Are the players bottlejobs?

[WalthamOwl]

Personally believe quite a few of these players are weak minded. Looking forward to Monk hopefully getting rid of that and getting players that will give everything out on the pitch for the club. When teams go down to 10 men they usually put extra effort in, make it even harder to be broken down. We where an absolute shambles against Blackburn. 

Edited January 24, 2020 by WalthamOwl

[Ian_D]

1 minute ago, matthefish2002 said:

 

Are we talking about the same Sheffield Wednesday here!?!?!? 
Ever since I was a kid and before (with a few notable exceptions) Wednesday have always had a reputation of letting you down in the big games.
 

My first experience of this was 1969 or thereabouts when we capitulated against Man City at home even though they did their best to not win (except Boyer, I'm not bitter, honest) and send us down.  Its happened many times since.

[Inspector Lestrade]

OP Bottled It

[Guest LittleG]

31 minutes ago, matthefish2002 said:

Would I want any of our current player in the trenches next to me? Perhaps Barry Bannan at most, rest of them wouldn't want to know.

Wouldn't mind Iorfa, Lees, Borner, Hutch, Luongo and Fletch next to me.

[Flat Owl]

Apart from one or two - you need to look to the dugout for the prombles imo...

[Belfast Owl 2]

51 minutes ago, Burnsie said:

Okay

 

It is time to address the elephant in the room. I wanted to post this a few times…but after the loss vs Blackburn, I thought I’d leave it a few days so I didn’t get excommunicated.

 

Anyway, every time we lose, we get many, many posters on here (some very regular and respected posters) that say the reason we lost was down to the fact that the players are “bottlers”, “spineless”, “cowards”.

 

A lot of the evidence for this links back to Wembley (in fact, in the current CC thread someone has mentioned that today).

 

Well, against Hull we didn’t play well… but did we bottle it? Or did we lose to a team that we’d not beaten that season (1 draw and 1 loss)…a team that finished places above us?  Moreover, of the “bottlers” only 2 “bottlejobs” started vs Blackburn (for those who link the current team to CC’s team). We also have a different manager!

 

Posters evidence the bottler tag due to the play-off defeats against Hudds. Now here, about 40-50% of the team are still around. And we were gash. However, maybe (as happens in big games…see many finals) two matched teams cancelled each other out. Remember, this Hudds team went up and stayed up. And then we have the “best chance to get promoted since…” Why? Cos it was “only” Reading in the final? Again, a team that finished above us and we didn’t beat them that season??? It wasn’t a forgone conclusion if we’d not “bottled” Hudds. It doesn’t matter Reading wasn’t a “name” at the time!

 

Earlier this season when we had the chance to go third for the first time and lost (was it to Blackburn again!!)…”bottlers” “always let you down”….

 

But a few games later we put a run together and did get third…were we bottlers then?

 

Loss over Christmas = Bottlers

 

Win away at Brighton and Leeds = never mentioned

 

Loss vs Blackburn and they are bottlers again.

 

They cant be bottlers every time they lose of game, surely? If they were bottlers, they wouldn’t win any game, especially hard ones? Moreover, they wouldn’t be professional footballers playing very high up in the game. As many people have said, skill only takes you so far…and playing for a Championship team is very, very far! If they were bottlers, I doubt they would be pros!

 

So maybe, just maybe, we are just not as good as people seem to think? Have we improved since CC days? If not, why do people suddenly expect us to be up there challenging? The players haven’t shown they are good enough, surely?

 

“yes, but the players are talented…look at Hutch…he would have been a Chelsea regular if he didn’t get injured….” Well, we’ll never know, cos he did.

 

At the start of the season, I thought we’d finish around 7-10th, I think we’re probably gonna do that (EFL depending!). Maybe we’ll finish there cos that’s how good we are based on all the teams in this league, not because of mental fortitude.

 

But just stop with the “bottlers” tag, it just seems lazy, immature and venomous. 

 

Lazy and immature sums up most of those on here who throw the term about

[Guest HillsboroughOwlNI]

Not sure if “bottlejob” is the correct term, but there’s definitely something wrong with the culture and psychology at the club.

