Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 19, 2014 10:58:32 GMT 1
And Powell to let the club know he wanted to keep him.
|
|
|
Post by Chips Longhorn on Oct 19, 2014 10:59:43 GMT 1
The people who don't seem to feel that a professional footballer is accountable for his own performances have never played football IMO
|
|
|
Post by thrice on Oct 19, 2014 11:09:43 GMT 1
Everyone will be part of his fan club if he keeps playing like this & crucially having an end product.
He takes the plaudits for his performances right now & is responsible for much of the tripe he served up previously.
He looks a different player since he started to look up!
|
|
Guthlac
Iain Dunn Terrier
[M0:1]
Posts: 523
|
Post by Guthlac on Oct 19, 2014 12:54:48 GMT 1
Was always a fan - even when he played under par, the potential was always clear to see. Now Powell has put an arm round him, he's flourishing, long may it continue. Exciting to watch too!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 19, 2014 13:27:29 GMT 1
Great performance yesterday. But can he do that against a better defence/opposition?!
Also despite his assists, his final ball is questionable. At times when Mcmahon ushered him out to the byline his crosses were awful. Until he can pick his man out like Hammill and Ward to from the byline then better defenders will nullify him.
|
|
|
Post by York Terrier on Oct 19, 2014 20:57:24 GMT 1
He played shite and got stick He plays well and gets praised Shock horror Take the blinkers off man the talent has always been there it's having the manager who knows how to get the best out of him. Talent is forever form is temporary
|
|
|
Post by Chips Longhorn on Oct 19, 2014 21:12:42 GMT 1
He played shite and got stick He plays well and gets praised Shock horror Take the blinkers off man the talent has always been there it's having the manager who knows how to get the best out of him. Talent is forever form is temporary Its you who needs to lose the blinkers. We all knew he was talented from day one. You aint no mystic meg there.. But he has put in countless DUFF performances and quite rightly imo was dropped ( I speak as a fan, I speak as someone who would have him over danny ward every day of the week !) Its ok saying "Robins couldn't handle him" or "powell knows how to get best out of him".. Well lets hope that's true and he can do it over a season cos so far its been 2-3 games.. and as I said before the PLAYER has to take responsibility for why he has been so poor previously you cant just blame a succession of managers
|
|
|
Post by Captainslapper on Oct 19, 2014 21:15:00 GMT 1
Anyone that saw his goal against Hibs (pre season under Grayson) saw his potential. It was similar to the goal v Leicester in the cup but he had to beat 3 defenders to score it. I put it down to the last 2 managers as to them not getting the best out of him. Espically Robins, Scannell never fitted into his formation or style of play. That's why he never got a look in under Robins. Also one of the many reasons robins failed here. Think its too convenient to blame the managers. He was on the pitch , producing little and looking uninterested and generally doing nothing to keep his place in the team. Formations and style of play don't come into it. Thats down to the player 100% IMO. Maybe Powell ( and Lillis beforehand) is a manager hes desperate to play well for, which is great for us NOW, but being a professional and an extremely well paid one at that, being desperate to play well should be a given whoever is in charge IMO.
|
|
buckers
Andy Booth Terrier
Posts: 3,759
|
Post by buckers on Oct 20, 2014 3:51:47 GMT 1
Anyone that saw his goal against Hibs (pre season under Grayson) saw his potential. It was similar to the goal v Leicester in the cup but he had to beat 3 defenders to score it. I put it down to the last 2 managers as to them not getting the best out of him. Espically Robins, Scannell never fitted into his formation or style of play. That's why he never got a look in under Robins. Also one of the many reasons robins failed here. Think its too convenient to blame the managers. He was on the pitch , producing little and looking uninterested and generally doing nothing to keep his place in the team. Formations and style of play don't come into it. Thats down to the player 100% IMO. Maybe Powell ( and Lillis beforehand) is a manager hes desperate to play well for, which is great for us NOW, but being a professional and an extremely well paid one at that, being desperate to play well should be a given whoever is in charge IMO. Formation and style of play don't come into it? So where did Scannell fit into Robins 3-5-2 possession football?
