I think he meant physically, not tactically. Cobi certainly was being abusive, because Brandon was shutting him down.
Well, the first half Prideaux was a misery. He was right in front of me and everyone was beating him. In the end nothing came of it, but not due to him. In the 2nd half he frustrated Cobi and the whole Galaxy team got frustrated. So maybe, IMHO, it was a tale of two halves.
My thoughts on the game: 1. Rimando has got to save that ball. End of story. He makes some blinding saves, but I have to say that he has cost us big in 3 matches this year by letting in soft goals. 2. Esky looks lost out there. He has no sense of when and where to make a run. Not only is he not in a position to receive a pass, he's often in the way. 3. We got blown away in midfield. If you're gonna bunker down for 90 (or 100, for that matter) you gotta win more balls in midfield. I thought we were totally outplayed in the middle of the field. 4. Hudson's got selective memory if he thinks we should have been up at the half. Maybe we blew 2 chances, but the Galaxy had 2 rattle off the pipes. 5. The tool shed is a hell of a stadium.
Where did Hudson make these 'frequent laments' ? I remember reading one article where he commented that the H.O. denial had screwed up their plans for next season. Nothing else, and certainly nothing that would give Convey any legitimate reason to think Hudson didn't want him back. Look, much as I sympathise with Convey, football is a tough sport and if you can't get over rejections and disappointments you are going to go nowhere. Look at Harkes autobiography where he describes how he was almost signed for Celtic, then the deal was called off because their then manager was sacked. Harkes was chucked out of his hotel room and had to go back to Sheffield Wed and beg them to sign him (after he turned down their original offer and left to find a better one). At some point Convey is going to have to decide whether he wants to spend the rest of his life moping about being turned down or if he wants to start contributing to the team again.
Isn't it a little early to be saying that Convey has looked awful, not gotten over the disapointment etc... I believe he's been back for 3 matches and appeared as a subsititute in all of them. We won 2 of those matches. We didn't lose Saturday because of Convey. His insertion made no impact on the game, and he was not at fault on the goal. He gave up the ball in midfield a few times, but no one was playing tremendously in the center of the pitch. Q2 was all over the midfield, often times unmarked, but rarely got the ball and did little to win balls himself.
I think you missed my point. I just think it's too early to be overly critical. Coming in as a sub is altogether different than starting a match. Some take longer to get into the swing of the play. When's the last time Convey played regularly as a second half sub? Also, he's only had a few matches back. Unfortunately, readjusting can take time, and it shouldn't be confused with moping. As I said, he hasn't had much impact in the last 3 substitute appearances, but I think it's a bit early to settle into a disparaging opinion as to why that's the case.
Why that's the case is relevant to how to coach him out of it, but it's totally irrelevant to whether to play him or not. As long as he's not contributing, why is he on the field? If we have a choice of putting in a second-half sub when we're struggling to win a game, and we know from his current track record that Convey isn't it, why on earth would someone put him in ahead of someone else who might make a difference? (obligatory DCU-glass-half-empty aside: if there is any such player) Maybe he's readjusting, maybe he's moping, maybe he's got an injury that's nagging: who knows? Bottom line is, "hasn't had much impact in the last three substitute appearances" is not a recommendation for subbing someone in.
Why bother subbing him? Who knows if that's the best answer. I agree it depends on how he's coached out of whatever mini-slump he's in. From the evidence, it's not wise to make him a late-game sub. However, until 6 weeks ago he was an automatic starting XI- I think it's fair to give him a run-out when he's match fit, as opposed to throwing in the towel on him. I don't think along the lines of "feast or famine" and I hope the coaches don't, either.