HonradaRaposa Posted 11 August 2010 Posted 11 August 2010 I seem to remember us being in total control against wednesday until kisnorbo went off injured? Defenders not giving the ball to the forwards? Have a day off, it's their PRIMARY job to defend. And they did that very well. No way was it their fault we weren't scoring. Are you being serious? Are you saying that 4 of the 10 outfield players do not need to worry about retaining possession and it is not an important part of their role? May I point out that our defensive record three seasons ago was one of the best in the entire Championship and that we went down because of a striking issue. Eh? Explain that logic to me will you. They were that good but we still went down. Did it escape your notice that every time our centre halves got the ball it either went in to the main stand or straight down the necks of the opposition. If you can explain to us how you are meant to score goals when the defence couldn't pass water let alone a ball I would grateful. Why are people still defending the worst set of players in our clubs history?
kylestyle06 Posted 11 August 2010 Posted 11 August 2010 Are you being serious? Are you saying that 4 of the 10 outfield players do not need to worry about retaining possession and it is not an important part of their role? Eh? Explain that logic to me will you. They were that good but we still went down. Did it escape your notice that every time our centre halves got the ball it either went in to the main stand or straight down the necks of the opposition. If you can explain to us how you are meant to score goals when the defence couldn't pass water let alone a ball I would grateful. Why are people still defending the worst set of players in our clubs history? He's defending the defence, and we did have one of the best defences in the championship that season.
HonradaRaposa Posted 11 August 2010 Posted 11 August 2010 He's defending the defence, and we did have one of the best defences in the championship that season. No we didn't we got relegated, we were the third worst team in the division, we were not the best at anything.
kylestyle06 Posted 11 August 2010 Posted 11 August 2010 No we didn't we got relegated, we were the third worst team in the division, we were not the best at anything. I'm talking about the defence not the team on a whole.
HonradaRaposa Posted 11 August 2010 Posted 11 August 2010 I'm talking about the defence not the team on a whole. Here was me thinking football was a team game. So we won't count Neilson's goal last night as he is a 'defender'
kylestyle06 Posted 11 August 2010 Posted 11 August 2010 Here was me thinking football was a team game. So we won't count Neilson's goal last night as he is a 'defender' The defence was good, the attack was poor.. = the reason we went down. So if we had a better attack we'd of stayed up is what you're saying? I know where you're coming from, but on paper we had one of the best defences.. you only need to check the stats for the proof.
Bettsj2 Posted 11 August 2010 Posted 11 August 2010 The defence was good, the attack was poor.. = the reason we went down. So if we had a better attack we'd of stayed up is what you're saying? I know where you're coming from, but on paper we had one of the best defences.. you only need to check the stats for the proof. This is basically the issue. People look at the stats and say that the defence was good. Anyone who went to any of the games that season know that the defence was actually dogshit. Sheehan, Mattock, Kisnorbo, McAuley, N'Gotty, Stearman, Clapham, Chambers, Kenton = SHIT. Just like the rest of the team that season. In fact, the only defender who was any good, had a heart attack and never played again. Pretty much set the scene that eh?
kylestyle06 Posted 11 August 2010 Posted 11 August 2010 This is basically the issue. People look at the stats and say that the defence was good. Anyone who went to any of the games that season know that the defence was actually dogshit. Sheehan, Mattock, Kisnorbo, McAuley, N'Gotty, Stearman, Clapham, Chambers, Kenton = SHIT. Just like the rest of the team that season. In fact, the only defender who was any good, had a heart attack and never played again. Pretty much set the scene that eh? I know they were shit, and i'll still say they are shit! But we only let in 45 goals!! Which IIRC was the 2nd best defence in the season!
lcfcsnow Posted 11 August 2010 Posted 11 August 2010 I know they were shit, and i'll still say they are shit! But we only let in 45 goals!! Which IIRC was the 2nd best defence in the season! If you've got 8 players minimum behind the ball every game including defenders in midfield positions you're bound to have a good defence. We didn't commit to attack, we went down. Lesson learned hopefully. No question about the defenders, they WERE shit.
hackneyfox Posted 11 August 2010 Posted 11 August 2010 ****s sake, so the defence didn't let in many goals, but they didn't pass to any of our players, therefore due to an inept defence that couldn't pass we couldn't score goals. If we had a goalkeeper who every time it was passed back to him, or he stopped a shot, he was then to throw it immediately to the nearest opposition player would you still post three messages saying he was a good goalie?