|
|
|
Post by Captainslapper on Oct 20, 2014 9:41:04 GMT 1
I mean they don't come into an individual players attitude and personal performance. A formation doesn't effect a players ability to control a ball or dribble it past someone, or track back or move into space or make a decent pass or look interested. Scannell let those previous managers down more often than not and spent 2 years basically cheating the club out of a massive wage. the way hes playing so well now and looking so up for it, just highlights that more.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2014 10:27:30 GMT 1
Take the blinkers off man the talent has always been there it's having the manager who knows how to get the best out of him. Talent is forever form is temporary Can I have you as my manager where I work?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2014 10:34:12 GMT 1
Think its too convenient to blame the managers. He was on the pitch , producing little and looking uninterested and generally doing nothing to keep his place in the team. Formations and style of play don't come into it. Thats down to the player 100% IMO. Maybe Powell ( and Lillis beforehand) is a manager hes desperate to play well for, which is great for us NOW, but being a professional and an extremely well paid one at that, being desperate to play well should be a given whoever is in charge IMO. Formation and style of play don't come into it? So where did Scannell fit into Robins 3-5-2 possession football? Robins didn't exactly play a conventional 352. It was a lopsided 442 with a left wing back, a right back covering the middle and a right winger in Hammill. That and he only played that for around 3-4 months... The rest of the time it was either 433/442 where Scannell had chances and repeatedly under performed.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2014 10:35:42 GMT 1
I mean they don't come into an individual players attitude and personal performance. A formation doesn't effect a players ability to control a ball or dribble it past someone, or track back or move into space or make a decent pass or look interested. Scannell let those previous managers down more often than not and spent 2 years basically cheating the club out of a massive wage. the way hes playing so well now and looking so up for it, just highlights that more. He created the same amount of goals in 10 mins on Saturday than he did for the whole of last season.
|
|
|
Post by AndySk on Oct 20, 2014 11:49:30 GMT 1
Ridiculous to blame anyone but the player if they've consistently been inconsistent for 2 years. In fact this was the reason we got him In first place so is the palace manager to blame also. Managers can have an effect but you should only be looking at one person when judging players be it good or bad
|
|
|
Post by Doc Halladay 32 on Oct 20, 2014 11:58:51 GMT 1
I mean they don't come into an individual players attitude and personal performance. A formation doesn't effect a players ability to control a ball or dribble it past someone, or track back or move into space or make a decent pass or look interested. Scannell let those previous managers down more often than not and spent 2 years basically cheating the club out of a massive wage. the way hes playing so well now and looking so up for it, just highlights that more. He created the same amount of goals in 10 mins on Saturday than he did for the whole of last season. It would have helped last season if Robins had allowed him to start back to back games. Ward and Hammill weren't exactly producing from January onwards but Scannell was not given successive starts even when he was MoM. I find it bemusing how Slapps can blame LC for ruining Arfield but then excuse Robins for his use of Scannell and accuse him of this attitude rubbish AGAIN... Lillis IMO would not give repeated chances to a guy who he felt cheated the club of a wage and having an attitude issue (See Hammill supposedly in rehab) but both times under his caretakership he has reintroduced Scannell into the starting XI from beyond the bench CP speaks of cajoling Scannell, so accuse him of needing managing correctly, needing an arm around him type of character but one who cheats for his wage and having an attitude problem ..... I just don't see it. 4 starts in the last 5 games and he starts to produce the performances most of us felt he was capable of .. funny that!
|
|
|
Post by AndySk on Oct 20, 2014 12:05:33 GMT 1
I'm sure everyone is happy that Powell blocked his move to Millwall. Especially Scannell cos it wouldve meant he had to play for Millwall. Could be best thing CP has done so far
|
|
|
Post by Doc Halladay 32 on Oct 20, 2014 12:21:22 GMT 1
Ridiculous to blame anyone but the player if they've consistently been inconsistent for 2 years. In fact this was the reason we got him In first place so is the palace manager to blame also. Managers can have an effect but you should only be looking at one person when judging players be it good or bad So Grant Holt is to blame why he hasn't produced his current form at Wigan not Rosler?
