katieakita Posted 5 January 2019 Posted 5 January 2019 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1997_Football_League_Cup_Final Apart from the PL win for many this is up with greatest achievements in the clubs history. So a challenge for all City fans who remember this. Go back as far as the QF against Ipswich and say what you remember about the 5 games, the excitement the free flowing football under MON then come back and tell us how the football under Puel is so bad and boring. Nobody claims it is perfect under Puel but it is not as bad as some want to think it is
sylofox Posted 5 January 2019 Posted 5 January 2019 Another Puel in/out argument to follow. This site really is becoming boring. In fact it's named wrong atm as very little talk is foxes. PuelTalk.co.uk
st albans fox Posted 5 January 2019 Posted 5 January 2019 1 minute ago, sylofox said: Another Puel in/out argument to follow. This site really is becoming boring. In fact it's named wrong atm as very little talk is foxes. PuelTalk.co.uk Is the OP wrong though ? I agree that perhaps a section devoted to the manager would solve some of the problems!
sylofox Posted 5 January 2019 Posted 5 January 2019 1 minute ago, st albans fox said: Is the OP wrong though ? I agree that perhaps a section devoted to the manager would solve some of the problems! Not saying anyone is wrong for starting some of the topics. Collymoore has a point with the goals thread. It's the fact it takes about six posts to be another in/out topic and not talking about the topic.
Bayfox Posted 5 January 2019 Posted 5 January 2019 3 hours ago, katieakita said: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1997_Football_League_Cup_Final Apart from the PL win for many this is up with greatest achievements in the clubs history. So a challenge for all City fans who remember this. Go back as far as the QF against Ipswich and say what you remember about the 5 games, the excitement the free flowing football under MON then come back and tell us how the football under Puel is so bad and boring. Nobody claims it is perfect under Puel but it is not as bad as some want to think it is Had this conversation with some mates the other day. I give you the fact that muzzy could score goals from midfield. And the fact that we normally had 3 cbs that made us dangerous at set pieces. Now that may not seem a lot but it made us more exciting to watch. Do you think we will score from a set piece Nowdays, we expected to score back then. And we're are the goals from midfield. When do any of our players break the lines Nowdays, look how many goals muzzy scored when breaking from the middle of the park. I'm properly on the fence at the minute. But at least MON knew how to take points of teams in the bottom half. Maybe it Was all set pieces but at least we had something. How many games has morgan played for us now, how often does he score, even Harry who was huge for England at the world cup hasn't looked that threatening for us.
Mark 'expert' Lawrenson Posted 5 January 2019 Posted 5 January 2019 I was around back then but I’m old now and my memory is fading fast ? or I’ve forgotten all the dull games! It just seemed so more exciting back then ? edit* actually everything seemed more exciting back then, oh the joys of youth
foxile5 Posted 5 January 2019 Posted 5 January 2019 4 hours ago, katieakita said: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1997_Football_League_Cup_Final Apart from the PL win for many this is up with greatest achievements in the clubs history. So a challenge for all City fans who remember this. Go back as far as the QF against Ipswich and say what you remember about the 5 games, the excitement the free flowing football under MON then come back and tell us how the football under Puel is so bad and boring. Nobody claims it is perfect under Puel but it is not as bad as some want to think it is Ipswich away was a dour game, improved only by Mark Robins belting one in. I sat slightly behind Jamie Lawrence and Matt Elliot in the stands. I belive Elliot had played for Oxford and was cup tied.
StanSP Posted 5 January 2019 Posted 5 January 2019 4 hours ago, katieakita said: tell us how the football under Puel is so bad and boring. Nobody claims it is perfect under Puel but it is not as bad as some want to think it is you contradict yourself saying the football under Puel is so bad and then go on to say 'it's not as bad as some want to think'.
bovril Posted 5 January 2019 Posted 5 January 2019 The 'boring boring' Leicester tag under O'Neill was completely wrong, it's bad enough other fans believed it without some Leicester supporters seemingly buying into it too.
Fox92 Posted 5 January 2019 Posted 5 January 2019 Too old for my time but I'm guessing the difference is O'Neill can get away with it because he won the trophies.
