Out-of-options Di Canio fears relegation (From The Wiltshire Gazette and Herald)

robstfc wrote:
I've loved Paolo since he arrived in Swindon.... But to be honest I'm starting to have enough.... He is exhausting he with his continual rants and mad antics during matches...

Yes we won the league, but I could have managed that team to the championship.... This is now a MUCH bigger test and will define Paolo's future management career..... He needs to step up to the mark and deliver.

Lazaat wrote:
I was there last night, there was a lot of huff and puff but what was needed was a bit if guile, someone who has genuine ability, someone who has the skill to get the ball down and make a cutting pass through the opposition defence! I believe Spurs have a young player who would fit the bill...his name is John Bostock!!! How the hell he didn't even get chance off the bench last night YET AGAIN when the game was crying out for someone like him defies logic...and he must be taking up a large slice of the budget? Paolo chased him all summer and has hardly used him, what is that all about? I'm sorry to say I am now also getting a little tired of some of the things being said after each game....change the bl00dy record Paolo!

Bast01 wrote:
I am a DiCanio fan, but the players in the squad - he bought them, he evaluated them, he decided they are good enough for this division and his style. Time to work with those players and teach them what ever is missing. DiCanio likes it when he is compared to Macari - well he bought players that had no right to play as well as they did for Swindon - he mentored them and grew them.

At some point, the responsibility for how the team plays falls at the managers feet and cannot be pushed off to the board.

Rebel_phish wrote:
Saidn it last night, al the doom and gloom merchants will be on here now. I was just listening to a report on BBC Swindon, They were on about a gloomy outlook, that we're stuck in a depression, with little change soon due to the inversion we're under..... Then I realised they were on about he weather.

Since 1950 wrote:

Rebel_phish wrote:
Saidn it last night, al the doom and gloom merchants will be on here now. I was just listening to a report on BBC Swindon, They were on about a gloomy outlook, that we're stuck in a depression, with little change soon due to the inversion we're under..... Then I realised they were on about he weather.

Exept Rebel, that this time the 'gloom and doom' merchant is the Manager himself - in case you missed the headline!

London Red wrote:
Has everyone connected to the Swindon area suddenly lost the ability to read, listen or digest any form of information?
.
We have people complaining about comments which have NOT been made!
.
PdC is simply saying we have a LOT of injuries and we now are in a situation where we have no options left
.
that is NOT saying the players are not good enough
.
It clearly says - how long can I play Tommy and Simon for 90 mins Tues-Sat-Tues-Sat without the risk of an injury to them - then what if that happens? I only have Thompson - a 17 year old youth player!
.
That is not saying Miller and Ferry are not good enough - it is saying of we lose them on TOP OF Navarro and Coke we will only have Thompson available - who is not ready - thats also not a criticism of him it is a fact!
.
Bostock is not that type of midfileder so is not an option before it is said
.
Likewise up top - Williams our main forward is injured - so PdC wants cover - he's not saying he is not good enough
.
Then we have people stating its PdC fault for signing the loanees on dadline day that we are in thwe embargo - which is according to Wray himself completely untrue!!!
.
Lets get one thing out here not one of us knows the full details about the wage cap / embargo
.
Not one of us knows what actually counts as income or expenditure - otherwise this debate which has been going on for weeks would not of had too
.
So to simply say it is PdC fault is riduculous
.
I have been saying it for days and Oxen raised it last night as to how this could be completely out of PdC's control and therefore, see why he is so angry about it
.
What we need now is a detailed article by the adver after speaking to the club to establish the rules and potential ways of coming out of it
.
Then and only then can we see "who is to blame" if we want a blame game
.
All I see is a team ravenge by injuries, low on confidence and in need of a fresh face or two to kick start our season again!
.
Now if the board can aid that by lifting the embargo and getting in a forward t to maintian the plan for back-to-back they should do it
.
If they can't lift it then there is nothing we can do and everyone has to just reassess their expectations to POs at best
.
PdC is certain it is the first option so that would suggest there is some truth in it! Especially as BOTH Wray and SWP have hinted at that as well

Rebel_phish wrote:
Saidn it last night, al the doom and gloom merchants will be on here now. I was just listening to a report on BBC Swindon, They were on about a gloomy outlook, that we're stuck in a depression, with little change soon due to the inversion we're under..... Then I realised they were on about he weather.

RAYSPARROW wrote:
Crowds give you revenue. Negative stories discourage crowds. Let's have no more of this nonsense.

