Good effort today but......

[PAULCAFC]

Ultimately not good enough, can't win games, now 9 wins in last 52 played in Lg 1 hence the reason we're going down, at least 10 points from safety 11 to play, I blame Davis first and then the board for lack of investment and apathy plus obsession with a lavish academy, any disagreements?

[Timmy58]

Yes

[gazan]

I've been screaming all season for someone to get to the byline and slam the ball at shin level into the oncoming pack (defenders and forwards) and at last someone did it!
And what do you know we scored. Well done Zouma. However, when he got into the same position again why oh why decide he decide to spoon it up into the centre!

Anyway, for most of the match we equalled them but I have to say that Burton will not set the Championship alight with that kind of performance.For ourselves Guthrie continues to impress as a centre half so I really hope the injury isn't serious. The other revelation was Ollie T in central midfield- please can we keep him there??

Nugent (who I generally like) had a nightmare game- every time he was involved he either fouled or lost possession. He was to blame again for the goal- giving away a totally unnecessary free kick, which they took quickly and caught us out. This is another tha's got to change -this assumption that the opposition will wait until

[Timmy58]

Absolutely agree about Guthrie and Turton. Nugent has got several goals recently and has either lost confidence in his decision making or just isn't very good. I can't really make my mind up. But once Davis and Ray are fully fit I do think one of them should play alongside Guthrie who at the moment looks very good. Seems to like the contest. Reminds me of someone we had many years ago in that respect. I thought Inman was good in the first half but was poor in the second half. And Haber is very good at what he does and now we have him doing it every week which is good. I don't believe Hitchcock is match fit. But he certainly hasn't shown any signs of doing anything since he has been back.
I think in terms of the youngsters breaking in to the side, the future looks good as, of the ones on view today, most looked pretty good. Ng coped well and was helped by Cooper supporting him, Kirk looked promising when he came on, and Turton looked much more comfortable in midfield.
The season has

[Roebuck]

I think in terms of the youngsters breaking in to the side, the future looks good as, of the ones on view today, most looked pretty good. Ng coped well and was helped by Cooper supporting him, Kirk looked promising when he came on, and Turton looked much more comfortable in midfield.



Unfortunately I disagree with you on this. I just don't think the current crop are up to it. Ng and Cooper looked miles off to me although it was obviously only Ng's first game and kids need time. I like Harry D, Jonah sometimes and I certainly don't think Turton is as bad as some posters. I agree Kirk looked promising, thought he did at Chesterfield too.

But to me that's quite meagre and when we don't have the budget to supplement it elsewhere I can only see us struggling. Unfortunately for the first time ever I think the current team would probably drop through the next Division as well.

[gazan]

Unfortunately we won't know if this team will drop straight through League 2 as probably half of them will leave (again). Here is one of our problems-constant transition-never getting a settled group of players from one season to the next.

As regards the players coming through-it won't matter how good any of them are unless we have a better tactical approach to utilising them. Everybody thought Haber was crap until he was given someone to play off him. Saunders was an exciting prospect but has never been played correctly.
It is no accident that: we have the lowest number of shots in the division.
we have only had one penalty all season
have a strike rate of 1.1 goals per game.
How often do we get players forward? How often do we have players breaking forward and finding that we only have one player in the box? We need a bigger midfield includeing one deep holding midfielder that will allow someone in front of them

[RedandWhiteSpartan]

We've been playing much better since Christmas, and today held the clear leaders of the League to a well deserved draw. However as Paul intimates we have, I fear left it too late and we will go down. The current team would do well in League 2 but as people have pointed out we will loose a lot of players in the summer, but the new Academy prospects look ok, Kirk in particular looked very good, but I thought Perry Ng also did well today.
An issue has to be why did it take until Christmas to find an effective formation, and until today to work out that Ollie Turton is a midfielder not a right back? I know the answer, but answers on the back of a postcard please, or e-mail Davishighlyoverated.co.uk

[itwasin]

I remember that same person saying this season looked bright with the youngsters coming through,so what's happened? Has the penny not dropped yet!

[jamesdad]

Is Haber a center forward or a winger. He appears to spend most of his time on either wing . fair enough he does win the ball and hold it up but he does not break sweat to get into the middle were we need him to score . He just ambles around away from the ball. Just an observation. We are preparing for life in a lower division and I feel we are going to struggle big style if we approach it with the same playing system.

[VindePays2009]

Paul's stat is a good one. I read today that McClaren has presided over nine Newcastle wins out of 43 since last March, and no wonder fans are baying for his blood.

