Daggers Posted 3 January 2009 Posted 3 January 2009 We're sick of hearing about Porter. Oddly enough "we" aren't. Some of us went to the game and noticed nothing being offered in attack. Maybe you would like to explain to me who else we have to talk about who could unlock defences because I am fvcked if I can think of anyone else.
Corky Posted 3 January 2009 Posted 3 January 2009 Oddly enough "we" aren't. Some of us went to the game and noticed nothing being offered in attack. Maybe you would like to explain to me who else we have to talk about who could unlock defences because I am fvcked if I can think of anyone else. I thought he should have come on instead of Adams, actually. Pearson could have tried him, nothing to lose and everything to gain.
Head Honcho Posted 3 January 2009 Posted 3 January 2009 Highlights starting in 5 minutes. Can't wait!
lavrentis Posted 3 January 2009 Posted 3 January 2009 Highlights starting in 5 minutes. Can't wait! We'll probably be on last so get comfy.
Thracian Posted 3 January 2009 Posted 3 January 2009 We'll probably be on last so get comfy. And don't anyone blink....
Bert Posted 3 January 2009 Posted 3 January 2009 I'd expect to see shots from Mattock, Gradel and Howard at best.
Corky Posted 3 January 2009 Posted 3 January 2009 I'd expect to see shots from Mattock, Gradel and Howard at best. I thought the Mattock shot was in. They might show Martin's save in the second half.
Jimmy Posted 3 January 2009 Posted 3 January 2009 I thought he should have come on instead of Adams, actually. Pearson could have tried him, nothing to lose and everything to gain. nah trying Gradel on the left was the better idea
clazkel Posted 3 January 2009 Posted 3 January 2009 Surely they'll show Tunchevs clearance and Howards miss
Daggers Posted 3 January 2009 Posted 3 January 2009 nah trying Gradel on the left was the better idea Albeit brief, but it showed Gradel playing on his best side.
Koke Posted 3 January 2009 Posted 3 January 2009 When Porter leaves, I'll be the first to say good riddance. I hope he ****s off this month.
Flynny Posted 3 January 2009 Posted 3 January 2009 They closed us down a lot quicker than most of the other sides we've played this season. That was the thing I noticed most. Even Tunch was forced into a hoof today. A lot of the reason our football wasn't quite as good as it has been was simply due to having less time and space. Incidentally I thought King looked least affected by this and always seemed to have room to make a pass, which is promising. Gradel looked good as well, much more lively than Dyer at left-wing, too. The mistake was not taking Howard off. He was having a great game, better in the air even than usual, but Gradel and Dickov were slow to his flick-ons and eventually they just kept two men on him to get to them first since he was out only real line of attack for much of the game. I'd have liked to see Chambers up front (who'd certainly have reached at least one Howard flick-on that Dickov was too slow for or Levi on for Dyer, maybe even both. We're a footballing side and despite Howard looking good I think he still limits us occasionally. Palace sat back today, and that they felt they had to is something to be proud of. We've struggled to unlock League One teams that've sat back, so that a Championship side proved difficult to do the same to is no surprise. If they attack when we're at their place I'm confident we'll win, really, stupidly confident in fact. I hope I can get down there. Overall I was fairly pleased. We didn't score but we looked most likely to. What we were doing was working. We made Palace look pretty poor.
Jimmy Posted 3 January 2009 Posted 3 January 2009 Albeit brief, but it showed Gradel playing on his best side. true but he did more in that brief period then Dyer did today, as I've said Dyer looks knackered
Maybes Posted 3 January 2009 Posted 3 January 2009 Crowd was fairly lively for 15,000. Atmosphere at the Walkers is STILL a lot better at the moment, which makes for a more enjoyable 90 minutes. Wo0p. What part of the ground were you in?
SOCCERROO FOX Posted 3 January 2009 Posted 3 January 2009 If David Batty and Peter Reid could play for England why the hell Porter sits on a freezing bench I'll never know. Draw was good for my betting account
Fez of Mahrez Posted 3 January 2009 Posted 3 January 2009 Jesus. Whinge, whinge, whinge. 8 home league wins in a row, we dare to draw one against a team doing well in the division above - without 2 of our best 3 players - and the place is up in arms. I love it.
