Thetownend.com

25% => Players => Topic started by: Don Rogers Shop on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 13:50:56



Title: Pook?
Post by: Don Rogers Shop on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 13:50:56
The last few weeks our defence has had no protection from the midfield,By all accounts he has performed well of late for the reserves and could maybe sit in front of the defence.

So is it time to recall pook? 


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: Bogus Dave on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 13:53:16
I've heard worse ideas. Maybe not quite yet


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: nevillew on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 13:54:52
We're always going to have this problem until McNamee learns some effective defensive duties (or is he beyond criticism ?)


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: DiV on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 14:08:11
no, if anyone need a chance back in midfield its Lee Peacock!

...but...I dont think thats in the gaffers plans, but would be mine...


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: Batch on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 14:23:56
I think Pook and Sturrock are further down the pecking order than I am. What's the story, are they working on loan deals for them or are they being frozen out to force their hand.

Not sure if DV was taking the piss, I thought he didn''t rate Peacock. But I genuinely think Peacock is as a better bet than Pook anyway.

We're always going to have this problem until McNamee learns some effective defensive duties (or is he beyond criticism ?)

No he isn't. Both he and JPM don't offer the protection they could. JPM pushes inside too much and leaves his man McNamee sometimes doesn't track back. We have some problem with the central partnership too mind, but I hope that will be resolved when Easton sharpens up.

All in my opinion of course.

I guess we will have to stifle a bit of creativity in order to tighten up. We can't keep conceding like we have been (even if most of them have been individual errors).


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: Don Rogers Shop on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 14:26:58
If you want protection then do not play mcnamee.I am afraid we cannot have it both ways if we want him to be creative we have to make do with how he is now as he will never become that player.

Jpm on the other hand has no exuse as he does not ever beat his man and should be able to offer more protection.


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: DiV on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 14:34:04
I was being serious Batch. I dont rate Peacock as a striker but I would have him in that midfield no problems. Infact he'd be one of the first names on my team sheet.


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: Batch on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 14:37:48
Fair enough. After paynters start to the season I'd agree Peacocks days as a striker are over (injury/suspensions aside). Like you say, I don't think Malpas sees it that way.


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: Samdy Gray on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 14:53:39
In order of preference:

Nalis > Easton > Timlin > Peacock > Allen > Pook

So in answer to the original question: No.


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: flammableBen on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 14:55:41
Do you not think Jack Smith could do a Gurney and move into the centre midfield?


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: Don Rogers Shop on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 14:57:19
No but i think he would be a very good option at right wing


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: Jamiesfuturewife on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 14:59:38
maybe we could put Pook and Blair in the Trade it "free to collector"?


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: Colin Todd on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 15:00:14
maybe we could put Pook and Blair in the Trade it "free to collector"?

I think the football equivalent of that has already happened


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: JOHNNY REEVES on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 15:05:26
the goals we let in saturday would still happen whoever was in midfield,ifil let the ball under his foot ,smith wanted to star in football gaffes and aljofree just wanted to get an assist.i cant see how the midfielders would have made a difference.our formation is a bit lopsided on the attacking front though.


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: fatbury on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 15:09:37
I agree with the suggestion of Pook in midfield ... I have always believed him without question better than Timlin and on his day better than Easton .. I believe at the very least a three man midfield of Easton, Pook and Nalis would serve us much better in the long run than what we have been playing with.



Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: Jamiesfuturewife on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 15:12:04
you weould pick up Pook if he was free to collector wouldnt you fatters?


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: ibelieveinmrreeves on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 15:20:22
No but i think he would be a very good option at right wing

Not a bad shout that, actually.


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: STFC_Gazza on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 15:22:03
I agree with the suggestion of Pook in midfield ... I have always believed him without question better than Timlin and on his day better than Easton

You clearly need your head examined mate!