But SD will be all right, won't he?

As for O'Driscoll, he was in charge of Walsall for six**** games before getting the sack. A period during which Walsall sank from second to fourth in the table, and are still in with a good shout for automatic promotion. No doubt the draw against the Alex was the particularly humiliating performance that was held against him.

It's not as if Walsall are such a money-bags club that they can afford to pay him off; they must be very comparable with us. Yet they are willing to take a gamble that we never would. We'd rather take a punt on Hitchcock, which has clearly been a waste of money, than get somebody else in who might play the youngsters from the start instead of belittling them by complaining about their unreliability.

[somersetcrewe]

We'd rather take a punt on Hitchcock, which has clearly been a waste of money, than get somebody else in who might play the youngsters from the start .......


Hindsight is a wonderful thing!

[MikeSB]

We'd rather take a punt on Hitchcock, which has clearly been a waste of money, than get somebody else in who might play the youngsters from the start .......

Hindsight is a wonderful thing![/quote]

Its not hindsight though mate, its pathetic selection and choice by Davis who has the likes of Kirk sitting around the place at age 19 waiting to get into the team when he Davis decides to bring back a player who has never made the grade at any club he has gone to and how anyone ever signed him and then plays only one or two games seems and expensive way of doing business. No wonder our kids get hissed off and want away when this sort of thing takes place. Kirk came on for Hitchcock and offered more in the 25 mins than he did in 65 mins and so what's going on? The Walsall manager was sacked after 16 games while still fourth in the table and we hang on to ours after 3 seasons in

[bigroof]

It is hindsight though, isn't it? Kirk is a fine talent (only just 18, not 19) and wasn't brought on 'like for like' - he was played deeper and wider, and Inman changed positions at the change. Seager may well have been a fine signing, but we'll never know because of his injury; that was bad luck. Obviously there aren't many - if any - others of his ilk that the club could have signed following his injury. Hitchcock is an unproven talent on the books of a club in a higher division. Our own, Saunders, has had injury and illness problems, so they needed to sign someone; unfortunately he hasn't been playing full games anywhere, so he's not lasting the pace. Who knows, the ball may fall kindly for him in another game, and he'll gain confidence?
You say, Mike, "no wonder our kids get 'hissed' off and want away" - do they? Who's that then?

[Timmy58]

I am not sure which of this seasons loan signings have been a disaster. Jury out on Hitchcock who clearly is not match fit. We were and more to the point the lad was more so, unlucky with the injury to Seagers who looked a decent player as on might expect. Even Dario, our much respected former manager, didn't throw kids in willy nilly. There was a plan where they made brief appearances as subs, or got half a dozen starts before being cast aside to take in their experience. And of course, he supplemented this with loan signings or signed untried players from other clubs but of course the market was rather different back then. I believe, that in the current climate, the club pretty much gets it right. On Saturday, by the end of the game, half of the players representing the Alex were home grown. I would suggest that is something we should be proud of.

[somersetcrewe]

Its not hindsight though mate, its pathetic selection and choice by Davis .......




I think you missed my point entirely, Mike. Was that on purpose? ;)
To suggest Hitchcock has been a waste of money after the event is hindsight. I think a few were encouraged when the news of his signing came through. Scored 3 in 6 last time around so it was always possible he might ignite something again around the team. It hasn't worked. But at least SD won't die wondering.

As for playing loanees ahead of youth, we've been here so many times before.
It's clear SD needs to do something so he is trying to supplement what we have with an affordable alternative that we don't. You either want him to make some signings to boost the team and not just rely on youth - or you don't!
He's damned if he does, damned if he doesn't.

Anyway, don't listen to me, listen to bigroof - he seems to be the voice of reason on this board.
Deals in facts!!

[MikeSB]

It is hindsight though, isn't it? Kirk is a fine talent (only just 18, not 19) and wasn't brought on 'like for like' - he was played deeper and wider, and Inman changed positions at the change. Seager may well have been a fine signing, but we'll never know because of his injury; that was bad luck. Obviously there aren't many - if any - others of his ilk that the club could have signed following his injury. Hitchcock is an unproven talent on the books of a club in a higher division. Our own, Saunders, has had injury and illness problems, so they needed to sign someone; unfortunately he hasn't been playing full games anywhere, so he's not lasting the pace. Who knows, the ball may fall kindly for him in another game, and he'll gain confidence?
You say, Mike, "no wonder our kids get 'hissed' off and want away" - do they? Who's that then?