Lillehamring Posted 3 January 2009 Posted 3 January 2009 ok, i didn't go to the game and so therefore i am not allowed to have opinion on anything the commentators have said about it, however this is foxes talk so i am free to comment on everybody else's opinion on it so here is my post-match-match-review-review..... 1. Thrac starts off with his take on the game based on what he's heard, and immediately someone wades into insult him with the usual tedious crap, whilst failing to address anything he has said, which, as it will turn out is more or less the same as most people have said minus the off-topic indulgent praise of a city player If you didn't go how can you get a fair reflection on what went on and who played well. take it you listened to it on the radio, which is commentated by two people giving THEIR opinion, tit 2. to which thrac counters with a fine retort which makes sir alex's dreary whining look even more pointless I didn't go because I guessed it would be exactly like it sounded.But by all means tell me you went, that the radio commentators were arseholes and that we actually peppered their goal with shots galore which were either brilliantly saved, cannoned off the woodwork or fizzed narrowly wide. Were there in fact more than three Leicester shots of any consequence? Was there even excitement at the other end apart from Tunchev's brilliant block? Right now I've got a picture of today's game, painted by two experienced commentators who seem to have done a pretty good job this season. And that picture is in a dull shade of grey with only the tiniest flecks of colour. By all means paint your "true" picture in vivid colours pal. Unless it's just you who's the tit. 3. mark then sensationally appears to back up thracian's opinion, but spoils it buy admitting he didn't go to the game - oddly no one points this out, tells him not to post, or calls him a tit Warnock said it all in the interview, he played 4-5-1 due to it being the only option available with his squad. We had 4 strikers available despite Fryatts injury but chose to cause a stalemate and hope to pinch a goal. It's this sort of negative attitude that saw 4 years of struggle end in relegation from that league.I'll let him off today but then I didn't sit through it. 4. in response to mark's observation about strikers, sir alex proves how hoplessly out of his depth he is by suggesting: The four strikers you are talking about are the same four strikers who were all dreadful in-front of goal last season. completely forgetting that we are currently unbeaten in many many games and have a new manager and an almost completely new midfield and defence. fryatt, last year, pretty crap too if memory serves..... 5. finally some sense is restored by the ever reliable abdul-jabbar, who seemed to mirror the game as i heard it online, we certainly seemed to have control of the midfield, tho i would add that the lack of firepower up front is clearly something that debilitated us today. tho we may have played three up front, with respect to king and davies, they aren't exactly out-and-out strikers, scoring from midfield is a different thing than from up front We weren't defensive by any means. We did try going forward but lacked the quality Oakley and Fryatt brings to the table. An in-form Dyer would have run them ragged. Palace were no more than an average Championship side. Palace tested Martin once (as I recall). We had several shots saved by Speroni. 6. sadly, it all got a bit sidetracked again when AOWW seemed to miss the point: Ooh, look.... Thracian's on the wind-up again. Let's all dance to his tune while he pulls the strings. - thrac isn't out to wind people up, he's just massively out-spoken and says what he thinks, regardless of whether it is the right time or place... it is the people who think it 's clever to have a dig at him or those that can't resist taking the bait that blow it all out of proportion... speaking of which... 7. far too seriously taken, yet oddly childish at the same time... Quite cleaver really. Every season you pick a player who is quite clearly not going to get a look in. You go on and on and on about them, making them out to be some footballing genius. Who, if played... would turn us into an unstoppable force. Knowing full well, the chances are you will never be proved wrong because they aren't likely to get a kick.Keeps you in your little position of looking like you know best, because you never put yourself in a position to be proved wrong. If the person you're championing leaves and fails miserably (which they mostly do), you just blame the clubs coaches for wrecking them. GENIUS!! ....um, like Andy King you mean.... 8. but as ever, a thread is not complete without a final thought from daggers, and to pull this thread completely full circle, he agrees with thrac, porter maybe isn't a bad player, and could be worth a shot, sounds like he has plenty to prove at the very least... Oddly enough "we" aren't. Some of us went to the game and noticed nothing being offered in attack. Maybe you would like to explain to me who else we have to talk about who could unlock defences because I am fvcked if I can think of anyone else. i dunno daggers, maybe you should ask sir alex FYI - this is all , don't get upset people
Ultra Posted 3 January 2009 Posted 3 January 2009 Today was a reality check. Many of the problems from last season will still need to be addressed if and when we return to the Championship. Although the defence was solid enough, without Oakley and Fryatt we were seriously deficient in both creativity and firepower. Howard once again showed that he can't cut it at Championship level, while Dickov's contribution was again minimal and raised the question of how much longer the club can allow him to live off past glories. Neither King nor Dyer were particularly effective against a higher standard of opposition than they'll have been used to in recent weeks. Gradel worked hard without looking any great threat. Davies gave another industrious display which shows why he should be signed on a permanent basis sooner rather than later. Not for the first time in recent seasons, a dire match was redeemed by excellent sessions in the pub both beforehand and afterwards. Special thanks to all the Foxestalk glitterati who met up in the Swan and Rushes before the game and ended up on the post-match crawl.
Daggers Posted 3 January 2009 Posted 3 January 2009 FYI - this is all , don't get upset people[/size] I hope someone else reads that full post in its entirity, that was very good.
Samilktray Posted 4 January 2009 Posted 4 January 2009 I was meant to attend this, waking up at 20 past 2 deaded that though.
SOCCERROO FOX Posted 4 January 2009 Posted 4 January 2009 I hope someone else reads that full post in its entirity, that was very good. I did and had a laugh but it did have some sense to it. But only getting to listen to the commentary i don't know how people can comment on individual performences
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.