Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Ronnie Schwartz (Page 73 - contract cancelled)
Comments
-
I am pretty sure one of the Danish addicks said that he would be decent?se9addick said:I would remind all of the wise words shared by @norwayaddick when rumours of our interest in Schwartz first emerged - this is the opinion of someone who had an awareness of Schwartz before last summer and has seen more of him than just a couple of YouTube videos of highlights.Norway was pretty sceptical at the time and I remember listening to that rather than the folks her who had apparently, overnight, become experts on reserve team players in the Danish league. Nothing has happened since to make it look like Norway was mistaken in his evaluation.This is looking like it will go down as one of Charlton’s weird signings from the Nordic region, maybe at our end of season awards he can be given the Tom Hovi trophy?1 -
I know football is a results business, but we really give players no time to settle or develop anymore, fanbase (Twitter etc, not just CL) demands the strikers be banging in goals from the first minute.
Shwartz has had two starts I think, less than 400 minutes, with a lot of those coming with 10 minutes to go or less, and arrived having not played any professional football this season, in addition to his documented personal issues in the current covid-climate. Bogle got the same treatment, hadn't been banging in goals so he was a dud and got horrendous abuse which undoubtedly contributed to his increasingly poor performances (although he still worked hard).
I think the only time to fairly judge Ronnie is next season when hopefully he will be playing a bigger part, if he's not in and around the starting XI by then - he really was a waste of time and money.
7 -
Completely agree - I get the feeling it's because this is a TS signing as he recommended him to be signed to Gallen and Bowyer.se9addick said:I don’t want anyone to get the wrong impression - I really want Schwartz to do well - because if he succeeds then so do Charlton. I just don’t understand why people are giving so much benefit of the doubt to a player they really know nothing about and has done so little in the short amount of time he has had.0 -
I think the issue is not that he is not banging in the goals, it's more to do with that on the whole, during his limited appearances, he has looked ineffectual and at the worst a detriment on the side.LonelyNorthernAddick said:I know football is a results business, but we really give players no time to settle or develop anymore, fanbase (Twitter etc, not just CL) demands the strikers be banging in goals from the first minute.
Shwartz has had two starts I think, less than 400 minutes, with a lot of those coming with 10 minutes to go or less, and arrived having not played any professional football this season, in addition to his documented personal issues in the current covid-climate. Bogle got the same treatment, hadn't been banging in goals so he was a dud and got horrendous abuse which undoubtedly contributed to his increasingly poor performances (although he still worked hard).
I think the only time to fairly judge Ronnie is next season when hopefully he will be playing a bigger part, if he's not in and around the starting XI by then - he really was a waste of time and money.
1 -
If he had scored that penalty, he would have a lot more people on his side. But he didn't, so here we are.FishCostaFortune said:
I think the issue is not that he is not banging in the goals, it's more to do with that on the whole, during his limited appearances, he has looked ineffectual and at the worst a detriment on the side.LonelyNorthernAddick said:I know football is a results business, but we really give players no time to settle or develop anymore, fanbase (Twitter etc, not just CL) demands the strikers be banging in goals from the first minute.
Shwartz has had two starts I think, less than 400 minutes, with a lot of those coming with 10 minutes to go or less, and arrived having not played any professional football this season, in addition to his documented personal issues in the current covid-climate. Bogle got the same treatment, hadn't been banging in goals so he was a dud and got horrendous abuse which undoubtedly contributed to his increasingly poor performances (although he still worked hard).
I think the only time to fairly judge Ronnie is next season when hopefully he will be playing a bigger part, if he's not in and around the starting XI by then - he really was a waste of time and money.3 -
se9addick said:I don’t want anyone to get the wrong impression - I really want Schwartz to do well - because if he succeeds then so do Charlton. I just don’t understand why people are giving so much benefit of the doubt to a player they really know nothing about and has done so little in the short amount of time he has had.
you just said it yourself, he's had a short amount of time to impress us and nowhere near enough to make an informed judgement on him. I'm not saying he going to turn out to be the next Clive Mendonca but we need to give him a bit more time and judge when he's actually had minutes on the pitch.2 -
Think he would link up well with Stockley2
-
Not if we keep trying to play the ball 40 yards, straight, to Stockley's head we won't. If your going to hit Stockley long it needs to be at an angle where he can do something other than flick it on or head it back into midfield.Redhenry said:Think he would link up well with Stockley
It's not reflection on how good, or not, Schwartz is but it was the wrong signing at a the wrong time. We weren't playing teams off the pitch, missing sitters and dropping points. The only 2 times we were crying out for a Ronnie was the second half against Rochdale, where he scored, and the second half against AFCW. We got five without him.