London Red wrote:
Don - you have completely missed the point AGAIN
.
Our new chairman clearly said that "amounts were held back to strengthen in January"
.
That to me clearly says that our full annual budget was NOT used up by PdC and he was under the impression he could sign COVER at later stages
.
Otherwise I'm sure he would have looked to use that earlier - as then who cares if we are under an embargo if we have 3 or 4 extra players in!
.
Which is pretty much how we were last season with a squad of nearly 30!
.
If that is the case then he is not operating like others - as like I said the other day Tranmere went out and signed cover for Apkro Apkra
.
Pompey - seem to sign a new player everyday yet have no money???
.
He would then simply have the ability to sign COVER
.
Why / How we ended up in the embargo needs clarifying and how we can get out of it does too
.
Then we can actually see if PdC is a cry baby or if he has justification in his rants
.
From the snippits we have had from Wray and SWP - it is certainly sounding that he has!
.
Also it depends on your satifaction level - if you are happy with midtable then yes he should get on with it
.
If you want promotion like PdC does - then you should be wanting answers!

Oldswindonian wrote:
Dear ,dear, look at all the above comments. Last month PDC was a God, yet this month he seems a little less poular? The season has not properly unwound and we wont know till the end of the year whether we are in with a shout or whether the season is not working. Give they guy a break and talk a bit of sense.

Northern Red wrote:
Poor managers buy poor players. Good managers turn poor players into good players. Paulo is fast looking like the former. I'm sure that with the budget PDC has been given over 2 years, King, Malpas, even Hart, could've 'bought' the league 2 title. As for fixture congestion, just stick 11 youngsters in the FA Cup... we've made our money from the league cup run, let's just kill off the FA Cup this year, we don't need it.

Northern Red wrote:
Poor managers buy poor players. Good managers turn poor players into good players. Paulo is fast looking like the former. I'm sure that with the budget PDC has been given over 2 years, King, Malpas, even Hart, could've 'bought' the league 2 title. As for fixture congestion, just stick 11 youngsters in the FA Cup... we've made our money from the league cup run, let's just kill off the FA Cup this year, we don't need it.

Is that you Lovesey wrote:

Northern Red wrote:
Poor managers buy poor players. Good managers turn poor players into good players. Paulo is fast looking like the former. I'm sure that with the budget PDC has been given over 2 years, King, Malpas, even Hart, could've 'bought' the league 2 title. As for fixture congestion, just stick 11 youngsters in the FA Cup... we've made our money from the league cup run, let's just kill off the FA Cup this year, we don't need it.

Hart couldn't have bought a bag of crisps.....

akershaker wrote:
Love Paolo. But I agree with the above. Every club in the league has to abide by the same rules. He has been given every freedom to construct the squad he wants. The injuries are unfortunate, but that happens - perhaps some cash should have been budgeted for emergency loans? Just get on with the job.

Oxon-Red wrote:
"After a tribunal panel ordered Town to pay the combined £340,000 due to Shrewsbury and Exeter for James Collins and Troy Archibald-Henville up front, rather than in separate instalments as the club had budgeted for, Swindon’s projected expenditure on wages and fees rose 1.5 per cent above the 65 per cent-of-turnover maximum dictated by new legislation brought in this season to combat excess spending."

COYMR

Oi Den! wrote:

Oxon-Red wrote:
"After a tribunal panel ordered Town to pay the combined £340,000 due to Shrewsbury and Exeter for James Collins and Troy Archibald-Henville up front, rather than in separate instalments as the club had budgeted for, Swindon’s projected expenditure on wages and fees rose 1.5 per cent above the 65 per cent-of-turnover maximum dictated by new legislation brought in this season to combat excess spending."

COYMR

I'm still not entirely convinced that it's transfer fees. Could be signing on fees and/or agents' fees. But I do take your point Oxon. As LR said, it would be useful if the Adver could get some clarity.

SeanG92 wrote:

Oi Den! wrote:

Oxon-Red wrote:
"After a tribunal panel ordered Town to pay the combined £340,000 due to Shrewsbury and Exeter for James Collins and Troy Archibald-Henville up front, rather than in separate instalments as the club had budgeted for, Swindon’s projected expenditure on wages and fees rose 1.5 per cent above the 65 per cent-of-turnover maximum dictated by new legislation brought in this season to combat excess spending."

COYMR

I'm still not entirely convinced that it's transfer fees. Could be signing on fees and/or agents' fees. But I do take your point Oxon. As LR said, it would be useful if the Adver could get some clarity.

Its everything! Its not just wages, or transfer fees, it all expendatures.

The rules stats that "Clubs cannot spend more than 65% of their turnover"

There is no dictation of "on transfer fees" or "on wages"

Oi Den! wrote:

SeanG92 wrote:

Oi Den! wrote:

Oxon-Red wrote:
"After a tribunal panel ordered Town to pay the combined £340,000 due to Shrewsbury and Exeter for James Collins and Troy Archibald-Henville up front, rather than in separate instalments as the club had budgeted for, Swindon’s projected expenditure on wages and fees rose 1.5 per cent above the 65 per cent-of-turnover maximum dictated by new legislation brought in this season to combat excess spending."