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: flammableBen on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 15:23:10
I agree with the suggestion of Pook in midfield ... I have always believed him without question better than Timlin and on his day better than Easton .. I believe at the very least a three man midfield of Easton, Pook and Nalis would serve us much better in the long run than what we have been playing with.



Do you think Pook should be cooked up into a stew and then fed to all the other players so that they could absorb his abilities and skills?

They shouldn't eat his brain though.


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: yeo on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 15:24:33
he should definitly be given a shot but unfortunatly he would just be another target for the boo boys


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: Jamiesfuturewife on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 15:32:22
Do you think Pook should be cooked up into a stew and then fed to all the other players so that they could absorb his abilities and skills?

They shouldn't eat his brain though.

That the funniest thign I have EVER read  :rofl2:


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: flammableBen on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 15:33:43
Really???

You're just being sarcastic and mean aren't you?


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: Jamiesfuturewife on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 15:35:04
No really - thats funny stuff


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: Arriba on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 15:35:43
i'm with dv on this.if anything give the man who didn't like playing in midfield a go.
and fatbury fucking have a word with yourself will you.


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: flammableBen on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 15:42:04
No really - thats funny stuff

Mental note: JFW amused by cannibalism.


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: Jamiesfuturewife on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 15:43:36
maybe in my dream - It just looked like Chilli but in fact it was Pooky stew??

euuuwww I ate Pooky stew


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: Samdy Gray on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 15:51:43
Fatbury loves a spot of :fishing:

They shouldn't eat his brain though.

Monkey brain's are a delicassy in some countries.


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: flammableBen on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 15:54:39
Fatbury loves a spot of :fishing:

Monkey brain's are a delicassy in some countries.

It could spread Kuru.


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: reeves4england on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 16:01:32
I agree that Peacock could give us something in terms of fight and defensive cover in the middle at the moment. I think long-term I'd like to see Nails and Easton working as a pais, but for now we need to see some confidence coming back to the defence to stop us conceding so many, so Peacock is a good option.

I'm no Pook hater, I think he's alright, but he is not the answer to our current problem.


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: Iffy's Onion Bhaji on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 16:23:53
no, if anyone need a chance back in midfield its Lee Peacock!

...but...I dont think thats in the gaffers plans, but would be mine...

Agree there.


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: Simon Pieman on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 17:09:16
Perhaps Pook has a similar clause in his contract as he had last time, so keep him back for dire emergencies only in that case.


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: tans on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 17:38:26
I agree with the suggestion of Pook in midfield ... I have always believed him without question better than Timlin and on his day better than Easton .. I believe at the very least a three man midfield of Easton, Pook and Nalis would serve us much better in the long run than what we have been playing with.



You have to be joking surely?

Hes not in the team for a reason - ie shit.


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: chalkies_shorts on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 18:38:19
Agree there.

Disagree. From what I've seen so far he's so far off the pace that the game will just pass him by. The only thing he offers in midfield is an aerial presence. He's not done it so far in midfield and he ain't going to start doing it now. 


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: Rich Pullen on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 18:40:59
You have to be joking surely?

Hes not in the team for a reason - ie shit.

The fact that no one wants him speaks volumes.


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: herthab on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 18:41:55
I agree with the suggestion of Pook in midfield ... I have always believed him without question better than Timlin and on his day better than Easton .. I believe at the very least a three man midfield of Easton, Pook and Nalis would serve us much better in the long run than what we have been playing with.




I think that Pook isn't as bad as some people make out. But better than Timlin and Easton?

No fucking way


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: BANGKOK RED on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 18:52:48
Methinks that Fatters is angling.


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: Rich Pullen on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 19:00:53
Methinks that Fatters is angling.

Anyone else, sure. Not Fatbury.

;D


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: JOHNNY REEVES on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 19:02:03
pook is shit     fact


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: the goat on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 19:41:06
wise played him, sturrock played him malpass doesn't?


