Bluepeter9 5,167 Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 He's bleating on about how it'll take more time for Fleck to settle in but every fucking interview we read with the players goes on about how he's spent so much time with them already and how he feels like a part of the team. So is it one or the other? No manager, no where, plays a 17 year old, no matter how good, nor how strong, week in week out. Not Wegner or Ferguson, not with Rooney, Wilcott, Owen, Giggs nor Ronaldo - and just think of the SLAGGING you would give Smith if Fleck was burnt out because Smith heeded your advice and played him every week - you'd slaughter him. Why not just trust him as manager? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gizmico1986 0 Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 He's bleating on about how it'll take more time for Fleck to settle in but every fucking interview we read with the players goes on about how he's spent so much time with them already and how he feels like a part of the team. So is it one or the other? No manager, no where, plays a 17 year old, no matter how good, nor how strong, week in week out. Not Wegner or Ferguson, not with Rooney, Wilcott, Owen, Giggs nor Ronaldo - and just think of the SLAGGING you would give Smith if Fleck was burnt out because Smith heeded your advice and played him every week - you'd slaughter him. Why not just trust him as manager? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMWWBK 0 Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 He is not a kid anymore, soon to be 18 and he should be playing reguarly at that stage. rooney was used as a sub for nearly all the time he was at everton No he wasn't. Wayne Rooney had made almost 50 starts for Everton by the time his Euro 2004 calling card came around. If Fleck isnt performing or isn't suited to a tactical system (even though we don't have any tactical systems), then sure, drop him. However, to be thinking about burn out at the current time is a bit confusing. You only have to look to Hamilton where young McCarthy is still easing through the majority of his games. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMWWBK 0 Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 He's bleating on about how it'll take more time for Fleck to settle in but every fucking interview we read with the players goes on about how he's spent so much time with them already and how he feels like a part of the team. So is it one or the other? No manager, no where, plays a 17 year old, no matter how good, nor how strong, week in week out. Not Wegner or Ferguson, not with Rooney, Wilcott, Owen, Giggs nor Ronaldo - and just think of the SLAGGING you would give Smith if Fleck was burnt out because Smith heeded your advice and played him every week - you'd slaughter him. Why not just trust him as manager? This isn't the EPL we're discussing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeneralCartmanLee 313 Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 He's bleating on about how it'll take more time for Fleck to settle in but every fucking interview we read with the players goes on about how he's spent so much time with them already and how he feels like a part of the team. So is it one or the other? No manager, no where, plays a 17 year old, no matter how good, nor how strong, week in week out. Not Wegner or Ferguson, not with Rooney, Wilcott, Owen, Giggs nor Ronaldo - and just think of the SLAGGING you would give Smith if Fleck was burnt out because Smith heeded your advice and played him every week - you'd slaughter him. Why not just trust him as manager? This isn't the EPL we're discussing. Indeed it isn’t…our league is very physically demanding though…… Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMWWBK 0 Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 He's bleating on about how it'll take more time for Fleck to settle in but every fucking interview we read with the players goes on about how he's spent so much time with them already and how he feels like a part of the team. So is it one or the other? No manager, no where, plays a 17 year old, no matter how good, nor how strong, week in week out. Not Wegner or Ferguson, not with Rooney, Wilcott, Owen, Giggs nor Ronaldo - and just think of the SLAGGING you would give Smith if Fleck was burnt out because Smith heeded your advice and played him every week - you'd slaughter him. Why not just trust him as manager? This isn't the EPL we're discussing. Indeed it isn’t…our league is very physically demanding though…… The physicalities of the league will pose no danger to Fleck, nor will the playing standard of it. If anything is going to stop him it's going to be the Glasgow nightlife and weither Smith can really influence him when it comes to that, i'm not so sure. For the moment he should just be left to get on with his football. He's clearly outgrown the reserve league. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeneralCartmanLee 313 Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 nor will the playing standard of it. If anything is going to stop him it's going to be the Glasgow nightlife and weither Smith can really influence him when it comes to that, i'm not so sure. Agreed…when he gets used to it….it’s a totally different game than what he has been used to so far, with better players. From the little I have seen he has the ability to succeed, but in Scotland it’s not just about ability. Walter will do well to shield him until he adapts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wreckedroy 33 Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 Entirely sensible statement, again obviously meant to dampen the fans expectations a little. And he does say he won't be dropped for the semi or even shortly, so there's every chance he'll play against both Dundee Utd and sellick. I don't see anything to get too down-hearted about, but I'm sure those with an anti-Smith agenda will find whatever they wish to find. It's the whole "He'll play a few games then get left out for a few games" bit that gets me. It's so blaise. Does that mean that Fleck will get left out after x number of games regardless of his performances? Surely something along the lines of "If John keeps up his level of performance then he'll be heavily in our plans for the rest of the season" would be far better. How would you feel if you were John Fleck reading that you're going to get left out for no apparent reason after a set number of games? He gives a reason. “He’s just 17 and will play a few games, but he’ll go out for a few games to get a rest." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