COYMR

I'm still not entirely convinced that it's transfer fees. Could be signing on fees and/or agents' fees. But I do take your point Oxon. As LR said, it would be useful if the Adver could get some clarity.

Its everything! Its not just wages, or transfer fees, it all expendatures.

The rules stats that "Clubs cannot spend more than 65% of their turnover"

There is no dictation of "on transfer fees" or "on wages"

But the system is called Salary Cost Management Protocol, so there's a big clue there in the name, and the Football League's own website refers only to wages.

Andy Evo wrote:
Coke not our player anyway and very rarely played even when not injured. Bessone a fish out of water at right back and Benson was just left at home wasn't he?

Oi Den! wrote:

Oxon-Red wrote: "After a tribunal panel ordered Town to pay the combined £340,000 due to Shrewsbury and Exeter for James Collins and Troy Archibald-Henville up front, rather than in separate instalments as the club had budgeted for, Swindon’s projected expenditure on wages and fees rose 1.5 per cent above the 65 per cent-of-turnover maximum dictated by new legislation brought in this season to combat excess spending." COYMR

I'm still not entirely convinced that it's transfer fees. Could be signing on fees and/or agents' fees. But I do take your point Oxon. As LR said, it would be useful if the Adver could get some clarity.

the wizard wrote:
Our new Chairman it is said has skills of negotiation, so how about him healing the rift between Caddis and the manager, that would be a major step forwards. We need to bring some solid leadership at the back, clearly Macca is not comfortable there right now. Another step would be to try Jonathan Smith in midfield again as I believe he is still our player, it won't cost us anything to try him. Some may scoff at both of those ideas but at present I don't think beggars can be choosers. It looks as if Austin is going to be sold in January, but nobody is wanting to part with prolific goal scorers at this time, so perhaps we could look at player plus cash swap deals using the Austin money if there is any to our advantage in any transfers coming our way. I can also see Bormuff coming in yet again, only this time with serious money for Ritchie. Given our circumstances now may be the time to say good-bye, all be it with a heavy heart. I think we do need to start looking for fees for any players that leave now, and also given Thompsons success we also need to be bringing these guys from youth more into the picture In between times our Chairman needs to speak to our manager and bring to an end this name/blame/shame culture he has adopted, and start with any positives he can bring out of the game, and apart from that, if its not positive don't be drawn into it make excuses and leave the interview, clearly stating, "if I have any comment concerning any individual it is to them that I shall address it to, not the press". A solid way forwards. That way he gains some respect not the comments we have for that behaviour here, his negative comments about players breed negative comments around him and his whole history at the club, something the Chairman now should be looking to rectify, using his PR skills.

London Red wrote:
The info on the website doesn't really say anything
.
It has a million word part on the Championship and 3 wods on L1 and L2
.
The legislation changes yearly but I think the website has not - so the name is probably completely out of date
,
Hopefully Sam will have spoken to the club and will be able to answer this once and for all in the Q&A today!

bhred wrote:
Notwithstanding injuries right now which is unfortunate for any team, PDC needs to take a very close look at HIS signings Navarro - certainly no better than Risser and Jonathan Smith was so much better Miller - neat and tidy at times but largely innefective when it comes to making a telling impact on any game Ward - ok in the air but his quality of distribution makes Aiden Flint look classy Adam Rooney - how many chances does he need to score? Roberts - is he really any better than the likes of Luke Rooney, Gabilondo or Easyjet for that matter? Troy - nervous performances at time andI doubt he responds well to PDC's rants Not to mention numerous other PDC signings that have come and gone The board have supported him incredibly well and now is the time he needs to show just how good a Manager he really is I love his passion, commitment, enthusiasm and everything he's done for the club but the best Managers are those that can get results when the chips are down

Oi Den! wrote:

Is that you Lovesey wrote:

Northern Red wrote: Poor managers buy poor players. Good managers turn poor players into good players. Paulo is fast looking like the former. I'm sure that with the budget PDC has been given over 2 years, King, Malpas, even Hart, could've 'bought' the league 2 title. As for fixture congestion, just stick 11 youngsters in the FA Cup... we've made our money from the league cup run, let's just kill off the FA Cup this year, we don't need it.

Hart couldn't have bought a bag of crisps.....

Lovesey, nobody knows whether Hart would have done a good job or not if he could have built his own squad. You're right about one thing though. He wasn't able to buy anything at the time.

