AyewJoking Posted 14 March 2007 Posted 14 March 2007 What a load of rubbish. Painfully frustrating that we dont have what it takes to beat dire sides like Leeds.
Ultra Posted 14 March 2007 Posted 14 March 2007 He played the ball back to Nils for a couple of crosses when he had little alternaitve and when Nils was much better placed. Porter also made the goal, had two cracking on-target piledrivers brilliantly blocked and was always trying to make something happen. Are you Porter's agent?? He did indeed have a couple of shots blocked. But what you fail to mention is that those blocks came because he showed a first touch which would have shamed a Special Olympics player! (though he was far from the only City player to do so). And what about all the setpieces he wasted? We wouldn't have tolerated that from Gareth Williams and we shouldn't from him either. One decent cross for the equaliser does NOT make a wonder display!
BartonFox Posted 14 March 2007 Posted 14 March 2007 Are you Porter's agent?? He did indeed have a couple of shots blocked. But what you fail to mention is that those blocks came because he showed a first touch which would have shamed a Special Olympics player! (though he was far from the only City player to do so). And what about all the setpieces he wasted? We wouldn't have tolerated that from Gareth Williams and we shouldn't from him either. One decent cross for the equaliser does NOT make a wonder display! :laugh:
Fez of Mahrez Posted 14 March 2007 Posted 14 March 2007 Porter was average again. I think he's employed Thracian as his spin doctor.
STUHILL Posted 14 March 2007 Posted 14 March 2007 Are you Porter's agent?? He did indeed have a couple of shots blocked. But what you fail to mention is that those blocks came because he showed a first touch which would have shamed a Special Olympics player! (though he was far from the only City player to do so). And what about all the setpieces he wasted? We wouldn't have tolerated that from Gareth Williams and we shouldn't from him either. One decent cross for the equaliser does NOT make a wonder display! Very harsh i think - I thought Porter, Hume and Jarrett were only ones who actually looked like they wanted to win it tonight! I admit the quality was lacking but I think especially Hume and Porter suffered tonight purely because of the garbage they have to play with! They deserve to be playing with better players than the shite we've got!!
Manwell Pablo Posted 14 March 2007 Posted 14 March 2007 I don't even think Hume was that good to be honest, I'm thinking he's getting marks for reputation and a shit goal which he should never of scored.
BartonFox Posted 14 March 2007 Posted 14 March 2007 I don't even think Hume was that good to be honest, I'm thinking he's getting marks for reputation and a shit goal which he should never of scored. I got in a row again with the bloke who mouths off near me. He reckons Hume is destined for the Premiership :laugh: He gets away with it because he is a cult amongst some of the numbskulls, but he tends to flatter to decieve. Personally for the money I don't think we have had good value.
Ultra Posted 14 March 2007 Posted 14 March 2007 At least he put the effort in, which was more than the rest of them did. It was a massive deflection off a defender for his goal, but he probably deserved that slice of luck. Porter's general crossing and setpieces were not good tonight. I know Thracian's incapable of seeing ANY wrong in the academy players, but the rest of you should have NO excuse!
Manwell Pablo Posted 14 March 2007 Posted 14 March 2007 I got in a row again with the bloke who mouths off near me. He reckons Hume is destined for the Premiership :laugh: He gets away with it because he is a cult amongst some of the numbskulls, but he tends to flatter to decieve. Personally for the money I don't think we have had good value. Overall for £750,000. I'd agree it's debateable. It's a lot of money.
BartonFox Posted 14 March 2007 Posted 14 March 2007 Overall for £750,000. I'd agree it's debateable. It's a lot of money. I like the guy and appreciate his application but that doesn't mask his serious faults to make it even in this division.
Fez of Mahrez Posted 14 March 2007 Posted 14 March 2007 Overall for £750,000. I'd agree it's debateable. It's a lot of money. Was desperation money after we'd flogged Connolly at the last minute. Should have gone for closer to £500,000. When you get as much from your strike partner as he did from Horsfield tonight though, you can expect to have a poor game.
STUHILL Posted 14 March 2007 Posted 14 March 2007 Overall for £750,000. I'd agree it's debateable. It's a lot of money. Nah he's still young, perhaps isn't as lethal as we would have liked for that money but put him in a team which has some more quality and I have high hopes for him, and Fryatt actually. Maybe i'm a dreamer but i don't care!
Manwell Pablo Posted 14 March 2007 Posted 14 March 2007 Was desperation money after we'd flogged Connolly at the last minute. Should have gone for closer to £500,000. When you get as much from your strike partner as he did from Horsfield tonight though, you can expect to have a poor game. True, but as I said over all, it's worth a discussion. Nah he's still young, perhaps isn't as lethal as we would have liked for that money but put him in a team which has some more quality and I have high hopes for him, and Fryatt actually. Maybe i'm a dreamer but i don't care! He might still be young but he's under contract for three years, we payed £750,000 to contract him for three years, at the end of which he can walk away if he wants. Him signing a new contract is far from a certainty.
