Brief synopsis

mcfry wrote:

So when a political party ruin a country it has nothing to do with the leader?

Yes it does, but which leader though, look I'm not trying to defend Brent, anything but that, just trying to make sense of that debacle yesterday and I don't think it can be wholly attributed to him.

I say again, why wasn't Reuben brought on sooner as he was 100% fit, surely it was clear for all too see that Matt was getting nowhere fast against that CH

Graiser.....you have some good points.....but bringing them to this forum is the equivelent of hitting head against a brick wall......Brent is the devil incarnate on here....he is responsible for everything that goes wrong at Argyle, Plymouth, Devon, SW Peninsula, England, UK, if we stay in the EU , if we leave the EU, etc. etc, etc, etc, etc.

Ok he isn't perfect but he isn't to blame for everthing that goes wrong in the western hemisphere surely.....but if your a stalwart of ATD that's the norm that's expected.

Exactly Zyph. No point whatsoever arguing for the value of Brentism here on ATD. Glad that's sorted. Common decency and all that. Have people not read the ATD bylaws ?

Cause and effect are suspended forthwith. Politically acceptable views only please. It's the British way, don't you know. No harassing the squire and his failed crop, or you'll be shown the lane North. Viva Brent.

Lord Biro wrote:

Exactly Zyph. No point whatsoever arguing for the value of Brentism here on ATD. Glad that's sorted. Common decency and all that. Have people not read the ATD bylaws ?

Cause and effect are suspended forthwith. Politically acceptable views only please. It's the British way, don't you know. No harassing the squire and his failed crop, or you'll be shown the lane North. Viva Brent.

Well bollocks to that, I was trying to make sense of that crap yesterday, but debating actual football matters seem to be beyond some on here

zyph wrote:

Graiser.....you have some good points.....but bringing them to this forum is the equivelent of hitting head against a brick wall......Brent is the devil incarnate on here....he is responsible for everything that goes wrong at Argyle, Plymouth, Devon, SW Peninsula, England, UK, if we stay in the EU , if we leave the EU, etc. etc, etc, etc, etc.

Ok he isn't perfect but he isn't to blame for everthing that goes wrong in the western hemisphere surely.....but if your a stalwart of ATD that's the norm that's expected.

Ain't that the truth

Graiser wrote:

Lord Biro wrote:

Exactly Zyph. No point whatsoever arguing for the value of Brentism here on ATD. Glad that's sorted. Common decency and all that. Have people not read the ATD bylaws ?

Cause and effect are suspended forthwith. Politically acceptable views only please. It's the British way, don't you know. No harassing the squire and his failed crop, or you'll be shown the lane North. Viva Brent.

Well bollocks to that, I was trying to make sense of that crap yesterday, but debating actual football matters seem to be beyond some on here

I certainly wouldn't bother debating the game of  football with Jimmy Brent, that's foreshore.  

Sadly Home Park isn't just about the football anymore. That's not my doing.

Graiser wrote:

mcfry wrote:

So when a political party ruin a country it has nothing to do with the leader?

Yes it does, but which leader though, look I'm not trying to defend Brent, anything but that, just trying to make sense of that debacle yesterday and I don't think it can be wholly attributed to him.

I say again, why wasn't Reuben brought on sooner as he was 100% fit, surely it was clear for all too see that Matt was getting nowhere fast against that CH

I was simply trying to point out that the final decisions are carried out by the person at the top of the tree, in this case Brent. It happens to be my personal opinion and not related to whether this site may/may not have a so called agenda. I happen to pretty much agree with what you said apart from not blaming Brent for what happened. I look at the bigger picture and even if I was a Brent supporter I would find it extremely difficult to point out any real positives since the self confessed non-footballing supporter turned up on the doorstep.

