• Welcome to the ShrimperZone forums.
    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which only gives you limited access.

    Existing Users:.
    Please log-in using your existing username and password. If you have any problems, please see below.

    New Users:
    Join our free community now and gain access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and free. Click here to join.

    Fans from other clubs
    We welcome and appreciate supporters from other clubs who wish to engage in sensible discussion. Please feel free to join as above but understand that this is a moderated site and those who cannot play nicely will be quickly removed.

    Assistance Required
    For help with the registration process or accessing your account, please send a note using the Contact us link in the footer, please include your account name. We can then provide you with a new password and verification to get you on the site.

Possibly, but if we could get 35 games out of a fit Kightly, based on what we knew about him as a player when we signed him, I still think that's good business.

The biggest mistake was not getting a deal sorted out for Will, as you'll get 40+ out of him, most seasons, unless that clown, Andre Marriner, is refereeing!

... and sacking the groundsman! :facepalm:
 
Possibly, but if we could get 35 games out of a fit Kightly, based on what we knew about him as a player when we signed him, I still think that's good business.

The biggest mistake was not getting a deal sorted out for Will, as you'll get 40+ out of him, most seasons, unless that clown, Andre Marriner, is refereeing!
But who would possibly imagine we could get 35 games out of Kightly when the stats show otherwise? It didn't happen ten years ago so it wasn't going to now, even if the pitch was perfect.
 
Are those stats based on appearances when he was fit, or appearances in general 'exiles'?
 
Last edited:
What you have to ask yourself is how many of those players have excited you at games. Under Tilson, you had Laurent who had fans on the edge of their seats. Admittedly leading to nothing most of the time but nevertheless exciting. Sturrock had Ryan Hall and Mohsni. The only exciting player under Brown that kids wanted to see was Payne. You'd hear them chant Payne's name in the family enclosure.

Brown has always liked 'workmen' type players. They get the job done but not in an exciting manner. Unfortunately when trying to get neutrals to come and watch a game (bums on seats), they want something or someone exciting to watch. Watching a team trying to grind out a 1-0 win isn't going to entice many people.
 
What you have to ask yourself is how many of those players have excited you at games. Sturrock had Ryan Hall and Mohsni.

I’d add Tomlin and assambalonga to Sturrock’s list - maybe his football wasn’t so bad after all aye...
 
But who would possibly imagine we could get 35 games out of Kightly when the stats show otherwise? It didn't happen ten years ago so it wasn't going to now, even if the pitch was perfect.

The only times that Kightly made 35 or more appearances in a season were in 2005/6 for Grays, 2008/9 for Wolves and 2013/14 for Burnley.
 
Yes, but as I asked 'exiles' based on what stats. Availability in general or availability due to injury?
 
The only times that Kightly made 35 or more appearances in a season were in 2005/6 for Grays, 2008/9 for Wolves and 2013/14 for Burnley.
Exactly, so there wasn't much due diligence shown in awarding him a lengthy contract. It would have paid Brown to get the Sky Football Yearbook and acquaint himself with some of his signings stats instead of going all starry eyed about signing 'names'.
 
Yes, but as I asked 'exiles' based on what stats. Availability in general or availability due to injury?
His time at Wolves was blighted by injuriesasiswellknown.The only time he was available but left out was when Pulis arrived at Stoke.
 
His time at Wolves was blighted by injuriesasiswellknown.The only time he was available but left out was when Pulis arrived at Stoke.

And what about as an unused sub or rested through a rotation policy?

Not doubting he has had injuries, but there are other factors as to why players appearance levels can be down.
 
Most of the players you list were loans so hardly "signings" in the true extent. Others like Nouble, Hines, and Sokolik were very short contracts and effectively extended trials. Strip those out and I expect there are less poor signings than either Bury or Gillingham make per season.

Some of those signings like Layne and Ibenfeldt (and Ba this year) were clearly gambles and hardly caused us any problems. I thought you were fan of taking on untried youngsters or non league players, or is only those that Peterborough sign?