papaguy51 912 Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 A rest? How does Fleck need a rest after 120 minutes when Davie Weir, at almost 40, can play two full seasons without one? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShootSpeedKillLight 0 Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 There's definitely something odd about a manager who'll have a 38 year old start 60 games a season (and play 90 minutes for the vast majority of them) but won't have a 17 year old start 3 in a row. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rfc_no1fan 13 Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 A rest? How does Fleck need a rest after 120 minutes when Davie Weir, at almost 40, can play two full seasons without one? Dave Weir doesnt need to worry about improving and reaching his potential He also doesnt need to worry about burn out early in his career Also, hes a defender, so its a poor comparison Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
papaguy51 912 Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 A rest? How does Fleck need a rest after 120 minutes when Davie Weir, at almost 40, can play two full seasons without one? Dave Weir doesnt need to worry about improving and reaching his potential He also doesnt need to worry about burn out early in his career Also, hes a defender, so its a poor comparison I can see why sitting on the bench will help Fleck improve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rfc_no1fan 13 Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 A rest? How does Fleck need a rest after 120 minutes when Davie Weir, at almost 40, can play two full seasons without one? Dave Weir doesnt need to worry about improving and reaching his potential He also doesnt need to worry about burn out early in his career Also, hes a defender, so its a poor comparison I can see why sitting on the bench will help Fleck improve He came on. Thats another game under the belt He will have been disappointed to be left out today, but I can guarantee you that Fleck will be in at training early tomorrow and will do everything he can to show Walter he is the man for Saturdays game. I know you dont agree, but its the best way to speed up his development. This process should have been started earlier though. The only way it wont work is if Walter doesnt play him at all over a period of time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
disgruntled_bear 157 Posted January 27, 2009 Author Share Posted January 27, 2009 Although i would love for Fleck to play every game, i can see the logic behind benching him tonight. Just a wee reminder to keep his feet on the ground. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
papaguy51 912 Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 A rest? How does Fleck need a rest after 120 minutes when Davie Weir, at almost 40, can play two full seasons without one? Dave Weir doesnt need to worry about improving and reaching his potential He also doesnt need to worry about burn out early in his career Also, hes a defender, so its a poor comparison I can see why sitting on the bench will help Fleck improve He came on. Thats another game under the belt He will have been disappointed to be left out today, but I can guarantee you that Fleck will be in at training early tomorrow and will do everything he can to show Walter he is the man for Saturdays game. I know you dont agree, but its the best way to speed up his development. This process should have been started earlier though. The only way it wont work is if Walter doesnt play him at all over a period of time. What people don't seem to be getting in this thread is that I think he should only be rested for the 'right' reasons. By this (and as I agreed with you earlier on) I mean rotating between him, Aaron and Naismith in order to give them all game time. If Fleck gets 'rested' for any big games for Adam or McCulloch, I simply don't see the point. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Revolt 44 Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 comes across as him bottling it to play him in the old firm charlie adam for the win Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orangeclement 572 Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 He is not a kid anymore, soon to be 18 and he should be playing reguarly at that stage. rooney was used as a sub for nearly all the time he was at everton No he wasn't. Wayne Rooney had made almost 50 starts for Everton by the time his Euro 2004 calling card came around. If Fleck isnt performing or isn't suited to a tactical system (even though we don't have any tactical systems), then sure, drop him. However, to be thinking about burn out at the current time is a bit confusing. You only have to look to Hamilton where young McCarthy is still easing through the majority of his games. didnt quite put my point across as i wanted i meant he was subbed in most games and moyes would drop him to save him from burnout. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts