play with a back three. He's probably just fed up of us not being able to beat sodding Bournemouth at home. Who are you having a go at? I've never said anything about being pretty. I'll ask you again. If you want to break teams down, in the way we've struggled, how is it done? If you don't know and Parish is leaving it up to someone like Frank to overhaul the club, why was he doing that?
COYP |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / RegisterNew users
Registration is now on our new message board
Existing users
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
Sponsors
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.