Thracian Posted 3 October 2006 Posted 3 October 2006 From the Blue Army site: Quote the writer: "The trip to St Andrew's was the third of three games during the month against the three sides relegated from the Premiership, who are always installed as favourites to bounce back - and City lost only one of them, the defeat at West Brom, which was ill-deserved." I'm as biased towards City as anyone but to say we didn't deserve to lose at West Brom is ridiculous. Apart from the fact that they scored and we didn't, this was as clear a case of City giving the initiatiive away as you will ever see and as a result we were hammered in the last quarter. The article concerned RK's intention to move on to "the next step now" by trying to win games, while remaining well organised and difficult to beat. Outwardly very commendable and welcome if he means it but I'm not convinced. First, I cannot imagine why any manager would not start the season and every game trying to win and, there it is, the inevitable not of caution...while remaining organised and difficult to beat. In other words, while making sure there's enough help for the defence... So I'll say it loud and clear again. Play the right team and the defence won't need any extra help. In fact, with the ball spending more time at the other end, they'll have much less work to do.
Dr The Singh Posted 3 October 2006 Posted 3 October 2006 From the Blue Army site: Quote the writer: "The trip to St Andrew's was the third of three games during the month against the three sides relegated from the Premiership, who are always installed as favourites to bounce back - and City lost only one of them, the defeat at West Brom, which was ill-deserved." I'm as biased towards City as anyone but to say we didn't deserve to lose at West Brom is ridiculous. Apart from the fact that they scored and we didn't, this was as clear a case of City giving the initiatiive away as you will ever see and as a result we were hammered in the last quarter. The article concerned RK's intention to move on to "the next step now" by trying to win games, while remaining well organised and difficult to beat. Outwardly very commendable and welcome if he means it but I'm not convinced. First, I cannot imagine why any manager would not start the season and every game trying to win and, there it is, the inevitable not of caution...while remaining organised and difficult to beat. In other words, while making sure there's enough help for the defence... So I'll say it loud and clear again. Play the right team and the defence won't need any extra help. In fact, with the ball spending more time at the other end, they'll have much less work to do. Agreed!!
eaststandtom Posted 3 October 2006 Posted 3 October 2006 From the Blue Army site: Quote the writer: "The trip to St Andrew's was the third of three games during the month against the three sides relegated from the Premiership, who are always installed as favourites to bounce back - and City lost only one of them, the defeat at West Brom, which was ill-deserved." I'm as biased towards City as anyone but to say we didn't deserve to lose at West Brom is ridiculous. Apart from the fact that they scored and we didn't, this was as clear a case of City giving the initiatiive away as you will ever see and as a result we were hammered in the last quarter. The article concerned RK's intention to move on to "the next step now" by trying to win games, while remaining well organised and difficult to beat. Outwardly very commendable and welcome if he means it but I'm not convinced. First, I cannot imagine why any manager would not start the season and every game trying to win and, there it is, the inevitable not of caution...while remaining organised and difficult to beat. In other words, while making sure there's enough help for the defence... So I'll say it loud and clear again. Play the right team and the defence won't need any extra help. In fact, with the ball spending more time at the other end, they'll have much less work to do. agreed with an amendment or two. play the right midfield and we'll do well the team did deserve a point at west brom 'hammered' in the last quarter??? disagree
Thracian Posted 3 October 2006 Author Posted 3 October 2006 agreed with an amendment or two. play the right midfield and we'll do well the team did deserve a point at west brom 'hammered' in the last quarter??? disagree You didn't leave before the end did you - like just before RK's substitutions?. I well understand if you did...
eaststandtom Posted 3 October 2006 Posted 3 October 2006 You didn't leave before the end did you - like just before RK's substitutions?. I well understand if you did... ha ha!!! nope. granted two goals in a minute were a sucker punch but over the course of 90 mins city were worthy of a point in my eyes
BartonFox Posted 3 October 2006 Posted 3 October 2006 ha ha!!! nope. granted two goals in a minute were a sucker punch but over the course of 90 mins city were worthy of a point in my eyes Where do you get your specs? The club should buy a job lot of 31,199 and we'd be packed out each home game.
PAULCFC Posted 3 October 2006 Posted 3 October 2006 Went to west brom and i agree with thracian.The worrying thing from that game for me was bringing stearmano n to play on the wing.
Thracian Posted 3 October 2006 Author Posted 3 October 2006 Went to west brom and i agree with thracian.The worrying thing from that game for me was bringing stearmano n to play on the wing. Worrying? I was expecting to see the medics carting RK off in a straightjacket!
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.