 

There’s been contrasting articles lately about the cultures at Liverpool and Man Utd. Apparently most Liverpool players can be found at the gym at least an hour before training sessions even start. In contrast Man Utd players were photographed going to a spa yesterday, after they were beaten by Burnley. I’ve no evidence, but something tells me our players tomorrow morning are more likely to be getting their backs and balls rubbed by busty Sharon down the local spa, than bench or leg pressing!

[Guest LittleG]

49 minutes ago, Burnsie said:

Okay

 

It is time to address the elephant in the room. I wanted to post this a few times…but after the loss vs Blackburn, I thought I’d leave it a few days so I didn’t get excommunicated.

 

Anyway, every time we lose, we get many, many posters on here (some very regular and respected posters) that say the reason we lost was down to the fact that the players are “bottlers”, “spineless”, “cowards”.

 

A lot of the evidence for this links back to Wembley (in fact, in the current CC thread someone has mentioned that today).

 

Well, against Hull we didn’t play well… but did we bottle it? Or did we lose to a team that we’d not beaten that season (1 draw and 1 loss)…a team that finished places above us?  Moreover, of the “bottlers” only 2 “bottlejobs” started vs Blackburn (for those who link the current team to CC’s team). We also have a different manager!

 

Posters evidence the bottler tag due to the play-off defeats against Hudds. Now here, about 40-50% of the team are still around. And we were gash. However, maybe (as happens in big games…see many finals) two matched teams cancelled each other out. Remember, this Hudds team went up and stayed up. And then we have the “best chance to get promoted since…” Why? Cos it was “only” Reading in the final? Again, a team that finished above us and we didn’t beat them that season??? It wasn’t a forgone conclusion if we’d not “bottled” Hudds. It doesn’t matter Reading wasn’t a “name” at the time!

 

Earlier this season when we had the chance to go third for the first time and lost (was it to Blackburn again!!)…”bottlers” “always let you down”….

 

But a few games later we put a run together and did get third…were we bottlers then?

 

Loss over Christmas = Bottlers

 

Win away at Brighton and Leeds = never mentioned

 

Loss vs Blackburn and they are bottlers again.

 

They cant be bottlers every time they lose of game, surely? If they were bottlers, they wouldn’t win any game, especially hard ones? Moreover, they wouldn’t be professional footballers playing very high up in the game. As many people have said, skill only takes you so far…and playing for a Championship team is very, very far! If they were bottlers, I doubt they would be pros!

 

So maybe, just maybe, we are just not as good as people seem to think? Have we improved since CC days? If not, why do people suddenly expect us to be up there challenging? The players haven’t shown they are good enough, surely?

 

“yes, but the players are talented…look at Hutch…he would have been a Chelsea regular if he didn’t get injured….” Well, we’ll never know, cos he did.

 

At the start of the season, I thought we’d finish around 7-10th, I think we’re probably gonna do that (EFL depending!). Maybe we’ll finish there cos that’s how good we are based on all the teams in this league, not because of mental fortitude.

 

But just stop with the “bottlers” tag, it just seems lazy, immature and venomous. 

Agree with a lot of what you say just don't like the use of the word venomous; rather a vile word to use but unfortunately seems to be the word of the month.

[Burnsie]

Just now, LittleG said:

Agree with a lot of what you say just don't like the use of the word venomous; rather a vile word to use but unfortunately seems to be the word of the month.

My friend hates the word mosit.... Just saying

[WindygrOWLer]

As mentioned before our away tactics seem to suit us more. When we're on our game and press the opposition we can beat anyone. Sadly, we don't always do this, like against Blackburn, we sat back like Forest did against us and let them play. The top teams consistently work their ârses off and strive for the best week in, week out.

[Guest LittleG]

7 minutes ago, Burnsie said:

My friend hates the word mosit.... Just saying

What does mosit mean? Venomous?

[sMacLean]

At home in particular yes. Feels like we are still stuck in the 'players are too scared to play at Hillsborough' days.

[Buddy Repperton]

Not about bottle - they're just  not good enough! 

[TodwickOwl]

51 minutes ago, Junk Smuggler said:

 

That day there was, yes.

Exactly, it happens

 

Theyre now knocking on the door of second place - like we was

 

Funny old game

[***HIRSTY***]

I don’t think we are bottlers, I just don’t think we are very good.

[Mike Hunt]

1 hour ago, Burnsie said:

Okay

 

It is time to address the elephant in the room. I wanted to post this a few times…but after the loss vs Blackburn, I thought I’d leave it a few days so I didn’t get excommunicated.

 

Anyway, every time we lose, we get many, many posters on here (some very regular and respected posters) that say the reason we lost was down to the fact that the players are “bottlers”, “spineless”, “cowards”.

 

A lot of the evidence for this links back to Wembley (in fact, in the current CC thread someone has mentioned that today).

 

Well, against Hull we didn’t play well… but did we bottle it? Or did we lose to a team that we’d not beaten that season (1 draw and 1 loss)…a team that finished places above us?  Moreover, of the “bottlers” only 2 “bottlejobs” started vs Blackburn (for those who link the current team to CC’s team). We also have a different manager!

 

Posters evidence the bottler tag due to the play-off defeats against Hudds. Now here, about 40-50% of the team are still around. And we were gash. However, maybe (as happens in big games…see many finals) two matched teams cancelled each other out. Remember, this Hudds team went up and stayed up. And then we have the “best chance to get promoted since…” Why? Cos it was “only” Reading in the final? Again, a team that finished above us and we didn’t beat them that season??? It wasn’t a forgone conclusion if we’d not “bottled” Hudds. It doesn’t matter Reading wasn’t a “name” at the time!

 

Earlier this season when we had the chance to go third for the first time and lost (was it to Blackburn again!!)…”bottlers” “always let you down”….

 

But a few games later we put a run together and did get third…were we bottlers then?

 

Loss over Christmas = Bottlers

 

Win away at Brighton and Leeds = never mentioned

 

Loss vs Blackburn and they are bottlers again.

 

They cant be bottlers every time they lose of game, surely? If they were bottlers, they wouldn’t win any game, especially hard ones? Moreover, they wouldn’t be professional footballers playing very high up in the game. As many people have said, skill only takes you so far…and playing for a Championship team is very, very far! If they were bottlers, I doubt they would be pros!

 

So maybe, just maybe, we are just not as good as people seem to think? Have we improved since CC days? If not, why do people suddenly expect us to be up there challenging? The players haven’t shown they are good enough, surely?

 

“yes, but the players are talented…look at Hutch…he would have been a Chelsea regular if he didn’t get injured….” Well, we’ll never know, cos he did.

 

At the start of the season, I thought we’d finish around 7-10th, I think we’re probably gonna do that (EFL depending!). Maybe we’ll finish there cos that’s how good we are based on all the teams in this league, not because of mental fortitude.

 

But just stop with the “bottlers” tag, it just seems lazy, immature and venomous. 

I was going to post a similar thread 

but I bottled it 

 

 

[ashley8]

What about a manager who talks about 'them' and 'their mentality ' weak weak manager. It's us and we its pathetic. Detaching himself. Get rid he plays crap football and takes some responsibility after 5 put past us to then go back to them . Some players do need to move on but he should go with them we are Wednesday we win we lose not them

[Mike Hunt]

29 minutes ago, WalthamOwl said:

Personally believe quite a few of these players are weak minded. Looking forward to Monk hopefully getting rid of that and getting players that will give everything out on the pitch for the club. When teams go down to 10 men they usually put extra effort in, make it even harder to be broken down. We where an absolute shambles against Blackburn. 

Which players are they then ?

[sherlyegg]

16 minutes ago, LittleG said:

They cant be bottlers every time they lose of game, surely? If they were bottlers, they wouldn’t win any game, especially hard ones?

Nope, but it depends who we are playing.

We are poor against tough gritty time wasting sides.

Good sides we seem to do better.

We are easy to out bully, creative footballing sides don't need to resort to shyte anti football tactics...usually!

Btw we deffo bottled the hudds semi...especially the pens

[OwlinOldham]

While Bottlers isn't maybe the right term, there is clearly something wrong at some level.

Maybe its a weak mentality within the squad or just a lack of application from some. Could even be an arrogance on the squads part to think the game ahead an easy one or a walkover.  

Whatever it is, we do seem to always capitulate at the times when we need a performance most. Truth is that every time we have some pressure on us to perform and we look like we are doing well, we suddenly forget to turn up. 

Theres room to be both top of your game and unable to deal with the pressure and maybe we have a good few of them types here...... who knows?