Factor in letting Williams and Maddison go, in the window we signed him, Covid, lockdown, never played in the league, his age, wage caps, no credible plan of how to use him and other glaring holes in our team.1 -
Wasn’t it a danish agent friend that TS introduced to gallen? Or was that just a cover storey to make it look like TS wasn’t suggesting/forcing playersjacob_CAFC said:
Completely agree - I get the feeling it's because this is a TS signing as he recommended him to be signed to Gallen and Bowyer.se9addick said:I don’t want anyone to get the wrong impression - I really want Schwartz to do well - because if he succeeds then so do Charlton. I just don’t understand why people are giving so much benefit of the doubt to a player they really know nothing about and has done so little in the short amount of time he has had.0 -
In the game where Schwartz scored, he partnered up with Aneke well, I was hoping we'd see them start together a few times after that. You can hit Aneke long and he can bring the ball down to the floor really well, which will make it easier to play in Schwartz.Redhenry said:Think he would link up well with Stockley
Stockley doesn't seem to have the ability to bring the ball down quite as well as Aneke from what i've seen6 - Sponsored links:
-
The first half against Wimbledon would've been the perfect opportunity for him to make an impression. Not often have we seen a winger beat his man repeatedly and get the ball into dangerous areas like Millar did during that 45 minutes. As it was, DJ came off the bench instead and found himself in the right place at the right time to score his first goal for the club.2
-
Yeah, for our 2nd goal ...... Millar picked out DJ, who was in just the sort of position that Ronnie finds.
And scores from, judging by his scoring record.
That's exactly the service that Ronnie needs.
All we likely need to do is set up and have a game plan to do what Millar did for laying on that 2nd goal last Saturday.
Any of our front players should score from those, if they are moving into position and anticipating. Plus that's Ronnie's speciality.
But often what we do is hammer the ball hopefully upfield - vaguely in the direction of Stockley.
Sort it out Curbs Nads.
4 -
We have not seen a lot of him, but the fact that Bowyer has said what a great finisher he is, and of course that is his reputation, plus he has a record of scoring, one can only assume that he is.
No one scores that many goals as he has without knowing where the net is.
The fact he was reluctant to sign gives us a bit of an insight to his mentality and he obviously has strong ties to his home.Moving to England does not seem to have been as easy as we may have thought or expect it to be, and with lockdown, being away from his family and not being able to see them cannot have been easy.
You also have to add in playing in a different Country with a different pace and style of football and it is no surprise he has not hit the ground running.
I think he will settle and score a few.1 -
We right players off far to early. He is living in a hotel with his partner back home pregnant in a team devoid of any idea thrown in randomly. Played through the middle out d wide 2/10 minutes here and there and we told him this division was better than the top danish league he must think what has he done. I still think he has shown enough to play in a pair and with a service unfortunately we play on the break and we’re not very good at it5
-
This forum has a target player all the time. Constant criticism until they leave and then another takes their place.
Schwartz has hardly had any game time and missed a crucial penalty. It happens.
Would be great if everybody got behind the team.13 -
Sure your comment is going to gain a plethora of likes, but I personally really do not understand this view point at all.Crusty54 said:This forum has a target player all the time. Constant criticism until they leave and then another takes their place.
Schwartz has hardly had any game time and missed a crucial penalty. It happens.
Would be great if everybody got behind the team.
People giving their opinion on a players ability on the forum for the football team he is currently playing for, if it is negative, is not not getting behind the team. You are just entitled to make a case that you think he is not a good signing, as much as you are that he is. The 'constant criticism', which is very much an overstatement, has been by people who have not been impressed by his performances - and rightly so. None of this has been personal, toxic, or vile (on here) and indeed you will see that many of these posters want him to actually come good and are sympathetic of his current position.
