Jump to content

Jim Goodwin Liability


Recommended Posts


The 90% isn't mine!

Its the majority's opinion, most don't post on threads and you can see why when other supposed saints fans think its clever to throw vile insults just because they don't agree.

Yeah theres a few need to catch a hold of themselves.

But if you can find any post by me that suggests JG doesn't go in hard, puts it about, and gets punished for it! Then please copy and paste it on here.

Like the over exaggeration of what happened on saturday, people that should know better get caught up in trying to goad fellow saints fans .

Why? God only knows

49 voted out of how many? I didn't vote but I looked at the figures at one point and now I'm told I voted. I didn't. I wonder if others noticed this? Strikes me it's not a lot of votes. You just go on about people crucifying Jim when the bulk of us don't. You simply seem incapable of accepting the fact that there is a problem with Jim's behaviour for all to see. Blind loyalty is nice but naive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 voted out of how many? I didn't vote but I looked at the figures at one point and now I'm told I voted. I didn't. I wonder if others noticed this? Strikes me it's not a lot of votes. You just go on about people crucifying Jim when the bulk of us don't. You simply seem incapable of accepting the fact that there is a problem with Jim's behaviour for all to see. Blind loyalty is nice but naive.

The majority have spoken, can't you leave it at that?

Why now am i incapable of anything you deem to type?

Whose naive, or blindly Faithful!

Its a funny old way for st mirren supporters to show their support, but then they've akways been a bunch of negs who revel in doing our players down before anyone else does.. But somehow feel we should have hung onto a guy that assaulted police officers to round off his family night outs.

Yeah i must be the naive, blind wan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I doubt you'd understand it if I did explain something to you, as you can't even seem to be able to understand my original post.

I haven't accused you of saying anything. I merely commented that I thought your interpretation of some other posters comments wasn't accurate.

Have a Like. Hopefully it'll cheer you up.

Or maybe I misunderstood something again, you wize old owl, you. D'oh.

Edited by JM1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What utter and complete drivel.....

You have now made up a whole load of things he simply didn't do on saturday.

Why?

Is it so hard to climb down of your horse of high integrity and admit you and a few others have overcooked this and then some.

Think for a minute, what you are suggesting is that in a game of contact sport, our club should sack anyone coming into contact with an opposing player?

Away and bile yir can. It's a man's game, man up or if you want to see real contact go watch a Woman's Hockey or Netball game!

They don't take prisoners, and they din't have a load if knicker-wetters saying 'gonna no dae that"

Lord, as others have pointed out, those days are long gone and thank goodness. All this "man up" isn't "cool" anymore and belongs in the old days.

As for

Edit: what makes your and the other Goodwin haters case even more paper thin is the fact his first yellow wasn't a foul, never mind a card offence. He won the ball, and the player fell over him in an attempt to influence the referee.

As his name is Goodwin (which comes pre-printed in all Refs notebooks) he got a card for a challenge that wasn't even a foul!

And so to this so called sickening forearm smash/elbow/near decapitation of Sutton....

Quite simply he leads with his forearm, forgetting Sutton can't jump for toffee, so instead of a nudge in the back, its a nudge on the neck/head. Which Sutton doesn't even react to. But again because his name is Goodwin its a second yellow (unless he'd been warned once or twice) when most would only concede a free kick.

This is just paranoid nonsense. If you genuinely believe every Referee has any player's name in his book pre-match then maybe you'd be better driving up the road to support one of two other teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was telling that Stephen Thomson did not try to defend Jim Goodwin. His comment on Sportscene showed his disappointment. Regardless of who is right on culpability in this debate it must be obvious that we are seriously hampered as a team every time Jim is sent off. That is not going to change.

Exactly what I thought also, well said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe Jim Goodwin seems to think he is more clever than he is and thought he'd get away with arm through player, even if hadn't been sent off he'd probably have got charge as due to reputation he has built up tv are now highlighting many of his challenges

if he would stick to football side of his game and stop trying to be clever and give little arm into opposition at time,s id be happy in saying that i do believe he has lost some pace over last couple of years and may start to struggle to still compete at this level

ans as previously stated on here it was more stupidity on his part for all sending off's and and a lot of bookings are same, he has tendency to lunge into challenges we cant defend him for stupidity any longer as he is supposed to experienced member of squad

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If anyone doubts what Goodwin brings to the team then have a look at tonight's performance. Yes he can be a liability but we need a player like him as both McLean and McGinn are not strong enough to boss a midfield. Totally out faught tonight.

Careful you'll get pelters for identifying that successful teams need and play with one or more holding midfielders.

Tonight we played with none!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like him, love him, hate him or loathe him, we need him. He needs to stay on the park and help his team. We were a shadow of team from Saturday. For all Hamilton played well, we were simply not at the races and the experience and guile that Jim brings was the major contributing factor.

The 'Negs' will have you for singing JG's praises.

Perhaps now the knickerwetters will accept him for what he is?

A damn good holding midfielder!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He brings extra protection to the defence . But for me playing a young boy out of position on his debut as holding midfielder is just crazy.

Kelly mcginn or tesselar should of been I'm there.

Of course Jim is going to look like he was missed big time with young brown doing his role Tommys fault that one

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Missed tonight badly! But Craig playing Young Brown in there was ludicrous

agreed... but the only alternative with that line-up was to play McGinn there and Brown in midfield.

Neal and his fellow hatchet men would still have had a field day bullying the young lads out of their game.

Said beforehand and still stand by it... we should have had Teale on from the start to try and give some experience... and also stretch the play effectively making Neal redundant. We played right into their strengths and exposed our own weaknesses doing so!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest TPAFKATS

It's been clear for a few years now we've needed a defensive midfielder who can compete with Goodwin.

I felt sorry for Brown tonight. He really struggled.

Not the best debut for Brown but he had some good play. I've seen worse debuts, indeed I saw worse performances tonight

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...