holly Posted 27 November 2005 Share Posted 27 November 2005 i was just looking on sufc to see what they had to say!! such sore loosers apparently the "penetrated our defence" apart from there two goals i dont think they were good coming forward, so how could they penetrate our defence?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Collymore Posted 27 November 2005 Share Posted 27 November 2005 i was just looking on sufc to see what they had to say!! such sore loosers apparently the "penetrated our defence" apart from there two goals i dont think they were good coming forward, so how could they penetrate our defence?? I think they did a very good job of penetrating each other TBH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
holly Posted 27 November 2005 Author Share Posted 27 November 2005 I think they did a very good job of penetrating each other TBH see that could of been taken as a normal comment but you made it rude with the wink Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoneWolf Posted 27 November 2005 Share Posted 27 November 2005 if any thing... evlis hammond single handidlly penetrated their defence MANY times.. if you asked some one who didnt follow football to watch that gae.. they wud fink we was in a diffrent leauge to them tbh playing like that.. look out Barcelona... champions leauge here we go!! lolz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hitesh Posted 27 November 2005 Share Posted 27 November 2005 I think they did a very good job of penetrating each other TBH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thracian Posted 27 November 2005 Share Posted 27 November 2005 I know it will get overlooked in the understandable euphoria - but Sheffield sliced our left flank apart at times, scoring one goal as a direct result and enjoying a 15 minute bombardment which had me scared stiff about an equaliser. Their second goal was also headed in at our left-back's post too. I don't know how long Levein intends to be plugging this gaping hole but it had better be quick. We told him Hume was brilliant when he first played for the reserves weeks ago (and he's only just started using him), we told him to stop playing hoof ball (how long has that taken?), we told him to keep attacking once in front (at long last it's happened), and lots of you told him to play two fast strikers (the penny having finally dropped). Why turn a deaf ear to the left-back solutions?. Are there none so blind as those who refuse to see?. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deathside Posted 27 November 2005 Share Posted 27 November 2005 T'blades were very unlucky not to be ahead in the first minute Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
filbertway Posted 27 November 2005 Share Posted 27 November 2005 Thracian, if smith tracked back more then these problems probably wouldn't have happened. I'm not bothered if smith isn't tracking back though if he's helping create goals at the other end which he is. I think its unfair to lay the blame on nils if thats what you are doing becasue he is being exposed alot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thracian Posted 27 November 2005 Share Posted 27 November 2005 Thracian, if smith tracked back more then these problems probably wouldn't have happened. I'm not bothered if smith isn't tracking back though if he's helping create goals at the other end which he is. I think its unfair to lay the blame on nils if thats what you are doing becasue he is being exposed alot. I don't want Smith wasting his energy, certainly not deep in defence. We've always got plenty of defenders. You don't see Nils up with the forwards very often! I want a natural left-back who plays quick, early passes to his team-mates and has the energy to link in naturally with Smith, exactly as Denis Irwin, Gary Neville, Heinze, Le Saux, Pearce and other top class attacking full-backs do/did. Why compromise on this when we have people who can do just that?. Why is a slow-turning, simply defensive but fairly expensive (wages) signing from Blackburn, who cannot pass particularly well, so much more appealing to you that our home grown youngsters who, from everything I've seen so far, have a much wider range of talents (including swiftness in recovery, energy to join the attack, quality passing capabilities). I'm interested cos there's others feel exactly the same way (not many mind) and I'm intrigued to know why. It was the same with Smith. Ric Flair said he was brilliant the first day he saw him but there were doubters up to last week and I said the same about Hume when he first played for the Reserves yet he didn't play for us properly for weeks and some had him down as a failure. So what is it about Nils that is so impressive (at left back I'm talking about?) that he should be in the team ahead of our youth internationals? If Nils were good enough (or more important, fast enough), he would jockey his opponent into safe areas until help arrived. His problem is that, when attacked and turned he's gone forever. This situation rarely happens as a twin centre-back. Smith's defensive capabilities, or lack of em, are only important if there's a weakness behind him. People talk about not putting too much on the shoulders of young players. We can't have Smith doing two jobs just because Levein refuses to plug a leak...surely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Arrow Posted 27 November 2005 Share Posted 27 November 2005 I agree, stearman played decent there againt Watford Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
filbertway Posted 27 November 2005 Share Posted 27 November 2005 I don't want Smith wasting his energy, certainly not deep in defence. We've always got plenty of defenders. You don't see Nils up with the forwards very often! I want a natural left-back who plays quick, early passes to his team-mates and has the energy to link in naturally with Smith, exactly as Denis Irwin, Gary Neville, Heinze, Le Saux, Pearce and other top class attacking full-backs do/did. Why compromise on this when we have people who can do just that?. Why is a slow-turning, simply defensive but fairly expensive (wages) signing from Blackburn, who cannot pass particularly well, so much more appealing to you that our home grown youngsters who, from everything I've seen so far, have a much wider range of talents (including swiftness in recovery, energy to join the attack, quality passing capabilities). I'm interested cos there's others feel exactly the same way (not many mind) and I'm intrigued to know why. It was the same with Smith. Ric Flair said he was brilliant the first day he saw him but there were doubters up to last week and I said the same about Hume when he first played for the Reserves yet he didn't play for us properly for weeks and some had him down as a failure. So what is it about Nils that is so impressive (at left back I'm talking about?) that he should be in the team ahead of our youth internationals? If Nils were good enough (or more important, fast enough), he would jockey his opponent into safe areas until help arrived. His problem is that, when attacked and turned he's gone forever. This situation rarely happens as a twin centre-back. Smith's defensive capabilities, or lack of em, are only important if there's a weakness behind him. People talk about not putting too much on the shoulders of young players. We can't have Smith doing two jobs just because Levein refuses to plug a leak...surely. Another good post thrac I would love to see sheehan in there instead of nils, i was just sticking up for him as i felt it wasn't his fault entirely that we were getting sliced apart on the left wing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.