I looked at Kirk's bio on the official site and he will be 19 this year and has the same birthday da

[bigroof]

Well, he obviously did play deeper and wider than Hitchcock Mike! That wouldn't prevent him having a shot would it? I was making the simple point that he didn't come on to play the same role as Hitchcock; also that he's not yet 19 until the autumn. Not that that should preclude him from being played; he's one that I'd earmarked even last season as probably having a debut this season. As with all young talent though, you need to handle them carefully; I'm sure MUFC will handle Rashford carefully too!
As for Hitchcock, obviously they weren't looking at him first choice, as they'd taken the unfortunate Seager; others of the same 'type' as Seager probably weren't available from their clubs, so we were always going to get someone inferior. Without Dalla Valle, and with Saunders' injury and illness problems, Crewe need the numbers up front. In Hitchcock's defence, he's a different kind of forward and we'll probably need to adapt to play to his strengths, and the full fitness will only come

[Timmy58]

Mike, I am not quite sure why you think Colclough would have been "hissed off". He played half a season (and played very well) but in all honesty he has spent 2 seasons out of the team for reasons various which I won't list. The club were criticised for selling him in January but the truth of the matter is that given his history and the promise made to the lad when he signed they had no choice but to sell him. And given his history I would suggest it was an opportunity the club would have been unwise not to take.
As for Kirk, he is getting opportunities and will continue to do so. The problem with having a team populated with kids, and at 18/19 and even 20 they are still kids. Still developing mentally and physically and the strain of playing 2 to 3 matches a week is not right which is why decent clubs play the kids for a few matches and then leave them out of the team for a bit. As has shown with Jones who is a good player, he is not playing well and needs to be left out of the side

[MikeSB]

Hitchcock should never have been signed knowing his fitness levels while we have talented players sitting on the bench and 17-19 are NOT kids, they are more man than boy and its not rocket science to allow them to play as long as they feel as though they can contribute and will contribute more than loan players or even players like Haber who must be one of the worst signings ever at this club and yet he is our main striker? Who on earth though he was good enough? Did you see the difference with their No.9 who OK he didn't score when he came on but he knew where the goal was and he was always trying to get into areas where he could have a shot. Haber hardly ever does that and so you may as well play our own and as the writing was on the wall back in August, why didn't we or doesn't the academy really produce good enough players at over a million a year? Put in context. What sort of player(s) could we get for that sort of money EACH season?

I know when I was 17-19, I wanted t

[AlexLeicester]

MikeSB, those comments makes you sound naive, incoherent and living on a different planet to us Crewe fans. In the past you have expressed yourself well. Has someone hacked your account?
Hitchcock should not have been signed? He had a poor game on Saturday, but he is a proven threat up front and has been consistent. Give the man a chance. He's probably the best we could get/afford.
Men not boys! I bow to your obviously superior medical knowledge (yes, that is blatant sarcasm). People who know a lot more about development and physiology have stated time and again that growing bodies need enforced rest. Of course late ****agers and early 20s feel they can do everything all the time - that's part of growing up and maturing - but it still doesn't make it right.
Haber has improved beyond measure in the last few games. He has a defined role in receiving, holding and passing on. When in sight of goal he shoots - quite successfully as of late.
I will not get involved in your Academy obsess

[Timmy58]

Only a fool would argue that kids of 17 to 19 are men and should be playing week in week out. As you rightly say AL, the body is still developing right up to the age of 21 and in some cases beyond. The phrase that comes to mind, is burn out. It happens and clubs have a duty to youngsters not to overuse them. That way, they have careers that last!!

[MikeSB]

Interesting that last two posters prove once again to use personal insults to get their message across. One even says "Us fans" Haha! Grow up Sonny!

Who said 17/18 year olds should be playing 'every' week throughout the season? Where have I said peak physical fitness is that age? All made up because you just can't stand reason or logical argument.

Humans development both mental and physical attributes have changed radically over the years and young men and they are young MEN and not kids have also developed so they are easily able to play 90 minutes of football once a week! They probably spend a hell of a lot more time training then they do on match days. Many young men at young ages play international football. I recall Duncan Edwards in that category and many recent ones and so its not the age that is relevant but whether they can play the game at a high enough level. Dean Ashon? Well check his stats and he was playing many first team games at age 17-19 link b

[Roebuck]

Jeez - don't you realise that different people develop at different times. Just because Duncan Edwards could play pro at 17 doesn't mean Ian Wright could have done. Some are ready at 16, some not until early 20's. It's not one size fits all you know!