It would be a boring world, and a boring forum, if opinions and debate on topics such as Schwartz's ability were not discussed.9 -
This all reminds me of when Murray slated Diawara, when the guy had only played a handful of games for us. Went on to prove his pedigree, with Charlton being the only real blip in his career. It’s not just foreign players, someone mentioned Wyke earlier, but sometimes players need time to adjust to new teammates, style of play, country, circumstances. I hope he’s given time to make that adjustment and that he himself wants to take that time.6
-
Let’s see what Nigel can do with RS and the team. If he’s still struggling 5/6 games into NA’s tenure, then perhaps he’s not what’s needed at Charlton.0
-
Ronnie playing in a game today vs Brentford B team at Sparrows Lane today, let's see what he can do there.0
-
The simple answer to all the problems.....Start him too see what he can do or if bringing him on as a sub, give him 30 minutes instead of 5.
Personally think he is a good addition to our team that has been poorly managed up till now.12 - Sponsored links:
-
UPDATE from Sparrows Lane.
"Schwartz all over the place, tackling, heading up and down the pitch to cover, 4 goals and it's not even half time!"6 -
Who would you start him at the expense of though? It shouldn't be our other strikers who are scoring goals, and offer more across the pitch because they fit in with our play style better.king addick said:The simple answer to all the problems.....Start him too see what he can do or if bringing him on as a sub, give him 30 minutes instead of 5.
Personally think he is a good addition to our team that has been poorly managed up till now.
I don't think someone is being poorly managed because they are not getting a place ahead of 3 strikers who are playing better then him. Especially when we don't know what goes on in training.
I'd say the poor decision would be to bring him in January, and taking him away from his pregnant girlfriend during a pandemic, where he can't do anything but dwell on what's going on.0 -
Are we Nil - Four down?soapy_jones said:UPDATE from Sparrows Lane.
"Schwartz all over the place, tackling, heading up and down the pitch to cover, 4 goals and it's not even half time!"0 -
Fish, you seem to not let this lie. I think everyone knows your opinion. No-one is saying its not valid, just most including myself are saying give it time, he hasn't had the chance to settle or played enough.FishCostaFortune said:
Who would you start him at the expense of though? It shouldn't be our other strikers who are scoring goals, and offer more across the pitch because they fit in with our play style better.king addick said:The simple answer to all the problems.....Start him too see what he can do or if bringing him on as a sub, give him 30 minutes instead of 5.
Personally think he is a good addition to our team that has been poorly managed up till now.
I don't think someone is being poorly managed because they are not getting a place ahead of 3 strikers who are playing better then him. Especially when we don't know what goes on in training.
I'd say the poor decision would be to bring him in January, and taking him away from his pregnant girlfriend during a pandemic, where he can't do anything but dwell on what's going on.
We just have to trust the management team to either get the best out of him, or move him on if it was all hype. Seems to be going round in circles this conversation, surely it would be better to see in say 6 games or even the end of season.0 -
We have 4 strikers to rotate and he can play with either Stockley or Aneke..maybe even Washington if we play a high press game where Washington harries the defence and Schwartz picks up loose balls etc.FishCostaFortune said:
Who would you start him at the expense of though? It shouldn't be our other strikers who are scoring goals, and offer more across the pitch because they fit in with our play style better.king addick said:The simple answer to all the problems.....Start him too see what he can do or if bringing him on as a sub, give him 30 minutes instead of 5.
Personally think he is a good addition to our team that has been poorly managed up till now.
I don't think someone is being poorly managed because they are not getting a place ahead of 3 strikers who are playing better then him. Especially when we don't know what goes on in training.
I'd say the poor decision would be to bring him in January, and taking him away from his pregnant girlfriend during a pandemic, where he can't do anything but dwell on what's going on.
I believe Bowyer poorly managed him. To constantly say "he isnt up to speed" then not play him to build his fitness is stupid. Aneke though, who has issues, got 45 here, 60 there. Bowyer had one system and that was that.
He is an adult..he DIDNT have to move but chose to do so. No doubt it plays on his mind but this is his job and should be an outlet for him but instead he was made to splinter his arse on the bench...thats when he sit there and dwell...thinking WTF have I moved for when i'm not playing.2 -
Let what lie exactly? Why am I not allowed to voice my total disagreement to those posters who are arguing that Schwartz is being mismanaged by the team and treated harshly by fans?johnnybev1987 said:
Fish, you seem to not let this lie. I think everyone knows your opinion. No-one is saying its not valid, just most including myself are saying give it time, he hasn't had the chance to settle or played enough.FishCostaFortune said:
Who would you start him at the expense of though? It shouldn't be our other strikers who are scoring goals, and offer more across the pitch because they fit in with our play style better.king addick said:The simple answer to all the problems.....Start him too see what he can do or if bringing him on as a sub, give him 30 minutes instead of 5.
