{ the forum }
 
An independent supporters' website dedicated to Mansfield Town FC

Score Fred sponsorship by Eric and the unbeaten run

Discuss all things Stags and Football League Two, and share stuff using our BBCodes.
Forum rules
Please read the Posting Rules before participating. Posting on the forums is subject to adhering to these.
Also, see the Guidelines for Posting. Moderators may sometimes tidy posts which do not follow these customs.

Re: Score Fred sponsorship by Eric and the unbeaten run

Postby geoffhill » Sat Feb 08, 2020 5:49 pm

Tomlinson not and never will be good enough.Want to see Evans on Tuesday.
geoffhill
Manager
Manager
 
Posts: 2094
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 1:21 pm

Re: Score Fred sponsorship by Eric and the unbeaten run

Postby gazza1988 » Sat Feb 08, 2020 5:52 pm

I'd like to see what Tomlinson can offer with a proper pre season under his belt. It's apparent ours this season wasn't very good and he only turned 22 a week or so ago. More benefit of the doubt than anything else.
post meanings:
I know what I'm doing
Just guessing
You're an idiot and I'm poking you with a stick
User avatar
gazza1988
Manager
Manager
 
Posts: 6350
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2009 5:23 pm
Location: Beeston, Nottingham

Re: Score Fred sponsorship by Eric and the unbeaten run

Postby adamstag » Sat Feb 08, 2020 5:52 pm

gazza1988 wrote:I'd like to see what Tomlinson can offer with a proper pre season under his belt. It's apparent ours this season wasn't very good and he only turned 22 a week or so ago. More benefit of the doubt than anything else.


I think he’s a good player, just wonder if he’d work better with a player of bishops experience that was more attacking
adamstag
Manager
Manager
 
Posts: 7583
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 9:20 am

Re: Score Fred sponsorship by Eric and the unbeaten run

Postby BH_Stag » Sat Feb 08, 2020 5:59 pm

adamstag wrote:
gazza1988 wrote:I'd like to see what Tomlinson can offer with a proper pre season under his belt. It's apparent ours this season wasn't very good and he only turned 22 a week or so ago. More benefit of the doubt than anything else.


I think he’s a good player, just wonder if he’d work better with a player of bishops experience that was more attacking


Don’t really know what he offers us though? He isn’t comfortable at going and getting the ball off the defenders, his passing is generally poor and can’t dictate play. He doesn’t contribute with goals or assists but the odd game he will do the dirty work well. More often than not though we lose the midfield battle, though admittedly he has little quality around him. If promotions the aim he’s not the answer... just my opinion.
BH_Stag
Manager
Manager
 
Posts: 2051
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2016 10:21 am

Re: Score Fred sponsorship by Eric and the unbeaten run

Postby Woodclanger 1 » Sat Feb 08, 2020 6:09 pm

BH_Stag wrote:
adamstag wrote:
gazza1988 wrote:I'd like to see what Tomlinson can offer with a proper pre season under his belt. It's apparent ours this season wasn't very good and he only turned 22 a week or so ago. More benefit of the doubt than anything else.


I think he’s a good player, just wonder if he’d work better with a player of bishops experience that was more attacking


Don’t really know what he offers us though? He isn’t comfortable at going and getting the ball off the defenders, his passing is generally poor and can’t dictate play. He doesn’t contribute with goals or assists but the odd game he will do the dirty work well. More often than not though we lose the midfield battle, though admittedly he has little quality around him. If promotions the aim he’s not the answer... just my opinion.


And mine, he makes Fraser MacLachan look like De Bruyne
Woodclanger 1
Manager
Manager
 
Posts: 6364
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2009 9:46 pm

Re: Score Fred sponsorship by Eric and the unbeaten run

Postby Cleveland_Stag » Sat Feb 08, 2020 6:18 pm

adamstag wrote:
gazza1988 wrote:I'd like to see what Tomlinson can offer with a proper pre season under his belt. It's apparent ours this season wasn't very good and he only turned 22 a week or so ago. More benefit of the doubt than anything else.


I think he’s a good player, just wonder if he’d work better with a player of bishops experience that was more attacking


He’s consistently played poorly since he joined us. Get rid this summer and bring in some proper midfielders finally.
Cleveland_Stag
Subs Bench
Subs Bench
 
Posts: 389
Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2019 1:12 pm

Re: Score Fred sponsorship by Eric and the unbeaten run

Postby wink68 » Sat Feb 08, 2020 6:25 pm

BH_Stag wrote:
adamstag wrote:
gazza1988 wrote:I'd like to see what Tomlinson can offer with a proper pre season under his belt. It's apparent ours this season wasn't very good and he only turned 22 a week or so ago. More benefit of the doubt than anything else.


