It's OK. You can pick Friend, Edwards and Collins ahead of the other three if you think that's what's best for the team.
I just wanted to clarify your thinking. Personally I wouldn't, but I know where you stand on the team selection now. 2009/2/18 Marcus Chantry <marcus.chan...@macquarie.com> > My insight is pretty simple: > > If that very team selection HAMMERED Brum previously, and Brum are our > nearest promotion threat (as quoted by you), then they are more than capable > of doing the same against all of the other lesser teams. The current team > selection certainly don't seem capable of doing that so why should they > remain in the team, with the exception of Berra who has only played two > games. > > This is a results game and the team selection that you seem to despise with > such passion is the very same team that got the result and gave you your > great optimism by hammering Birmingham. Give me a reason why they shouldn't > play? Can't get any more simple than that Steve. > > ------------------------------ > *From:* nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswol...@googlegroups.com] *On > Behalf Of *Steven Millward > *Sent:* Wednesday, 18 February 2009 1:38 PM > > *To:* nswolves@googlegroups.com > *Subject:* [NSWolves] Re: Where are you Steve? [sec=unclassified] > > You're suggesting selecting: > > Dave Edwards over Foley (who is thought to be the player of the season and > almost always has a good game) > George Friend over Jarvis > Collins over Berra (and you've slagged off Collins before. He's the most > hated player amongst Wolves fans from what I gather). > > PLEASE! Explain the logic of those choices. I hope it's a good > explanation because your credibility is on the line. And don't go turning > to another line of argument because I've got you well and truly pinned down > here. Just explain why those three selections should be made. > > We await your insight. > > 2009/2/18 Marcus Chantry <marcus.chan...@macquarie.com> > >> If those players are the ones that got us the result why shouldn't they be >> selected ahead of the favourites or the players that make sense to you? The >> favourites have done f all to suggest they should retain their places. Put >> the lads in who are hungry to prove themselves. >> >> ------------------------------ >> *From*: nswolves@googlegroups.com >> *To*: nswolves@googlegroups.com >> *Sent*: Wed Feb 18 09:54:15 2009 >> >> *Subject*: [NSWolves] Re: Where are you Steve? [sec=unclassified] >> >> Interesting point Lee. This is the team that played that Birmingham >> match. So you are suggesting that Mick should play this team rather than >> some of his "favourites"? >> >> Therefore you mean that we should play: >> >> Dave Edwards instead of his "favourite" Foley at right back >> George Friend on the left wing rather than his "favourite" Jarvis >> Collins instead of his "new favourite" Berra in central defence >> >> That doesn't make a lot of sense to me. >> >> Wayne Hennessey, >> Neill Collins, >> Dave Edwards, >> Richard Stearman, >> Michael Kightly, >> Karl Henry, >> Andy Keogh, >> Stephen Ward, >> David Jones, >> Sam Vokes (Chris Iwelumo 78), >> George Friend. >> >> >> >> 2009/2/18 Morris, Lee SGT <lee.mor...@defence.gov.au> >> >>> We hammered Brum with a team very different to MM's favoured eleven. He >>> went straight back to his favourites and the results speak for themselves. I >>> don't think that game was a good indicator. >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> *From:* nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswol...@googlegroups.com] *On >>> Behalf Of *Steven Millward >>> *Sent:* Tuesday, 17 February 2009 20:01 >>> *To:* nswolves@googlegroups.com >>> *Subject:* [NSWolves] Re: Where are you Steve? [sec=unclassified] >>> >>> Have you seen anything in the last month/2 months to suggest we are on >>> our way to improving our current predicament? >>> >>> *Yes, we hammered our promotion rivals Birmingham in the cup in their >>> own back yard. That was about a month ago. If they are our only >>> competition for second spot then I'm not too worried.* >>> >>> >>> 2009/2/17 Marcus Chantry <marcus.chan...@macquarie.com> >>> >>>> "This brings me back to my original point. When Wolves are playing >>>> well, you expect their form to turn bad. When Wolves are playing bad you >>>> expect their form to stay bad." >>>> >>>> When we *were* playing well I don't recall saying anything to suggest >>>> that I expected our form to suddenly turn bad. I do remember saying >>>> however >>>> that there were numerous games leading up to our current poor form where we >>>> played badly but still managed to get points. Since that point we have >>>> done >>>> stuff all to show that we have the ability to improve our chances of >>>> promotion (SEB's hattrick aside). If we were showing glimpses of >>>> brilliance >>>> or we were continually loosing because of bad luck/ bad decisions then I >>>> would expect our luck to change and our form to improve. But all of the >>>> reports, the highlights, the internet commentary all make it abundantly >>>> clear that we do not even look like reversing our poor form. >>>> >>>> Have you seen anything in the last month/2 months to suggest we are on >>>> our way to improving our current predicament? If not, how can anyone >>>> reasonably expect our current form to do anything other than stay bad? >>>> >>>> The information contained in this email is confidential. If you are not >>>> the intended recipient, you may not disclose or use the information in this >>>> email in any way and should destroy any copies. Macquarie does not >>>> guarantee >>>> the integrity of any emails or attached files. The views or opinions >>>> expressed are the author's own and may not reflect the views or opinions of >>>> Macquarie. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Pig's pudding - it's a mon's dinner aer kid -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
