The Scratching Shed is delighted to welcome Journalism and Media student Zak Lewis who is here to share his thoughts on Leeds United’s recent troubles. 

I must admit, I along with what seems like every other Leeds fan this summer, have been underwhelmed and disappointed with our summer acquisitions. Bringing four players in, two goalkeepers, a 34 year old defensive midfielder and a centre back on loan who hasn’t had many ringing endorsements, isn’t going to spark the fan’s imaginations after what was on the whole, a good progressive season.

As last season concluded there was an air of optimism amongst the Leeds faithful, even after our disappointing end of season collapse that seems to be a Leeds staple nowadays. The supporters believed that we would invest and I shared that thought. We knew we wouldn’t be spending ridiculous amounts of money, and we didn’t want to. The last thing we needed was another Ridsdale situation, but we did expect a reasonable amount of cash being spent. After all we are one of only two Championship clubs in the black according to ‘good old’ Ken.

It started well being linked with players like; Jack Cork, Kieran Westwood and even Leeds old boys Lee Bowyer, Jonathan Woodgate and serial ‘Badge Kisser’ Alan Smith. The general consensus amongst the fans was that most, if not all of them would improve our team. Then we were shocked with the news that Leeds had accepted an offer from Leicester City for Kasper Schmeichel. This was when the optimism started to drift away. Our targets started to slip out of our grasp. Westwood went to Sunderland, we ended up with Rachubka, Bowyer cited family reasons and snubbed Leeds for Ipswich and we end up with Brown who hasn’t played in six months. Whilst our optimism that we may sign Eric Lichaj with some of the Kasper Schmeichel money or at the very least on loan, seems more unlikely with the arrival of Darren O’Dea who has already been dubbed Darren “O’Dear” by many of the fans.

Even with all these problems, a part of me still believed we could get something out of the Saints game. Maybe Michael Brown is what we missed last season I told myself, maybe Andy Lonergan will be better than Kasper and maybe just maybe Kisnorbo could still be as good and shore up our defence. Unfortunately my optimism diminished within ten minutes when O’Brien failed to close down the opposition once again and Lonergan failed to save a shot, which to be honest he should have done better with. The rest of the game wasn’t any better either. Leeds looked lethargic and disinterested, our defence looked worse for most parts and our midfield was non-existent for large parts of the game, whilst Grayson looked worried and bemused as to how bad we were. This isn’t taking anything from Southampton, to their credit they looked good, but part of me wondered whether that was because we looked so bad.

However there were a few shining lights. Clayton looked good, he got stuck in and had a few tidy touches, Lonergan made some good saves and improved as the match wore on and at least we scored which prevented us from being bottom of the league on the opening day. But we need to improve tenfold if we’re going to have any chance of mounting a serious promotion challenge this season. The latest rumour of us signing Ryan Bertrand on loan for the rest of the season sounds promising and I for one would be happy if it happened. But I am still holding out hope for the return of Lichaj and hopefully another defensive midfielder to back up Brown who just gave away fouls left right and centre.

Either way keep the faith and keep singing your hearts out for the lads, because getting on their backs this early isn’t going to help matters.

MOT, Zak Lewis.

10 Responses

  1. Jim R H

    I personally think it will come together but more by luck than judgment. Larry fell upon the 451 formation last season and it just started working. you’ve only got watch him in the dugout he hasn’t got a plan A let a lone plan B so hopefully he’ll fall on a formation or be forced into one that works. look at the players in the squad individually and there as good as 70% of the squads in the c/ship we’ve just got to keep the faith

  2. _dje

    A good summary of a frustrating summer.

    Oddly, I feel, Grayson would have been 'playing it safe' if he had brought in half a dozen players, as we expected changes afoot owing to Kilkenny and Johnson going and needing to push on from last season's seventh place finish. With six new players arrived at least he'd have the worn excuse of needing time to gel etc. Instead he played it risky by achieving very little in the transfer market. If we lose tonight then things could turn sour for morale and Grayson's future very fast.