|
|
|
Post by bluedogs, Esq. on Oct 20, 2014 12:26:56 GMT 1
I have no doubt that if he had gone to Millwall Ian Holloway would have got him playing the way he is now
Just think what the post on here would of been like, would we of blamed Sean Scannell or the management and coaching staff
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2014 12:28:10 GMT 1
So Grant Holt is to blame why he hasn't produced his current form at Wigan not Rosler? Largely, yes. He's obviously put in more effort pre-season (where he says that he was four kilos lighter than he'd ever been), but surely this just shows the effort levels weren't there previously. It would appear the Rosler made his mind up about him based on last season's performances and doesn't see a way back for him. Sounds a bit like cutting your nose off to spite your face to me, however it was Holt's fault that he's found himself in that situation.
|
|
|
Post by Doc Halladay 32 on Oct 20, 2014 12:41:03 GMT 1
So Grant Holt is to blame why he hasn't produced his current form at Wigan not Rosler? Largely, yes. He's obviously put in more effort pre-season (where he says that he was four kilos lighter than he'd ever been), but surely this just shows the effort levels weren't there previously. It would appear the Rosler made his mind up about him based on last season's performances and doesn't see a way back for him. Sounds a bit like cutting your nose off to spite your face to me, however it was Holt's fault that he's found himself in that situation. But last season his efforts got him a loan move to the Premier League so you could suggest that he is at a worse level this season
|
|
|
Post by AndySk on Oct 20, 2014 12:46:20 GMT 1
Ridiculous to blame anyone but the player if they've consistently been inconsistent for 2 years. In fact this was the reason we got him In first place so is the palace manager to blame also. Managers can have an effect but you should only be looking at one person when judging players be it good or bad So Grant Holt is to blame why he hasn't produced his current form at Wigan not Rosler? Yep
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2014 12:55:12 GMT 1
I always blame players for poor performances, especially when it is clear they have the talent to do a lot better. Worked under a lot of what I consider to be poor managers, for me this is never an excuse to underperform.
This is the real world, not an episode of the Apprentice.
Top respect to him for getting it right at last. This lad could have been knocking on the national team squad and playing in the prem if he had some bollocks about him. Chuffed he has grown up a bit whilst with us and yes I will now join his fan club, but don't blame anyone else for his previous piss poor showings.
As a previous poster says more assists in one game, than in 2 full years at a club, that smells very like an attitude problem. Players with us often start to look good in the last year if their contract. Maybe it focuses their minds a bit.
|
|
|
Post by Captainslapper on Oct 20, 2014 13:15:55 GMT 1
I find it bemusing how Slapps can blame LC for ruining Arfield but then excuse Robins for his use of Scannell and accuse him of this attitude rubbish AGAIN... Lillis IMO would not give repeated chances to a guy who he felt cheated the club of a wage and having an attitude issue (See Hammill supposedly in rehab) but both times under his caretakership he has reintroduced Scannell into the starting XI from beyond the bench CP speaks of cajoling Scannell, so accuse him of needing managing correctly, needing an arm around him type of character but one who cheats for his wage and having an attitude problem ..... I just don't see it. 4 starts in the last 5 games and he starts to produce the performances most of us felt he was capable of .. funny that! Whats bemusing about it? theres a huge difference between the two. Arfield would be busting a gut and giving 100% even if he was having a poor game. He looked like a player who was desperate to keep his place in the team. Scannell would be looking like he couldn't give a stuff. He wasn't doing anything to warrent being given this run of games we should have apparently been giving him, he wasn't looking like he wanted a run of games and he wasn't doing enough to pick him ahead of hammill or Ward. Blaming the managers in his case is a total red herring IMO. Its 100% down to the player. He took a huge wage for 2 years and didn't give full commitment in return. Whats that if its not cheating the club?