Graiser wrote:

[I say again, why wasn't Reuben brought on sooner as he was 100% fit, surely it was clear for all too see that Matt was getting nowhere fast against that CH

Where have you been the last 6 months ? Have you not followed Adams' comments regarding, and I paraphrase, the sick bay culture at Argyle this season. Have you ever thought the manager and him have issues over the fitness thing ? Have you ever considered that the manager just might think Reid's heart was somewhere else ? It's about people first and foremost.

Lord Biro wrote:

Graiser wrote:

[I say again, why wasn't Reuben brought on sooner as he was 100% fit, surely it was clear for all too see that Matt was getting nowhere fast against that CH

Where have you been the last 6 months ? Have you not followed Adams' comments regarding, and I paraphrase, the sick bay culture at Argyle this season. Have you ever thought the manager and him have issues over the fitness thing ? Have you ever considered that the manager just might think Reid's heart was somewhere else ? It's about people first and foremost.

I know where I've been alright and all depends on what you wish to select and believe as fact, one fact I do know is Derek declaring days before the game that Reuben was fully fit, so is he telling porkies.
Or maybe Reuben's telling porkies.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Well, there you go then.
I find it almost impossible to believe that Reid was miraculously all of a sudden 100% fit for the Wembley game, after 6 months of supposed problems. All you will get in the media is people papering over issues, and rightly so. Nobody is going to air their dirty laundry out in the public gaze.

Graiser wrote:

mcfry wrote:

So when a political party ruin a country it has nothing to do with the leader?

Yes it does, but which leader though, look I'm not trying to defend Brent, anything but that, just trying to make sense of that debacle yesterday and I don't think it can be wholly attributed to him.

I say again, why wasn't Reuben brought on sooner as he was 100% fit, surely it was clear for all too see that Matt was getting nowhere fast against that CH

some of us blame brent, some blame adams. others recognise plymouth as a FAILED city. argyle are ko'd in a big way,

what would YOU do, to put it right  ??


ps you will note 'failure' sheridan has rocked up at notts co on a 3 year deal.....none of this rolling 1 year crap. can you see brenty boy ever giving someone a FULL 3 year deal ? not 2.5 years but three whole years

Maybe Adams wanted Wimbledon to think that Reuben was fully fit and able to play....mind games comes to mind.

Elias wrote:

Graiser wrote:

mcfry wrote:

So when a political party ruin a country it has nothing to do with the leader?

Yes it does, but which leader though, look I'm not trying to defend Brent, anything but that, just trying to make sense of that debacle yesterday and I don't think it can be wholly attributed to him.

I say again, why wasn't Reuben brought on sooner as he was 100% fit, surely it was clear for all too see that Matt was getting nowhere fast against that CH

some of us blame brent, some blame adams. others recognise plymouth as a FAILED city. argyle are ko'd in a big way,

what would YOU do, to put it right  ??


ps you will note 'failure' sheridan has rocked up at notts co on a 3 year deal.....none of this rolling 1 year crap. can you see brenty boy ever giving someone a FULL 3 year deal ? not 2.5 years but three whole years  

And that's got what to do with yesterday's performance ?

This is all getting a bit pasoti. I'm bowing out for now. Jeez

Graiser wrote:

Elias wrote:

Graiser wrote:

mcfry wrote:

So when a political party ruin a country it has nothing to do with the leader?

Yes it does, but which leader though, look I'm not trying to defend Brent, anything but that, just trying to make sense of that debacle yesterday and I don't think it can be wholly attributed to him.

I say again, why wasn't Reuben brought on sooner as he was 100% fit, surely it was clear for all too see that Matt was getting nowhere fast against that CH

some of us blame brent, some blame adams. others recognise plymouth as a FAILED city. argyle are ko'd in a big way,

what would YOU do, to put it right  ??


ps you will note 'failure' sheridan has rocked up at notts co on a 3 year deal.....none of this rolling 1 year crap. can you see brenty boy ever giving someone a FULL 3 year deal ? not 2.5 years but three whole years  

And that's got what to do with yesterday's performance ?

short term contracts get you nowhere. we havent gone up for that reason alone !

