Barrett

[Feathers]

I don't have to answer to you or supply you any evidence. The people on here that actually know what happened aren't happy but you and others keep spouting tripe about AB not being good enough and that's why he was dropped, that's fine by me. You can believe or think whatever you like, not a problem

The only evidence that is needed was on view yesterday afternoon and has been for a number of weeks. Anton Ferdinand and Adam Thompson are playing extremely well and it is highly disrespectful to both players to suggest that they are not fully worthy of their place in the team,

Which one of Ferdinand or Thompson would you drop to accommodate Barrett and how would that improve the team or team morale?

 

[Trucking shrimper]

Sorry, when did he play for Colchester?

Never has.

Years	Team	Apps	(Gls)
1998–1999	Leyton Orient	0	(0)
1999–2000	Plymouth Argyle	52	(3)
2000–2002	Mansfield Town	37	(1)
2002–2004	Bristol Rovers	90	(5)
2004–2010	Southend United	249	(27)
2010–2011	Crystal Palace	7	(0)
2011	→ Leyton Orient (loan)	14	(0)
2011–2012	Bournemouth	21	(1)
2012–2015	Gillingham	88	(3)
2014–2015	→ AFC Wimbledon (loan)	30	(2)
2015–	Southend United	59	(4

 

[Ricey]

Never has.

Years	Team	Apps	(Gls)
1998–1999	Leyton Orient	0	(0)
1999–2000	Plymouth Argyle	52	(3)
2000–2002	Mansfield Town	37	(1)
2002–2004	Bristol Rovers	90	(5)
2004–2010	Southend United	249	(27)
2010–2011	Crystal Palace	7	(0)
2011	→ Leyton Orient (loan)	14	(0)
2011–2012	Bournemouth	21	(1)
2012–2015	Gillingham	88	(3)
2014–2015	→ AFC Wimbledon (loan)	30	(2)
2015–	Southend United	59	(4

My thoughts exactly. Don't know where people get this stuff from sometimes.

 

[AndyT]

No-one is disputing that he shouldn't be in the team, but people are questioning why he can't seem to even get on the bench.

My gut feeling is that he and PB talked about this and the view was there wouldn't be a point to having someone of AB's age in the 18 man matchday squad.

I hold the view that if Anton was injured, like Coker was against Bradford City, early on, who would I want jogging on to replace him before half-time. I'd still say AB, ahead of Sokolik.

This is, I think, where some people feel there is more to this than his age.

 

[Blues 'n twos]

Got to love the "I know something you don't know" posts on here.

Currently we have the best starting 11 on the pitch, as results are proving, end of, fact.

 

[Chocolardo]

Thanks for the personal abuse. I won't lower myself the level that you find yourself at.

Just so you are aware, it's 'You are' or 'You're' for the next time you want to personally abuse me.

Haha won't lower yourself to personal abuse but pick up on a grammar mistake.....

 

[Feathers]

No-one is disputing that he shouldn't be in the team, but people are questioning why he can't seem to even get on the bench.

My gut feeling is that he and PB talked about this and the view was there wouldn't be a point to having someone of AB's age in the 18 man matchday squad.

I hold the view that if Anton was injured, like Coker was against Bradford City, early on, who would I want jogging on to replace him before half-time. I'd still say AB, ahead of Sokolik.

This is, I think, where some people feel there is more to this than his age.

Although I do not claim to have any inside knowledge I agree with you. Adam Barrett has nothing to prove or little to benefit from at this stage of his career by being on the bench. He has already stated that he is interested in a coaching role within the club and whilst no doubt would play if called upon can no doubt see the benefit of Sokolik and/or Matasuska being on the bench ahead of him.

 

[Massimo Giovanni]

No-one is disputing that he shouldn't be in the team, but people are questioning why he can't seem to even get on the bench.

My gut feeling is that he and PB talked about this and the view was there wouldn't be a point to having someone of AB's age in the 18 man matchday squad.

I hold the view that if Anton was injured, like Coker was against Bradford City, early on, who would I want jogging on to replace him before half-time. I'd still say AB, ahead of Sokolik.

This is, I think, where some people feel there is more to this than his age.

9 out of 10 times I agree with your posts but not on this.
Jacob is faster and playing for his career still ahead AND I think is better suited to playing with the ball to feet and in front of him. Adam is better in the air,set pieces (as an individual) and blocks. Jacob has made some mistakes but I would expect him to be improving AND if Thommo was injured then he (Jacob) would be a better replacement at right CB than Adam.
For me these are the reasons he isn't on the bench not any immature, unprofessional gossip that some posters allude to but won't/can't/aren't able to give details about; if they believed those stories to be true then truth isn't slander or civil court stuff so why not tell?

 

[fatgrandad]

I don't have to answer to you or supply you any evidence. The people on here that actually know what happened aren't happy but you and others keep spouting tripe about AB not being good enough and that's why he was dropped, that's fine by me. You can believe or think whatever you like, not a problem

Putting to one side for a moment the matter of any insider knowledge, do you think AB warrants a place in the team at the moment? If so, at whose expense?

 

[AndyT]

Fair comment 'Massimo'.

