Gary O'Neil

Allen said:
Dom was a bit off today, but he was class against Newcastle, he nearly scored the same back heel he's done a few times. He is also due a purple patch. I was aying Tavernier should come off at half time and then he scores a few minutes later.
Click to expand...

And both are coming back from injury. Amazed Dom managed 90 v Newcastle. It doesn’t just switch back on and ideally we would have introduced them more gradually but both are so important to us I guess it’s worth letting them straight back in.
 
AFCBade said:
I think players bottled it at leeds under pressure and I think Neto would have helped the team cope with the pressure - GON responded at leeds by bringing on Stacey and he misses a sitter at 3-3 to get the winner. IF that had gone in, fans would be saying what a great coach he was after the changes he made at forest to win 3-2

Small margins at this level. At Brighton we could have been bolder with tav and Dom on the bench but we didn’t have great options imho. Traore subbed as GON worried about him doing an injury
Click to expand...
Stacy didn’t miss a sitter Vs Leeds, that was a very difficult chance to convert.

I agree re Neto, the difference between him and Travers is like night and day. We’d have won Vs Leeds with Neto in goal, very confident about that.
 
KingKieffer said:
Stacy didn’t miss a sitter Vs Leeds, that was a very difficult chance to convert.

I agree re Neto, the difference between him and Travers is like night and day. We’d have won Vs Leeds with Neto in goal, very confident about that.
Click to expand...
Absolutely right about the Stacey chance - it wasn't that easy, nor was it obvious that he should have shot rather than crossed. That he SHOULD have scored is entering Vitals lore (along with Baudry would have been an all-time great and we missed out on a starlet in Coulibaly, based on 20 minute cameos).

We'd have drawn vs Leeds if someone had taken one for the team like Billing did yesterday. But we may well have won if we hadn't sat back when leading. We had been slaughtering Leeds up to that point.

Hopefully with new players and others back from injury, GON feels his squad is stronger and we no longer need to sit back that. (Next 3 games aside).
 
It's no shock since we got key players back from injury and signed some new ones with a bit of pace and attacking threat we suddenly look a more competitive team.
With all due respect to Moore, Christie, with them as starters and youth team players on the bench, choices were a bit limited.
It's now all about competition for places and having options on the bench.
 
AFCBade said:
I think players bottled it at leeds under pressure and I think Neto would have helped the team cope with the pressure - GON responded at leeds by bringing on Stacey and he misses a sitter at 3-3 to get the winner. IF that had gone in, fans would be saying what a great coach he was after the changes he made at forest to win 3-2

Small margins at this level. At Brighton we could have been bolder with tav and Dom on the bench but we didn’t have great options imho. Traore subbed as GON worried about him doing an injury
Click to expand...
Totally disagree at Leeds. Sure Stacey had a chance and it wasn't a sitter - he was cutting in from the wing, a lot were expecting a cross because of the angle. He was also a like for like sub for Fredericks so no real tactical change. The fact is that Leeds changed their tactics in centre midfield and consequently up front as soon as we scored our third. GON did absolutely nothing to counter that. I have the ingrained images of the team looking at the bench and coming over to the bench with their arms out stretched out saying what do you want us to do. Answer from bench - nothing. No meaningful subs until 85th minute after they scored the 4th - then Stanislas and Rothwell came on.
Its O.K. to say the players bottled it, a bit of help from management would have stopped that possibility.
Look at the crass stupidity of the subs at Brighton. You have 3 sub windows for a potential 5 subs, so what does GON do - waste them by making 3 individual substitutions (2 within just 5 minutes of each other) which means that when we concede with 5 mins plus injury time left he cannot bring Kieffer Moore (or anyone for that matter) on to push an extra man forward for an equaliser. Why do most teams do a couple of subs together - because it keeps a sub window open for later if needed. Its simple stuff really.
 
Last edited:
I remain unconvinced but I can see we're stuck with him now until at least the end of the season. I thought he was lucky yesterday, Wolves gave everything in the first half and when they didn't score 0-0 looked the likeliest result as up to that point we hadn't had a shot on target. Yes, he was more positive with his subs but it definitely looked like Wolves had run out of gas and ideas so a bit of skill from Solanke and a bit of luck/skill from Tav was the difference. But with 32% possession, 1 shot on target and 2 corners it could just as easily gone the other way. Based on that Alex Crook's tweet is ridiculous.
 
Johnny Comelately said:
I remain unconvinced but I can see we're stuck with him now until at least the end of the season. I thought he was lucky yesterday, Wolves gave everything in the first half and when they didn't score 0-0 looked the likeliest result as up to that point we hadn't had a shot on target. Yes, he was more positive with his subs but it definitely looked like Wolves had run out of gas and ideas so a bit of skill from Solanke and a bit of luck/skill from Tav was the difference. But with 32% possession, 1 shot on target and 2 corners it could just as easily gone the other way. Based on that Alex Crook's tweet is ridiculous.
Click to expand...
I thought he was unlucky at Brighton, another game that could have gone either way...but that's just me...I'm just a glass half full kind of guy
 
KingKieffer said:
Anybody with a bit of management experience would be a far better option than O’Neil. We could have easily had Neil Critchley, who ended up going to QPR. Proven championship manager who played an exciting brand of football on a limited budget. Just as an example. Giving the job full time to somebody with no management experience and then giving him an entire coaching team with no experience in senior football wasn’t just a bad decision, it was an utterly insane one that wasn’t at all based on hindsight, numerous people were saying this at the time.
Click to expand...
Critchley worked out well at qpr, good news though he's available again
 
New Forest Cherry said:
waz's history on this board is the gift that keeps giving :LOL:
Click to expand...
on paper he was a better pick then GON with more experience which could of won us more points, he wouldn't of been my pick, even though critchley has now been sacked what waz said was true that giving the job to someone with no managerial experience was a bad idea, he used critchley as a example
 
rikki39 said:
on paper he was a better pick then GON with more experience which could of won us more points, he wouldn't of been my pick, even though critchley has now been sacked what waz said was true that giving the job to someone with no managerial experience was a bad idea, he used critchley as a example
Click to expand...

and there was me thinking he was using any old here-today-gone-tomorrow manager to try to belittle GoN
 
Simply survival? What was the remit given to Gary O’Neil when he got the job?
Oh you know, a mix of short and long term things and stuff

What did the board tell him during the recent poor run?
Ummm i dunno, i didnt ask lol

And who does he turn to for advice?
Some people that know what's going on. Others dont know, so i dont ask them
 
king-bedwetter said:
There’s literally no answer to any of those questions in that article. What hopeless clickbait.
Click to expand...
Definitely a clickbait title because, as you say, those questions were not directly answered. It was however still interesting to hear that GO does have outside help ( source unknown ) and that the January window was about planning for the future ( clearly the plan is to hoover up young talent, showcase them in the PL and then hopefully make a profit by selling them on ).
Definitely a clickbait, dishonest heading though !
 
thegazzyb said:
Definitely a clickbait title because, as you say, those questions were not directly answered. It was however still interesting to hear that GO does have outside help ( source unknown ) and that the January window was about planning for the future ( clearly the plan is to hoover up young talent, showcase them in the PL and then hopefully make a profit by selling them on ).
Definitely a clickbait, dishonest heading though !
Click to expand...

Particularly scummy as you now need to pay/subscribe...

(I know there's 'unofficial' ways around the pay wall, but still...).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

;