Breaking News Paterson leaves Southend on loan deal

[MattLloyd]

He's had 13 league starts. That's a quarter of our league games since he arrived.

Six league starts this season. If you were to look at last season, he walked into a team that was walking out the door as he arrived. Statistic are just that statistics, why don't we get behind our players and cheer them on anymore instead of just 'sticking it to them?'

 

[Ayrshire Blue]

Six league starts this season. If you were to look at last season, he walked into a team that was walking out the door as he arrived. Statistic are just that statistics, why don't we get behind our players and cheer them on anymore instead of just 'sticking it to them?'

You are Matt Paterson and I claim my £5.

 

[Beefy]

Who doesn't "get behind our players"?

Surely the point of a messageboard is to state your honest opinion. No one on here has any reason to dislike Paterson. People are just giving their honest opinion on the player.

In my opinion he's been given a lot of chances and over two managers he's proven to not be much of a goalscorer or offer much else. He may well go on and have a decent career and I've no doubt he's a good player but this isn't the Club for him and Paul Sturrock isn't the manager for him. Him leaving seems best for all parties and I don't see why you feel the need to get so emotional about it.

Plus look on the bright side, if he goes on to climb up the leagues you can gloat about how right you are, like I gloat about being right about Hooper.

 

[EastStandBlue]

Mohsni is a good example of finding someone from nowhere! He will be gone on the summer.
Clohessy has I will agree been solid all season. Will he stay in the summer?
Hall is a good player, but his morale compass is somewhat lacking.

As for Barney, it took him four years to get good, goals and out of here - Pato's been her what, just over half a season?

Especially on here, most posters seem to spend their time putting over crass over the top observations of our players in stead of getting behind them and praising them and trying to show them a little confidence, I in particular, am beginning to loathe this messageboard and some of the tripe that is written on it.

What does Mohsni's origins have to do with it? The fact is that he came here, we've developed him, and he'll move on a far better player.

Again, Hall's charge has little to do with his football development.

Barnard was here for two years and came here having not done so well during loan spells at Orient and Crewe. We took him on, built him up and got him scoring almost instantaneously.

Pato's been here for a year now, and he looks no different compared to when he arrived.

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

Completely and utter disagree with more of your tripe.

Paterson has only had six starts.

To borrow a phrase that's tripe. You've had 15 starts and 16 sub appearances.

How about last season? Does that not count? Do sub appearances not count?

I am basing my opinions on actual evidence here.

Two of them he was battered by bigger and tougher defenders fair enough. Two he held his own and played well. The other two he was MOTM scoring two in each of them. Two against a pretty ordinary Barnet side and two against Championship Bristol City. He looked neither lightweight nor mentally soft in these games.

Your description of the lad is just plainly made up. He had tonsilitus followed by a serous back spasm - get it right.

So you are admitting that you are injury/illness prone?

Also if he was too beef up more as you say, he would lose that mobility that he has, that's his ace, he is very mobile and finds good space around the front line, has excellent feet and knows where the back of the net is. He has been bombed out because he's on too much money and Sturrock doesn't see him as competition against his son Blair and Barry Corr, both who have struggled recently. I can understand it if the manager doensn't take to you, I have no problem with that, but to treat him the way he has allegedly been treated and then to read some of the inane comments and attempts to agree with his treatment is simply wrong.

How about your treatment under Tilson? Why did Tilson pick the likes of Scott Vernon ahead of you? Was that because you were on too much money then as well?

Is that why Southampton released you as well?

If he had been given a run of games - say twelve starts - he would be banging them in now, and the pathetic attempts of the SZ 'we know everything uber-posters' to undermine the kid is again simply wrong.

You had a run in the team last season - why weren't you banging them in then?

Don't forget - he's only gone for a month. He will be back, probably after reading this crap and the way he has been treated he won't want to come back, but he's got 18 months left on his contract, so unless TB pays him off he's still our player.

Just hate the way we completley desteroy players, especially those who have something, why do we chase them away?

