Hatchy stays! Welcome Rob Youhill!!

[My opinion]

17 is a first 11 + 5 substitutes allowing 1 extra in case a player is injured in the warm up as often can happen..
I am curious as to who you would leave out of the squad given the players we have and additions that we need..central midfield and cover for right back. (Mitchell can cover right back but Youill won't)

[Ingleby]

I don't even know if we will have Mitchell next season. But we know Weldon has gone. He needs a replacement on the bench. Same with Mota, who I think will be gone.

I think Youhill would fill in at RB if asked but not really what he's about.

So with the numbers we have currently, nobody will be missing out.

[My opinion]

OK ..You are entitled to your opinion...I just think your overloading the forward line with your choice.
Last season people (me included) on here were saying that our 6 forwards (Purewal, Armstrong, Dowson, Hatch, Thompson and Fisher was too many.
I'm sure MG will bring in who he can so it doesn't really matter who or what formation you and I think.
I'm sure we will be in with a shout come the end of next season

[Ingleby]

You could be right. But a lot of our forwards (Thompson, Purewal and Dowson) have all had roles out wide also. So it's not always simply a case of 2 from 5 or 6.

Plus we also know Purewal is some way off yet, and Armstrong is anyone's guess. Worst case scenario we might not have the attacking options we'd like for a long while yet.

I wasn't expecting Hatch to be kept on really. Maybe it's partly due to that goal, but I think more importantly he's very useful on the bench as a defender or striker. He also proved quite an asset since he was made available part way through the season. Lucky we still had him to call on.

[Neil Johnson]

If Youhill is going to be in a team that passes the ball around more, to suit him, then Thompson, Mitchell and Mota(!) will also benefit from such play.

I imagine that Hatch (as well as Cartman & the others) would benefit from Youhill's quick thinking & quality with passes.

"Defensive" Fullback work has been iffy, especially against set pieces and pacy break-aways.

Another option in central midfield would also help in creating competition for places and cover for injuries and suspensions.

If Bell is off, we also need a good #2 keeper.

The present squad could be strong enough for beating the also-rans, but I expect we need the extra players mentioned and variations in attacking against the top promotion teams.

I hope a few kids can come through from the reserves and get some run-outs, initially from the bench. Blending some kids into a team that is playing well is great for knocking off their rough edges.

[stayhigh13]

Just because players such as Thompson & Mitchell aren't tall it doesn't mean that playing direct or with the early ball forward is not suited to them. Players of that sort, Youhill also, benefit when they can get 1v1 or in space between the lines- situations that arise of an early ball turning round the opposition or by the winning of the second ball high up the pitch.

there's been a few references to our style of play and a lack of barca style play. I don't think we should change our style of play and I don't think we will!!

[Quakerz]

Just because players such as Thompson & Mitchell aren't tall it doesn't mean that playing direct or with the early ball forward is not suited to them. Players of that sort, Youhill also, benefit when they can get 1v1 or in space between the lines- situations that arise of an early ball turning round the opposition or by the winning of the second ball high up the pitch.

there's been a few references to our style of play and a lack of barca style play. I don't think we should change our style of play and I don't think we will!!

Well said that man.

Our style of play is suited to the level, works (as proven by 2 promotions), and to be fair can be good to watch especially when we are pinning the opposition back.

The problem is not the style of play, but the fact that some fans are wankers.

[My opinion]

Just because players such as Thompson & Mitchell aren't tall it doesn't mean that playing direct or with the early ball forward is not suited to them. Players of that sort, Youhill also, benefit when they can get 1v1 or in space between the lines- situations that arise of an early ball turning round the opposition or by the winning of the second ball high up the pitch.

there's been a few references to our style of play and a lack of barca style play. I don't think we should change our style of play and I don't think we will!!

Well said that man.

Our style of play is suited to the level, works (as proven by 2 promotions), and to be fair can be good to watch especially when we are pinning the opposition back.

The problem is not the style of play, but the fact that some fans are wankers.

