ASH17LCFC Posted 16 September 2007 Posted 16 September 2007 Woah, where the fu(k did that come from!!!!!i'm not being 'high and mighty' i'm being impartial and openminded... i accept that the substitutions (which may or may not have been dictated by megson) didn't have a positive effect, what manager hasn't got it wrong once in a while, but given how long megson has been here, that on another day it could have been 3-1 (not including the woodwork attempts) to just sit and say (and A LOT of people, can't remember your own observations) 'oh well, it's all megsons fault, if we'd have made no substitutions we'd have won' is crazy... no single thing determines a football result, everyone knows that.i couldn't care less whether you are happy or not, i don't know what motivates your sense of satisfaction, but for PEOPLE IN GENERAL to simply blame megson for yesterdays performance (which, by many accounts wasn't so bad, i mean last year we'd have been happy just to have shots on target) i find bizarre, and it seems to stem from the fact that a lot of people seem to actually want megson to fail just cause they don't like him... again, bizarre. and, as for my presence at the game, reading the narrow-minded, one-track, paranoid pessimism produced by many who WERE THERE, i think my observations on the season as a whole are probably more balanced and less judgemental than those who are balancing their opinion against their begrudging of buying a season ticket... it was one game, we're unbeaten in five, we have players that piss all over last years squad, a draw against QPR isn't a catastophe, and it has as much to do with the players on the field as it does the manager.... Im sorry but if you where there, You would have known it was Megson fault for them stupid substitutions.
Asha Posted 16 September 2007 Posted 16 September 2007 Im sorry but if you where there, You would have known it was Megson fault for them stupid substitutions. Agreed. If i were the manager, De Vries would have been on a good 20 minutes earlier.
ASH17LCFC Posted 16 September 2007 Posted 16 September 2007 Agreed. If i were the manager, De Vries would have been on a good 20 minutes earlier. Very true. Why bring him on with 3 mins left ? Fcuk off megson.
Lillehamring Posted 16 September 2007 Posted 16 September 2007 yeah yeah yeah - but it was 90 minutes that we could have won that game, they're all professionals whatever formation, they conceeded a soft goal out of the blue but if you all want to believe that a man who has had the job for a few days is SOLELY to blame then, go for it....
Lovejoy Posted 16 September 2007 Posted 16 September 2007 There was time and chances a-plenty to put that game well out of reach before anyone started tinkering. This is what will stop us from going up. Shame, because the team managed to be more ruthless against Watford, which means that they are capable. Well Said Anyway I don't seem to remember Martin Allen being given this treatment after losing to Blackpool. And we played better (for 70 minutes anyway) yesterday too.
davieG Posted 16 September 2007 Posted 16 September 2007 yeah yeah yeah - but it was 90 minutes that we could have won that game, they're all professionals whatever formation, they conceeded a soft goal out of the bluebut if you all want to believe that a man who has had the job for a few days is SOLELY to blame then, go for it.... I do!
ASH17LCFC Posted 16 September 2007 Posted 16 September 2007 Well Said Anyway I don't seem to remember Martin Allen being given this treatment after losing to Blackpool. And we played better (for 70 minutes anyway) yesterday too. Why do you think alot of us don't like Megson ? Allen had the fans on his side.
Lillehamring Posted 16 September 2007 Posted 16 September 2007 I do! yeah, well, lets hope that i'm right, otherwise it's gonna be a frickin nightmare
dandannieldanok Posted 16 September 2007 Posted 16 September 2007 Anyway I don't seem to remember Martin Allen being given this treatment after losing to Blackpool. And we played better (for 70 minutes anyway) yesterday too. Plus Allen had 6 weeks pre-season, Megson has had perhaps 2 training sessions. I think the main reasons why Allen didn't get the harsh treatment from a lot of people because he said a lot of jokes, posted endless quirky stories and didn't have ginger hair.
davieG Posted 16 September 2007 Posted 16 September 2007 yeah, well, lets hope that i'm right, otherwise it's gonna be a frickin nightmare That's what I'm worried about, actually what pissed me off more was him calling the players naive and lacking intelligence, no comment on whoever made those substitutions and left Cort floundering.
Daggers Posted 16 September 2007 Posted 16 September 2007 ....a draw against QPR isn't a catastophe... There lies the crux of the problem. For many posters on here a draw against QPR is a catastrophe. Many people were being reasonable in their predictions for this season during the summer but then posts started popping up anticipating us to go up. Unrealistic expectations based on a couple of mediocre signings and ignoring recent history. It seemed to be the only thing they were noticing were the proclamations from Mandaric HQ and not bothering to think about how we could possibly achieve a top 6 slot. Top 10 was a reasonable target before the season started, it still is until we strengthen the squad further over Xmas and next summer. Until then we are going to continue to slip points away that should otherwise be buried, we still have too many players that are not up to the job of obtaining promotion.
davieG Posted 16 September 2007 Posted 16 September 2007 Plus Allen had 6 weeks pre-season, Megson has had perhaps 2 training sessions. I think the main reasons why Allen didn't get the harsh treatment from a lot of people because he said a lot of jokes, posted endless quirky stories and didn't have ginger hair. He got a massive amount of criticism after the forest debacle.
chesterfox Posted 16 September 2007 Posted 16 September 2007 Well Said Anyway I don't seem to remember Martin Allen being given this treatment after losing to Blackpool. And we played better (for 70 minutes anyway) yesterday too. You are of course absolutely right but fans work in strange ways - somebody has rattled their cages and now they object for the sheer hell of it and Smegs will get the brunt of it. The answer of course is to get back on track, get a winning team and forget all this shite, but it ain't gonna happen. MA really did it for me - he spoke the way I wanted a manager to speak, he had passion that a manager should have and he believed in trying to win games. Time to move on, yes but the cages have been rattled!!!!
davieG Posted 16 September 2007 Posted 16 September 2007 Well Said Anyway I don't seem to remember Martin Allen being given this treatment after losing to Blackpool. And we played better (for 70 minutes anyway) yesterday too. Maybe because Allen tried to win the game whereas Megson virtually threw it away.