Bayfox Posted 5 January 2019 Posted 5 January 2019 1 hour ago, Vlad the Fox said: People moaned back then as well. Yeah but we didn't have Foxestalk or Twitter so it was confined to the pub and matchday
Bert Posted 5 January 2019 Posted 5 January 2019 2 hours ago, sylofox said: Another Puel in/out argument to follow. This site really is becoming boring. In fact it's named wrong atm as very little talk is foxes. PuelTalk.co.uk Which you have inadvertently started. If the site is becoming so boring you don’t have to grace us with your presence.
sylofox Posted 5 January 2019 Posted 5 January 2019 10 minutes ago, Bert said: Which you have inadvertently started. If the site is becoming so boring you don’t have to grace us with your presence. Great advert for the site a mod telling a poster to do one.
Mark 'expert' Lawrenson Posted 5 January 2019 Posted 5 January 2019 43 minutes ago, bovril said: The 'boring boring' Leicester tag under O'Neill was completely wrong, it's bad enough other fans believed it without some Leicester supporters seemingly buying into it too. Did this really happen? (The boring tag) I know we were labelled hoof ball at times (unfairly) but we played to our strengths, lots of set piece goals etc, but boring... I thought it was exciting ??
HighPeakFox Posted 5 January 2019 Posted 5 January 2019 7 minutes ago, Mark 'expert' Lawrenson said: Did this really happen? (The boring tag) I know we were labelled hoof ball at times (unfairly) but we played to our strengths, lots of set piece goals etc, but boring... I thought it was exciting ?? I think our team of that time was best described as 'effective'. However, at times we played some decent stuff.
Durnerz Posted 5 January 2019 Posted 5 January 2019 O'Neill's team was never the most talented but the hardest working, we would outwork teams. We had that touch of quality in Heskey, Izzet and Guppy with many others solid, dependable players. Often we would grind out results and make set plays our key weapon.
bovril Posted 5 January 2019 Posted 5 January 2019 26 minutes ago, Mark 'expert' Lawrenson said: Did this really happen? (The boring tag) I know we were labelled hoof ball at times (unfairly) but we played to our strengths, lots of set piece goals etc, but boring... I thought it was exciting ?? We were dismissed as boring from some quarters at the time and I've heard it repeated by a couple of Leicester fans more recently. We had some real quality as stated above.
Kitchandro Posted 5 January 2019 Posted 5 January 2019 We had a tiny ground and little money in an era when the Premier League was full of big clubs. Now we're financially competitive and in a league with Bournemouth, Brighton, Watford, Cardiff, Hudddersfield, Fulham and Burnley. There's no excuse for playing football this dull with the players we have in this squad. I'm not old enough to remember entire matches from the O'Neill era but it's safe to say that team was greater than the sum of it's parts. This one most certainly isn't. Oh, and it was nice that we actually tried to win trophies back then. Again, what's Puel's excuse for not doing that now? Looks like we were playing pretty much our 1st team against Ipswich.
Izzy Posted 5 January 2019 Posted 5 January 2019 7 hours ago, katieakita said: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1997_Football_League_Cup_Final Apart from the PL win for many this is up with greatest achievements in the clubs history. So a challenge for all City fans who remember this. Go back as far as the QF against Ipswich and say what you remember about the 5 games, the excitement the free flowing football under MON then come back and tell us how the football under Puel is so bad and boring. Nobody claims it is perfect under Puel but it is not as bad as some want to think it is I remember the semi final 2nd leg away at Wimbledon. The kick off was delayed as there were so many Leicester trying to get in. We had the whole of thier main stand, must have been 8,000 of us there. We hung on a bit but our goal was typical of us back then - brilliant Parker free kick delivery and a Grayson bullet header. Scenes at the end will last a long time. Great days..
Bert Posted 5 January 2019 Posted 5 January 2019 3 hours ago, sylofox said: Great advert for the site a mod telling a poster to do one. Not told you to do at all. Just saying you don’t have to be here.
Tuna Posted 5 January 2019 Posted 5 January 2019 Would a cup be allowed to be sponsored by Coca Cola these days? You'd predict the twitter mob would be in uproar.
l444ry Posted 5 January 2019 Posted 5 January 2019 Big difference was that Martin knew how to play the underdog card and get the fans behind the team. Legend.
SpacedX Posted 5 January 2019 Posted 5 January 2019 7 hours ago, foxile5 said: Ipswich away was a dour game, improved only by Mark Robins belting one in. I sat slightly behind Jamie Lawrence It was a smash and grab. Wait, shouldn't Lawrence have been outside poised with the get away vehicle?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.