Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

i was quite pleased, 1st round carling cup is never a big attraction imho.

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

I thought it was a good turnout last nught. 300 up on the last time Stanley played at home 1st round. Several Championship clubs with sub 5,000 gates. It's not a great competition for attracting crowds

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

:) Must addmit i was pleasantly surprised by the attendances, still think it was over priced thou:)

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

I was impressed with some of the new players especially first half, thought Craney was poor though. Seeing Ryan in opposition colours left me feeling a little flat and it all felt a bit like a hangover to me after the way last season ended. Hopefully Saturday will be a bit of a pick up!

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

Can't argue with that. The first couple of rounds at least should be no more than a tenner maximium. The sponsors should contribute more. I think the only prize money in the Carling Cup is for the finalists. Pretty poor sponsorship package by todays standards

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

Can't say that I have seen much of young Taylor so perhaps you can explain why he should have been brought on much earlier. How good is he and how many times have you seen him play ?

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

1. Craney needed to be replaced - he was slow in both thought and action. Guthrie received no support whatsoever from him, nor did Craney drop back sufficiently to help in defence. His contribution to the game was nil.

2. Given the playing positions of the subs available, Taylor seemed to be the only possibility. It could have been an ideal opportunity for a youngster to shine. Guthrie had proved that the Scunthorpe defenders could not cope with speed and, just by looking at him, I would guess that Taylor would be pretty quick. I have never seen him play; I have no idea how good he is. But .... there was no way he could have been worse than Craney.

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

Id rather have you put your boots on Jeff than Craney to be honest !

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

my reckoning guthrie would benefit big time if coley played 2 strikers, at least at home.

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

Ironically Scunthorpe home to Newcastle next round

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

Disagree about Craney.Thought he linked play well for 45 minutes,chances were created and on another day we could have been three up.
The problem is hes not 100% fit,he just has to put the effort in and the fitness will come.
Although he missed some good chances,I thought Gutherie worked hard,its just his running style that some may think hes going through the motions!!,I am beginning to think hes quicker that i first thought.
Question for lancs dave ---thought the young burnley lad (wes?) may have been available on loan,have you heard anything ???

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

Not heard anything from Stanley end, just info from somebody else that it's not altogether ruled out. :)

No idea what the issues are though.

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

I suspect you will be in a minority in thinking that Craney linked play well for 45 minutes.

But the quote above is part true and part nonsense. It is true he is not 100% fit - but he was not 100% fit when he arrived. Nothing has changed. If he is to put the effort in before the fitness comes, then please let that effort be on the training ground or in the gym. Not while he is taking up a place in the first team for 90 minutes.

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

Revived red,i did mean on the training paddock,although theres no substitue for match fitness.He would still be in my starting eleven,based on the sub bench.
You cant deny the amount of chances created and football played in the first period.
I still think when we go long from the keeper it doesnt suit our style(unlike stevenage) and thats what happened and the wheels fell off

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

My view is perhaps they went long cos they were knackered? n no fresh legs didn't help.