Samuel Update (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter LJC_CCFC
- Start date
stupot07
Well-Known Member
Agreed. Will be a massive blow for us if true.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
georgehudson
Well-Known Member
bartley wasn't even booked for the challenge, & was allowed to continue his version of sly thuggery for the rest of the game, yet again another example of below standard refereeing
Terry Gibson's perm
Well-Known Member
We need a bit more thuggery in our side, the ref was poor but so is the league we are in.
Otis
Well-Known Member
It was dreadful refereeing.
the most blatant of the lot was the one where their player made made the crudest of shoulder charges and quite deliberately took our player out. That was a nailed on yellow card all night long, but I don't think the ref even had a word with him.
The Samuel challenge was very crude too.
skybluepm2
Well-Known Member
I just posted a similar comment on the CT article. Yet 5 minutes later, Nouble was booked for a challenge which wasnt even half as bad. Referees seem untouchable no matter how poorly they perform.
SkyBlue_Bear83
Well-Known Member
Luckily the ref was poor, I thought that should have been a penalty when Pennington brought Henderson down.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
That was good defending I thought
stupot07
Well-Known Member
I thought He stumbled, lost his balance then fell on Hendersons legs. Seen them given, we'd have been screaming for it if it was in the other penalty area.
Was a bizarre ref, didn't let his linesmen make any decisions.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
rupert_bear
Well-Known Member
With no Sammuel Mowbray will have to alter his tactics, we have that Jackson bloke or the German, so likely to have to lump it to the Hun and hope at the very least he can head it because he certainly can't fucking kick it !!
Speedies_Chips
Well-Known Member
Pete in Portugal
Well-Known Member
Or does anyone think Reda could play as a striker? The defence could do with bolstering I know, but I suspect our attack is even weaker than our defence with Samuel and Tudgay missing. What do you reckon?
SkyBlue_Bear83
Well-Known Member
We're dooooooommmmmmeeeeeddddd!
skybluepm2
Well-Known Member
I'm not so sure although we do know he's good at taking penalties..
sw88
Chief Commentator!
Only paid off at Bradford through desperation when we threw him up top, but went on to cost us the points. He wouldn't last 90 up top. He struggles lasting 90 at the back!
Pete in Portugal
Well-Known Member
Well I think his fitness / injury proneness is a big concern wherever he plays. At least he'd be less likely to concede a penalty if he was playing up front. I'm not sure that Nouble or Odelusi last 90mins in most matches. The problem is that the only real alternative is to play Jackson. Frankly neither would fill me with much confidence.
johnwillomagic
Well-Known Member
How long is Tudguy out for - need him back - otherwise though need Jackson to step up to plate.
With this injury almost screaming out for us to revert back to 4-4-2 with Nouble and either Tudguy or Jackson up top to begin with.
With this injury almost screaming out for us to revert back to 4-4-2 with Nouble and either Tudguy or Jackson up top to begin with.
Sky Blue Harry H
Well-Known Member
If Maddison is back fit, we may create more for nippier players like Jackson, Odelusi etc through his creativity. Clutching at straws, but it does look as though we are going to have a predominantly 'small' set of midfielder/forwards to get us through this. We might need Reda just for set pieces (even if we have to use a wheelbarrow to move him from one end of the pitch to the other )
)Sky Blue Spud
Member
Taking Samuel out of the game in the early stages was part of Orient's cynical game plan as he was obviously recognised as our main / only goal threat. The damage to our relegation fight is far greater through his injury than the unjust result of last night's game.
Johnnythespider
Well-Known Member
Why is nobody mentioning turgott. Surely he has to get a start now
stupot07
Well-Known Member
Because most of us have only seen him play for 10 minutes.......and he's not a striker.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
Johnnythespider
Well-Known Member
He scored in that 10 minutes. If you look at the number of goals our top scorer has none of them are striker'sBecause most of us have only seen him play for 10 minutes.......and he's not a striker.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
stupot07
Well-Known Member
No, Turgott never scored last night. Btw I'm not implying he is rubbish, just throwing out a reason why people probably haven't mentioned him, I.e the majority of us (those that go to home games and don't go away) have only see only seen him play an unimpressive 10 minutes. He scored a decent goal at the weekend, personally I wasn't there so I can only judge him on what I've seen and I wasn't particularly impressed Wednesday night.
Our top scorer in all competitions is Nouble (a striker), followed by Samuels (a striker)
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
Last edited:
Johnnythespider
Well-Known Member
I know he never scored last night, we lost 1-0. My point is that the number of goals they have is what you would expect from a midfielder not a striker. We can't really include Samuels as this thread is about his injury and who can take his place. I do think he will be missed, but I would give Turgott a go. Just my 2 penneth.No, Turgott never scored last night. Btw I'm not implying he is rubbish, just throwing out a reason why people probably haven't mentioned him, I.e the majority of us (those that go to home games and don't go away) have only see only seen him play an unimpressive 10 minutes.
Our top scorer in all competitions is Nouble (a striker), followed by Samuels (a striker)
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
stupot07
Well-Known Member
Yeah, sorry. Wasn't sure what you meant.
But I suppose the only point i was making is in response to you asking why he hadn't been mentioned. I just suggested it's because most of us haven't seen him play other than an uninspiring 10 mins on Wednesday. Personally I can't back him to replace Samuels because I haven't seen enough of him. I'd push ward further forwards or bring maddison in.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
