Swindon Town v Crewe Alexandra Official Matchday Thread

[Pax Romana]

seriously? you can't see how it could damage the player?

"damage the player?" it's you who surely can't be serious?  Any professional sportsman who is "damaged" by being subbed when they don't want to be needs to get a grip.

Yes, for sure good man management is about respecting people but it's not about pandering to them.  If someone is consciously not following your instructions then it's essential that they and everyone around them see that it won't be tolerated.  As I understand it that was Flitcroft's intention.

You snowflake millennials are all the same 

[Batch]

millennial  - if only!

damage the relationship with the player then... and yes it depends how he takes it.  Not like we've not seen it happen before. Hopefully he has more sense.

[Lady Magpie]

52,851 includes 171 away fans.

Thanks for the wrong answer, The County Ground wouldn't hold 52,851. As a person that was born and bred in Swindon and taken to watch Swindon regularly, perhaps a sensible answer could be given

Thanks.

[Munichred]

Any idea what the red card was for?

[pauld]

"damage the player?" it's you who surely can't be serious?  Any professional sportsman who is "damaged" by being subbed when they don't want to be needs to get a grip.

Yes, for sure good man management is about respecting people but it's not about pandering to them.  If someone is consciously not following your instructions then it's essential that they and everyone around them see that it won't be tolerated.  As I understand it that was Flitcroft's intention.

So tear a strip off him at half time in the dressing room, that shows the player and the group that the behaviour won't be tolerated and adds an element of peer group humiliation (which presumably was also the intent). But to make the sub 3-4 minutes before half time seems to add an unnecessary element of public humiliation. Taken together with the way he's hung Vigoroux out to dry, it does look like poor man management. He may well have his reasons, he may well be justified in wanting to sanction either or both players but the purpose of such sanctions is to reset the relationship and enable it to be rebuilt, hopefully stronger. Whereas Flitcroft just seems to burn his bridges publicly to prove who's the bigger man. And in both instances, with players who the club had hoped to make a return on. So not very good asset management either.

[OOH! SHAUN TAYLOR]

Thanks for the wrong answer, The County Ground wouldn't hold 52,851. As a person that was born and bred in Swindon and taken to watch Swindon regularly, perhaps a sensible answer could be given

Thanks.

That information does not seem to be available from any of the usual outlets for some reason

[REDBUCK]

Any idea what the red card was for?

C5 highlights say it was a second yellow for the wild take out in the lead up to our third goal.

[chalkies_shorts]

The first yellow for their no 3 was for time wasting. A total joke of a yellow as it was the no 20 fucking around. Threw him the ball and then the no 3 gets booked. 8 yellows and1 red and no really bad challenges.

[Munichred]

The first yellow for their no 3 was for time wasting. A total joke of a yellow as it was the no 20 fucking around. Threw him the ball and then the no 3 gets booked. 8 yellows and1 red and no really bad challenges.

Thanks. I was watching on ifollow but didn't spot the second yellow foul. Yes, the wrong player booked for time wasting.

[pauld]

The first yellow for their no 3 was for time wasting. A total joke of a yellow as it was the no 20 fucking around. Threw him the ball and then the no 3 gets booked. 8 yellows and1 red and no really bad challenges.

Think the ref was sponsored by Clintons tbh

[The Artist Formerly Known as Audrey]

The first yellow for their no 3 was for time wasting. A total joke of a yellow as it was the no 20 fucking around. Threw him the ball and then the no 3 gets booked. 8 yellows and1 red and no really bad challenges.

Spot on about their No. 20 who should have been booked. Would have been his second yellow, too, so maybe that explains why the ref booked the other fella.

[Posh Red]

Thanks for the wrong answer, The County Ground wouldn't hold 52,851. As a person that was born and bred in Swindon and taken to watch Swindon regularly, perhaps a sensible answer could be given

Thanks.

Did they announce the crowd?

It didn't look many more than about 6,000 with about 200 Crewe fans there at most.

No crowd figure announced, or reported on the website.

I blame Power, even though he was in Australia with Tactics Tim.


FWIW my feelings are.
Wait til HT to sub Woolery, nothing good can come of trying to humiliate one of your better players.

Crewe did us a huge favour of stop attacking after 3-1, had they have continued they would probably have scored more goals.

Lancashire looks poor, but Robertson is worse.

Dunne is a very limited footballer, has very little club what to do with the ball, but he probably saved two goals in the first half with a clearance off the line & a block of a shot from inside the box before they made it 2-1.

[Batch]

ok, so the official attendance yesterday is: sparce.

reckon they don't announce < 6k? looked like it could be that low to me

[singingiiiffy]

ok, so the official attendance yesterday is: sparce.

reckon they don't announce < 6k? looked like it could be that low to me

Attendance was 5427 im quite sure. They announced it in hospitality and said they didn't over the tannoy because it was so low. Which it was. Hell of a game to miss!

[Batch]

thanks. it was a few less at 3-1 too! like you say, hell of a game.

Still doesn't feel like this year's 'Northampton' though. The game where you think this is a nailed on good year. Guess it's because we aren't dominating and look vulnerable at the back.

Richards and Banks look like good signings to me though.