I think he’s a good player, just wonder if he’d work better with a player of bishops experience that was more attacking


Don’t really know what he offers us though? He isn’t comfortable at going and getting the ball off the defenders, his passing is generally poor and can’t dictate play. He doesn’t contribute with goals or assists but the odd game he will do the dirty work well. More often than not though we lose the midfield battle, though admittedly he has little quality around him. If promotions the aim he’s not the answer... just my opinion.

Tomlinson and Bishop are the same type of midfielder. Get a foot in and protect the defence but doesn't create going forwards. Every team needs one but not two on the pitch together. Battle hard to win the ball, but you have to when you keep giving it away and leave the strikers marooned up top on their own to feed off scraps.Shoot me down all you want about Mellis and is off the field problems and not working hard enough. Quality on the ball which we now have nobody anywhere near his ability. Yes he had problems but surely a good manager would back himself to sort him out and get him doing the business on the park.
wink68
Subs Bench
Subs Bench
 
Posts: 627
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2009 8:35 pm

Re: Score Fred sponsorship by Eric and the unbeaten run

Postby cassellswasmagic » Sat Feb 08, 2020 6:26 pm

We have no decent midfield players. We must get better if we are aiming for promotion.
cassellswasmagic
Manager
Manager
 
Posts: 3247
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 2:12 pm

Re: Score Fred sponsorship by Eric and the unbeaten run

Postby Martin Shaw » Sat Feb 08, 2020 6:26 pm

I don't agree that the substitution of Maynard, bringing on Hamilton after 75 minutes, had any impact on the result. In principle, it seemed a reasonable change to me, with Hamilton's pace to run at the defence in the latter stages. Unfortunately it was the substitution of Clarke on for Riley (Riley I think off with some kind of groin strain or something like that) which did have an impact as it looked to me like it was Clarke who lost his man Kenyon who knocked in the equaliser.
"Four points clear as Lincoln are McCaffreyised", CHAD headline, April 1975
Martin Shaw
Site Admin
 
Posts: 19489
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 6:20 pm
Location: Guildford

Re: Score Fred sponsorship by Eric and the unbeaten run

Postby BH_Stag » Sat Feb 08, 2020 6:35 pm

Martin Shaw wrote:I don't agree that the substitution of Maynard, bringing on Hamilton after 75 minutes, had any impact on the result. In principle, it seemed a reasonable change to me, with Hamilton's pace to run at the defence in the latter stages. Unfortunately it was the substitution of Clarke on for Riley (Riley I think off with some kind of groin strain or something like that) which did have an impact as it looked to me like it was Clarke who lost his man Kenyon who knocked in the equaliser.


It may not have had a direct impact on the goal incident itself, but I do think the sub invited pressure. It achieved nothing and we didn’t learn our lesson from just 7 days ago. Twice now as soon as he’s left the pitch we’ve been really poor at seeing the game out because we are just letting teams come on to us. Today they gradually built pressure until they scored and once they did they could have easily scored again, they didn’t have to worry about any attacking threat from us. They had no choice but to go for it anyway of course, but they could do so in the knowledge we were now toothless up top. We barely entered their half after that sub, that’s no coincidence cor me.
BH_Stag
Manager
Manager
 
Posts: 2051
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2016 10:21 am

Re: Score Fred sponsorship by Eric and the unbeaten run

Postby WVStag » Sat Feb 08, 2020 6:39 pm

BH_Stag wrote:
Martin Shaw wrote:I don't agree that the substitution of Maynard, bringing on Hamilton after 75 minutes, had any impact on the result. In principle, it seemed a reasonable change to me, with Hamilton's pace to run at the defence in the latter stages. Unfortunately it was the substitution of Clarke on for Riley (Riley I think off with some kind of groin strain or something like that) which did have an impact as it looked to me like it was Clarke who lost his man Kenyon who knocked in the equaliser.


It may not have had a direct impact on the goal incident itself, but I do think the sub invited pressure. It achieved nothing and we didn’t learn our lesson from just 7 days ago. Twice now as soon as he’s left the pitch we’ve been really poor at seeing the game out because we are just letting teams come on to us. Today they gradually built pressure until they scored and once they did they could have easily scored again, they didn’t have to worry about any attacking threat from us. They had no choice but to go for it anyway of course, but they could do so in the knowledge we were now toothless up top. We barely entered their half after that sub, that’s no coincidence cor me.