Personally think he is a good addition to our team that has been poorly managed up till now.
I don't think someone is being poorly managed because they are not getting a place ahead of 3 strikers who are playing better then him. Especially when we don't know what goes on in training.
I'd say the poor decision would be to bring him in January, and taking him away from his pregnant girlfriend during a pandemic, where he can't do anything but dwell on what's going on.
We just have to trust the management team to either get the best out of him, or move him on if it was all hype. Seems to be going round in circles this conversation, surely it would be better to see in say 6 games or even the end of season.
This is nothing to do with whose opinion is valid or not. How do you think this thread should continue, that it should only be those in agreement making their point, and if you disagree then you shouldn't be able to respond?
I am certainly not a Bowyer defender at all - indeed I feel like we played some of our worst football under him, and his reliance in players like Pratley was quiet baffling. So he could have completely mismanaged Schwartz but would you rather give Aneke 45 minutes from the bench of Schwatz?king addick said:
We have 4 strikers to rotate and he can play with either Stockley or Aneke..maybe even Washington if we play a high press game where Washington harries the defence and Schwartz picks up loose balls etc.FishCostaFortune said:
Who would you start him at the expense of though? It shouldn't be our other strikers who are scoring goals, and offer more across the pitch because they fit in with our play style better.king addick said:The simple answer to all the problems.....Start him too see what he can do or if bringing him on as a sub, give him 30 minutes instead of 5.
Personally think he is a good addition to our team that has been poorly managed up till now.
I don't think someone is being poorly managed because they are not getting a place ahead of 3 strikers who are playing better then him. Especially when we don't know what goes on in training.
I'd say the poor decision would be to bring him in January, and taking him away from his pregnant girlfriend during a pandemic, where he can't do anything but dwell on what's going on.
I believe Bowyer poorly managed him. To constantly say "he isnt up to speed" then not play him to build his fitness is stupid. Aneke though, who has issues, got 45 here, 60 there. Bowyer had one system and that was that.
He is an adult..he DIDNT have to move but chose to do so. No doubt it plays on his mind but this is his job and should be an outlet for him but instead he was made to splinter his arse on the bench...thats when he sit there and dwell...thinking WTF have I moved for when i'm not playing.
It's very early days, but this didn't change under JJ, or Adkins when he had a chance to put him on instead of Washington.2 -
i have stated you are more than entitled to your opinion, however you have repeated your point even to the point it feels like an agenda. Maybe its just how i have read things.FishCostaFortune said:
Let what lie exactly? Why am I not allowed to voice my total disagreement to those posters who are arguing that Schwartz is being mismanaged by the team and treated harshly by fans?johnnybev1987 said:
Fish, you seem to not let this lie. I think everyone knows your opinion. No-one is saying its not valid, just most including myself are saying give it time, he hasn't had the chance to settle or played enough.FishCostaFortune said:
Who would you start him at the expense of though? It shouldn't be our other strikers who are scoring goals, and offer more across the pitch because they fit in with our play style better.king addick said:The simple answer to all the problems.....Start him too see what he can do or if bringing him on as a sub, give him 30 minutes instead of 5.
Personally think he is a good addition to our team that has been poorly managed up till now.
I don't think someone is being poorly managed because they are not getting a place ahead of 3 strikers who are playing better then him. Especially when we don't know what goes on in training.
I'd say the poor decision would be to bring him in January, and taking him away from his pregnant girlfriend during a pandemic, where he can't do anything but dwell on what's going on.
We just have to trust the management team to either get the best out of him, or move him on if it was all hype. Seems to be going round in circles this conversation, surely it would be better to see in say 6 games or even the end of season.
This is nothing to do with whose opinion is valid or not. How do you think this thread should continue, that it should only be those in agreement making their point, and if you disagree then you shouldn't be able to respond?
