Nope. It's saying that players out injured might be pushing harder to be declared fit if we were doing better.

Come on Mrs B you know that's not what he's implying.
Please don't let your perceived distaste of seb cloud the discussion.
As established by Carl spackler seb is merely pointing out hypothetically of course that due to our poor form or dislike for the coach players may be less likely to play on through the pain barrier and would rather wait until say the are100% fit instead of 80 to 90.

It amounts to the same thing. Players able to take the field but choosing to take the easy option. A disappointing accusation from a supporter IMO.

What I was saying was its been insinuated that players are due to their poor character as men are willing to let their teammates/friends cop the flack/struggle because they don't like to lose or play for the coach.

No the players and current coach are pillars of virtue arnt they as can be seen when they played in the play off game against Hudds in 2013

Makes me sad to think this is what some of our fans are now.
I know some sl players well n I lived with one for a while n I've seen the ridiculous lengths players go to to get out on the pitch when average folk would be off work for weeks n in physio for ages. Some of these lads setting themselves up for some uncomfortable later yrs in life for in some cases wages not much greater/less even than some of the posters on here. Of some of the tripe I read on here regular this actually angers me!

Was a lot happening then.
I knew bomber was off in may n that Gentle was going in the July. Lot of unrest behind the scenes.
The lads currently out have done enough in the games so far to be given the benefit that they are genuine. You name checked thompson for a start. Unfair imo

Only 6 out of the 17 in that Hudds game played v Leeds. Gentle was coach then, of course. Keep digging that poisonous hole though.

Not really. As you yourself said, one is a fairly libellous accusation of breach of contract, whereas the other is more a questioning of the players' depth of dedication to the cause. It appears to be a rather clumsy attempt to link it to the players not being behind Radford. The fairly stretched anti-Radford element does not make it the accusation you're suggesting, though.

I'll reiterate that I don't necessarily agree with him, but I think the interpretation you've applied is incorrect and a bit OTT, personally.



But allegedly it does go on. I bet we all remember how quickly model professional Richard Swain's bicep injury with it's curiously vague medium to long-term status cleared up after Kear's sacking.

21 incidents reviewed by the video panel this weekend, 20 not charged.