Completely agree, BH.
WVStag
Subs Bench
Subs Bench
 
Posts: 675
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2015 11:27 pm

Re: Score Fred sponsorship by Eric and the unbeaten run

Postby Martin Shaw » Sat Feb 08, 2020 7:00 pm

BH_Stag wrote:
Martin Shaw wrote:I don't agree that the substitution of Maynard, bringing on Hamilton after 75 minutes, had any impact on the result. In principle, it seemed a reasonable change to me, with Hamilton's pace to run at the defence in the latter stages. Unfortunately it was the substitution of Clarke on for Riley (Riley I think off with some kind of groin strain or something like that) which did have an impact as it looked to me like it was Clarke who lost his man Kenyon who knocked in the equaliser.


It may not have had a direct impact on the goal incident itself, but I do think the sub invited pressure. It achieved nothing and we didn’t learn our lesson from just 7 days ago. Twice now as soon as he’s left the pitch we’ve been really poor at seeing the game out because we are just letting teams come on to us. Today they gradually built pressure until they scored and once they did they could have easily scored again, they didn’t have to worry about any attacking threat from us. They had no choice but to go for it anyway of course, but they could do so in the knowledge we were now toothless up top. We barely entered their half after that sub, that’s no coincidence cor me.

I mentioned in commentary when Maynard came off that he was basically getting no service at all all afternoon, save for one brilliant cross from Riley. The principle of having Hamilton run at them and get in behind them was reasonable I think. More of a problem in my opinion was that the midfield, especially Charsley and Tomlinson, didn't have good games. Bishop did at least get quite a few good tackles in in the second half.
"Four points clear as Lincoln are McCaffreyised", CHAD headline, April 1975
Martin Shaw
Site Admin
 
Posts: 19489
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 6:20 pm
Location: Guildford

Re: Score Fred sponsorship by Eric and the unbeaten run

Postby NorthLondonStag » Sat Feb 08, 2020 7:09 pm

Martin Shaw wrote:
BH_Stag wrote:
Martin Shaw wrote:I don't agree that the substitution of Maynard, bringing on Hamilton after 75 minutes, had any impact on the result. In principle, it seemed a reasonable change to me, with Hamilton's pace to run at the defence in the latter stages. Unfortunately it was the substitution of Clarke on for Riley (Riley I think off with some kind of groin strain or something like that) which did have an impact as it looked to me like it was Clarke who lost his man Kenyon who knocked in the equaliser.


It may not have had a direct impact on the goal incident itself, but I do think the sub invited pressure. It achieved nothing and we didn’t learn our lesson from just 7 days ago. Twice now as soon as he’s left the pitch we’ve been really poor at seeing the game out because we are just letting teams come on to us. Today they gradually built pressure until they scored and once they did they could have easily scored again, they didn’t have to worry about any attacking threat from us. They had no choice but to go for it anyway of course, but they could do so in the knowledge we were now toothless up top. We barely entered their half after that sub, that’s no coincidence cor me.

I mentioned in commentary when Maynard came off that he was basically getting no service at all all afternoon, save for one brilliant cross from Riley. The principle of having Hamilton run at them was reasonable I think. More of a problem was that the midfield, especially Charsley and Tomlinson, didn't have good games. Bishop did at least get quite a few good tackles in in the second half.


As a team they were raspberry (with some very limited personal exceptions).

I’ve been to some games where they’ve got slated and I thought they played well but got nothing. Today they’ve played a very very poor Morecambe side and come away with a draw and I would say they are fortunate to have that.
NorthLondonStag
Subs Bench
Subs Bench
 
Posts: 494
Joined: Thu May 02, 2019 8:46 pm

Re: Score Fred sponsorship by Eric and the unbeaten run

Postby adamstag » Sat Feb 08, 2020 7:12 pm

This side is quite easily worse than the side that went down.

Quite easily the worst football league side I’ve ever seen. They’re embarrassing.

Yet you get tits like bishop who when in the middle of the pitch and has a player to his left and right kicking the ball out the ground and then moaning at the fans for basically moaning at another pass which was terrible and moaning at the fans
adamstag
Manager
Manager
 
Posts: 7583
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 9:20 am

Re: Score Fred sponsorship by Eric and the unbeaten run

Postby BH_Stag » Sat Feb 08, 2020 7:13 pm

Martin Shaw wrote:
BH_Stag wrote:
Martin Shaw wrote:I don't agree that the substitution of Maynard, bringing on Hamilton after 75 minutes, had any impact on the result. In principle, it seemed a reasonable change to me, with Hamilton's pace to run at the defence in the latter stages. Unfortunately it was the substitution of Clarke on for Riley (Riley I think off with some kind of groin strain or something like that) which did have an impact as it looked to me like it was Clarke who lost his man Kenyon who knocked in the equaliser.