There isn't a right style or wrong style for playing the game.
Some like the old Wimbledon way (they won their way from nowhere to the 1st division and won the FA cup with longball football), some like the Barcelona way (arguably the best team in theworld at the moment)...I'm somewhere in the middle, though I would rather watch Barca than the old Wimbledon.

Calling some fans wankers because their preferred style is different to yours is ridiculous...Would have expected a bit better than that from you Q

[divas]

No he's right.

Only at Darlo can fans twist about the quality of the football when we've won 2 promotions in 3 years and reached the play-offs in the other.

It's not about having a difference in opinion football should be plaid, it's about having a brain.

[Quakerz]

There isn't a right style or wrong style for playing the game.
Some like the old Wimbledon way (they won their way from nowhere to the 1st division and won the FA cup with longball football), some like the Barcelona way (arguably the best team in theworld at the moment)...I'm somewhere in the middle, though I would rather watch Barca than the old Wimbledon.

Calling some fans wankers because their preferred style is different to yours is ridiculous...Would have expected a bit better than that from you Q

We are nothing like the old Wimbledon...hoof it to Fashanu, elbow the defender, loose ball comes back to Jones or Wise, who stamp on whoever they are competing with for that ball.

Wimbledon were bullies. They had to be, because otherwise they didn't have what it took to survive in division 1. They were a decent division 2 team, a very good division 3 team, playing well above themselves in division 1...by booting anything that moved. I don't mean that in a bad way either, they knew their limitations and maximised what they were good at in order to compete for a few seasons. It was ugly, it was effective, but to even mention our current team's style in the same breath as that mid-late 80's Wimbledon team is offensive because we are nothing like.

We aren't long ball, and it's not my fault that some fans think we are. They are wrong. At worst we can sometimes be direct - I don't mind, we need to win.

There's a difference between long ball, ugly garbage played by a team that needs to drag the opposition down to their skill level and occasional direct, pressing play by a team that is at least the equal of the opposition and wants to beat them - someone with a reasonable knowledge of football gained through years of watching/or playing/both can spot the difference all day long.

You take offence to me saying that some of our fans are wankers? Well, by the law of averages, some have to be. Might as well be the ones that can't correctly identify how we play.

[Quakerz]

Only at Darlo can fans twist about the quality of the football when we've won 2 promotions in 3 years and reached the play-offs in the other.

Summed up in a lot less words than I posted!

[D_F_C]

I think we mix it up well. We do play good football at times when pitches allow us. We seemed to use the long ball well when Armstrong and purewal were up front. There was a period of the season you could argue we over used it, but we were getting closed down a lot. Some fans have to understand it's not easy when a team defends with 10 behind the ball.

Anyone who thinks we shouldn't use long ball needs to think again. It's just one of the weapons in our arsenal

[My opinion]

There isn't a right style or wrong style for playing the game.
Some like the old Wimbledon way (they won their way from nowhere to the 1st division and won the FA cup with longball football), some like the Barcelona way (arguably the best team in theworld at the moment)...I'm somewhere in the middle, though I would rather watch Barca than the old Wimbledon.

Calling some fans wankers because their preferred style is different to yours is ridiculous...Would have expected a bit better than that from you Q

We are nothing like the old Wimbledon...hoof it to Fashanu, elbow the defender, loose ball comes back to Jones or Wise, who stamp on whoever they are competing with for that ball.

Wimbledon were bullies. They had to be, because otherwise they didn't have what it took to survive in division 1. They were a decent division 2 team, a very good division 3 team, playing well above themselves in division 1...by booting anything that moved. I don't mean that in a bad way either, they knew their limitations and maximised what they were good at in order to compete for a few seasons. It was ugly, it was effective, but to even mention our current team's style in the same breath as that mid-late 80's Wimbledon team is offensive because we are nothing like.

We aren't long ball, and it's not my fault that some fans think we are. They are wrong. At worst we can sometimes be direct - I don't mind, we need to win.