Is that you Lovesey wrote:

Oi Den! wrote:

Is that you Lovesey wrote:

Northern Red wrote: Poor managers buy poor players. Good managers turn poor players into good players. Paulo is fast looking like the former. I'm sure that with the budget PDC has been given over 2 years, King, Malpas, even Hart, could've 'bought' the league 2 title. As for fixture congestion, just stick 11 youngsters in the FA Cup... we've made our money from the league cup run, let's just kill off the FA Cup this year, we don't need it.

Hart couldn't have bought a bag of crisps.....

Lovesey, nobody knows whether Hart would have done a good job or not if he could have built his own squad. You're right about one thing though. He wasn't able to buy anything at the time.

Den, going by his team selection and the results achieved, the guy was the worst manager I have EVER yes worse than Iffy, Andy King, Jimmy quinn and even Malpass.... Ever seen here.... have no time or respect for him and from this point forward I shall delete him from my STFC (mind) filing cabinet...

Oi Den! wrote:
Football League's reply to my query:

"Turnover for SCMP is not strictly turnover as laid out in a club’s accounts. It is relevant income that we allow to use against player wages. Relevant income comprises of all football related revenues, such as gate income, League distributions, prize money etc. We then use gross profit for a club’s commercial revenues (e.g. sponsorship, advertising hospitality etc.), rather than turnover and also net transfer monies (i.e. sales less purchases), which can be negative. Also, cash injections via donations and/or equity, which does not appear in the turnover figure in a club’s financial statements, can also be included as relevant income.

All player wages are included in the calculation. This covers basic wage, bonuses, appearances and any other add-ons. The calculation also includes PAYE, medical costs, cars and travel and also agent payments. Basically the full cost of a player is included. Players included are all contract players (full contract, non-contract, multiplicity etc.) and loan players. Players loaned out are deducted for the period of the loan. Players not included are youth players on a professional contract (i.e. players that have been in the club’s YD scheme and have been given a pro contract. They must be 20 years of age or under at the start of the season to be discounted from the SCMP calculation."

That reply came within 7 minutes
of my email and is very full and clear. I am impressed.

So transfer fees on acquisitions are included - not in the wages part of the calculation, but as a reduction in turnover, which is more favourable in terms of making it harder to breach the 65% barrier.

Oi Den! wrote:
It may have been what tipped us over the edge but it is just part of the reason, LR. The entire reason is that we have spent a lot of money on players, which many of us are arguing should have provided us with a strong squad - strong enough to carry us through the odd spell of injuries and suspension. I have never objected to the expenditure. I have always praised the board for making the funds available to PDC. One thing I never did understand though was how many people said we had made "great signings" before the players had put on a Town shirt. Some of them have proved to be far from great.

Oi Den! wrote:
It may have been what tipped us over the edge but it is just part of the reason, LR. The entire reason is that we have spent a lot of money on players, which many of us are arguing should have provided us with a strong squad - strong enough to carry us through the odd spell of injuries and suspension. I have never objected to the expenditure. I have always praised the board for making the funds available to PDC. One thing I never did understand though was how many people said we had made "great signings" before the players had put on a Town shirt. Some of them have proved to be far from great.

SeanG92 wrote:

Oi Den! wrote:
It may have been what tipped us over the edge but it is just part of the reason, LR. The entire reason is that we have spent a lot of money on players, which many of us are arguing should have provided us with a strong squad - strong enough to carry us through the odd spell of injuries and suspension. I have never objected to the expenditure. I have always praised the board for making the funds available to PDC. One thing I never did understand though was how many people said we had made "great signings" before the players had put on a Town shirt. Some of them have proved to be far from great.

If you look at the apparent caliber of most of the guys signed then we should have been making 'great' signings. Many of the players for me, just haven't achieved what they sold have so far.

the wizard wrote:
The rants are explainable, the header is,

SWINDON TOWN: Out-of-options Di Canio fears relegation

or should it read,

SWINDON TOWN, Out of options Di Canio fears the sack.

Is it easier to change the number of players, or is it easier to change one person ?

For what its worth I think we should be cutting some slack here. Not so very long ago some here were almost orgasmic because we beat an off-day Stoke side and a Brighton side that really are focused on promotion this season, but we did show how we can play. The Pox recently went through 6 or 8 rough games and now players are back from injury replied on Saturday with a heavy win. You cannot have your cake and eat it. I don't agree with the name/shame/blame culture, but with so many out injured what do you expect.
Don't forget not so long ago there was a queue waiting to kiss his ar5e.

Oi Den! wrote:

SeanG92 wrote:

Oi Den! wrote:
It may have been what tipped us over the edge but it is just part of the reason, LR. The entire reason is that we have spent a lot of money on players, which many of us are arguing should have provided us with a strong squad - strong enough to carry us through the odd spell of injuries and suspension. I have never objected to the expenditure. I have always praised the board for making the funds available to PDC. One thing I never did understand though was how many people said we had made "great signings" before the players had put on a Town shirt. Some of them have proved to be far from great.