BigGibbo Posted 16 September 2007 Posted 16 September 2007 There lies the crux of the problem.For many posters on here a draw against QPR is a catastrophe. Many people were being reasonable in their predictions for this season during the summer but then posts started popping up anticipating us to go up. Unrealistic expectations based on a couple of mediocre signings and ignoring recent history. It seemed to be the only thing they were noticing were the proclamations from Mandaric HQ and not bothering to think about how we could possibly achieve a top 6 slot. Top 10 was a reasonable target before the season started, it still is until we strengthen the squad further over Xmas and next summer. Until then we are going to continue to slip points away that should otherwise be buried, we still have too many players that are not up to the job of obtaining promotion. No draw is a catastrophe but to a team that just wants to finish in the top half of the table a draw at home to a not very good QPR isn't acceptable!
breadandcheese Posted 16 September 2007 Posted 16 September 2007 No draw is a catastrophe but to a team that just wants to finish in the top half of the table a draw at home to a not very good QPR isn't acceptable! Absolutely. That QPR side is woeful and a candidate for relegation. We should be winning, especially when we dominate the game possesionally for so long.
Lillehamring Posted 16 September 2007 Posted 16 September 2007 Maybe because Allen tried to win the game whereas Megson virtually threw it away. yeah, but you don't actually believe that was his intention?
Lillehamring Posted 16 September 2007 Posted 16 September 2007 No draw is a catastrophe but to a team that just wants to finish in the top half of the table a draw at home to a not very good QPR isn't acceptable! but equally, how many people would have expected us to pick up 3points against watford?
davieG Posted 16 September 2007 Posted 16 September 2007 yeah, but you don't actually believe that was his intention? Of course not he tried to go all out defend a 1-0 lead by going all defensive insted of bolstering a weakening (Cort) attack.
davieG Posted 16 September 2007 Posted 16 September 2007 but equally, how many people would have expected us to pick up 3points against watford? One doesn't justify the other though.
l444ry Posted 16 September 2007 Posted 16 September 2007 Surely it is going well over the top blaming Megson for single-handedly throwing two points away. Or if it is, then Megson must have been single-handedly responsible for getting City into a winning position in the first place. Probably neither is true.
Smudge Posted 16 September 2007 Posted 16 September 2007 we still have too many players that are not up to the job of obtaining promotion. We don't have many in form quality players; maybe Fullop, Clemence and N'Gotty, Hume; that's it from the playing team, don't know about the new guys since they don't get played. I can fully understand why Megson would criticize the team, by and large they are very average. Whether he should say so publicly, I guess is a different issue, but its better than "we've got a hard working bunch of smashing lads". The substitutions were strange but I assume he was watching the panic and decided to close down only to be concerned that even they didn't perform. In any event Taggert was there, could he have influenced those decisions? I don't hear of any criticism laid at his door, why not? The Devries sub was a time waster IMO since they were looking like we could actually lose the game. The body of yesterdays team is the similar to that under Levein, Kelly, Worthington and Allen; namely McAuley, Kisnorbo, Wesolowski, Sheehan, Porter, Hume, DeVries. Henderson on the bench. It's no surprise to me that that we are getting the same performance? I have no problem with his overview which doesn't mean I am a Megson fan, I'm going to give him several weeks in the job before I praise or criticise him.
Lillehamring Posted 16 September 2007 Posted 16 September 2007 Of course not he tried to go all out defend a 1-0 lead by going all defensive insted of bolstering a weakening (Cort) attack. you should be used to these sort of (constantly unsuccesful) tactics at city by now... how many times have we sat there and said - attack! lets face it, he just didn't want to lose his first game, and he got a draw, for a first game in charge at LCFC that's usually as good as it gets! thing is, all-out-defence or not, they conceded a shot from 35 yards and you simply can't legislate for that... lets just wait and see how THE TEAM responds against forest...
Simon Posted 16 September 2007 Posted 16 September 2007 you should be used to these sort of (constantly unsuccesful) tactics at city by now... how many times have we sat there and said - attack! lets face it, he just didn't want to lose his first game, and he got a draw, for a first game in charge at LCFC that's usually as good as it gets!thing is, all-out-defence or not, they conceded a shot from 35 yards and you simply can't legislate for that... lets just wait and see how THE TEAM responds against forest... Was it bollocks...
Vennegoor10 Posted 16 September 2007 Posted 16 September 2007 A forest fan came on here when megjoke first got appointed and said he would go defensive at one nil up an thats exactly what happened. I hope what else the treeboy said isnt true as it included a large amount of hoofball and falling out with players.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.