It may not have had a direct impact on the goal incident itself, but I do think the sub invited pressure. It achieved nothing and we didn’t learn our lesson from just 7 days ago. Twice now as soon as he’s left the pitch we’ve been really poor at seeing the game out because we are just letting teams come on to us. Today they gradually built pressure until they scored and once they did they could have easily scored again, they didn’t have to worry about any attacking threat from us. They had no choice but to go for it anyway of course, but they could do so in the knowledge we were now toothless up top. We barely entered their half after that sub, that’s no coincidence cor me.

I mentioned in commentary when Maynard came off that he was basically getting no service at all all afternoon, save for one brilliant cross from Riley. The principle of having Hamilton run at them and get in behind them was reasonable I think. More of a problem in my opinion was that the midfield, especially Charsley and Tomlinson, didn't have good games. Bishop did at least get quite a few good tackles in in the second half.


Maynard wasn’t in the game as much as we’d have liked I agree, though I personally think there’s value in having your goalscorer on the pitch at all times. Psychologically when we take him off we start to sink and the mind set shifts to ‘shut up shop’ mode, and we’re not very good at it. CJ coming on to run is fine in principle but it didn’t really materialise.

I agree that our midfield was the main issue today.
BH_Stag
Manager
Manager
 
Posts: 2051
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2016 10:21 am

Re: Score Fred sponsorship by Eric and the unbeaten run

Postby Martin Shaw » Sat Feb 08, 2020 7:17 pm

BH_Stag wrote:
Martin Shaw wrote:
BH_Stag wrote:
Martin Shaw wrote:I don't agree that the substitution of Maynard, bringing on Hamilton after 75 minutes, had any impact on the result. In principle, it seemed a reasonable change to me, with Hamilton's pace to run at the defence in the latter stages. Unfortunately it was the substitution of Clarke on for Riley (Riley I think off with some kind of groin strain or something like that) which did have an impact as it looked to me like it was Clarke who lost his man Kenyon who knocked in the equaliser.


It may not have had a direct impact on the goal incident itself, but I do think the sub invited pressure. It achieved nothing and we didn’t learn our lesson from just 7 days ago. Twice now as soon as he’s left the pitch we’ve been really poor at seeing the game out because we are just letting teams come on to us. Today they gradually built pressure until they scored and once they did they could have easily scored again, they didn’t have to worry about any attacking threat from us. They had no choice but to go for it anyway of course, but they could do so in the knowledge we were now toothless up top. We barely entered their half after that sub, that’s no coincidence cor me.

I mentioned in commentary when Maynard came off that he was basically getting no service at all all afternoon, save for one brilliant cross from Riley. The principle of having Hamilton run at them and get in behind them was reasonable I think. More of a problem in my opinion was that the midfield, especially Charsley and Tomlinson, didn't have good games. Bishop did at least get quite a few good tackles in in the second half.


Maynard wasn’t in the game as much as we’d have liked I agree, though I personally think there’s value in having your goalscorer on the pitch at all times. Psychologically when we take him off we start to sink and the mind set shifts to ‘shut up shop’ mode, and we’re not very good at it. CJ coming on to run is fine in principle but it didn’t really materialise.

I agree that our midfield was the main issue today.

it didn't materialise, I agree. But that doesn't mean it was the wrong thing to do at the time, unless we just want to talk in hindsight.
"Four points clear as Lincoln are McCaffreyised", CHAD headline, April 1975
Martin Shaw
Site Admin
 
Posts: 19489
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 6:20 pm
Location: Guildford

Re: Score Fred sponsorship by Eric and the unbeaten run

Postby Billy the fish » Sat Feb 08, 2020 7:19 pm

Martin Shaw wrote:
BH_Stag wrote:
Martin Shaw wrote:I don't agree that the substitution of Maynard, bringing on Hamilton after 75 minutes, had any impact on the result. In principle, it seemed a reasonable change to me, with Hamilton's pace to run at the defence in the latter stages. Unfortunately it was the substitution of Clarke on for Riley (Riley I think off with some kind of groin strain or something like that) which did have an impact as it looked to me like it was Clarke who lost his man Kenyon who knocked in the equaliser.