If you can't take criticism Matt, then maybe professional football isn't the career for you and I'd definitely advise not reading message boards. I'm not mindlessly abusing you here, I'm making constructive, reasoned points. I'm not saying you won't make it in professional football, I'm saying you need to work on X, Y and Z and I don't think you'll be ready for at least a year.

Glad to see you want people to get behind our players though, is that going to extend to Corr and Sturrock?

 

[MattLloyd]

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Another boring post from a SZ warlord

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Another boring post from a SZ warlord

And thank you for that insightful contribution.

I really think you added a lot to the board with that comment, so well done.

 

[MattLloyd]

And thank you for that insightful contribution.

I really think you added a lot to the board with that comment, so well done.

It's easier to read and far more exciting than the tripe you come with. You don't half talk bollocks at times, and then expect eveyone to bow to your 'superior knowledge'.

 

[chapperzUK]

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Another boring post from a SZ warlord

It is called debating. You have given your opinion and now they have given their opinion, and this happens until a conclusion has come.

I have to admit that I have only seen a couple of games this season, but from last season Paterson looked like a decent player, but Sturrock would rather stick with who he knows best, and it has appeared to work well.

Your point about Barnard is irrelevant, as we all knew he would score goals, but he easily got injured and never got a decent run of games because of this.

 

[ibwiajwa]

I'm sure that you had a wry smile on your face when you heard this news. Are you happy now that there's no one to force Blair onto the bench? Harry and Asante won't be given much pitch time. Do you think any 'non' Sturrock striker would want to join us?
Never given the pitch time his obvious talents deserved, I for one hope he rips it up at Stockport and goes onto bigger and better things.

No I didn't have a smile on my face. If he does well somewhere else then blessings on him as long as he's not rubbing our faces in it at Roots Hall. TBH, I don't get you and Mr Lloyd's attitude to people who don't rate Paterson, implying that we are disloyal, drive players out of the club etc. etc. when both of you take so many opportunities to criticise players who are actually on the pitch for us!

 

[TravellingBlue]

No I didn't have a smile on my face. If he does well somewhere else then blessings on him as long as he's not rubbing our faces in it at Roots Hall. TBH, I don't get you and Mr Lloyd's attitude to people who don't rate Paterson, implying that we are disloyal, drive players out of the club etc. etc. when both of you take so many opportunities to criticise players who are actually on the pitch for us!

I am sure if you check through there are many posters on here who are of the opinion that Paterson has not been given a fair crack of the whip at Southend and would have liked to have seen him given more opporunity on a frequent basis - especially early season when he was playing well - and then suddenly dropped.

The problem I and many of my friends and contemporaries have with this messageboard is that there seems to a little 'clique' of maybe 10 or 12 posters who seem to want to let everyone know that 'they know best and everything'.

I actually find it all very tiresome, hence why I do not post as much nowadays, i am sick of the bickering and constant belittling of a lot of our players. The same as I nearly came to blows with a fan at the Shrews match who spent the whole match slagging off Blair and Easton - I guess I'm just getting too old to listen to rubbish.

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

It's easier to read and far more exciting than the tripe you come with. You don't half talk bollocks at times, and then expect eveyone to bow to your 'superior knowledge'.

I don't expect people to necessarily agree everything I say but if they don't agree instead of dismissing it as "tripe" I expect them at least to engage with the arguments I put forward.

 

[Beefy]

The problem I and many of my friends and contemporaries have with this messageboard is that there seems to a little 'clique' of maybe 10 or 12 posters who seem to want to let everyone know that 'they know best and everything'.

Nonsense. Again, this is a messageboard where people come to exchange opinions. We can't all agree with eachother and this place would be very dull if we all did.

I've got a huge amount of respect for you, for your knowledge and for your opinions, but you don't half get precious when people disagree wih you.

 

[Tampa Blue]

Evidence suggests the contrary.

did you say this about Hooper, Kightly - imho football is a Team game with too many variances too spout about evidence about an individual.

Does evidence suggest that Barker is a poor defender when we concede goals for example ? I would suggest that it does not.

The only evidence we have is that Sturrock does not rate him and he is one of the last on high wages signed under Tilson.