If you look at the apparent caliber of most of the guys signed then we should have been making 'great' signings. Many of the players for me, just haven't achieved what they sold have so far.

Sean, I just think it's best to see what they do for us before judging how good they are - whatever their history or reputation.

Malkym wrote:
1:49pm


1:48pm Wed 24 Oct 12
the wizard says

If, and it is a BIG if, our manager were to up sticks and leave, who would you like to see come in and take up the reigns ?


Very big if. No need for me to stir that up right now.


Well said sammy boy!!

Wiz where do you want me to send your wooden spoon? Long may Paolo reign but if you're looking foe reins you perhaps ought to look down the road in Lambourn.

igiwigi wrote:
what about Luke Rooney ,Bostock or even sweet talk Caddis!!!!!!!!!!!
Paulo chose the team and they keep playing the long ball, WHY!!!!???
We slaughtered teams when we played football along the ground

Bostock Is class and left on the bench--WHY!!!???

Ritchie left off till after half time WHY???

Paulo does not know what he is doing.
His temper rules his judgements!!!

SeanG92 wrote:

Oi Den! wrote:

SeanG92 wrote:

Oi Den! wrote:
It may have been what tipped us over the edge but it is just part of the reason, LR. The entire reason is that we have spent a lot of money on players, which many of us are arguing should have provided us with a strong squad - strong enough to carry us through the odd spell of injuries and suspension. I have never objected to the expenditure. I have always praised the board for making the funds available to PDC. One thing I never did understand though was how many people said we had made "great signings" before the players had put on a Town shirt. Some of them have proved to be far from great.

If you look at the apparent caliber of most of the guys signed then we should have been making 'great' signings. Many of the players for me, just haven't achieved what they sold have so far.

Sean, I just think it's best to see what they do for us before judging how good they are - whatever their history or reputation.

Yeh thats definitely a fair point. However would you be saying the same if we signed, by some miracle, Messi? I doubt it.

Why move the goalposts? If you sign a player who has shown they can be very good on a consistent basis, you naturally expect that from them.

Malkym wrote:
1:49pm


1:48pm Wed 24 Oct 12
the wizard says

If, and it is a BIG if, our manager were to up sticks and leave, who would you like to see come in and take up the reigns ?


Very big if. No need for me to stir that up right now.


Well said sammy boy!!

Wiz where do you want me to send your wooden spoon? Long may Paolo reign but if you're looking foe reins you perhaps ought to look down the road in Lambourn.

Oi Den! wrote:
Football League's reply to my query: "Turnover for SCMP is not strictly turnover as laid out in a club’s accounts. It is relevant income that we allow to use against player wages. Relevant income comprises of all football related revenues, such as gate income, League distributions, prize money etc. We then use gross profit for a club’s commercial revenues (e.g. sponsorship, advertising hospitality etc.), rather than turnover and also net transfer monies (i.e. sales less purchases), which can be negative. Also, cash injections via donations and/or equity, which does not appear in the turnover figure in a club’s financial statements, can also be included as relevant income. All player wages are included in the calculation. This covers basic wage, bonuses, appearances and any other add-ons. The calculation also includes PAYE, medical costs, cars and travel and also agent payments. Basically the full cost of a player is included. Players included are all contract players (full contract, non-contract, multiplicity etc.) and loan players. Players loaned out are deducted for the period of the loan. Players not included are youth players on a professional contract (i.e. players that have been in the club’s YD scheme and have been given a pro contract. They must be 20 years of age or under at the start of the season to be discounted from the SCMP calculation." That reply came within 7 minutes of my email and is very full and clear. I am impressed. So transfer fees on acquisitions are included - not in the wages part of the calculation, but as a reduction in turnover, which is more favourable in terms of making it harder to breach the 65% barrier.

igiwigi wrote:
what about Luke Rooney ,Bostock or even sweet talk Caddis!!!!!!!!!!!
Paulo chose the team and they keep playing the long ball, WHY!!!!???
We slaughtered teams when we played football along the ground

Bostock Is class and left on the bench--WHY!!!???

Ritchie left off till after half time WHY???

Paulo does not know what he is doing.
His temper rules his judgements!!!

Malkym wrote:

Oldswindonian wrote: Dear ,dear, look at all the above comments. Last month PDC was a God, yet this month he seems a little less poular? The season has not properly unwound and we wont know till the end of the year whether we are in with a shout or whether the season is not working. Give they guy a break and talk a bit of sense.