There's a difference between long ball, ugly garbage played by a team that needs to drag the opposition down to their skill level and occasional direct, pressing play by a team that is at least the equal of the opposition and wants to beat them - someone with a reasonable knowledge of football gained through years of watching/or playing/both can spot the difference all day long.

You take offence to me saying that some of our fans are wankers? Well, by the law of averages, some have to be. Might as well be the ones that can't correctly identify how we play.

You have taken my quote out of context and missed my point.
i never said we played like old Wimbledon.
I gave examples of the two extremes. Wimbledon and Barcelona. Some fans are happy with each style of play.
just because it does not agree with your style, you have resorted insulting them..
Divas..Your comment about "only at Darlo"
Try looking on the websites of all clubs that have done well (Man City, Man Utd chelsea Arsenal and Liverpool) If you think that our fans twist on, you should see some of their comments after they have lost a couple of games.. Brendan Rodgers was a hero this time last season.. By September the fans were wanting him out.

[Darlo_Pete]

I think the style of football we play is fine. We are not a long ball team, we have too much quality to play like that. The only time we play hoof ball is when we have run out of ideas or we have fallen behind and then we revert to aimless hoof up field.

[My opinion]

I think the style of football we play is fine. We are not a long ball team, we have too much quality to play like that. The only time we play hoof ball is when we have run out of ideas or we have fallen behind and then we revert to aimless hoof up field.

I agree with you 100%.
We play direct football and play to our strengths, but that is not to get mixed up with hoofball.
As I said before.. We lost our way a little when Amar was injured and Cartman came in.
Over the last few games we played to his strenghts and we could see what he can do.
Come next season we will be able to mix it up better with plan A and also have a very good plan B

[Darlogramps]

. Brendan Rodgers was a hero this time last season.. By September the fans were wanting him out.

No, some fans wanted him out, not all.

That just reinforces Quakerz's point about every club having wankers.

When we had our poor run in February/March, there were some fans who wanted Gray gone. On Twitter, there were some incredibly unpleasant things written about him.

And I don't think Quakerz was calling fans wankers for the style of play they like. He called them wankers for making out we're a long ball team when the truth is we're not.

The issue is, because in the Northern League and to a lesser extent Evo Stik Div 1 North we could run through teams 4-0, 5-0, 6-0, 7-0, some fools believe we're a non-league Barcelona.

So when we have to be a bit more pragmatic and a bit more direct, some put that down as "hoofball" which is not the case.

[My opinion]

The Brendan Rodgers comment was referring to the "Only at Darlo" comment.
My point on this is it's all clubs. Not just Darlo
The Wankers comment was referring to the style of play.
They are seperate issues.

[Ingleby]

Nothing against the way we play for the most part. However, it does look a bit crap when we are kicking off and boot the ball down the channel/the corner flag.

It's a bit odd, Rugby like even.

[Darlofan97]

Ingleby, most teams at this level do that.

I'm sure that tactic got us a goal against Spennymoor in a league game, and saw us score within seconds against Ossett Albion and Consett. That's just from memory.

[Ingleby]

Ingleby, most teams at this level do that.

I'm sure that tactic got us a goal against Spennymoor in a league game, and saw us score within seconds against Ossett Albion and Consett. That's just from memory.

Never seen anyone do it against us recently. Maybe they wait 30 seconds not the second touch.
Gives possession away needlessly 99% of the time.

Consett?

[divas]

The Brendan Rodgers comment was referring to the "Only at Darlo" comment.
My point on this is it's all clubs. Not just Darlo
The Wankers comment was referring to the style of play.
They are seperate issues.

Not the same at all. Ultimately Liverpool have won nothing, we have, twice. A section were wanting him out because they felt they'd regressed. Now if they've won the league twice, I'm sure they'd not be wanting him out.

[Darlogramps]

The Brendan Rodgers comment was referring to the "Only at Darlo" comment.
My point on this is it's all clubs. Not just Darlo
The Wankers comment was referring to the style of play.
They are seperate issues.