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: Bogus Dave on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 19:43:08
Thats it!! Pook holds the key for malpas


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: flammableBen on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 19:54:04
Holy shit!!! I hope he reads the TEF. That'll be a fucking revelation!


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: Spencer_White on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 20:12:24
Fucks sake.

Pook is pure relegation fodder in League 1. Same as Ricky Shakes, Gareth Whalley, Tony Thorpe, Jack Smith, Nicky Nicolau, Jamie Cureton (with a contract get out clause), and a pissed up Christian Roberts.


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: suttonred on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 20:25:30
Nice thought train, although you forgot smith and ifil!! As as much as we like them i think they need to be put in the same bracket.


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: tans on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 20:48:11
To be honest i didnt think Nicolau was that bad in the games he played.

I wonder how my mate Gareth Whalley is getting on these, hopefully unemployed...


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: Don Rogers Shop on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 21:25:12
Cant believe i got 3 pages out of this, like fuck pook is the answer and i cant believe some of you would still play him


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: flammableBen on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 21:27:55
I don't think many said they would.

3 pages is good going though. Don't think you would have got that many without fatbury's attention whoring at the end of page 1.


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: Batch on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 21:29:11
wise played him, sturrock played him malpass doesn't?

He found his level in league 2 ;)


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: Don Rogers Shop on Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 21:36:20
I relied heavily on fatburys input ben.


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: DiV on Thursday, September 18, 2008, 01:12:08
Fucks sake.

Pook is pure relegation fodder in League 1. Same as Ricky Shakes, Gareth Whalley, Tony Thorpe, Jack Smith, Nicky Nicolau, Jamie Cureton (with a contract get out clause), and a pissed up Christian Roberts.

Jack Smith?!?!?!??!


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: fatbury on Thursday, September 18, 2008, 07:38:49
I just hope he gets the chance to prove his doubters wrong one day


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: Spencer_White on Thursday, September 18, 2008, 17:30:59
Jack Smith?!?!?!??!

Couldnt get in the team last season, and that was a fairly average team.

He's OK. But the goals against table speaks for itself this season.


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: Don Rogers Shop on Thursday, September 18, 2008, 17:34:25
been are best defender spence imo but thats football.


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: Spencer_White on Thursday, September 18, 2008, 18:16:43
Yeah, but it isnt saying a lot this season.

Its like picking your favourite Brussel sprout at christmas.


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: Don Rogers Shop on Thursday, September 18, 2008, 18:25:51
Haha very true


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: leefer on Thursday, September 18, 2008, 19:20:26
Timlin hasnt impressed me in one match this season,Eastons done ok,Nalis will defo come good....Pook should be given a chance on the bench at least.


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: JPC82 on Wednesday, September 24, 2008, 16:08:15
Pooky seems to be the best player in the reserves every game, hes the best trainer at the club by a mile, he took the option of the extra year feeling confident Malpas would be out by Xmas and a new man in who he starts with a clean slate


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: Jamiesfuturewife on Wednesday, September 24, 2008, 16:12:26
you would say that about yourself! tee hee!


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: JPC82 on Wednesday, September 24, 2008, 16:13:59
you would say that about yourself! tee hee!

u been drinking today??  some of your posts have suprised me!!


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: Jamiesfuturewife on Wednesday, September 24, 2008, 16:16:48
why????????


No Ive not been drinking - not like that time when we had a l;ovely conversation ont he stairs in the apartments!!
 ;)


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: JPC82 on Wednesday, September 24, 2008, 16:24:46
oh when u said u wanted to dress up in the 19 Pook shirt and have things done to u


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: Peter Venkman on Wednesday, September 24, 2008, 16:25:34
Pooky seems to be the best player in the reserves every game, hes the best trainer at the club by a mile, he took the option of the extra year feeling confident Malpas would be out by Xmas and a new man in who he starts with a clean slate

Pook was certainly not the best play yesterday that fell to Marshall, but I can admit that your comment on Pook about waiting for MM to leave is pretty close to the truth.


