• We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies from this website. Read more here

Crawley v Exeter City match day thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

andrew p long

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Jan 6, 2006
Messages
12,542
Location
Hagley, Stourbridge
I think in fairness to MT, his answer about Ben Seymour was in response to a question (which Craig may now regret the phrasing of)

'Ben Seymour *sacrificed* again?'

It invited MT to explain why Seymour didn't play more yesterday and could also have been taken as implying that MT had a vendetta against Seymour.

So MT's answer was overly defensive and in terms which I suspect he will regret too. And in his next interview will be at pains to seek to rectify
 

Legohead

Banned
Joined
Jan 28, 2016
Messages
6,762
Not comparable in any way whatsoever. Anyone can do what you did, not anyone can be a professional footballer (in terms of fitness).
I would agree with that generally, but we are talking about a player who is of such a young age and who has barely played. In addition, players train and keep fit so they are match ready for selection at any time. Unless they are recovering from injury or illness. Either Seymour is not fit in the first place which would maybe indicate he's not training properly or as Matt is asking, or Matt isn't training him properly and thus he's not as fit as he could be. I don't know. I'm just asking the question as to why Seymour isn't fit because it makes no sense.

Either way, it's not about comparing my youth boozing exploits with a professional footballer's ability to run about a bit for 90 minutes. It's about questioning why Seymour is tired because there is no reason from a footballing perspective why he should be.
 

IndoMike

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
May 9, 2010
Messages
34,044
Location
Touring Central Java...
I heard Taylor nicked one of Seymour's cheeseburgers on Tuesday evening.
Perleeease.....Surely it would have been a couple of chips or a hunk of fish...🙄
 

east_mid

Well-known Exeweb poster
Joined
May 14, 2007
Messages
7,298
Location
Nottingham
I think Matt was saving Seymour for the Tuesday match instead of draining his energy levels on a lost cause that may have negatively impacted on the next game.Dont know why he came up with that rubbish excuse.
 

Legohead

Banned
Joined
Jan 28, 2016
Messages
6,762
I think in fairness to MT, his answer about Ben Seymour was in response to a question (which Craig may now regret the phrasing of)

'Ben Seymour *sacrificed* again?'

It invited MT to explain why Seymour didn't play more yesterday and could also have been taken as implying that MT had a vendetta against Seymour.

So MT's answer was overly defensive and in terms which I suspect he will regret too. And in his next interview will be at pains to seek to rectify
I think your last sentence could provide the answer to the conspiracy theory. Perhaps it is simply a case of inappropriate choices of words and phrases.

For example, instead of saying that the goal from Seymour was a long time coming, MT could have reframed the comment to say something like we're all delighted for the lad that he's got off the mark and he'll take great confidence from that going forward. Instead of it sounding like better late than never.

You are right Andrew. I did find the comments about Seymour defensive, dismissive and negative when the opportunities were there to encourage and praise. Probably just semantics on my part.
 

John William

Well-known Exeweb poster
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
9,914
Location
Undisclosed
I did find the comments about Seymour defensive, dismissive and negative when the opportunities were there to encourage and praise. Probably just semantics on my part.
Taylor has rightly been praised in earlier times for being upfront and uncomplicated, but this can become tactless and and lacking understanding. As our American cousins would say. "the buck stops here"

Wrong selection
Wrong formation
Wrong tactics
Wrong substitutes

are not the players' fault
 

red1

Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2008
Messages
336
Interesting stuff re: Taylor saying Seymour playing tired/squad being tired and having to freshen things up each game etc.. Why is it then, that when Bowman is available, he plays EVERY game ?? I personally think that Bowman works as hard as, if not harder than any other player when on the pitch. How come he doesnt get "rotated" ?
 

Red Devon

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Apr 1, 2004
Messages
11,082
Amongst all the disappointment it is worth remembering that prior to Parkes moment of madness we didn't look like conceding.
Debatable they had a chance from 12 yards with only Andresson to beat which really should have been put away...they also had the best chance in the first half that flew just wide of the post which Jokull could only look at.
 

IndoMike

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
May 9, 2010
Messages
34,044
Location
Touring Central Java...
I think your last sentence could provide the answer to the conspiracy theory. Perhaps it is simply a case of inappropriate choices of words and phrases.

For example, instead of saying that the goal from Seymour was a long time coming, MT could have reframed the comment to say something like we're all delighted for the lad that he's got off the mark and he'll take great confidence from that going forward. Instead of it sounding like better late than never.

You are right Andrew. I did find the comments about Seymour defensive, dismissive and negative when the opportunities were there to encourage and praise. Probably just semantics on my part.
You don't often get gushing praise from Northerners.
But MT was talking in riddles a bit yesterday. Why doesn't he let some of his backroom staff do the interviews occasionally? Or even match reactions from a player..
 

Rosencrantz

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Jul 12, 2019
Messages
10,120
Location
Tiverton
I think you can get into being over analytical of everything that a manager says and look for meanings that are not there or meant. Matt saying "long time coming" could just as easily have been more to say Ben's reward (of a league goal) was a long time coming in terms of the hard work he puts in on the training ground and promise he shows. After all if Matt rated Ben the same as some on here, he would have been out of the door by now, at least on loan.

As to fitness, there is general fitness and then there is match fitness. And modern thinking and analysis into fitness and performance levels is a mile away from all those "in my day" anecdotes. They are all wearing monitors with the stats downloaded and analysed. I'm sure Ben could have ran around a lot to some degree for 90 minutes. But the coaching staff would have known his levels coming off his first 90 minutes for ages.

With a constant two games a week, a lot of travelling time, staying overnight, I doubt the squad has had a normal training week this year. Picking your best eleven every match becomes more than subjective. The squad has to be managed in terms that will get the squad in the best shape throughout the season. How often do we see that the squad who are finishing strongly at the right time go up? So it's more a balancing judgement to keep in touch but keep energy levels up.

Jake Taylor and Joel Randall have both just come back from muscle injuries that come from fatigue, particularly for Joel. Williams has a stress fracture which is a wear and tear injury. Professional sport fitness is a long way from general fitness and we have a professional strength and conditioning coach advising Matt on that side of it. Although Matt himself has a background in fitness himself from his university days as well so is probably very aware and qualified to speak about all things fitness.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top