  3. number1inyorkshire

    currently loosing 1-0 to bfd city there is no faith 4-5-1 is just dreadful
    we should be palying 4-4-2 with either nunez ,howson or grella up front with mccormack

  4. number1inyorkshire

    currently loosing 1-0 to bfd city there is no faith 4-5-1 is just dreadful

  5. number1inyorkshire

    fantastic going up as champions ,
    Clayton was MOM again but mccormack was fantastic too

  6. FiliasFogg

    Mccormack got one goal, and did well after that, but he misses the target to often and run/stand in offside too many times. Nunes was invisible most of the game, but he have skills and got two goals. Clayton played well. Andy O'Brien have not played well since we signed him, but played 3 good games before that. Sell him, and buy one with some talent, maybe buy back Matthew Kilgallon. We should play 4-4-1-1 with Nunes as OM(S) and a striker that is able to set him up. Gradel M(L), Snodgrass M(R), Howson and Clayton M(S). MOT

  7. HunterExide

    Zak – tip for a trainee journalist; look up the difference between "disinterested" and "uninterested". They are two very different words. You meant the latter.

    • youngy28

      Disinterested and uninterested share a confused and confusing history. Disinterested was originally used to mean “not interested, indifferent”; uninterested in its earliest use meant “impartial.” By various developmental twists, disinterested is now used in both senses. Uninterested is used mainly in the sense “not interested, indifferent.” It is occasionally used to mean “not having a personal or property interest.”
      Many object to the use of disinterested to mean “not interested, indifferent.” They insist that disinterested can mean only “impartial”: A disinterested observer is the best judge of behavior. However, both senses are well established in all varieties of English, and the sense intended is almost always clear from the context.
      Thought it was a rather rude comment, telling our fledgling journalist student of what he 'meant to say'- when i'm perfectly sure he did. Ni one likes a clever dick eh ;-)

  8. HunterExide

    Indeed Youngy28…ni one does. Disinterested just means impartial and is used and confused with uninterested constantly. Cheers – Clever Dock.

  9. youngy28

    I have even provided you with a comprehensive account of the genesis of both words and still you fail to see the error of your ways! As stated above, "disinterested" (in its earliest form) was used to describe “not interested". That's a fact, its written.
    Over the years as new words are created and sentence structures develop, certain words can overlap and mean essentially the same thing. These words are "synonyms."
    The prefixes "un" and "dis" do share a conflict of sorts though that provides debate. The prefix "un" has been in the language longer than "dis", however this does not apply in this case as "uninterested" in its earliest form meant "impartial."
    Now I would suggest that the two words have evolved to the point where the crossover may indeed support your argument, in its current context, however from an historical aspect you are incorrect.
    In summary I would argue both words essentially mean the same and can pass for the same meaning when used in written and spoken English and there are other words that would conflict more so than the words we are discussing here. That is for another day though.
    Overall, I was just embarrassed for you that you felt the need to even point out your observation in the first place. I mean this a football soundboard, not a forum for would-be-dictionary compilers!! If your original comment was intended to help then you could certainly have phrased it better and linked it in to a comment on the piece.
    You just came across as obnoxious and rather sad. Try sticking to football based comments instead of trawling the annals of internet pages pulling people up on their mistakes.
    If you'd understood the irony in which i'd written my comment then you'd have noticed the slightly self-deprecating way in which i used "clever dick." I was certainly pointing out that you are but also realising at the same time others may well have thought I was, given how articles can be interpreted.
    I would never normally go on at length to defend a point, for fear of coming across as patronising, however I felt you should be put firmly in your place.
    I gave you enough rope to hang yourself with and you duly proved me right, by simply bringing up what was an obvious typing error in my comment last night. There was no basis for any of your supporting argument and you could only retort with a feeble jibe.
    I have tried to make this inoffensive as possible so I wont be replying to any further comments you may wish to make in response to this. The next post should be relating to the article itself.
    As Terry Tibbs would say "thankyou and goodnight."


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.