Thracian Posted 14 March 2007 Posted 14 March 2007 At least he put the effort in, which was more than the rest of them did. It was a massive deflection off a defender for his goal, but he probably deserved that slice of luck. Porter's general crossing and setpieces were not good tonight. I know Thracian's incapable of seeing ANY wrong in the academy players, but the rest of you should have NO excuse! Porter's crosses, apart from the goal of course, were often blocked or slightly wayward but he posed a constant threat and apart from the assist would quite possibly have scored twice had his goalbound shots not been brilliantly blocked by defenders in last ditch situations. It wasn't so much what he achieved - and he did achieve something - but what he was forever attempting and Leeds deserved sonme credit for constantly being alert to the danger he posed. The lad creates a stir. That's always a good thing and, second half, he stayed much wider allowing our front four look quite threatening at times.
AyewJoking Posted 14 March 2007 Posted 14 March 2007 Hume is gold dust. No one in this squad works harder than Hume and no one comes close to his talent. How much did we pay for Hammond? Two Hammonds would still fall way short of Hume.
Ultra Posted 14 March 2007 Posted 14 March 2007 I think Hume has ability, but we won't see the best of it under the current regime. He spends far too much time in his own half trying to cover for the inadequacies of his defensive and midfield colleagues, and would be better used as an attacking midfielder (which we desperately need) than a striker.
Fez of Mahrez Posted 14 March 2007 Posted 14 March 2007 I believe Porter also developed a cure for cancer halfway through the first half.
AyewJoking Posted 14 March 2007 Posted 14 March 2007 Porter beat their right back once (as far as I could see) and the rest of the time he resembled Jordan Stewart.
STUHILL Posted 14 March 2007 Posted 14 March 2007 Porter's crosses, apart from the goal of course, were often blocked or slightly wayward but he posed a constant threat and apart from the assist would quite possibly have scored twice had his goalbound shots not been brilliantly blocked by defenders in last ditch situations. It wasn't so much what he achieved - and he did achieve something - but what he was forever attempting and Leeds deserved sonme credit for constantly being alert to the danger he posed. The lad creates a stir. That's always a good thing and, second half, he stayed much wider allowing our front four look quite threatening at times. Thracian you don't help yourself by your exagerating! The defenders 'brilliantly' blocked his shots because he took too long to shoot, especially for one of them where he should have hit it 1st time, but he didn't he took at least one touch which gave the defender precious time! Like i said in my ratings, good performance but should have scored!!
DanTheFoxBhoy Posted 14 March 2007 Posted 14 March 2007 Hume is the best we have. He has consistently been in the squad and can partner with anyone. Looks as though our wings might be sorted, only time will tell. Hope we display some talent against QPR.
Thracian Posted 14 March 2007 Posted 14 March 2007 Thracian you don't help yourself by your exagerating! The defenders 'brilliantly' blocked his shots because he took too long to shoot, especially for one of them where he should have hit it 1st time, but he didn't he took at least one touch which gave the defender precious time! Like i said in my ratings, good performance but should have scored!! My view was that he was simply determined to get the ball on target - and focused on that - whereas Hughes, by comparison, snatched too quickly at his shots and never looked like being successful. "Could have scored" would have been my phrase for Levi's situation but it's depatable I'll admit and you might be right.
Manwell Pablo Posted 14 March 2007 Posted 14 March 2007 My view was that he was simply determined to get the ball on target - and focused on that - whereas Hughes, by comparison, snatched too quickly at his shots and never looked like being successful. "Could have scored" would have been my phrase for Levi's situation but it's depatable I'll admit and you might be right. Behave, Porters shots could have ended up in row Z for all you know.
Daggers Posted 14 March 2007 Posted 14 March 2007 God that was a long journey home...now point me in the direction of the ratings thread because I've got some low numbers to dish out. Are you listening Horsey? Some ****ing low numbers
Tommeh Posted 14 March 2007 Posted 14 March 2007 Porter beat their right back once (as far as I could see) and the rest of the time he resembled Jordan Stewart. The same Jordan Stewart who has had a remarkable year performance wise in the premiership. Yes thats P-R-E-M-I-E-R-S-H-I-P my dad knows a Watford fan who said the Jordo has been the most consistantly good player at Watford this season. Sorry but it really p1sses me off when people try and use Stewart as a yard stick for crapness, when he'd walk straight back into our team. And is currently applying his trade sucessfully (personally) at a much higher level.
lookwhaticando Posted 14 March 2007 Posted 14 March 2007 So... that's a point at Southend... a point against Leeds. We'd better beat QPR or we might as well be down in the bottom three with Poison Dwarf and the Rectangle-faced gimp. You have to beat the shit teams, and we're just not doing it... looks like March will be our shit month following a solid February... and so the good team/bad team routine continues.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.