andy_croydz Posted 11 August 2010 Posted 11 August 2010 Wait a minute... Did I see criticism for Hume!? Hume was a good player *puts on bullet proof clothing because he know he'll be shot down any minute now*
hackneyfox Posted 11 August 2010 Posted 11 August 2010 Great thread this, we are starting to see exactly why people's scores on players can be so radically different. It also shows why some managers fail with a a supposedly great team and others like O'neill can manage to make a great team from inferior players. It is all about the entire eleven players on the pitch and how they interact with each other, the balance etc. Picking the best player that you can for each position does not mean you will have a good team. i.e England To summarise The whole is greater than the sum of its parts...
hackneyfox Posted 11 August 2010 Posted 11 August 2010 Wait a minute... Did I see criticism for Hume!? Hume was a good player *puts on bullet proof clothing because he know he'll be shot down any minute now* Too bloody right you will be, he too was dog shite. Not a striker Not a midfielder Not a winger But a major whinger when played in a position he didn't like. That bloody penalty that relegated us. But he must have been good (a la Weale) as Premier clubs were sniffing. Yep, they turned up, they sniffed, they smelled dog shite, they fooked off.
andy_croydz Posted 11 August 2010 Posted 11 August 2010 Too bloody right you will be, he too was dog shite. Not a striker Not a midfielder Not a winger But a major whinger when played in a position he didn't like. That bloody penalty that relegated us. But he must have been good (a la Weale) as Premier clubs were sniffing. Yep, they turned up, they sniffed, they smelled dog shite, they fooked off. Hume was one of our best players for a time, he was the one scoring goals when hardly anyone else in the team was chipping in. He had pace, he had flair, his finishing wasn't bad and he was our top goalscorer for 2 seasons. Are you absolutely serious?
Bettsj2 Posted 11 August 2010 Posted 11 August 2010 Hume was one of our best players for a time, he was the one scoring goals when hardly anyone else in the team was chipping in. He had pace, he had flair, his finishing wasn't bad and he was our top goalscorer for 2 seasons. Are you absolutely serious? You are talking about the Hume that used to play for us yeah?
marbelladave Posted 11 August 2010 Posted 11 August 2010 Been here before. As has been pointed out we played many games with 5 sometimes 6 defenders, all of whom thought it was their 'primary job' to win the ball and hoof it, anywhere would and did do! The fact that it just kept coming back at them time and time again did not seem to register. Our midfield and attack had so little possession that even an attempt on goal was a major achievement, yet there are still a fair few on this forum who believe that we had a good defence... I've made this point a number of times, even during the season in question, and been 'robbied' (rhyming slang) about it many times, it is perhaps better to save your breadth. These arguments, like player ratings, are more indicative of the posters prejudices than anything else, rise above it!...
hackneyfox Posted 11 August 2010 Posted 11 August 2010 Hume was one of our best players for a time, he was the one scoring goals when hardly anyone else in the team was chipping in. He had pace, he had flair, his finishing wasn't bad and he was our top goalscorer for 2 seasons. Are you absolutely serious? I'm absolutely serious, are you? So he was top scorer for 2 seasons, perhaps that just means that he never created chances for the strikers around him, or that they were poor at the time. Flair? He is one of the worst players we have had for a long time, he looked as if he was doing things but the final product really wasn't there.
hackneyfox Posted 11 August 2010 Posted 11 August 2010 Been here before. As has been pointed out we played many games with 5 sometimes 6 defenders, all of whom thought it was their 'primary job' to win the ball and hoof it, anywhere would and did do! The fact that it just kept coming back at them time and time again did not seem to register. Our midfield and attack had so little possession that even an attempt on goal was a major achievement, yet there are still a fair few on this forum who believe that we had a good defence... I've made this point a number of times, even during the season in question, and been 'robbied' (rhyming slang) about it many times, it is perhaps better to save your breadth. These arguments, like player ratings, are more indicative of the posters prejudices than anything else, rise above it!... Agreed, but it isn't just prejudices it is whether people actually understand that football is a team game and not about individual performances. I'm enjoying these threads, it will help when I read threads about games I haven't attended, whose scores and feedbacks are good and whose are best described as Wealish (so so) Kisnorboish or Humish (just plain shit)
andy_croydz Posted 11 August 2010 Posted 11 August 2010 Agreed, but it isn't just prejudices it is whether people actually understand that football is a team game and not about individual performances. I'm enjoying these threads, it will help when I read threads about games I haven't attended, whose scores and feedbacks are good and whose are best described as Wealish (so so) Kisnorboish or Humish (just plain shit) I have to ask though with your criticism of Weale... Have you ever been a goalkeeper yourself? I'm hardly a good goalkeeper but i've played for a team for 4 years and I know what being a goalkeeper involves. When I watch Weale I can tell he is a good keeper, i'm not an expert on scouting goalkeepers but from what I look for in a keeper... Weale has the qualities to be a good goalkeeper at this level and he proved that last season. As I have said before... Confidence as a keeper is HUGE, it lays a bigger factor as a keeper than any other position to play in. Maybe he hasn't been as good as he was for the first half of last season because of that mistake against Derby near the end of last season. His confidence might still be average because of that, I don't know, you would have to ask him. Criticising Weale will only harm his confidence though, it's no benefit to him or us if that happens.