 

[stuscfc]

lol . . . nice to see you have petty squabbles on your chat site too lol . . . seems all fans are similar at the end of the day . . . opinions eh? :smile:

 

[Gremlin]

lol . . . nice to see you have petty squabbles on your chat site too lol . . . seems all fans are similar at the end of the day . . . opinions eh? :smile:

Rubbish, how dare you! Where's your evidence to support this?

 

[Blue_Wes]

What I find bizarre is when I mentioned that last year Spencer's performance in a higher league weilded more goals than say Sturrocks in a lower league this season, and in less games and was told it's not really relevant to the team this year and should be judged on how he is performing under the new management. Then the same group of people use Paterson's perfomances from last season as opposed to how he's played this year as a stick to beat him with. I'm all for debate, but there is a lot of self righteousness on here with people that are never wrong, and a lot of them I've noticed are quite hyprocritical in their anylysis or proof of how their opinion is the right one, as in the above example.

I'm not in for naming names, as I don't particularly want to get in a bun fight with anyone, but I can understand TravellingBlues frustrations sometimes - and with the Paterson debate, I agree with him, although referring to other people's opinions as tripe probably doesn't help his cause, but then you can't criticise him for that, and then belittle MattLloyd's post backing TB by referring to him as Matt Paterson.

Also, supporting Matt Paterson's claim to a first team spot doesn't make you anti Blair/Corr, it just means that you feel they are not as good a striker. I for one, felt in Pato, Corr and Blair that we were lucky to have three different strikers, and had we utilised them all based on their skill sets & opponents we would have done even better than we have so far. It's Sturrock's reluctance to utilise an assett in tandom/rotation with Blair and Corr that frustrates some posters on here, myself included. IMO he has done well this season in the brief opportunities he has been presented. The game everyone refers to that he performed so badly in is the Crewe game, but the entire team had a shocker that day, brought on by Sturrock's change in tactics. If the entire team plays badly, it's very difficult for the strikers to perform, as I recall service was non-existence, although Pato should of dropped deeper to support the mid and win the ball. In his last couple of appearances, sub at Oxford (a) & Chelt (h) (I think), he was eager, working hard and looked a real threat up front but wasn't seen again. It seemed as if he played well, he was dropped, he played ok, he was dropped, he played poorly and was dropped, whereas other players in the squad, could play well, poorly or averagely and often were still in the starting line up, if not the squad.

I wish him well, it would be interesting if Pato set's the world alight at Stockport, and we are struggling up top still, that Luggy put's the team first and gives Pato an option to re-create a place at Southend United, or sticks to his guns and still let's him go.

The biggest frustration for me in all this is the timing, we now have a striker that is unfit, and struggles to maintain fitness in Corr, a player that struggles to score even when presented with very good chances, and has looked well out of place on the left in this latest formation in Blair, and a massively under experienced striker in Crawford.

 

[EastStandBlue]

did you say this about Hooper, Kightly - imho football is a Team game with too many variances too spout about evidence about an individual.

Does evidence suggest that Barker is a poor defender when we concede goals for example ? I would suggest that it does not.

The only evidence we have is that Sturrock does not rate him and he is one of the last on high wages signed under Tilson.

The statement was that Paterson was a goalscorer... The lad has two goals in 27 appearances for us which would suggest otherwise. The evidence actually suggests that Barker is a good defender, because we concede far less goals with him in the team than we do without him.

 

[Mick]

The only evidence we have is that Sturrock does not rate him and he is one of the last on high wages signed under Tilson.

Are his wages really that high, bearing in mind we signed him when we had to give Barnard away for a song (or someone lied with the figures!) because we were already deep in the financial mire?

 

[Beefy]

What I find bizarre is when I mentioned that last year Spencer's performance in a higher league weilded more goals than say Sturrocks in a lower league this season, and in less games and was told it's not really relevant to the team this year and should be judged on how he is performing under the new management. Then the same group of people use Paterson's perfomances from last season as opposed to how he's played this year as a stick to beat him with. I'm all for debate, but there is a lot of self righteousness on here with people that are never wrong, and a lot of them I've noticed are quite hyprocritical in their anylysis or proof of how their opinion is the right one, as in the above example.

Perhaps you could find some quotes?