Kilworthfox Posted 29 November 2006 Posted 29 November 2006 It was just daft. I dont understand Kelly sometimes,and how he thinks we can win the game when he takes of our best player when there a others not pulling there wait quite obviosuly. I was undecided about him until last nights substitutions crazy!
Wils Posted 29 November 2006 Posted 29 November 2006 I feel last night was a game where we needed a big striker. We were putting to many balls into the box that the keeper was jus taking every time,would have been werth sticking McAuley up there rather than COG or Fryatt. We just needed someone on the end of them.
Kilworthfox Posted 29 November 2006 Posted 29 November 2006 I feel last night was a game where we needed a big striker. We were putting to many balls into the box that the keeper was jus taking every time,would have been werth sticking McAuley up there rather than COG or Fryatt. We just needed someone on the end of them. but do you not think that putting mcauley up there as a big man is a discrase when we sent de donkey to holland who would do that job that people seem to be asking for from the past two games
Guest Posted 29 November 2006 Posted 29 November 2006 I have just got back from Narch (we stayed over, before anyone thinks they're clever). I can't be bothered to read the rest of this post, because I am far too pissed off, annoyed, frustrated, depressed, and a million and one other adjectives. My thoughts can be summed up by the well-known songstress Lonnie Gordon "It's happening all over again".
Wils Posted 29 November 2006 Posted 29 November 2006 I have just got back from Narch (we stayed over, before anyone thinks they're clever). I can't be bothered to read the rest of this post, because I am far too pissed off, annoyed, frustrated, depressed, and a million and one other adjectives. My thoughts can be summed up by the well-known songstress Lonnie Gordon "It's happening all over again". I agree Lisa. Last night was frustrating,and we are in trouble.
Guest Posted 29 November 2006 Posted 29 November 2006 I agree Lisa.Last night was frustrating,and we are in trouble. I thought we had the better of the first half, and yet we were always susceptible. I felt that their goal came from complacency on our part, the players were expecting the half-time whistle, and yet Narch fought until it came. That was the big difference.Just my opinion.
Wils Posted 29 November 2006 Posted 29 November 2006 I thought we had the better of the first half, and yet we were always susceptible. I felt that their goal came from complacency on our part, the players were expecting the half-time whistle, and yet Narch fought until it came. That was the big difference. Just my opinion. We had a good first half,looked the better side and it was just slack marking for the 1st but if we had held on till half time i feel the game may have gone different.
Guest Posted 29 November 2006 Posted 29 November 2006 We had a good first half,looked the better side and it was just slack marking for the 1st but if we had held on till half time i feel the game may have gone different.Groundhog Day, anyone?
Goat Posted 29 November 2006 Posted 29 November 2006 Before i start i just wanted to say i havn't read ALL of this thread, just bits. In my opinion, leicester had the better of the first half but were poor in the second. I don't like to point the finger but it seemed that Josh Low was the "weak link" again. We were poor all over but he seemed to stand out from the rest. The delivery into the box was poor and their keeper seemed to catch everything. We should have made the most of the other opotunities we had in the first half and maybe what has happened could have been prevented. Having said that, me and my mates still enjoyed the outing. Lets hope we can get going again soon
Kilworthfox Posted 29 November 2006 Posted 29 November 2006 Before i start i just wanted to say i havn't read ALL of this thread, just bits. In my opinion, leicester had the better of the first half but were poor in the second. I don't like to point the finger but it seemed that Josh Low was the "weak link" again. We were poor all over but he seemed to stand out from the rest. The delivery into the box was poor and their keeper seemed to catch everything. We should have made the most of the other opotunities we had in the first half and maybe what has happened could have been prevented. Having said that, me and my mates still enjoyed the outing. Lets hope we can get going again soon I know he is unpopular and i dislike his play as the next fan but i thought he had one of his better games not much of a statement i know but still i would hardly say he was the main reason. Did you realy think he was the worst?
Wils Posted 29 November 2006 Posted 29 November 2006 Did you realy think he was the worst? Yes. Wasted posession to much.