They were separate issues in your post.

I've linked them together by pointing out similarities in the reasons for both.

[My opinion]

The Brendan Rodgers comment was referring to the "Only at Darlo" comment.
My point on this is it's all clubs. Not just Darlo
The Wankers comment was referring to the style of play.
They are seperate issues.

They were separate issues in your post.

I've linked them together by pointing out similarities in the reasons for both.

Yes, I can see that you have done that. but it has somewhat moved on from the point I was making.
I'll be glad when football is the main talking point on here again.

[My opinion]

The Brendan Rodgers comment was referring to the "Only at Darlo" comment.
My point on this is it's all clubs. Not just Darlo
The Wankers comment was referring to the style of play.
They are seperate issues.

Not the same at all. Ultimately Liverpool have won nothing, we have, twice. A section were wanting him out because they felt they'd regressed. Now if they've won the league twice, I'm sure they'd not be wanting him out.

Of course it's the same.
Your statement was that "Only at Darlo can fans twist on about the quality of football"
All clubs have their moaners...Often the reason for them to moan is about the quality of football..Go onto their forums and you will see that some are very hard to please no matter what.
it's not just Darlo
Also..At the time of the moaning we were in danger of failing to win the 2nd promotion.

[Quakerz]

And I don't think Quakerz was calling fans wankers for the style of play they like. He called them wankers for making out we're a long ball team when the truth is we're not.

So when we have to be a bit more pragmatic and a bit more direct, some put that down as "hoofball" which is not the case.

Correct on both counts. The first point was exactly what I was saying.

[My opinion]

And I don't think Quakerz was calling fans wankers for the style of play they like. He called them wankers for making out we're a long ball team when the truth is we're not.

So when we have to be a bit more pragmatic and a bit more direct, some put that down as "hoofball" which is not the case.

Correct on both counts. The first point was exactly what I was saying.

OK.
On that score I am sorry and stand corrected.
I misinterpreted.your reasons.

[Darlofan97]

Ingleby, most teams at this level do that.

I'm sure that tactic got us a goal against Spennymoor in a league game, and saw us score within seconds against Ossett Albion and Consett. That's just from memory.

Never seen anyone do it against us recently. Maybe they wait 30 seconds not the second touch.
Gives possession away needlessly 99% of the time.

Consett?

Second touch or one a couple of touches later, it's the same principle.

Purewal scored a goal against Consett within 20 seconds with this tactic.

[lo36789]

I think the pass back and long ball on top of the full back has to be one of the most common plays in football. You are testing your opponent early doors before they have a chance to settle and traditionally full backs won't always be the best in the air.

Even if it goes straight out of play you get pressure on from a throw in straight away.

I am pretty sure I remember in Hodgy's day you used to know which side we'd go down as we would be doubled/tripled up on that side from the kick off.

[Neil Johnson]

No one has every proposed that DFC stop playing long balls. they are a VALID approach.

There should also be different approaches that can be applied, when the long ball ONLY ploy is CLEARLY not working against fully prepared centre backs and offside traps.

The club has players available that can vary the attacking methods to cause more surprise, doubt and open up more opportunities.

Apart from potentially being more effective against better defences, it should be more entertaining and help build the much needed home support.

[Ingleby]

Ingleby, most teams at this level do that.

I'm sure that tactic got us a goal against Spennymoor in a league game, and saw us score within seconds against Ossett Albion and Consett. That's just from memory.

Never seen anyone do it against us recently. Maybe they wait 30 seconds not the second touch.
Gives possession away needlessly 99% of the time.

Consett?

Second touch or one a couple of touches later, it's the same principle.

Purewal scored a goal against Consett within 20 seconds with this tactic.

I can't recall Consett , must be going back some.

I understand principle, put pressure on early. But it goes uncontested as we don't get chance to get anywhere near it, most of the time. So it doesn't test anyone. A bit more patience before doing it would be better.

But as long as we are winning it's not really a big issue.