[NSWolves] Burnley
So Burnley, one our great rivals for relegation apparently, are now 1 point better off than us from the midweek round of games. It seems they decided that they could compete with the big boys and got a point from the game against Arsenal. That's now one point that will stop us moving above them even if we do manage to beat them on Sunday. So lets thinks about which team is going to be the more confident going in to Sunday's match? The team that has taken a point of 3rd placed Arsenal or the team that rolled over and took one up the rear from Man Utd. The information contained in this email is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose or use the information in this email in any way and should destroy any copies. Macquarie does not guarantee the integrity of any emails or attached files. The views or opinions expressed are the author's own and may not reflect the views or opinions of Macquarie. -- Pig's pudding - it's a mon's dinner aer kid
RE: [NSWolves] Burnley
The black pudding eating surrender monkey's team will be more confident because they know he's a tactical genius. _ From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswol...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Marcus Chantry Sent: Thursday, 17 December 2009 9:35 AM To: nswolves@googlegroups.com Subject: [NSWolves] Burnley So Burnley, one our great rivals for relegation apparently, are now 1 point better off than us from the midweek round of games. It seems they decided that they could compete with the big boys and got a point from the game against Arsenal. That's now one point that will stop us moving above them even if we do manage to beat them on Sunday. So lets thinks about which team is going to be the more confident going in to Sunday's match? The team that has taken a point of 3rd placed Arsenal or the team that rolled over and took one up the rear from Man Utd. The information contained in this email is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose or use the information in this email in any way and should destroy any copies. Macquarie does not guarantee the integrity of any emails or attached files. The views or opinions expressed are the author's own and may not reflect the views or opinions of Macquarie. -- Pig's pudding - it's a mon's dinner aer kid -- Pig's pudding - it's a mon's dinner aer kid
RE: [NSWolves] Burnley
But who will have the freshest legs?!! From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswol...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Rog Rita Sent: Thursday, 17 December 2009 10:17 AM To: nswolves@googlegroups.com Subject: RE: [NSWolves] Burnley The black pudding eating surrender monkey's team will be more confident because they know he's a tactical genius. From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswol...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Marcus Chantry Sent: Thursday, 17 December 2009 9:35 AM To: nswolves@googlegroups.com Subject: [NSWolves] Burnley So Burnley, one our great rivals for relegation apparently, are now 1 point better off than us from the midweek round of games. It seems they decided that they could compete with the big boys and got a point from the game against Arsenal. That's now one point that will stop us moving above them even if we do manage to beat them on Sunday. So lets thinks about which team is going to be the more confident going in to Sunday's match? The team that has taken a point of 3rd placed Arsenal or the team that rolled over and took one up the rear from Man Utd. The information contained in this email is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose or use the information in this email in any way and should destroy any copies. Macquarie does not guarantee the integrity of any emails or attached files. The views or opinions expressed are the author's own and may not reflect the views or opinions of Macquarie. -- Pig's pudding - it's a mon's dinner aer kid -- Pig's pudding - it's a mon's dinner aer kid Before printing, please consider the environment. IMPORTANT NOTICE: This e-mail and any attachment to it are intended only to be read or used by the named addressee. It is confidential and may contain legally privileged information. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistaken transmission to you. The RTA is not responsible for any unauthorised alterations to this e-mail or attachment to it. Views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, and are not necessarily the views of the RTA. If you receive this e-mail in error, please immediately delete it from your system and notify the sender. You must not disclose, copy or use any part of this e-mail if you are not the intended recipient. -- Pig's pudding - it's a mon's dinner aer kid
RE: [NSWolves] Burnley
do you want fresh legs or points? I'd certainly rather have points in the bag and feel tired. From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswol...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of LEESE Matthew Sent: Thursday, 17 December 2009 10:45 AM To: nswolves@googlegroups.com Subject: RE: [NSWolves] Burnley But who will have the freshest legs?!! From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswol...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Rog Rita Sent: Thursday, 17 December 2009 10:17 AM To: nswolves@googlegroups.com Subject: RE: [NSWolves] Burnley The black pudding eating surrender monkey's team will be more confident because they know he's a tactical genius. From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswol...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Marcus Chantry Sent: Thursday, 17 December 2009 9:35 AM To: nswolves@googlegroups.com Subject: [NSWolves] Burnley So Burnley, one our great rivals for relegation apparently, are now 1 point better off than us from the midweek round of games. It seems they decided that they could compete with the big boys and got a point from the game against Arsenal. That's now one point that will stop us moving above them even if we do manage to beat them on Sunday. So lets thinks about which team is going to be the more confident going in to Sunday's match? The team that has taken a point of 3rd placed Arsenal or the team that rolled over and took one up the rear from Man Utd. The information contained in this email is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose or use the information in this email in any way and should destroy any copies. Macquarie does not guarantee the integrity of any emails or attached files. The views or opinions expressed are the author's own and may not reflect the views or opinions of Macquarie. -- Pig's pudding - it's a mon's dinner aer kid -- Pig's pudding - it's a mon's dinner aer kid Before printing, please consider the environment. IMPORTANT NOTICE: This e-mail and any attachment to it are intended only to be read or used by the named addressee. It is confidential and may contain legally privileged information. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistaken transmission to you. The RTA is not responsible for any unauthorised alterations to this e-mail or attachment to it. Views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, and are not necessarily the views of the RTA. If you receive this e-mail in error, please immediately delete it from your system and notify the sender. You must not disclose, copy or use any part of this e-mail if you are not the intended recipient. -- Pig's pudding - it's a mon's dinner aer kid -- Pig's pudding - it's a mon's dinner aer kid
[NSWolves] Another Guardian piece
Any Wolves fans reading this who were at Old Trafford on Tuesday night may like to post a comment or two to clear up a mystery. When defending his radical decision to rest all 10 outfield players from the victory against Spurs four days earlierhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2009/dec/16/mick-mccarthy-wolves-manchester-united, Mick McCarthy said he had some sympathy if fans were disappointed but hoped they would understand his reasoning. So the question is: do they? Do Wolves fans really not mind trooping up to Manchester on a cold, rainy night and paying £40 or so to watch the reserves get trounced? And would they, as McCarthy trusts will be the case, forgive everything if the club manages to stay up at the end of the season? Part of the reason for asking is that midway through the second half the away fans struck up a chant of We want our money back. In the press room afterwards, opinion was divided about how this should be presented to news desks. Clearly, a team sending out the stiffs to lose 3-0 to Manchester Unitedhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/football/manchester-united and being attacked by their own supporters for offering poor value for money makes a good story, one that virtually writes its own headline. Yet it was not at all clear the Wolves fans were attacking their own team. They remained good humoured all night and seemed to enjoy themselves despite the disappointment, mocking the United support, predicting the locals would soon be following Chelsea or Manchester City, and proudly proclaiming they supported their local team. Even at the end they were singing both the team's name and McCarthy's, so it was hard to say they were angry or even discontented. I actually thought the We want our money back chants were ironically aimed at United, because neither the Old Trafford atmosphere nor the home performance were anything to write home about and the away supporters had just been chanting What a waste of money at the mostly unimpressive Dimitar Berbatov. While it was worth mentioning, it was not necessarily a case of Angry Wolves Fans Turn On McCarthy, even though that story was clearly there to be written. One imagines angry Wolves fans will soon be turning on McCarthy if anything goes wrong on Sunday against Burnley, the winnable fixture for which the manager is saving his senior players, though if I am wrong and supporters were genuinely annoyed at Old Trafford please write in and let me know. All I can say is it didn't sound like it. A crowd of more than 73,000, paying the sort of prices Premier Leaguehttp://www.guardian.co.uk/football/premierleague grounds charge these days, certainly has a right to be annoyed when what looks like an intriguing fixture - bearing in mind Wolves' sensational result at the weekend - turns into a meaningless reserve match devoid of any excitement or interest. In the old days there used to be firm rules about this sort of thing, both to protect the interests of paying spectators and to keep the competition honest so that Chelsea or Arsenal, say, could not complain United were given the points too easily. McCarthy said he didn't hear any objections from United when he gamely but unwisely gave Chelsea an easy victory by attempting to play 3-5-2 against them, though that is not really the point. Wolves are at Arsenal in April next year, at a stage of the season when they are likely to be fighting for every point and unlikely to be picking their matches. Should McCarthy's players battle for a draw at the Emirates, for example, and those two dropped points make the difference between Arsenal finishing inside or outside the top four, what Wolves did at Old Trafford will not be easily forgiven in London. A team's levels of energy and application vary throughout the season in response to the exact challenge at hand, everyone understands that. But it still ought to be recognisable as the same team, even if listless one week and motivated the next. Ten changes is just too many, especially after such a splendid win on Saturday. The trouble is that the old rules were formulated in the days when squads were considerably smaller and everyone knew to within a position or two what comprised each club's best team. Younger readers may find this hard to imagine, but in the dim and distant past football supporters could not only rhyme off the names of their own club's first team, they could do so for most of the rest of the division as well. So you knew when you were being short changed. You might be disappointed on occasion if United turned up without George Best or Liverpool without John Barnes, but you would be familiar with the deputies. If teams turned up with half a dozen or more players you had never heard of they would be in trouble, because they would literally be playing their reserves, and reserves in the old day were not potential substitutes but a lower level of competition altogether. Reserves in that