|
|
|
Post by Doc Halladay 32 on Oct 20, 2014 13:37:06 GMT 1
I find it bemusing how Slapps can blame LC for ruining Arfield but then excuse Robins for his use of Scannell and accuse him of this attitude rubbish AGAIN... Lillis IMO would not give repeated chances to a guy who he felt cheated the club of a wage and having an attitude issue (See Hammill supposedly in rehab) but both times under his caretakership he has reintroduced Scannell into the starting XI from beyond the bench CP speaks of cajoling Scannell, so accuse him of needing managing correctly, needing an arm around him type of character but one who cheats for his wage and having an attitude problem ..... I just don't see it. 4 starts in the last 5 games and he starts to produce the performances most of us felt he was capable of .. funny that! Whats bemusing about it? theres a huge difference between the two. Arfield would be busting a gut and giving 100% even if he was having a poor game. He looked like a player who was desperate to keep his place in the team. Scannell would be looking like he couldn't give a stuff. He wasn't doing anything to warrent being given this run of games we should have apparently been giving him, he wasn't looking like he wanted a run of games and he wasn't doing enough to pick him ahead of hammill or Ward. Blaming the managers in his case is a total red herring IMO. Its 100% down to the player. He took a huge wage for 2 years and didn't give full commitment in return. Whats that if its not cheating the club? Again I ask why Mark Lillis, probably the most honest fella at the club, would bring a player into the starting XI if he felt he was cheating the club or he had an attitude problem. Repeatedly Lillis uses the mantra of putting a shift in: example 1example 2example 3example 4example 5I really don't see how, with this philosophy that Mark Lillis would agree in any way with your opinion, it just doesn't make sense picking someone regularly who cheats the club and has an attitude issue when Lillis is all about putting a shift in. Robins' character and methods got the best from Hammill, but clearly it didn't with Scannell but if he'd have started him more ...who knows! Scannell put in a MoM performance at home to Leicester and was dropped for Watford away, I think this year has shown that with a run of games he can produce, but he didn't get a run of games under Robins last year, he didn't start 2 successive games all season long.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2014 14:45:03 GMT 1
He created the same amount of goals in 10 mins on Saturday than he did for the whole of last season. It would have helped last season if Robins had allowed him to start back to back games. Ward and Hammill weren't exactly producing from January onwards but Scannell was not given successive starts even when he was MoM. I find it bemusing how Slapps can blame LC for ruining Arfield but then excuse Robins for his use of Scannell and accuse him of this attitude rubbish AGAIN... Lillis IMO would not give repeated chances to a guy who he felt cheated the club of a wage and having an attitude issue (See Hammill supposedly in rehab) but both times under his caretakership he has reintroduced Scannell into the starting XI from beyond the bench CP speaks of cajoling Scannell, so accuse him of needing managing correctly, needing an arm around him type of character but one who cheats for his wage and having an attitude problem ..... I just don't see it. 4 starts in the last 5 games and he starts to produce the performances most of us felt he was capable of .. funny that! I was just being a tad facetious Doc Still think Scannell has to take a huge part of the responsibility for not doing much until now. 1 goal in 42 appearances last season... He did have plenty of opportunities, he just never took them. His performance this season at Chesterfield was absolutely hideous as well under Lillis. I'm delighted that he's doing the business at the moment, but for me I'm just going to enjoy it whilst it lasts, as he's had little spells before where he looks like he'll kick on but never does. Powell does seem to be a great man manager though, and finally maybe we've got a guy who can get a tune out of a potentially devastating player where Grayson, Robins and Lillis have failed previously, or at least at a consistent level.