I'm guessing there would be only room for one centre-back on the bench, on that basis, so I can see the logic of Sokolik being the one, for the reasons you mention.

I was working on the assumption that, prior to the defeat at Rochdale, AB was always first choice ahead of Sokolik in the starting line-up, so would be the natural cover at centre-half for Anton, with John White being able to cover Thompson.

 

[mattitouk]

Putting to one side for a moment the matter of any insider knowledge, do you think AB warrants a place in the team at the moment? If so, at whose expense?

Your completely right. Although i'm a huge fan of Adam, I have to admit he is well down the pecking order.

The only time I would have envisaged him making the team or bench, would be in order to rest another player during a cup game, in order for them to be fully fit for a league match.

Now we only have league fixtures left this season, (unless injuries of course) I don't think AB does merit a place in the team currently, and unlikely to do so, until we have nothing left to play for in the season.

 

[davewebbsbrain]

Putting to one side for a moment the matter of any insider knowledge, do you think AB warrants a place in the team at the moment? If so, at whose expense?

No the current starting 11 are there on merit and are playing well. It's the reason behind Adams exclusion that is grating on those that know the real reason. Yes it's an I know something you don't know thing and publicly he is just accepting of what's going on but privately he is fuming. He has to tow the company line as anyone would do

 

[Gremlin]

Haha won't lower yourself to personal abuse but pick up on a grammar mistake.....

Actually he's right and you're wrong. There's nothing funny about having certain standards.

 

[Massimo Giovanni]

No the current starting 11 are there on merit and are playing well. It's the reason behind Adams exclusion that is grating on those that know the real reason. Yes it's an I know something you don't know thing and publicly he is just accepting of what's going on but privately he is fuming. He has to tow the company line as anyone would do

Is this a new player? any relation to the ex-Arsenal and England Adams or is it a grammatical error and Adam's?
Also a full stop at the end of a sentence is required unless another punctuation form is used.

 

[RHB]

9 out of 10 times I agree with your posts but not on this.
Jacob is faster and playing for his career still ahead AND I think is better suited to playing with the ball to feet and in front of him. Adam is better in the air,set pieces (as an individual) and blocks. Jacob has made some mistakes but I would expect him to be improving AND if Thommo was injured then he (Jacob) would be a better replacement at right CB than Adam.
For me these are the reasons he isn't on the bench not any immature, unprofessional gossip that some posters allude to but won't/can't/aren't able to give details about; if they believed those stories to be true then truth isn't slander or civil court stuff so why not tell?

One person's truth is another person's slander. Barrett is not offering anything publicly for a reason (and I don't know what it is), so it would be unfair to him if someone offered a version of it on a public message board.

 

[davewebbsbrain]

Is this a new player? any relation to the ex-Arsenal and England Adams or is it a grammatical error and Adam's?
Also a full stop at the end of a sentence is required unless another punctuation form is used.

Touche, but don't pull me up on the lack of a diacritic over the e, my phone won't add it

 

[BenfleetBlue77]

Robert Drake? Yes, they do.

Yes, Robert Drake. I had to do a double take at first, although the Southend United tracksuit and bobble hat were a bit of a giveaway.

 

[RHB]

Touche, but don't pull me up on the lack of a diacritic over the e, my phone won't add it

I didn't even know what that meant, I had to google it. Good word webby!

 

[Massimo Giovanni]

One person's truth is another person's slander. Barrett is not offering anything publicly for a reason (and I don't know what it is), so it would be unfair to him if someone offered a version of it on a public message board.

Fair point, and often there are more than two sides of a tale AND each telling of the same, but different view point of the same tale can be true to either a larger or lesser extent.
I also ponder as to possible harm being done to Adam's position at SUFC or in the wider footballing, professional circle?
Are the gossipers repeating the veiled "it happened" story with Adam's consent?
Is Adam's non involvement in the "non story" an indication that he would prefer any situation to "blow over" and be history; which is partially being impeded by some posters' personal agendas?
What do you think of those points?

 

[RHB]

Fair point, and often there are more than two sides of a tale AND each telling of the same, but different view point of the same tale can be true to either a larger or lesser extent.
I also ponder as to possible harm being done to Adam's position at SUFC or in the wider footballing, professional circle?
Are the gossipers repeating the veiled "it happened" story with Adam's consent?
Is Adam's non involvement in the "non story" an indication that he would prefer any situation to "blow over" and be history; which is partially being impeded by some posters' personal agendas?
What do you think of those points?

I'm not sure whether you're asking me alone, or anyone else as well. But for what it's worth I don't think there is/ has been any harm done to Adam's position, locally or wider. If anything it might encourage an interested party to bid for his services. I don't have a clue on the 'it happened' front, but he has never struck me as the sort of bloke who would want others to reveal stuff on his behalf, he's more of a man than that I think. As for 'blowing over', it's certainly what I would want, and I suspect him too.

Folk will always post stuff on here which they genuinely believe, and that's ok as long as it doesn't get the Zone in trouble. Without the contentious stuff it would be pretty boring on here at times.

Here endeth what I think. Anyone else have a view?