Elias wrote:

Graiser wrote:

Elias wrote:

Graiser wrote:

mcfry wrote:

So when a political party ruin a country it has nothing to do with the leader?

Yes it does, but which leader though, look I'm not trying to defend Brent, anything but that, just trying to make sense of that debacle yesterday and I don't think it can be wholly attributed to him.

I say again, why wasn't Reuben brought on sooner as he was 100% fit, surely it was clear for all too see that Matt was getting nowhere fast against that CH

some of us blame brent, some blame adams. others recognise plymouth as a FAILED city. argyle are ko'd in a big way,

what would YOU do, to put it right  ??


ps you will note 'failure' sheridan has rocked up at notts co on a 3 year deal.....none of this rolling 1 year crap. can you see brenty boy ever giving someone a FULL 3 year deal ? not 2.5 years but three whole years  

And that's got what to do with yesterday's performance ?

short term contracts get you nowhere. we havent gone up for that reason alone !

You think that's the blame for yesterday's performance, load of crap

Lord Biro wrote:

This is all getting a bit pasoti. I'm bowing out for now. Jeez

Oh feck me now PASOTi's got a mention.

Graiser wrote:

Elias wrote:

Graiser wrote:

Elias wrote:

Graiser wrote:

mcfry wrote:

So when a political party ruin a country it has nothing to do with the leader?

Yes it does, but which leader though, look I'm not trying to defend Brent, anything but that, just trying to make sense of that debacle yesterday and I don't think it can be wholly attributed to him.

I say again, why wasn't Reuben brought on sooner as he was 100% fit, surely it was clear for all too see that Matt was getting nowhere fast against that CH

some of us blame brent, some blame adams. others recognise plymouth as a FAILED city. argyle are ko'd in a big way,

what would YOU do, to put it right  ??


ps you will note 'failure' sheridan has rocked up at notts co on a 3 year deal.....none of this rolling 1 year crap. can you see brenty boy ever giving someone a FULL 3 year deal ? not 2.5 years but three whole years  

And that's got what to do with yesterday's performance ?

short term contracts get you nowhere. we havent gone up for that reason alone !

You think that's the blame for yesterday's performance, load of crap

dear me. enjoy the ride to morecambe next season.

....or a weekend at Blackpool.

Graiser wrote:

but debating actual football matters seem to be beyond some on here

Then:

Graiser wrote:

You think that's the blame for yesterday's performance, load of crap

Superbly argued case, thanks for showing us how 'debating football matters' should be done...

charleymouse wrote:

Graiser wrote:

but debating actual football matters seem to be beyond some on here

Then:

Graiser wrote:

You think that's the blame for yesterday's performance, load of crap

Superbly argued case, thanks for showing us how 'debating football matters' should be done...

You either haven't read the whole trail or your having a selective moment, quite common here at times

Graiser wrote:

charleymouse wrote:

Graiser wrote:

but debating actual football matters seem to be beyond some on here

Then:

Graiser wrote:

You think that's the blame for yesterday's performance, load of crap

Superbly argued case, thanks for showing us how 'debating football matters' should be done...

You either haven't read the whole trail or your having a selective moment, quite common here at times

I have read it, thanks, although I wasn't aware that this was some kind of exam. Did I pass?

But I'm sure it's my fault that you lamented the quality of debate before refuting an argument with 'load of crap'. There must be some subtext in those eloquent words that I'm missing. It's always other people's fault, isn't it?

So have you got an opinion on Monday's performance or not, or do you just wish carry on nit picking ?

Playing one up front who was clearly being dominated 
Players being warned about how Wimbledon will play and not responding on the day
Too many loan players - they will simply not commit in the same way
Not enough depth in the squad, one might call it threadbare leading to players not under threat for their places and a lack of options.

1 = Adams
2= Players + Brent
3 and 4 = Brent

In small squads with a smattering of talent the real talent soon gets Sussed as in Carey getting marked out of the Wembley match, until we have another decent winger to sub him with no manager will manage more than Adams has.