[Timmy58]

I don't particularly think Dean Ashton was an exception. He wasn't playing every week at 17. He also sadly had his career cut short thru injury. I sense that had that not been the case he wouldn't have played beyond 32 anyway. The fact of the matter is that young lads don't finish growing until their 20s and that is why Dario always broke them in gently. I would suggest that James Jones is long in need of a rest and I would hope that Fox will be back on Saturday alongside Turton who had a good game back in midfield against Burton. Hitchcock has not played since September/October for whatever reason and as for saying we shouldn't have signed him, what should we have done given that Saunders has not yet shown that he is ready. Still growing of course. And getting opportunities from the bench. If we hadn't have signed Hitchcock the majority of supporters would be saying why haven't we signed someone.

[Stealex]

Personally i am sick and fed up of the moaning contingent of Gresty Road choosing their scapegoat in the form of Marcus Haber. Whilst i admit that he's never going to improve from this level, he puts in a shift now that he is being used correctly. He is a targetman that we can use to pump the ball to for it to be held up and allowing others to be brought into play. He is also worth a goal or two but on the whole does a good job of the tougher aspects of the game. If you don't like the fact that he is playing too deep then maybe you should look at the tactics - he's deep because we play football on the edge of our own penalty area. I am not going to criticise Hitchcock but i do think that our other striker should play closer to Marcus and pick up on some of the many flick-ons that he wins. Could another of our players do the job that Haber does? No. They are not tall enough or strong enough to be a targetman. The acid test will be how we cope without him when he goes off to repr

[Timmy58]

Excellent comment and pretty accurate in all respects.

[MikeSB]

Well, Dario wouldn't have signed Haber and so if folks are moaning, they need to ask why? Its actually NOT the Crewe way to bump the ball up to a 'front' man who then does nothing else especially as most times the ball just comes back as nobody else there. Maybe those who watch the academy games know the answer what was the Crewe way and maybe the kids are taught that and when they get into the first team they are asked to play differently with the big hoof? The midfield do that the whole time, so is that what SD and JC tells them to do or play it on the floor?

Ask Dario and he will tell us in one word or a few words..."We can't PASS the ball" and so our very good teams used to PASS the ball to the midfield who then used to PASS the ball to one of the Strikers and so maybe that's why we are no longer the threat we used to be when most experts would sum us up as a team that can PASS the ball. I think we also lack speedy winger type players who can beat a man and run like hel

[Stealex]

Dario is no longer in charge of the first team and so it is pretty much irrelevant whether he approves of Davis' style or not. Maybe we don't have the players to PASS like we used to. There are also those of us that don't want us to PASS the ball in our own half because we're not good enough to keep it. I am not an advocate of the hoof ball tactic but sometimes it's necessary.

Marcus Haber plays for Crewe Alexandra and while he does he deserves our support. I suppose you thought it was a bad thing when he put us 1 up on Saturday? With supporters like you who needs an opposition?

[bigroof]

I like Haber! He's not the greatest of his type, but he's pretty fundamental to what Crewe have been trying to do since the Sheffield United game in the autumn - not always an orthodox 4-4-2, but always someone working close to him, and off him. When he's away with Canada they'll miss him, but if Dalla valle's fit he at least can receive the ball with his back to goal, but without the height obviously. Their only alternative will be Frazer Murdoch, a young lad who has had nothing but injury problems, but if he's still on the books next season, and ready to play, could be Haber's replacement next season - a fine talent, who worked well with Saunders in the under 18s the season before last.

[Crewe99]

Why do people get on at Haber? He is doing nothing different to what he did before we brought him in. He has never been a prolific goalscorer (he's scored more for Crewe than anyone else) but we knew this from the start. As for DG not signing him - it is true that he wouldn't have signed him but that would have been more to the fact that Haber wasn't a kid who he could 'mould' but a grown man who had 'bad habits'.

[AstonAlex]

And of course Dario never played with Futcher, Whitehurst, Deano, Hulse, etc up front. And didn't he once sign Jamie Moralee?

Don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of Gradi, but he didn't get it right all the time, didn't always sign kids he could mould and wasn't afraid to play a big lad up front when it suited.

[ShropshireAlex]

I looked at Kirk's bio on the official site and he will be 19 this year and has the same birthday day as me and so he will do just fine. ;)

Yes - Christmas Eve this year! (So far ahead I won't even wish you Happy Birthday yet Mike ;D )

Charlie Kirk's a second year scholar, not even on pro contract (till I hope now he's shown what he can do is already signed up.) He'll be very good - even as a free roaming Nick Powell type next year as some have said, but 18 years old just 2 and a half months ago is really quite young!