I am certainly not a Bowyer defender at all - indeed I feel like we played some of our worst football under him, and his reliance in players like Pratley was quiet baffling. So he could have completely mismanaged Schwartz but would you rather give Aneke 45 minutes from the bench of Schwatz?king addick said:
We have 4 strikers to rotate and he can play with either Stockley or Aneke..maybe even Washington if we play a high press game where Washington harries the defence and Schwartz picks up loose balls etc.FishCostaFortune said:
Who would you start him at the expense of though? It shouldn't be our other strikers who are scoring goals, and offer more across the pitch because they fit in with our play style better.king addick said:The simple answer to all the problems.....Start him too see what he can do or if bringing him on as a sub, give him 30 minutes instead of 5.
Personally think he is a good addition to our team that has been poorly managed up till now.
I don't think someone is being poorly managed because they are not getting a place ahead of 3 strikers who are playing better then him. Especially when we don't know what goes on in training.
I'd say the poor decision would be to bring him in January, and taking him away from his pregnant girlfriend during a pandemic, where he can't do anything but dwell on what's going on.
I believe Bowyer poorly managed him. To constantly say "he isnt up to speed" then not play him to build his fitness is stupid. Aneke though, who has issues, got 45 here, 60 there. Bowyer had one system and that was that.
He is an adult..he DIDNT have to move but chose to do so. No doubt it plays on his mind but this is his job and should be an outlet for him but instead he was made to splinter his arse on the bench...thats when he sit there and dwell...thinking WTF have I moved for when i'm not playing.
It's very early days, but this didn't change under JJ, or Adkins when he had a chance to put him on instead of Washington.
By all means reason/ discuss this, but it just seems like the same things in response to others which include myself making the same point. Its going round in circles really.
I do feel he hasn't been given the chance and with a new manager you would hope he can make the decision whether he deserves one. (NB this does sound like i am repeating my point again so i apologise and will move on)0 -
My thinking is that you cant say someone is up to scratch but not help to build his fitness.FishCostaFortune said:
Let what lie exactly? Why am I not allowed to voice my total disagreement to those posters who are arguing that Schwartz is being mismanaged by the team and treated harshly by fans?johnnybev1987 said:
Fish, you seem to not let this lie. I think everyone knows your opinion. No-one is saying its not valid, just most including myself are saying give it time, he hasn't had the chance to settle or played enough.FishCostaFortune said:
Who would you start him at the expense of though? It shouldn't be our other strikers who are scoring goals, and offer more across the pitch because they fit in with our play style better.king addick said:The simple answer to all the problems.....Start him too see what he can do or if bringing him on as a sub, give him 30 minutes instead of 5.
Personally think he is a good addition to our team that has been poorly managed up till now.
I don't think someone is being poorly managed because they are not getting a place ahead of 3 strikers who are playing better then him. Especially when we don't know what goes on in training.
I'd say the poor decision would be to bring him in January, and taking him away from his pregnant girlfriend during a pandemic, where he can't do anything but dwell on what's going on.
We just have to trust the management team to either get the best out of him, or move him on if it was all hype. Seems to be going round in circles this conversation, surely it would be better to see in say 6 games or even the end of season.
This is nothing to do with whose opinion is valid or not. How do you think this thread should continue, that it should only be those in agreement making their point, and if you disagree then you shouldn't be able to respond?
I am certainly not a Bowyer defender at all - indeed I feel like we played some of our worst football under him, and his reliance in players like Pratley was quiet baffling. So he could have completely mismanaged Schwartz but would you rather give Aneke 45 minutes from the bench of Schwatz?king addick said:
We have 4 strikers to rotate and he can play with either Stockley or Aneke..maybe even Washington if we play a high press game where Washington harries the defence and Schwartz picks up loose balls etc.FishCostaFortune said:
Who would you start him at the expense of though? It shouldn't be our other strikers who are scoring goals, and offer more across the pitch because they fit in with our play style better.king addick said:The simple answer to all the problems.....Start him too see what he can do or if bringing him on as a sub, give him 30 minutes instead of 5.
Personally think he is a good addition to our team that has been poorly managed up till now.
I don't think someone is being poorly managed because they are not getting a place ahead of 3 strikers who are playing better then him. Especially when we don't know what goes on in training.
I'd say the poor decision would be to bring him in January, and taking him away from his pregnant girlfriend during a pandemic, where he can't do anything but dwell on what's going on.
I believe Bowyer poorly managed him. To constantly say "he isnt up to speed" then not play him to build his fitness is stupid. Aneke though, who has issues, got 45 here, 60 there. Bowyer had one system and that was that.