hackneyfox Posted 11 August 2010 Posted 11 August 2010 So you're a goalie, and therefore your opinion counts as I never have been. In that case why should you give an opinion on Hume? Sorry but that is an awful argument you have put forward there. I and many others think he is poor at controlling the box, controlling the defence and coming for crosses but as you have played at amateur level ......... Follow your thinking and only those that play the game should bother to go and watch or discuss it down the pub etc. And it is arrogant to believe that confidence for a goalie is anymore important than for a striker or in fact for any other position. And I don't boo Weale at games, I discuss what I feel to be his shortcomings on football boards, if he is stupid enough to get his confidence built or shattered by what fans (whose opinions can change from minute to minute, let alone game to game) have to say on a chat page then he is very stupid individual.
andy_croydz Posted 11 August 2010 Posted 11 August 2010 So you're a goalie, and therefore your opinion counts as I never have been. In that case why should you give an opinion on Hume? Sorry but that is an awful argument you have put forward there. I and many others think he is poor at controlling the box, controlling the defence and coming for crosses but as you have played at amateur level ......... Follow your thinking and only those that play the game should bother to go and watch or discuss it down the pub etc. And it is arrogant to believe that confidence for a goalie is anymore important than for a striker or in fact for any other position. And I don't boo Weale at games, I discuss what I feel to be his shortcomings on football boards, if he is stupid enough to get his confidence built or shattered by what fans (whose opinions can change from minute to minute, let alone game to game) have to say on a chat page then he is very stupid individual. Dude listen.. I'm not saying my opinion counts and yours doesen't. I'm simply saying... Try not to be so hard on Weale, I personally know how difficult being a keeper is and 1 mistake seems to be remembered for a long time. If an outfield player makes a mistake it tends to be forgotton about very quickly.
HonradaRaposa Posted 11 August 2010 Posted 11 August 2010 Wait a minute... Did I see criticism for Hume!? Hume was a good player *puts on bullet proof clothing because he know he'll be shot down any minute now* He was not good. He was a moody liitle oik, selfish but like Dion Dublin he knew how to play the crowd. Another dreadful Levein signing, where is he now? Barnsley, all you need to know. Possibly the best bit of business Mandaric has done in his time here, that and fleecing Ipswich for McAuley.
hackneyfox Posted 11 August 2010 Posted 11 August 2010 Dude listen.. I'm not saying my opinion counts and yours doesen't. I'm simply saying... Try not to be so hard on Weale, I personally know how difficult being a keeper is and 1 mistake seems to be remembered for a long time. If an outfield player makes a mistake it tends to be forgotton about very quickly. Dude????? I'm simply saying that many people on this board have been giving Weale an easy ride for a very long time now. And it is a lot more than 1 mistake. My main point, which you keep missing, is that it isn't the bad mistake that stops him being a good goalie it is the lack of box control and flapping on crosses. They don't all lead to goals and so get forgotten. They do however lead to a defence that don't know whether or not he will come out, and if he does whether he will flap or not. You being a goalie is of no importance whatsoever. If an electrician comes to your house and fits a new socket and the following day it shorts and burns your house down I can't imagine you standing there looking at the still smoking rubble and saying 'I won't blame the electrician as I'm not one and so my opinion isn't valid'.
hackneyfox Posted 11 August 2010 Posted 11 August 2010 He was not good. He was a moody liitle oik, selfish but like Dion Dublin he knew how to play the crowd. Another dreadful Levein signing, where is he now? Barnsley, all you need to know. Possibly the best bit of business Mandaric has done in his time here, that and fleecing Ipswich for McAuley. Spot on, more than Hume was with that penalty that effectively relegated us.
andy_croydz Posted 11 August 2010 Posted 11 August 2010 Dude????? Oh, I just saw that you have supported City since 1967... If that is the year you were born then I can see why you didn't like being called a dude
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.