Stuttle gone

[Birdman]

Not even a token ‘thanks for his efforts and good luck’?

This link could’ve (should’ve) been included in the opening post then your comment wouldn’t have been required :- https://www.theshots.co.uk/player-recal ... y-stuttle/

Feels like TW could have said it in person? Think we’ve always talked about players who have left in the past?

I don’t know if I’ve missed a recent relevant interview that could have mentioned Stuttle. I say ‘missed’ insofar as I don’t listen to pre or post-match interviews but somebody generally mentions a comment or two that has been said during these interviews.
I’ve just looked on the club’s website and I can’t see an article containing an interview since Stuttle left. Maybe he’ll get a mention when the pre-match interview is posted.

[Silasgoldeen]

it was posted yesterday and it wasn't discussed

[Warnboro South]

This seems like so 'last season'.

The sooner we can all move on the better.

[Birdman]

it was posted yesterday and it wasn't discussed

Was it on Twitter (X), facebook yesterday?

I see that it’s on the club’s website now :- https://www.theshots.co.uk/shots-tv/tom ... -wood-h-2/

[Old Bob]

If TW is playing his favourites which in turn means he is not necessarilly playing his strongest 11 available each game,(which i think most of us agree he is not) then the only sensible conclusion is that he cannot have the clubs best interests at heart.
We can't be 100% sure this is what he is doing each game, but if i was a betting man ............Questions must surley be floating around the boardroom as to whether this is the case

While I am sympathetic to your point of view, I don't think your logic stands up. It is perfectly possible that Tommy thinks in his own mind that he is playing his strongest 11. That's why they are his favourites, because Tommy believes they are part of his group of "strongest" players. Few would agree, but maybe that's how he sees things.

I think this is obviously true. I think it's taken them a while to work out what they want from this team but for all the naysaying, they have been playing quite well for a while now. (it's not just me, Rob W says this all the time on his podcast and he's been around the block a few times and knows the leagues). The points haven't come but to my mind this is a mid-table team that's on the wrong side of the variance every football club experiences.

The problem is that Tommy seems to want a high variance game and so has to accept some share of the blame for weird results. The best teams to the EBB this season have scored goals and shut up shop, whereas we keep playing this pinball football which means we have it in us to beat anyone but leaves us open to conceding at any moment, hence all the 2-2 draws etc. They tightened things up in the autumn but found we couldn't score.

Thank you for your thoughtful post, Silas. I do agree with your perspective ... "pinball football which means we have it in us to beat anyone but leaves us open to conceding at any moment" is a very apt description of Shots '25. As you imply, this will lead to high variance results ... beating Oldham away and then gifting Braintree a point.

I don't know what the answer is, other than a more reasoned and coherent approach to team selection. For instance, try playing Tetek in place of Widdrington when the opportunity is there, and make better use of the talents of the likes of Jonny Stuttle in case Bournemouth decide they are being taken as mugs and recall the boy only to farm him out to a team at a lower level.

OK, so perhaps I do know what the answer is!

[Old Bob]

If TW is playing his favourites which in turn means he is not necessarilly playing his strongest 11 available each game,(which i think most of us agree he is not) then the only sensible conclusion is that he cannot have the clubs best interests at heart.
We can't be 100% sure this is what he is doing each game, but if i was a betting man ............Questions must surley be floating around the boardroom as to whether this is the case

While I am sympathetic to your point of view, I don't think your logic stands up. It is perfectly possible that Tommy thinks in his own mind that he is playing his strongest 11. That's why they are his favourites, because Tommy believes they are part of his group of "strongest" players. Few would agree, but maybe that's how he sees things.

Fair point ob,but if TW thinks by playing Jr over at least 2 others ,because he thinks Jr is stronger, then we do have a problem.
I am not one to slag off individual players, but i would imagine 99%on here would argue that Jr is not the strongest, and i do think TW knows this, but still insists on playing him,so i would argue he is not playing his srongest 11 due to his favourites.

I am with you, Beechcroft. Don't get me wrong. I am not defending Tommy in any way over team selection, only suggesting that his thinking might lead him to believe he is selecting his strongest team for each game when we onlookers struggle to see things the same way.

[brian bloomfield]

It's always amazes me how many times we think a player has played good or bad, when our mates watching the same match will disagree. Even on this board there can be major discrepancies on the marks given to certain players in the same match.

Looking forward tomorrow to a very proactive attacking formation.

[Old Bob]

The blind spots with Theo, Maghoma, JVS and Mullins really seem to defy logic.

Jimmy Greaves suffered a bad cut in the last group game against France and was replaced by Geoff Hurst for the quarter final challenge of Argentina. Jimmy was everyone’s favourite, and with 44 goals in only 50 odd games for England he was probably the greatest goal scorer of my lifetime.

But Alf picked teams to win games. He was certainly like Tommy in that he was obdurate, and always ignored the opinion of others. However, unlike Tommy, he was a good manager. In fact for the job in hand, probably the best.

I am going to disagree with you, Wales. And for good reason. That reason is that I think you are quite wrong. Alf was far TOO obdurate for his own (and England's) good. OK, you can get way with that when Lady Luck is on your side. But when she starts to sulk, you are in la merde.

One of Alf's failings was his child-like faith in those who had served him well in the past. The likes of Bobby Moore. Alf could not bring himself to drop his talismanic captain who had lifted the World Cup. Never mind that the old chap was well past his best, his legs (such as they ever were) had gone and he had slowed up mentally. Alf insisted on playing him whatever.

In 1972, Moore had a nightmare against West Germany at Wembley in the Euopean Championship quarter finals. Dispossessed for Germany's first and then giving away a penalty, it was clear he was no longer the dominant, quick-witted central defender of 1966. Further, Alf failed to detail anyone to close down Gunter Netzer who ran riot. (Norman Hunter was probably first choice for this task, with Moore backing him up.) This should have been a case of "Thank you, Bobby, for your superb past efforts" but no! Alf continued to pick him.

In the crucial World Cup 1973 qualifier away to Poland, which we lost 0-2, Moore was culpable in both goals. Alf didn't pick that team to win the game. He picked it with the sentiment that Bobby Moore was his WC winning captain who could not be dropped.

So no, he passed up the opportunity to be considered the best, or anything like, by his stubborness. Such was this stubborness that the FA were forced to sack him in 1973 when evryone would have much preferred that he had quit while he was winning.

I haven't even mentioned Mexico 1970! Blimey, Wales, how can you forget that debacle?