Hear hear - some real dross from so called seasoned posters who suddenly want to villify PdC. There were/are many who think STFC have a divine right to "cakewalk" this league in the same manner as last season. Reality check time. Granted as per last year PdC must take responsibility for players he signed and if they don't deliver then he has to address that - last season it was by means of an open cheque book -this season it has to be by using existing players. For once I agree with LR - and while any manager can use injuries as an excuse when one or two key players are missing -we have several currently unavailable. Wiz makes a good point re Oxford's recent return to form after getting key players back from injury.Also Paolo is discovering that some players who looked good in L2 are coming up short in L1 -Alan Mac for one & possibly Benno for another, although re the latter he, Collins & Williams haven't had the greatest service from midfield. I take his relegation comment as somewhat tongue in cheek and part of his "gee them up psycology" To use an Italian analogy Rome wasn't built in a day! and those who are banking on us going up again -just because its in the 3 yr plan really do need to take stock and realise its not cut and dried.

Malkym wrote:

Oi Den! wrote:
It may have been what tipped us over the edge but it is just part of the reason, LR. The entire reason is that we have spent a lot of money on players, which many of us are arguing should have provided us with a strong squad - strong enough to carry us through the odd spell of injuries and suspension. I have never objected to the expenditure. I have always praised the board for making the funds available to PDC. One thing I never did understand though was how many people said we had made "great signings" before the players had put on a Town shirt. Some of them have proved to be far from great.

Yep Den the highly praised TAH for one if he's any better than Flinty I'll eat Paolo's new coat...and you can add Ward & Rooney to that list in my opinion.

Oi Den! wrote:
Oxon, I was just the messenger. Excellent reply from the Football League I would say.

Oldswindonian wrote:
Dear ,dear, look at all the above comments. Last month PDC was a God, yet this month he seems a little less poular? The season has not properly unwound and we wont know till the end of the year whether we are in with a shout or whether the season is not working. Give they guy a break and talk a bit of sense.

London Red wrote:
Luke Rooney is back for Villa onwards when his loan expires (confirmed on the OS)
.
Hopefully the games he had at Burton will mean he is back fresh and hungry
.
before that at Stevenage I would go
.
Fodders
Devera Ward Flint McEveley
Ritchie Ferry Macca Roberts
Collins RDV
.
Bench: Bedwell, Troy, Miller, Bostock, Benson, Storey
.
Defense has not been too bad prior to last night tso go with the same pairing that had been in that team
.
Miller will need a rest and it gives us a chance to see Macca in the middle with Ferry
.
Ritchie back after a rest / kick up the arse
.
RDV scored so he obviously knows where the net is so lets put him up top
.
Keep Storey on the bench as he is different to Collins and Benson

DarrenSTFCRomain wrote:

Oldswindonian wrote: Dear ,dear, look at all the above comments. Last month PDC was a God, yet this month he seems a little less poular? The season has not properly unwound and we wont know till the end of the year whether we are in with a shout or whether the season is not working. Give they guy a break and talk a bit of sense.

I think people might give him a break when he stops blameing the embargo you know the 65% football rule... As i said weeks ago the man has had a great budget alot more than most and has spent it after 11 games???????????

Oi Den! wrote:
LR, this reminds me so much of the Wilson days. You would never accept that he had a weak squad until it was too late - and even then you blamed our relegation on the person who tried to pick up the pieces of the shambles that was beyond repair. And now you tell us that a transfer embargo arising from breaking the wage cap is nothing to do with signing 5 players on transfer deadline day! Astounding.
.
On the subject of the embargo, why not have a look at the Football League website? It is there as plain as day that the League imposes an embargo when wages are about to go beyond 65% of turnover. It actually makes much more sense for it to be calculated this way than using transfer fees. If it was done on transfer fees, clubs could pay a fortune in wages to loan signings or free transfers and not breach the fair play rules.
.
But whether it's wages or turnover, and whether equity injection counts as turnover is neither here nor there for the purposes of this debate. It is spending on players that got us into the embargo. And given the fact that we have spent enough to cause an embargo, I think the manager should accept it with good grace, as it is he who has done the spending.
.
The transfer embargo may not have been the reason for Wray being pushed out but I think Black may well have felt that it was proof that he (JW)had been allowing the tail to wag the dog for far too long.

Oi Den! wrote:
Oxon, I was just the messenger. Excellent reply from the Football League I would say.

Lazaat wrote:
I was there last night, there was a lot of huff and puff but what was needed was a bit if guile, someone who has genuine ability, someone who has the skill to get the ball down and make a cutting pass through the opposition defence! I believe Spurs have a young player who would fit the bill...his name is John Bostock!!! How the hell he didn't even get chance off the bench last night YET AGAIN when the game was crying out for someone like him defies logic...and he must be taking up a large slice of the budget? Paolo chased him all summer and has hardly used him, what is that all about? I'm sorry to say I am now also getting a little tired of some of the things being said after each game....change the bl00dy record Paolo!

alchafreds wrote:
are they not good enough or dont they wish to play for di canio anymore

southside7 wrote:

alchafreds wrote:
are they not good enough or dont they wish to play for di canio anymore

This is the key. Sister of someone in the shadows at STFC for many years says the players are in awe of his history but can't f*ckin stand him.