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: Jamiesfuturewife on Wednesday, September 24, 2008, 16:26:33
euwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww

anyway have I guessed right who you are?


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: JPC82 on Wednesday, September 24, 2008, 16:28:30
Pook was certainly not the best play yesterday that fell to Marshall, but I can admit that your comment on Pook about waiting for MM to leave is pretty close to the truth.


thats fair enough mate i wasnt there last night so cant comment, but Dave has praised Pooky on numerous occasions this season


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: JPC82 on Wednesday, September 24, 2008, 16:29:05
euwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww

anyway have I guessed right who you are?

no :)


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: Peter Venkman on Wednesday, September 24, 2008, 16:33:17
JPC82 did you go to Dorcan school by any chance?

Sorry for being nosey, but I think I may know you...well know of you


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: JPC82 on Wednesday, September 24, 2008, 16:33:55
JPC82 did you go to Dorcan school by any chance?

Sorry for being nosey, but I think I may know you...well know of you

who do u think i am? PM me if u like


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: Spencer_White on Wednesday, September 24, 2008, 17:27:06
Pooky seems to be the best player in the reserves every game, hes the best trainer at the club by a mile, he took the option of the extra year feeling confident Malpas would be out by Xmas and a new man in who he starts with a clean slate

Pook's always looked good against half arsed opposition.

Boston United away and Crawley Town away pre season are the only times he's ever looked any good to me, and they were both non league sides.


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: Don Rogers Shop on Wednesday, September 24, 2008, 17:50:19
Agree spence but least he is still trying


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: Fred Elliot on Wednesday, September 24, 2008, 18:19:01
Still trying





Still shite


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: fatbury on Wednesday, September 24, 2008, 18:32:47
Pick him!


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: RobertT on Wednesday, September 24, 2008, 18:33:31
Pook should have become a right back I think.  One of the better positions to fit into if your talent is limited but you have a good engine.  He would also find it easier to stay in position.


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: Don Rogers Shop on Wednesday, September 24, 2008, 18:37:57
Can he worse than timlin andy?


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: RobertT on Wednesday, September 24, 2008, 18:40:02
Before Andy replies, yes, yes he can and he is.

The one player I have proper berated, during a pre match session when Wise used to have them out 3 hours before kick off.  he consistently failed to get the fucking ball off the ground in some corner drills.  Sorry, the boy may try, but he's lost in midfield, the only time I was ever impressed with him was when he came on in defence a couple of years ago as a sub.


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: Don Rogers Shop on Wednesday, September 24, 2008, 18:43:08
Fwiw its worth i agree but ,every other manager has rated him.


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: A Gent Orange on Wednesday, September 24, 2008, 18:46:34
He's too slow, small and slight for a modern full back either. Look at half full backs in the lower divisions these days. Most are terrible footballers (Yes Pook fits this part) but they are young (Okay this bit too) and incredibly able to get up and back and up and back again. They are also well over six foot, incredibly fit and and disciplined - if they are any good. 

Judging by what I've seen of he's lucky to still be a pro let alone thinking about getting back in the team.


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: axs on Wednesday, September 24, 2008, 18:48:22
pook? slight? not really.


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: JPC82 on Wednesday, September 24, 2008, 18:53:58
Pooky is a decent enough player, unfortunately for him we have Timlin Nalis & Easton who are better than him


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: A Gent Orange on Wednesday, September 24, 2008, 18:59:29
pook? slight? not really.

okay badly put but he is a world away from so many dominant full backs and centre halves.


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: Simon Pieman on Wednesday, September 24, 2008, 19:05:34
Pook is shit. How many years has he supposedly had potential for?


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: Peter Venkman on Wednesday, September 24, 2008, 19:07:07
I think I agree with Rob I think he would make a fair fullback, he can tackle, he has fair distribution, hes not slow but hes not pacey, I think he could make it as a fullback, maybe not in our team at the present but certainly a divison lower where his lack of pace wont be found out so quickly by fast skillfull wingers.


