|
|
Post by Jesus on Sept 14, 2007 11:05:31 GMT 10
I think the best thing is a roof over bay 16 by far. Would send the noise back to the other bays
|
|
|
|
Post by brett on Sept 14, 2007 11:14:24 GMT 10
My family and I are 'die-hards' who pay 'good money' for their half way seats. I chose to move there after the CWC not to get away from the 'atmosphere' but to get closer to the action. These old eyes aren't what they used to be. I won't get into whether the 'Marinators' should move - that is a matter for those who sit in Bay 16 - but I would love to see some 'travelling marinators' to educate the other bays. Don't take my post the wrong way, I was simply pre-empting what I see as inevitable negative feedback if we were to theoretically move to half way. While there would be people like your good self who would probably be glad to have their cake (view) and eat it too (marinate), judging by a lot of feedback we get about the Marinators general reputation, the majority may well be screaming, running in the opposite direction and two hands over their kid's eyes/ears at first sight of people standing, twirling scarves, and, McKinna forbid, singing songs of support for their team. Basically, I didn't mean to offend. But it's a big fat IMHO that most people on half way wouldn't welcome us to that area, citing the things you quoted me on as to why we should stay out of their way. |
|
|
|
Post by bikinigirl on Sept 14, 2007 12:02:29 GMT 10
. i know this is a bit off topic (apparently) - but how about our shape?
. i am coming around to the back 4 idea - the way we are playing
. in effect we are playing with a back 3 a lot of the time as ossie or heff go on raids but their mobility allows consolidating to a back 4 in defensive situations - best of both worlds?
. this may partly be dictated by the reason for suggesting a back 3 in the first place (too many specialist CBs & shortage of specialist L&RBs)
. heff was always going to allow this to happen (as V1) but ossie seems to be a bit of a revelation and the flow-on effect has been a success
|
|
|
|
Post by brett on Sept 14, 2007 12:17:51 GMT 10
. i know this is a bit off topic (apparently) - but how about our shape? . i am coming around to the back 4 idea - the way we are playing . in effect we are playing with a back 3 a lot of the time as ossie or heff go on raids but their mobility allows consolidating to a back 4 in defensive situations - best of both worlds? . this may partly be dictated by the reason for suggesting a back 3 in the first place (too many specialist CBs & shortage of specialist L&RBs) . heff was always going to allow this to happen (as V1) but ossie seems to be a bit of a revelation and the flow-on effect has been a success In games like the QLD one, I still think a back three would have its plusses. Not only did we have wide midfielders (Kwas and Gumps) drifting narrow and exposing us wide, we had our back four pinned in our own area. A back three could have retreated centrally, with wingbacks stemming the supply from their flanks, but also providing us with an outlet to come away with the ball other than long balls out to Sash and Nik who rarely had much luck keeping possession. |
|
|
|
Post by bikinigirl on Sept 14, 2007 12:31:28 GMT 10
. brett i think i still agree
. but we have been effective - 3 wins & 3 clean sheets and a goal difference we have not seen before
. i will not mention the 'I' word but it would be interesting to see if this changed things
|
|
|
|
Post by Foriegnmariner on Sept 14, 2007 23:24:11 GMT 10
I think we need to solitify the numbers and get rid of the non-marinator fans in the Bay before we expand out. I think after maybe during next season we expand out into a different part of the stadium every match.
|
|
|
|
Post by roylaw on Sept 15, 2007 10:19:12 GMT 10
Sorry to upset the Tommy fans but I will be astonished if his contract is renewed next season. He contributed almost nothing last year, his ability to cross the ball being akin to Kwasnik's (last year's model) ability to shoot and this year he is making just cameo appearances. What happens when Owens begins to make his mark? Where will TP be then? Were we serious about Elrich? I also think Gumprecht's contract won't be renewed but I don't know when it runs out.
|
|
|
|
Post by brett on Sept 15, 2007 10:48:58 GMT 10
Sorry to upset the Tommy fans but I will be astonished if his contract is renewed next season. He contributed almost nothing last year, his ability to cross the ball being akin to Kwasnik's (last year's model) ability to shoot and this year he is making just cameo appearances. What happens when Owens begins to make his mark? Where will TP be then? Were we serious about Elrich? I also think Gumprecht's contract won't be renewed but I don't know when it runs out. I think both their contracts are up at the end of this season? It would be a damn shame if Tommy wasn't given the chance to show what he can do. |
|
|
|
Post by Pete on Sept 15, 2007 11:35:40 GMT 10
Pete - this is an open forum and people can have an opinion Regarding a move in bays, it's not gonna happen, we will always be bay 16 and it's surrounding bays. Thanx DJ, knew that already. But I knew I was going to post a longish post to a topic raised within this thread that was off topic - and off topic posts can be taken to task by the Mods (altho our Mods are fairly lenient). Wanted to be polite about making my comments, given that it was off topic to the Thread's subject. Comments like "It's not gonna happen", while your own opinion, assert a definitive approach to the issue. I'm glad you are so confident that this issue will remain as is and not change. Always expect the unexpected, I reckon. The Mariners have had a change of folks at board level, they may form views over time that could affect the status quo. Who knows what the future brings? |
|