It may not have had a direct impact on the goal incident itself, but I do think the sub invited pressure. It achieved nothing and we didn’t learn our lesson from just 7 days ago. Twice now as soon as he’s left the pitch we’ve been really poor at seeing the game out because we are just letting teams come on to us. Today they gradually built pressure until they scored and once they did they could have easily scored again, they didn’t have to worry about any attacking threat from us. They had no choice but to go for it anyway of course, but they could do so in the knowledge we were now toothless up top. We barely entered their half after that sub, that’s no coincidence cor me.

I mentioned in commentary when Maynard came off that he was basically getting no service at all all afternoon, save for one brilliant cross from Riley. The principle of having Hamilton run at them and get in behind them was reasonable I think. More of a problem in my opinion was that the midfield, especially Charsley and Tomlinson, didn't have good games. Bishop did at least get quite a few good tackles in in the second half.


Or we could have brought Cooke on ?? 2 games running press from the front your going to need to replace the strikers why on earth you let a contracted goal scorer leave beggars believe .GC jury out
User avatar
Billy the fish
Manager
Manager
 
Posts: 1519
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 2:54 pm

Re: Score Fred sponsorship by Eric and the unbeaten run

Postby Sneag » Sat Feb 08, 2020 7:24 pm

Billy the fish wrote:
Martin Shaw wrote:
BH_Stag wrote:
Martin Shaw wrote:I don't agree that the substitution of Maynard, bringing on Hamilton after 75 minutes, had any impact on the result. In principle, it seemed a reasonable change to me, with Hamilton's pace to run at the defence in the latter stages. Unfortunately it was the substitution of Clarke on for Riley (Riley I think off with some kind of groin strain or something like that) which did have an impact as it looked to me like it was Clarke who lost his man Kenyon who knocked in the equaliser.


It may not have had a direct impact on the goal incident itself, but I do think the sub invited pressure. It achieved nothing and we didn’t learn our lesson from just 7 days ago. Twice now as soon as he’s left the pitch we’ve been really poor at seeing the game out because we are just letting teams come on to us. Today they gradually built pressure until they scored and once they did they could have easily scored again, they didn’t have to worry about any attacking threat from us. They had no choice but to go for it anyway of course, but they could do so in the knowledge we were now toothless up top. We barely entered their half after that sub, that’s no coincidence cor me.

I mentioned in commentary when Maynard came off that he was basically getting no service at all all afternoon, save for one brilliant cross from Riley. The principle of having Hamilton run at them and get in behind them was reasonable I think. More of a problem in my opinion was that the midfield, especially Charsley and Tomlinson, didn't have good games. Bishop did at least get quite a few good tackles in in the second half.


Or we could have brought Cooke on ?? 2 games running press from the front your going to need to replace the strikers why on earth you let a contracted goal scorer leave beggars believe .GC jury out


Tyler Walker just scored for Florist, perhaps we should all cry over that spilt milk too.
Logic is lost in your cranial abatoir,
Shallow empty inside,
Sly witted and full of snide.
User avatar
Sneag
Manager
Manager
 
Posts: 8526
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 6:41 pm
Location: King Solomon he never lived `round here

Re: Score Fred sponsorship by Eric and the unbeaten run

Postby london amber stag » Sat Feb 08, 2020 7:31 pm

Really pleased for Tyler, he deserves his place in that Forest team. Excellent attitude, professional and ran all game, how we miss him. Exeter away springs to mind.
Mansfield Town, my club even though been exiled in London since 1983.
User avatar
london amber stag
Manager
Manager
 
Posts: 1622
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2009 7:16 pm
Location: Bromley Kent

Re: Score Fred sponsorship by Eric and the unbeaten run

Postby BH_Stag » Sat Feb 08, 2020 7:31 pm

Martin Shaw wrote:
BH_Stag wrote:
Martin Shaw wrote:
BH_Stag wrote:
Martin Shaw wrote:I don't agree that the substitution of Maynard, bringing on Hamilton after 75 minutes, had any impact on the result. In principle, it seemed a reasonable change to me, with Hamilton's pace to run at the defence in the latter stages. Unfortunately it was the substitution of Clarke on for Riley (Riley I think off with some kind of groin strain or something like that) which did have an impact as it looked to me like it was Clarke who lost his man Kenyon who knocked in the equaliser.