|
|
|
Post by Doc Halladay 32 on Oct 20, 2014 14:56:26 GMT 1
It would have helped last season if Robins had allowed him to start back to back games. Ward and Hammill weren't exactly producing from January onwards but Scannell was not given successive starts even when he was MoM. I find it bemusing how Slapps can blame LC for ruining Arfield but then excuse Robins for his use of Scannell and accuse him of this attitude rubbish AGAIN... Lillis IMO would not give repeated chances to a guy who he felt cheated the club of a wage and having an attitude issue (See Hammill supposedly in rehab) but both times under his caretakership he has reintroduced Scannell into the starting XI from beyond the bench CP speaks of cajoling Scannell, so accuse him of needing managing correctly, needing an arm around him type of character but one who cheats for his wage and having an attitude problem ..... I just don't see it. 4 starts in the last 5 games and he starts to produce the performances most of us felt he was capable of .. funny that! I was just being a tad facetious Doc Still think Scannell has to take a huge part of the responsibility for not doing much until now. 1 goal in 42 appearances last season... He did have plenty of opportunities, he just never took them. His performance this season at Chesterfield was absolutely hideous as well under Lillis. I'm delighted that he's doing the business at the moment, but for me I'm just going to enjoy it whilst it lasts, as he's had little spells before where he looks like he'll kick on but never does. Powell does seem to be a great man manager though, and finally maybe we've got a guy who can get a tune out of a potentially devastating player where Grayson, Robins and Lillis have failed previously, or at least at a consistent level. I was responding to Slapps mainly Of those 42 appearances last season, only 9 (NINE) were starts he was dropped every time for the next game and the vast majority were 15mins of less off the bench. Scannell is not without blame for his lack of consistant performances, but IMO he has shown more than glimpses of ability in his first 2 seasons at Town but Robins clearly didn't rate him enough to displace Hammill (for successive games) whose production dropped off significantly last season when Vaughan was no longer in the team. It is difficult for any player to get into any rhythm or confidence in spot starts which I feel was the case with Scannell last season.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2014 15:11:49 GMT 1
He created the same amount of goals in 10 mins on Saturday than he did for the whole of last season. It would have helped last season if Robins had allowed him to start back to back games. Ward and Hammill weren't exactly producing from January onwards but Scannell was not given successive starts even when he was MoM. I find it bemusing how Slapps can blame LC for ruining Arfield but then excuse Robins for his use of Scannell and accuse him of this attitude rubbish AGAIN... Lillis IMO would not give repeated chances to a guy who he felt cheated the club of a wage and having an attitude issue (See Hammill supposedly in rehab) but both times under his caretakership he has reintroduced Scannell into the starting XI from beyond the bench CP speaks of cajoling Scannell, so accuse him of needing managing correctly, needing an arm around him type of character but one who cheats for his wage and having an attitude problem ..... I just don't see it. 4 starts in the last 5 games and he starts to produce the performances most of us felt he was capable of .. funny that! Ward was involved with a third of our goals, Hammill 12 assists. It wasn't just those two not producing it was the team and a team lacking Vaughan. And Scannell was NEVER mom once last season.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2014 15:13:06 GMT 1
Also the fitness issues, is that not down to the player?! Or I suppose you'll be saying Redknapp's to blame for Taraabt being 3 stone overweight.
|
|
|
Post by Captainslapper on Oct 20, 2014 15:21:13 GMT 1
But theres a reason why he never got 2 starts running. Time and again hed earn a start with a great little 20 minute cameo sub appearence, and time and time again he would be utter dross and look uninterested and totally ineffective the following game when he did start.. You've got to earn a start surely and at the same time he was doing that, we had Hammill and Ward who were both producing so much more. We didn't have a strong enough team or a strong enough league position , that we could carry a player in the hope he comes good and leave out more effective players to do it. And what does it do for team spirit when all the team can see a player keeping his place after a half-assed performance, especially when hes one of the top earners. You have to make sure everyone knows that robbing the club of your wage won't be tolerated.
Lillis played him in his first game ( chesterfield) subbed him after an hour and dropped him for the next game. But then when he gave him another chance he played well and has carried on playing well so kept his starting place. I don't think thats ANY different from what Robins would have done, or did. If Scannell had played the same way for Robins, then Robins would have played him. If Scannell had been as poor for Lillis as he was for Robins, then Im certain Lillis would have dropped him too. Theres also been issues with hammill apparently, so it would have been harder for Lillis to have left him out anyway.
|
|
rocky
Andy Booth Terrier
Posts: 3,077
|
Post by rocky on Oct 20, 2014 15:47:47 GMT 1
Whatever the reasons behind his inconsistency, he's been a revelation these last few games. If he can finally find a way to get something approaching this level of performance over a longer period then we've got a tremendous player on our hands.
|
|