London Red wrote:
Wiz based on Sam's Q&A today none!
.
Bessone at least a month, Thompson unknown yet and Williams and Navarro have only just arrived back from the specialist so not expected back until November some time

London Red wrote:
Lots complaining about lack of consistency and players like Flint not getting a look in again
.
So thought I'd look at the actual starting line ups to see if that is true
.
I'm not surprised that it is not!
.
We have started 20 in total this season
.
With 9 featuring 10 or more of our 18 games
.
We still have a "super 7" which have started in 10 or more of our 14 league games and 12 have started in at least half of the league games
.
Some would be higher if not injured- for example Williams has been out injured so couldn't play in at least 2 - which would have taken him to 100% alongside Wes
.
Roberts was out up to Pompy but has started 6 of the 9 since then - with the ones missing due to another knock!
.
Flint has 8 of 17 total and 7 of 13 in the league - that is hardly out of the picture!
.
Total
Fodderingham 18 100%


McEveley 16 89%
Miller 16 89%
Williams 16 89%
Macca 15 83%
Ritchie 15 83%
Collins 11 61%
Devera 10 56%
RDV 10 56%
Ferry 9 50%
Navarro 9 50%
Benson 8 44%
Flint 8 44%
Ward 8 44%
Roberts 6 33%
Troy 5 28%
Bessone 5 28%
Rooney 3 17%
Coke 2 11%
Rooney.L 1 6%
.
League
Fodderingham 14 100%


McEveley 13 93%
Miller 13 93%
Ritchie 12 86%
Williams 11 79%
Macca 11 79%
Collins 10 71%
RDV 8 57%
Ferry 8 57%
Devera 7 50%
Flint 7 50%
Ward 7 50%
Navarro 6 43%
Benson 5 36%
Roberts 5 36%
Bessone 4 29%
Troy 3 21%
Rooney 2 14%
Coke 1 7%
Rooney.L 1 7%

London Red wrote:
Not really Jayden - it doesn't take long to the official website and look at the line ups
.
Then excel does the rest using formulas
.
I started after my wage post - so what 20 mins in total to work that out - which is better than watching the c@ck the Mrs had on in the background

London Red wrote:
Not really Jayden - it doesn't take long to the official website and look at the line ups
.
Then excel does the rest using formulas
.
I started after my wage post - so what 20 mins in total to work that out - which is better than watching the c@ck the Mrs had on in the background

London Red wrote:
Not really Jayden - it doesn't take long to the official website and look at the line ups
.
Then excel does the rest using formulas
.
I started after my wage post - so what 20 mins in total to work that out - which is better than watching the c@ck the Mrs had on in the background

London Red wrote:
Lots complaining about lack of consistency and players like Flint not getting a look in again
.
So thought I'd look at the actual starting line ups to see if that is true
.
I'm not surprised that it is not!
.
We have started 20 in total this season
.
With 9 featuring 10 or more of our 18 games
.
We still have a "super 7" which have started in 10 or more of our 14 league games and 12 have started in at least half of the league games
.
Some would be higher if not injured- for example Williams has been out injured so couldn't play in at least 2 - which would have taken him to 100% alongside Wes
.
Roberts was out up to Pompy but has started 6 of the 9 since then - with the ones missing due to another knock!
.
Flint has 8 of 17 total and 7 of 13 in the league - that is hardly out of the picture!
.
Total
Fodderingham 18 100%


McEveley 16 89%
Miller 16 89%
Williams 16 89%
Macca 15 83%
Ritchie 15 83%
Collins 11 61%
Devera 10 56%
RDV 10 56%
Ferry 9 50%
Navarro 9 50%
Benson 8 44%
Flint 8 44%
Ward 8 44%
Roberts 6 33%
Troy 5 28%
Bessone 5 28%
Rooney 3 17%
Coke 2 11%
Rooney.L 1 6%
.
League
Fodderingham 14 100%


McEveley 13 93%
Miller 13 93%
Ritchie 12 86%
Williams 11 79%
Macca 11 79%
Collins 10 71%
RDV 8 57%
Ferry 8 57%
Devera 7 50%
Flint 7 50%
Ward 7 50%
Navarro 6 43%
Benson 5 36%
Roberts 5 36%
Bessone 4 29%
Troy 3 21%
Rooney 2 14%
Coke 1 7%
Rooney.L 1 7%

mancrobin wrote:

