Solent after match interviews

davygravy

Fans' Favourite
Bit of a debate on Twitter - listening to Kris Temple speak to Eddie after the game, he avoided the main talking points of the majority of our supporters - which was centered around why Daniels came back in and why Smithy was out of position yet again, when we had actual wide midfield players on the bench.

Instead, he just asked Eddie about leaving Wilshere on the bench and general stuff about letting in too many goals.

To be fair, Kris answered the posts towards him, he felt that Wilshere was the most pertinent point to raise with Eddie. A few of us have replied saying it was obvious why Jack was rotated but far more puzzling why Eddie chose the back four and Smith in those positions.

It's something that has mildly frustrated me for a long time - those interviews rarely get to the nitty gritty of a defeat. You end up feeling they are almost not allowed to ask Eddie any properly probing questions at all!
 
Daniels is a better left back than what I've seen of Ake. I would of thought he'd at least try Ake in place of Gosling who is not to up prem league standard IMO.
 
Charlie Daniels coming in at left back to replace Adam Smith who had started there against Liverpool doesn't take much explaining. Neither does playing there ahead of Ake if Daniels is fully fit.

Adam Smith at right wing isn't exactly unheard of either, he regularly played there as a sub in the Championship.

So when Kris Temple only has a limited number of questions, Wilshere on the bench is probably higher up the pecking order.
 
So it seems the guys on Twitter think differently to the both of you then! I'm quite surprised at your comment DJ!

Charlie has been in poor form nearly all season, so should he really have come straight back in? Brad Smith did ok at Arsenal and Ake did rather well at LB last season, so that is a valid question to ask.

Adam Smith at right midfield isn't unheard of but when he's played there, it's rarely worked. So a valid question is surely - why is he playing there when we have several wide players not selected.

Anyway, Kris did actually ask Eddie about Smith today but the answer is worrying if I am honest. Eddie thought it was a worthwhile decision to take and felt he'd played well enough there!
 
All of it :) That Wilshere was a higher priority question to ask - most people on Twitter commenting were quite happy with the theory he couldn't do three games in eight days. The vast majority were far more worried about Daniels and Smith.
 
I think Kris' questions was fair enough - is he not allowed a different opinion ? He felt Wilshere missing was bigger news is all. If he starts badgering Eddie, he will find himself unwelcome and probably wouldn'#t have got a straight answer anyway.
 
afcdibby - 12/12/2016 19:39

All threads seems to revert to twitter nowadays. Is twitter the be all and end all?

I wouldn't know ....I'm not on there. However Its obvious that people are leaving here and putting more effort into twitter.

 
davygravy - 12/12/2016 19:19

All of it :) That Wilshere was a higher priority question to ask - most people on Twitter commenting were quite happy with the theory he couldn't do three games in eight days. The vast majority were far more worried about Daniels and Smith.

Everyone is going to have a different opinion. I don't read Twitter so my comments are just based on my thinking, I wouldn't know what the consensus on there were saying. Perhaps Kris Temple just asked what he thought was the priority question?

RobTrent posted on here straight after the game asking why we we played a weakened midfield, I'd hazard a guess others did too.

The theory of Wilshere being rotated though is only a theory until the question is answered.

I don't share any worry over Daniels. But then I've always thought he was underrated by many. For me he's always been first choice if fully fit, be it Ian Harte or Nathan Ake offering competition.

With Junior Stanislas injured, Adam Smith right wing isn't an unfathomable selection either. It's just all down to opinion over which question to ask first.
 
The Alchemist - 12/12/2016 20:04

I think Kris' questions was fair enough - is he not allowed a different opinion ? He felt Wilshere missing was bigger news is all. If he starts badgering Eddie, he will find himself unwelcome and probably wouldn'#t have got a straight answer anyway.

Not about badgering anyone though. Just about sometimes challenging Eddie when decisions he makes are questioned by many. There were quite a few posts that I saw, asking similar questions about the starting line up.
 
davygravy - 12/12/2016 20:26

The Alchemist - 12/12/2016 20:04

I think Kris' questions was fair enough - is he not allowed a different opinion ? He felt Wilshere missing was bigger news is all. If he starts badgering Eddie, he will find himself unwelcome and probably wouldn'#t have got a straight answer anyway.

Not about badgering anyone though. Just about sometimes challenging Eddie when decisions he makes are questioned by many. There were quite a few posts that I saw, asking similar questions about the starting line up.

But everyone will have a different idea on team selection every week? I can understand 11 changes in the Cup raising an eye brow or two, but first choice left back returning post injury when he's only been out 2 games?
 
davygravy - 12/12/2016 19:19

All of it :) That Wilshere was a higher priority question to ask - most people on Twitter commenting were quite happy with the theory he couldn't do three games in eight days. The vast majority were far more worried about Daniels and Smith.

I haven't been concerned at all about Daniels at left back, in fact I think he's been adequate.
 
I still don't understand Wilshere not playing. If the 3 games in 8 days schedule is too much then surely it makes most sense to miss the game in the sandwich (Leicester).
 
Neither have I, 3 ? goals so far this season and I would imagine some assists. (Re Charlie Daniels)
 

;