Coco Posted January 18, 2008 Share Posted January 18, 2008 This time I don't want to hear Stephen Frail telling us "that we did well for an hour and I'm pleased with that" The game doesn't last 60 minutes. I want him to pick a side that can last the whole game, not one with the fitness problems of a number of players which means that they can't last a full game. If Velicka plays it has to be less than a full game (either starting or on the bench). Ksnavicius, Stewart, Nade to name just 3 are incapable of lasting a whole game either. The substitutions need to recognise that some of our players can't last 90 minutes and those players need to be replaced - in time ie not after we lose a lead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morgan Posted January 18, 2008 Share Posted January 18, 2008 This time I don't want to hear Stephen Frail telling us "that we did well for an hour and I'm pleased with that" The game doesn't last 60 minutes. I want him to pick a side that can last the whole game, not one with the fitness problems of a number of players which means that they can't last a full game. If Velicka plays it has to be less than a full game (either starting or on the bench). Ksnavicius, Stewart, Nade to name just 3 are incapable of lasting a whole game either. The substitutions need to recognise that some of our players can't last 90 minutes and those players need to be replaced - in time ie not after we lose a lead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Only a Game Posted January 18, 2008 Share Posted January 18, 2008 This time I don't want to hear Stephen Frail telling us "that we did well for an hour and I'm pleased with that" The game doesn't last 60 minutes. I want him to pick a side that can last the whole game, not one with the fitness problems of a number of players which means that they can't last a full game. If Velicka plays it has to be less than a full game (either starting or on the bench). Ksnavicius, Stewart, Nade to name just 3 are incapable of lasting a whole game either. The substitutions need to recognise that some of our players can't last 90 minutes and those players need to be replaced - in time ie not after we lose a lead. The problem is that very few of our players are fit enough to last 90 minutes due to the poor fitness and training regime we have. Thats not going to change anytime soon, certainly not by lunchtime tomorrow. I guess we'll have to hope that we get far enough ahead to hang on in the last 30 minutes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gershwin Posted January 18, 2008 Share Posted January 18, 2008 Agreed. I'm just hoping we've remembered how to defend, that Kurskis doesn't play and we show up that goon in goals for Hibs. I've been itching to sing the doo doo doo doo makalamby song after he spills one in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coco Posted January 18, 2008 Author Share Posted January 18, 2008 The problem is that very few of our players are fit enough to last 90 minutes due to the poor fitness and training regime we have. Thats not going to change anytime soon, certainly not by lunchtime tomorrow. I guess we'll have to hope that we get far enough ahead to hang on in the last 30 minutes Last week Eggert Jonsson sat on the bench when we replaced the 2 injured wingers with a left back and a winger. He then sat on the bench when Frail waited until the 85th minute to replace Ksnavicius who was having a shocker and barely moved in the second half. That sort of thing can be controlled by Frail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JamboRobbo Posted January 18, 2008 Share Posted January 18, 2008 Spot on as usual Coco. We have players who can't last anywhere near 90 minutes. You'd think it would be obvious we shouldn't try to play them for 90 minutes. Over to you Mr Frail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vegas-voss Posted January 18, 2008 Share Posted January 18, 2008 Last week Eggert Jonsson sat on the bench when we replaced the 2 injured wingers with a left back and a winger. He then sat on the bench when Frail waited until the 85th minute to replace Ksnavicius who was having a shocker and barely moved in the second half. That sort of thing can be controlled by Frail. Im still not sure that Frail is pulling the strings to me he is just a more acceptable face. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coco Posted January 18, 2008 Author Share Posted January 18, 2008 Im still not sure that Frail is pulling the strings to me he is just a more acceptable face. I have my suspicions on that too. But he says that he is making the decisions. If he is not then it is just bare faced lying from him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K1874M Posted January 18, 2008 Share Posted January 18, 2008 I'd like to think the focus has been on this throughout the week in training. Moan the hearts... Getting nervous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig_ Posted January 18, 2008 Share Posted January 18, 2008 The problem is that very few of our players are fit enough to last 90 minutes due to the poor fitness and training regime we have. Thats not going to change anytime soon, certainly not by lunchtime tomorrow. I guess we'll have to hope that we get far enough ahead to hang on in the last 30 minutes There's been signs that they're looking a bit sharper in the last two games, so hopefully the double training sessions will begin to pay off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bighusref Posted January 18, 2008 Share Posted January 18, 2008 This time I don't want to hear Stephen Frail telling us "that we did well for an hour and I'm pleased with that" The game doesn't last 60 minutes. I want him to pick a side that can last the whole game, not one with the fitness problems of a number of players which means that they can't last a full game. If Velicka plays it has to be less than a full game (either starting or on the bench). Ksnavicius, Stewart, Nade to name just 3 are incapable of lasting a whole game either. The substitutions need to recognise that some of our players can't last 90 minutes and those players need to be replaced - in time ie not after we lose a lead. I totally agree. I have never subscribed to the half hearted defence of teams by saying "we were great most of the game" or a pet hate "if the game was ten minutes longer we would have won". A 90 minute game should not be outwith our players capabilities, if it is there can be no excuse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nelly Terraces Posted January 18, 2008 Share Posted January 18, 2008 I totally agree. I have never subscribed to the half hearted defence of teams by saying "we were great most of the game" or a pet hate "if the game was ten minutes longer we would have won". A 90 minute game should not be outwith our players capabilities, if it is there can be no excuse. Correct. The fact that actually quite a few of of our players haven't got the required fitness levels to last a full match is to me, pretty disgusting. Y'know what, the new manager, if we ever get one, I think will come in and be appauled at the fitness levels of our lot. Frail must shoulder quite a lot of responsibility for that, he ha, after all, been a coach for the whole season. I could se a scenario where the new bloke wants rid of him as soon as due to this. Still, for tomorrow, just rip them a new erse, Hearts, I want that lot begging for mercy by the end. I predict 4-1 Hearts actually! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimeBandit Posted January 18, 2008 Share Posted January 18, 2008 The fitness aspect really gets on my goat with footballers. They are very well paid professional athletes whose job it is to play a game of football for 90 minutes. If they can't last 90 minutes what the smeg are they doing on the pitch? Or in "training".? The fact that its the same players week in week out who are mentioned on the boards shows they dont have any sort of professional pride or discipline. I went from a complete zero fitness level, and I mean zero, (16st of flab and resting heart rate of 94... ) to achieving fitness levels required for the Paras in 9 months. Any army/forces/TA types on here will know the sort of fitness requirement that is.!! Now if I, as a poorly paid admin (at the time) worker, family man type person, can achieve that on my limited resources and largely on my own with no special complexes or access to experts then there is NO excuse for these players to still be languishing in the fitness doldrums. Now I realise football fitness and army fitness are different but when you're fit as **** you're fit as **** and can cope with adapting to different types. Show some pride ya bunch of overpaid hoofters and you might win our respect back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.