I agree with RR and JB wholeheartedly re Payne - he's class and will only improve with time. His acquisition was a real coup in my opinion and his forced withdrawal at HT (as well as our inability to defend, obviously) was a major factor in our second half decline."JoeyBeauchamp" wrote:Yes I was going to make the same pojnt about Payne, looks a very good prospect and seems to have a bit more dynamism than the others. Hall, though, has been the flop signing I feared he might be."Radley Rambler" wrote:I'd disagree about Payne GY. He looks a class act to me (and only 19 so a lot more to come). He can win a tackle and for once, we have a footballer who is prepared to shoot and sometimes even on target! Hall I still don't know about, is he the one who mops up a la Bulman? Baker - not up to it, I imagine he'll be gone in January."GodalmingYellow" wrote:
For me players like Hall, Baker, Payne are all too similar and insufficiently talented to progress us.
Absolute rubbish
-
- Puberty
- Posts: 258
- Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 3:41 pm
- Location: Oxford
Re:
-
- Puberty
- Posts: 354
- Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 12:15 am
- Location: Slumdon
Re:
Agree with all of that, except the Josh Payne inclusion. We have been very solid with Josh in the side, our last two away games whilst he was on the pitch, tells that story. He is a gem of a player, along with Heslop."GodalmingYellow" wrote:My main concern is that Wilder has signed too many non-descript central midfielders, who neither provide the stubborn resistance defensively, nor the creative flair going forward. Heslop I exclude from this.
For me players like Hall, Baker, Payne are all too similar and insufficiently talented to progress us.
However, Hall, Baker, Cole surely all have to buck up or ship out. They are being carried and you are correct, they will not help us progress.
Surgery is needed pretty darn quick. I haven't even started on our defenders and striking options yet
-
- Senile
- Posts: 5178
- Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 10:22 am
Re:
No, it's just best left out all together."slappy" wrote:I forgot to mention one aspect of the match which also annoyed me (five times). Playing music after a goal. That's best left to clubs like Stevenage.
-
- Middle-Aged Spread
- Posts: 1808
- Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 11:34 am
- Location: London
Re:
If I was a local radio / news paper journo, or introducing the U's next away highlights on the BBC then factually I can use this introduction:"OUFC4eva" wrote:Talking of winning at Grays - let's look at the 2010 calendar year.
Since we won there 0-4 in January we have only won on the road in the 'league' on TWO other occasions.
0-1 at Altrincham in April and 0-2 at Hereford in September. I am ignoring the win at Chelmsford in the FAT and the victory at 'neutral' Wembley.
'League" defeats have occurred at Luton, Stevenage, Hayes, Eastbourne, Macclesfield and Bradford.
Draws have occurred at Cambridge, Tamworth, Rushden, Rushden PO, Burton, Wycombe, Crewe and Cheltenham.
THREE WINS IN 17 MATCHES AWAY FROM OXFORD - you could then add in the cup defeats at West Ham, Aldershot (JPT) and a win at Chelmsford makes it 4 wins in 20 aways in 2010 so far with games to come at Rotherham, Chesterfield, Lincoln and Stevenage.
We have to improve on our travels.
"With a third of the season already gone, Oxford United have lost just twice on the road in their first campaign in the football league, for four years.
*However, today at the Don Valley Stadium...
*And their good run of away form looked like continuing today at the Don Valley Stadium...
*And, with both teams set up for a midfield battle, it was always likely that neither side would find a breakthrough...
*delete as appropriate.
Not a bad stat, is it?