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: Spencer_White on Wednesday, September 24, 2008, 19:30:48
Fwiw its worth i agree but ,every other manager has rated him.

This is a bit of a hunch, but I think Pook is one of these players who looks good in training, but never quite cuts it in the real heat and battle. Hes always genuinely wanted to play for Swindon as well, which has helped prolong his career here. I actually do think he's a reasonably skilful player, ive seen him score decent goals. But the engine isnt there, no pace and he goes missing big time in hard games. Which renders him useless to be honest. He cant use the excuse of a lack of games, he's got more games than a young player in that position could ever hope for.

Chris Allen is slightly better than Pook at this stage. Hopefully he will improve, rather than stagnate like Pook did.



Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: Don Rogers Shop on Wednesday, September 24, 2008, 19:32:37
See i dont rate allen


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: Spencer_White on Wednesday, September 24, 2008, 19:42:13
Again, he's trying to cut it in the hardest position on the pitch.

I guess as the best player in the youth set up, he has to play there.


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: Peter Venkman on Wednesday, September 24, 2008, 20:00:12
See i dont rate allen

I dont think Allen will cut the mustard, I think him and Pook are very similar in ability, I suppose Allen has age on his side still though so with good coaching he MAY improve.


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: Iffy's Onion Bhaji on Wednesday, September 24, 2008, 20:04:32
How anyone can possibly rate Pook is beyond me.


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: DiV on Wednesday, September 24, 2008, 21:55:58
Pooky seems to be the best player in the reserves every game, hes the best trainer at the club by a mile, he took the option of the extra year feeling confident Malpas would be out by Xmas and a new man in who he starts with a clean slate

...he's still shit though.



Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: sonic youth on Wednesday, September 24, 2008, 22:48:52
wasn't hewlett always supposed to be one of the best players in training?

nuff sed


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: LucienSanchez on Wednesday, September 24, 2008, 22:50:39
Nnnnggghhhh... every time i remember Hewlett a little piece of me dies...


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: THE FLASH on Friday, September 26, 2008, 09:13:08
Gives the ball away all the time............bring him back, he would fit in well at the minute!


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: sharper on Tuesday, September 30, 2008, 15:59:16
On the Hewlett subect, prior to his bad knee injury he was a decent midfielder.  The less said about his return the better.  Similar story to Kieth O'Halleron, good midfielder who managed to break his leg twice...never the same again and ended up going back to Ireland to play football.

I think Pook could still do a job.  One of my biggest concerns with MM is that his has built a rod for his own back by stating clearly Pook and Sturrock are two players free to look elsewhere.  These players although not flash, work hard, always give 100% and get stuck in.  I hate to be critical of some in the side currently, but JP, to name one, has bottled so many tackles this season I have lost count.


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: Samdy Gray on Tuesday, September 30, 2008, 16:44:48
A see a trend here. Pook clearly needs a serious injury.


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: Arriba on Saturday, November 15, 2008, 20:08:47
the lad has been quality in the last 2 games i have seen him play.first half i thought he was our best player today.he faded for a while in the second but then was right back into it.
well pleased to see a local lad playing so well


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: reeves4england on Saturday, November 15, 2008, 20:31:49
I always thought people were harsh on Pook and thought he could do a job as a squad player. It soudns like he's been playing out of his skin lately though so fair play to the lad


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: dell boy on Saturday, November 15, 2008, 22:01:51
I always thought people were harsh on Pook and thought he could do a job as a squad player. It soudns like he's been playing out of his skin lately though so fair play to the lad
Four league games without a defeat, Pook has made a large contribution to the side, not only for his battling qualities but also his creative vision.


Title: Re: Pook?
Post by: fatbury on Saturday, November 15, 2008, 23:47:37
another top performance from him again today