London Red wrote:
Lots complaining about lack of consistency and players like Flint not getting a look in again
.
So thought I'd look at the actual starting line ups to see if that is true
.
I'm not surprised that it is not!
.
We have started 20 in total this season
.
With 9 featuring 10 or more of our 18 games
.
We still have a "super 7" which have started in 10 or more of our 14 league games and 12 have started in at least half of the league games
.
Some would be higher if not injured- for example Williams has been out injured so couldn't play in at least 2 - which would have taken him to 100% alongside Wes
.
Roberts was out up to Pompy but has started 6 of the 9 since then - with the ones missing due to another knock!
.
Flint has 8 of 17 total and 7 of 13 in the league - that is hardly out of the picture!
.
Total
Fodderingham 18 100%



McEveley 16 89%
Miller 16 89%
Williams 16 89%
Macca 15 83%
Ritchie 15 83%
Collins 11 61%
Devera 10 56%
RDV 10 56%
Ferry 9 50%
Navarro 9 50%
Benson 8 44%
Flint 8 44%
Ward 8 44%
Roberts 6 33%
Troy 5 28%
Bessone 5 28%
Rooney 3 17%
Coke 2 11%
Rooney.L 1 6%
.
League
Fodderingham 14 100%



McEveley 13 93%
Miller 13 93%
Ritchie 12 86%
Williams 11 79%
Macca 11 79%
Collins 10 71%
RDV 8 57%
Ferry 8 57%
Devera 7 50%
Flint 7 50%
Ward 7 50%
Navarro 6 43%
Benson 5 36%
Roberts 5 36%
Bessone 4 29%
Troy 3 21%
Rooney 2 14%
Coke 1 7%
Rooney.L 1 7%

Nice one LR. Good analysis.

Surprises for me, yes, Flint has started quite a few but less than 50% overall. I thought he would have been nearer 100 %. Also interesting how few Ferry and Benson have started.

Notwithatanding injuries and suspensions, the most important point for me is how team selection can encourage partnerships and combinations. We still haven't found anything to match Caddis, Ferry and Ritchie at its best.

London Red wrote:
Lots complaining about lack of consistency and players like Flint not getting a look in again
.
So thought I'd look at the actual starting line ups to see if that is true
.
I'm not surprised that it is not!
.
We have started 20 in total this season
.
With 9 featuring 10 or more of our 18 games
.
We still have a "super 7" which have started in 10 or more of our 14 league games and 12 have started in at least half of the league games
.
Some would be higher if not injured- for example Williams has been out injured so couldn't play in at least 2 - which would have taken him to 100% alongside Wes
.
Roberts was out up to Pompy but has started 6 of the 9 since then - with the ones missing due to another knock!
.
Flint has 8 of 17 total and 7 of 13 in the league - that is hardly out of the picture!
.
Total
Fodderingham 18 100%


McEveley 16 89%
Miller 16 89%
Williams 16 89%
Macca 15 83%
Ritchie 15 83%
Collins 11 61%
Devera 10 56%
RDV 10 56%
Ferry 9 50%
Navarro 9 50%
Benson 8 44%
Flint 8 44%
Ward 8 44%
Roberts 6 33%
Troy 5 28%
Bessone 5 28%
Rooney 3 17%
Coke 2 11%
Rooney.L 1 6%
.
League
Fodderingham 14 100%


McEveley 13 93%
Miller 13 93%
Ritchie 12 86%
Williams 11 79%
Macca 11 79%
Collins 10 71%
RDV 8 57%
Ferry 8 57%
Devera 7 50%
Flint 7 50%
Ward 7 50%
Navarro 6 43%
Benson 5 36%
Roberts 5 36%
Bessone 4 29%
Troy 3 21%
Rooney 2 14%
Coke 1 7%
Rooney.L 1 7%

London Red wrote:
Not really Jayden - it doesn't take long to the official website and look at the line ups
.
Then excel does the rest using formulas
.
I started after my wage post - so what 20 mins in total to work that out - which is better than watching the c@ck the Mrs had on in the background

Steve. Brentford wrote:

London Red wrote:
Not really Jayden - it doesn't take long to the official website and look at the line ups
.
Then excel does the rest using formulas
.
I started after my wage post - so what 20 mins in total to work that out - which is better than watching the c@ck the Mrs had on in the background

Why what was she wearing that was so cack james..,,

bradley red 1 wrote:
Paolo di canio i get the feeling you have pisxed off the majority of us supporters mentioning relegation so it is now over to you and the palyers you have signed to get results please please do not keep harping on about this embargo when you are partly responsible along with wray and your agent! if you wish to walk away then go as i along with other supporters will still be here! you are not bigger than the club.