Set pieces tonight

thegazzyb said:
Like I said, limited or not, they are available and could be used as an excuse for an interception, so the point is valid. A player is unlikely to just openly accept that he played a poor corner, there will always be some excuse for why it was intercepted and that in itself opens up room for debate and arguments on the pitch.
Click to expand...

I don't see why it matters when you've got other people who can take them. You hit the first man and your chance has gone. If the next guy also does it his chance has gone. The only reason you'd change this is if you're deliberately trying a near post flick on like Barnsley's first on Saturday.

We used to have this with pens. You keep taking them until you miss.
 
SlowDownDerek said:
I don't see why it matters when you've got other people who can take them. You hit the first man and your chance has gone. If the next guy also does it his chance has gone. The only reason you'd change this is if you're deliberately trying a near post flick on like Barnsley's first on Saturday.

We used to have this with pens. You keep taking them until you miss.
Click to expand...
I think the only workable solution would be if the manager would erm.......MANAGE. If he sees that our usual corner taker is having a bad game, have a word from the touchline and move the corner taking duties to somebody else. That way Stan ( or whoever ) can be annoyed that they've blown their opportunity but they have to accept it because it was the manager's decision. It simply leaves zero room for debate, discussion or handbags. It also has the added benefit that the usual corner taker becomes aware that the boss is not happy with the standard of his dead ball deliveries. That COULD be an extra incentive for him to go away and do more work on the training ground to improve his consistency in this area.
So personally I'd like to see the manager take responsibility for the quality of our corners / dead ball situations. The players can't be trusted to sort it out amicably amongst themselves and quite frankly, neither is it their job to do so !
 
thegazzyb said:
Like I said, limited or not, they are available and could be used as an excuse for an interception, so the point is valid. A player is unlikely to just openly accept that he played a poor corner, there will always be some excuse for why it was intercepted and that in itself opens up room for debate and arguments on the pitch, which is unlikely to be helpful.
Click to expand...

But this goes back to my point....if the ball is sent as Dan did there would be no need for excuses. It doesnt matter who wins the header there, its not the corner takers fault? If the defender at the near post is dipping his head to clear the ball then its an issue!
 
Druss_the_Legend said:
But this goes back to my point....if the ball is sent as Dan did there would be no need for excuses. It doesnt matter who wins the header there, its not the corner takers fault? If the defender at the near post is dipping his head to clear the ball then its an issue!
Click to expand...
Yes, but how you deal with such a situation without causing unrest between the players is the issue. As I said above, I think it should be the manager who takes responsibility for such things, it just removes all room for debate. If JW sees that Stan's last two corners were shite, he needs to tell Danjuma and Stan that Danjuma gets the job until further notice. The manager can see the quality of the balls coming in and in my opinion if they are not good enough it is HIS job to sort it out.
 
SlowDownDerek said:
This is putting 2 and 2 together and coming up with 10. You don't know what manager's instructions have been and to say Stan is a greedy fucker as opposed to Danjuma is hilarious.

That said I'd bring in a new instruction on free kicks and corners... Whoever is taking set pieces has one chance to put a decent one in. If you hit the first man someone else gets the next one. Decent ball, whether we score or not, and you can continue.
Click to expand...
Danjuma's greedy aswell, not disputing that. But he's greedy in open play. Stans greedy in open play and demand all the set pieces, including penalties. Yes , he generally is a good pen taker, occasionally a good direct free kick taker but not so great at corners.
 
Red_till_im_ded said:
Danjuma's greedy aswell, not disputing that. But he's greedy in open play. Stans greedy in open play and demand all the set pieces, including penalties. Yes , he generally is a good pen taker, occasionally a good direct free kick taker but not so great at corners.
Click to expand...

You don't know who's decision it is to have him take those set pieces. Are all designated pen/corner/free kick takers greedy?
 
Set pieces debate corners, free kicks. If we had a penalty on Saturday without Junior on the pitch, who would you select?
 
LionelC said:
Set pieces debate corners, free kicks. If we had a penalty on Saturday without Junior on the pitch, who would you select?
Click to expand...
Good question. Whoever takes it needs the technical ability but, more importantly, the self belief, nerve, bottle, confidence to step up... or as so eloquently described above... "greedy".
 
SlowDownDerek said:
You don't know who's decision it is to have him take those set pieces. Are all designated pen/corner/free kick takers greedy?
Click to expand...
Neither do you know who's decision it is and I haven't said that I know, however , you seem desperate to jump on that. How do you know Stan is the designated pen/corner/ freekick taker?
 
DJ said:
This thread didn’t age well. ;)
Click to expand...

The thread has aged like a fine wine. Its literally about how poor our set pieces are. Indeed we both suggest taking away corner duties when a player is not hitting them well. More important than ever. Ironically the worse ones last night were the ones we didnt simply swing the ball in but tried to be clever.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

;