Goat Posted 29 November 2006 Posted 29 November 2006 You are right in saying the blame can't be put in him on the whole.. I just remember him down infront of us throughout the second half being so poor. Its one of those things really, you seem to focus on one player and forget what the others did wrong. I agree that he wasn't the main reason though.
nandojolob Posted 29 November 2006 Posted 29 November 2006 [size=4]Could it be that the substandard players in our team are not giving their all so that the results suffer and MM changes his mind about buying our beloved football club ?[/size]
gatesheadfox Posted 29 November 2006 Posted 29 November 2006 im all for mindless complaint but that is just the stupidist thing i have read on here :pinch: including the word stupidist? hehe. only joking of course. yep, the players are scared incase the team gets financial backing because none of them want even a remote chance of a promotion or an increased wage. i know i wouldnt
Mort Posted 29 November 2006 Posted 29 November 2006 including the word stupidist? hehe. only joking of course. yep, the players are scared incase the team gets financial backing because none of them want even a remote chance of a promotion or an increased wage. i know i wouldnt I think it's probably an over reaction, but if your Rab Douglas, Josh Low, Andy Johnson, Alan Maybury, Andy Welsh even Hughes, Fryatt or McCarthy you would not be looking forward to a new manager who might have the cash to rebuild the squad... i could see McCarthy not lasting too long as a skipper either under a new manager, though i could Kisnorbo or even a new sigining getting the gig.
lcfc_jme Posted 29 November 2006 Posted 29 November 2006 Well the ongoing takeover by Milan seems to be the latest excuse the management want to throw at us for poor performances and bad results. I can see why it'd be worrying the players, but it really shouldn't be affecting them enough to make them play awfully badly and cause them to lose games. If anything, it is supposed to make them more determined to play well, so that they can impress the new owner, and, if worst comes to worst, the new manager that comes in - guaranteeing them their jobs. What I see with City is not determination, desire, passion, hunger, commitment and willingness to give maximum effort. I see passionless, non-committed, lazy players who know their manager is going to try and take the pressure off of them by bailing them out with lame and pathetic excuses week after week. This excuse-making and toothless team ethic is costing us dearly, and imo either Kelly needs to be MUCH tougher on his players, or Milan needs to sort out a jumble sale in January.
nandojolob Posted 29 November 2006 Posted 29 November 2006 im all for mindless complaint but that is just the stupidist thing i have read on here :pinch: My comments were meant as food for thought - which could have an element of truth behind them - that's what forum discussions are all about. So rather than being dismissive and offensive about someones view point, how about a bit of constructive critisism if you disagree with what's been said.
davieG Posted 29 November 2006 Posted 29 November 2006 Well the ongoing takeover by Milan seems to be the latest excuse the management want to throw at us for poor performances and bad results. I can see why it'd be worrying the players, but it really shouldn't be affecting them enough to make them play awfully badly and cause them to lose games.If anything, it is supposed to make them more determined to play well, so that they can impress the new owner, and, if worst comes to worst, the new manager that comes in - guaranteeing them their jobs. What I see with City is not determination, desire, passion, hunger, commitment and willingness to give maximum effort. I see passionless, non-committed, lazy players who know their manager is going to try and take the pressure off of them by bailing them out with lame and pathetic excuses week after week. This excuse-making and toothless team ethic is costing us dearly, and imo either Kelly needs to be MUCH tougher on his players, or Milan needs to sort out a jumble sale in January. On the other hand if they know deep down that they are shite and will not be part of MMs plans then their motivation will plummet because they will have seen the future of LCFC and they aren't in it.
Swedging Posted 29 November 2006 Posted 29 November 2006 On the other hand if they know deep down that they are shite and will not be part of MMs plans then their motivation will plummet because they will have seen the future of LCFC and they aren't in it. Or, more probably, half the team is thinking, "Everything rests on how I do these next few matches." People are nervous and selfish, and team play goes to shit.
The People's Hero Posted 30 November 2006 Posted 30 November 2006 Or, more probably, half the team is thinking, "Everything rests on how I do these next few matches." People are nervous and selfish, and team play goes to shit. Or they're just all sh it.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.