It may not have had a direct impact on the goal incident itself, but I do think the sub invited pressure. It achieved nothing and we didn’t learn our lesson from just 7 days ago. Twice now as soon as he’s left the pitch we’ve been really poor at seeing the game out because we are just letting teams come on to us. Today they gradually built pressure until they scored and once they did they could have easily scored again, they didn’t have to worry about any attacking threat from us. They had no choice but to go for it anyway of course, but they could do so in the knowledge we were now toothless up top. We barely entered their half after that sub, that’s no coincidence cor me.

I mentioned in commentary when Maynard came off that he was basically getting no service at all all afternoon, save for one brilliant cross from Riley. The principle of having Hamilton run at them and get in behind them was reasonable I think. More of a problem in my opinion was that the midfield, especially Charsley and Tomlinson, didn't have good games. Bishop did at least get quite a few good tackles in in the second half.


Maynard wasn’t in the game as much as we’d have liked I agree, though I personally think there’s value in having your goalscorer on the pitch at all times. Psychologically when we take him off we start to sink and the mind set shifts to ‘shut up shop’ mode, and we’re not very good at it. CJ coming on to run is fine in principle but it didn’t really materialise.

I agree that our midfield was the main issue today.

it didn't materialise, I agree. But that doesn't mean it was the wrong thing to do at the time, unless we just want to talk in hindsight.


Didn’t make it clear above but by ‘fine in principle’ I suppose I really meant I understand the principle. I’m never a fan of taking your goalscorer off at 1-0 though, it’s asking for trouble. I didn’t think that particular sub was a good idea at the time, or in hindsight. Each to their own though!
BH_Stag
Manager
Manager
 
Posts: 2051
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2016 10:21 am

Re: Score Fred sponsorship by Eric and the unbeaten run

Postby Captain Cunno » Sat Feb 08, 2020 7:36 pm

london amber stag wrote:Really pleased for Tyler, he deserves his place in that Forest team. Excellent attitude, professional and ran all game, how we miss him. Exeter away springs to mind.


Some wouldn't have him back though....
These are my opinions , if you don't like them I have others...
User avatar
Captain Cunno
Manager
Manager
 
Posts: 3459
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2009 1:23 pm

Re: Score Fred sponsorship by Eric and the unbeaten run

Postby oldweststander » Sat Feb 08, 2020 7:39 pm

I hope Riley's injury isn't a recurrence of the injury he had at Plymouth that kept him out for sometime?
oldweststander
Manager
Manager
 
Posts: 3240
Joined: Sun Aug 25, 2013 11:17 am

Re: Score Fred sponsorship by Eric and the unbeaten run

Postby BH_Stag » Sat Feb 08, 2020 7:40 pm

oldweststander wrote:I hope Riley's injury isn't a recurrence of the injury he had at Plymouth that kept him out for sometime?


Looked like a groin strain so don’t think so. Hopefully doesn’t keep him out too long.
BH_Stag
Manager
Manager
 
Posts: 2051
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2016 10:21 am

Re: Score Fred sponsorship by Eric and the unbeaten run

Postby Cleveland_Stag » Sat Feb 08, 2020 7:45 pm

Captain Cunno wrote:
london amber stag wrote:Really pleased for Tyler, he deserves his place in that Forest team. Excellent attitude, professional and ran all game, how we miss him. Exeter away springs to mind.


Some wouldn't have him back though....


There were a disturbing amount of fans on Facebook at the end of the season saying that they preferred Rose over Walker because "Walker was lazy".
Cleveland_Stag
Subs Bench
Subs Bench
 
Posts: 389
Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2019 1:12 pm

Re: Score Fred sponsorship by Eric and the unbeaten run

Postby london amber stag » Sat Feb 08, 2020 7:57 pm

Cleveland_Stag wrote:
Captain Cunno wrote:
london amber stag wrote:Really pleased for Tyler, he deserves his place in that Forest team. Excellent attitude, professional and ran all game, how we miss him. Exeter away springs to mind.


Some wouldn't have him back though....


There were a disturbing amount of fans on Facebook at the end of the season saying that they preferred Rose over Walker because "Walker was lazy".


Well that just about sums up the noisy majority on Facebook. Tyler is one of the best loan players we have had for years and I have no doubt had we gone up, he would have stayed with us.
Mansfield Town, my club even though been exiled in London since 1983.
User avatar
london amber stag
Manager
Manager
 
Posts: 1622
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2009 7:16 pm
Location: Bromley Kent

PreviousNext

Return to Stagsnet Main Discussion Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: sw19stag, west country stag and 28 guests