On a more positive note I would say his best signings are:

Ben Coker
Simon Cox
Stephen McLaughlin
Adam Thompson
Will Atkinson
David Worrall
Mark Oxley
Harry Kyprianou (potentially)

And all signed I believe for the grand sum of £0

I trust you have been telling Ron just how great Phils signings have been. Perhaps thats why hes got rid of the big 4 including Head Scout, Hes clearly had enough.. There is not. a professional who overall thinks our recruitment over the last few years has been other than poor. Its the main reason we are where we are. Sometimes getting in a lot of players doesnt work I agree. Port Vale and BURY are classic examples. However at other times it works a treat. Do you remember Paul Strurrock inheriting just 2 registered players. We could have been in the Conference but for the huge intake, on limited resources, . A number of the players might have fallen into your untried category. Incidentally I dont recall ever saying Im a fan of untried players, You musnt keep distorting what people say to suit your ever increasing, desperate agenda
Poor old Peterborough eh ? 3 points off the play offs, through to the 4th round of the cup and another £20k pay out, millions brought in from signing ? untried players?? How much have we made from Browns signings ?
Incidentally did you miss the large number of signings Shrewsbury, Scunthorpe, [Portsmouth, Blackburn, and Peterborough have been making, Where are they in the table?
 
Sorry Feathers my apols, this was meant to be a response to Rigby and my opinion with regard to his
 
My taking on his signings in general is that he has not had the patience and tolerance with players that Ron has had with him.

The longer he has been manager the less likely the has been to sign and use younger players and that he has been much happier to sign "names" so much so that the team has become completely unbalanced as the names by virtue of being a name will be slowing up 1) because of age and 2 ) because of the legacy of the injuries that most will have suffered in their careers.

At no point it seems has he been out scouring the lower leagues for gems - I think he saw it beneath him or his radio work didn't allow it.

Three of his first 4 permanent signings have probably been his steadiest and most reliable White, Coker and Atkinson - Atkinson of course he knew but White and Coker surprised me -I wonder who spotted them unless White came to us and brought Coker with him. These supplemented the players Sturrock left and got us promoted

The younger players Clifford, Bolger, Thompson and Worrall were either rejected after mistakes or got out as quickly as they could when their contracts expired. Thompson did sign one new contract but was out injured at the time - he had no other option.

Barrett was a good signing but was it Brown or Ron bringing him in.

After promotion he went to add a bit of experience and class -which was fine Mooney, Hunt and Wordsworth and McLaughlin plus a couple of others to make the numbers up - but of course Hunt and Wordsworth were injury prone.

Bouyed by his success he went for more experience - Demetriou sought us out as he wanted to move back to Essex and he went for Cox, Anton and Fortune and thought he could tame the maverick Ranger.

This of course worked well last season when Ranger has interested and Wordsworth was fit. A fine line between success and failure.

However, this year he over did it as adding Turner and Kightly to already ageing remaining players has made us so slow.

Signing Kiernan was big gamble that didn't pay off and Wright he signed because he could.

Of the players we had on loan, and there were dozens of them -Thompson and Bolger were signed permanently in the early days, then McLaughlin and O'Neill with Hendrie and Kiernan being added this year - both now poor signings.

He went too much for name and past reputation rather than recent form. What I call lazy recruitment. This has cost him his job.

Youngsters make mistakes experienced pros don't - well they do if physically they are no longer up to it.
 
And what about as an unused sub or rested through a rotation policy?

Not doubting he has had injuries, but there are other factors as to why players appearance levels can be down.

Wiki reckons he said he suffered from depression when he was injured for 15 months at Wolves.
 
Yep, I saw that, as well. Didn't know that, I have to say.

What is also thrown up is that between 2008-2011 he had some injury concerns, but that since then he has been out of favour at Stoke and Burnley and in both cases loaned out.
 
Yep, I saw that, as well. Didn't know that, I have to say.

What is also thrown up is that between 2008-2011 he had some injury concerns, but that since then he has been out of favour at Stoke and Burnley and in both cases loaned out.

Was excellent in the Championship but not quite good enough for the Premier League I'd say. Loaned out at Burnley at the end of his contract.
 
Spot on 'LB'.

That's how I see it with him. More of a squad player in the Premier League.

That said, he has been disappointing so far, moreso actually on the ball. His work-rate seems fine. Just seems to try the fancy extra touch, instead of taking a shot or releasing another player.

Maybe that adjustment will come in time, with a change of manager bringing the best out of him.
 
Back
Top