He is an adult..he DIDNT have to move but chose to do so. No doubt it plays on his mind but this is his job and should be an outlet for him but instead he was made to splinter his arse on the bench...thats when he sit there and dwell...thinking WTF have I moved for when i'm not playing.
It's very early days, but this didn't change under JJ, or Adkins when he had a chance to put him on instead of Washington.
Dont get me wrong...form wise..Aneke all day as with Washington hence why he started ahead of him but how can you build any form when you dont play?3 -
That's every thread on any forum ever ha ha.johnnybev1987 said:
i have stated you are more than entitled to your opinion, however you have repeated your point even to the point it feels like an agenda. Maybe its just how i have read things.FishCostaFortune said:
Let what lie exactly? Why am I not allowed to voice my total disagreement to those posters who are arguing that Schwartz is being mismanaged by the team and treated harshly by fans?johnnybev1987 said:
Fish, you seem to not let this lie. I think everyone knows your opinion. No-one is saying its not valid, just most including myself are saying give it time, he hasn't had the chance to settle or played enough.FishCostaFortune said:
Who would you start him at the expense of though? It shouldn't be our other strikers who are scoring goals, and offer more across the pitch because they fit in with our play style better.king addick said:The simple answer to all the problems.....Start him too see what he can do or if bringing him on as a sub, give him 30 minutes instead of 5.
Personally think he is a good addition to our team that has been poorly managed up till now.
I don't think someone is being poorly managed because they are not getting a place ahead of 3 strikers who are playing better then him. Especially when we don't know what goes on in training.
I'd say the poor decision would be to bring him in January, and taking him away from his pregnant girlfriend during a pandemic, where he can't do anything but dwell on what's going on.
We just have to trust the management team to either get the best out of him, or move him on if it was all hype. Seems to be going round in circles this conversation, surely it would be better to see in say 6 games or even the end of season.
This is nothing to do with whose opinion is valid or not. How do you think this thread should continue, that it should only be those in agreement making their point, and if you disagree then you shouldn't be able to respond?
I am certainly not a Bowyer defender at all - indeed I feel like we played some of our worst football under him, and his reliance in players like Pratley was quiet baffling. So he could have completely mismanaged Schwartz but would you rather give Aneke 45 minutes from the bench of Schwatz?king addick said:
We have 4 strikers to rotate and he can play with either Stockley or Aneke..maybe even Washington if we play a high press game where Washington harries the defence and Schwartz picks up loose balls etc.FishCostaFortune said:
Who would you start him at the expense of though? It shouldn't be our other strikers who are scoring goals, and offer more across the pitch because they fit in with our play style better.king addick said:The simple answer to all the problems.....Start him too see what he can do or if bringing him on as a sub, give him 30 minutes instead of 5.
Personally think he is a good addition to our team that has been poorly managed up till now.
I don't think someone is being poorly managed because they are not getting a place ahead of 3 strikers who are playing better then him. Especially when we don't know what goes on in training.
I'd say the poor decision would be to bring him in January, and taking him away from his pregnant girlfriend during a pandemic, where he can't do anything but dwell on what's going on.
I believe Bowyer poorly managed him. To constantly say "he isnt up to speed" then not play him to build his fitness is stupid. Aneke though, who has issues, got 45 here, 60 there. Bowyer had one system and that was that.
He is an adult..he DIDNT have to move but chose to do so. No doubt it plays on his mind but this is his job and should be an outlet for him but instead he was made to splinter his arse on the bench...thats when he sit there and dwell...thinking WTF have I moved for when i'm not playing.
It's very early days, but this didn't change under JJ, or Adkins when he had a chance to put him on instead of Washington.
By all means reason/ discuss this, but it just seems like the same things in response to others which include myself making the same point. Its going round in circles really.
I do feel he hasn't been given the chance and with a new manager you would hope he can make the decision whether he deserves one. (NB this does sound like i am repeating my point again so i apologise and will move on)
Having an opinion and counter argument to posters is not having an agenda. Any agenda I may have is that forming a negative view of Schwartz ability is not harsh, and it does not mean you are not getting behind the team.
2 -
I'm reminded of the way Simon Francis was constantly criticised.
Left to join Bournemouth and went on to captain them in the Premier League and did pretty well.
Constructive criticism is good. The make up of the team changed with the signings in the window after Schwartz signed.7
