Why did King go off?

[Jakemoore]

Theres a clause in his transfer to Man Utd that says he cant play more than 70 minutes each game.

Oh God please NO!!

[Finnegan]

Gallagher is being called shit and apparantly should be dropped for Dyer because he doesnt work hard enough

More like Gallagher should be dropped for Dyer because Dyer actually is a winger.

What makes Andy King exempt from critisism but Gallagher is open season?

I don't really think King is exempt from criticism. In fact, most seasons he splits opinion fairly evenly between those who think he's some subtle genius and those who think he's an anonymous time waster who does nothing for ninety odd minutes.

Is it because King came up through the youth ranks?

No, it's because he's already got more goals this season than most of the strikers in this league and generally your leading goalscorer tends to be doing something right.

[marbelladave]

So in one thread, despite scoring twice, Gallagher is being called shit and apparantly should be dropped for Dyer because he doesnt work hard enough, but in this thread, Sven is an idiot and King should never be taken off because even when he's doing nothing he can pop up with a goal???

Here's an idea, how about instead of continuously searching for things to moan about, why dont we just support our team unconditionally. Every player, every decision, every minute of every fooking game.

There isnt one player on the face of the fooking planet who doesnt acknowledge that if the supporters are behind them then it gives them a lift.

Sometimes as supporters we piss all over some players whilst others are put on a pedastal and why?? What makes Andy King exempt from critisism but Gallagher is open season? Is it because King came up through the youth ranks? Are we that desperate to have another Joachim, Heskey et al?

For christ sake, if we were as good at encouragement as we are critisism, the atmosphere at the Walkers would be electric.

Support the team at the game, comment and analyse the performance afterwards, what's the problem?

The support on saturday was pretty damn good, I was not in the away end, some distance from it in fact, but the city fans were louder and more supportive than anything Watford could manage, even at 2-0 our support remained very positive, exactly as it should be...

Criticism of the performance after the event is fair enough, a lot of contributors are somewhat irrational, swinging from joy to despair depending on the result, everyone needs a rant sometimes and boards like this provide the platform.

I do not take a lot of interest in posts of the "we were great/shit" variety but I understand the need to vent, personally I try and keep things in balance, I look at the performance rather than just the result which means that my views are often very different from the mainstream.

I watch the game, usually from a better vantage point than the 'away end' and give my views on how we play, for me that is a big part of the fun. I call it as I see it but like everyone I 'like' some players more than others and I am sure that sometimes comes out in my comments. However it does not mean that I 'slag off' our own players, I hate that, but where criticism is given I think it important to give reasons and try and explain what is going wrong.

[North-LondonFox]

So in one thread, despite scoring twice, Gallagher is being called shit and apparantly should be dropped for Dyer because he doesnt work hard enough, but in this thread, Sven is an idiot and King should never be taken off because even when he's doing nothing he can pop up with a goal???

Here's an idea, how about instead of continuously searching for things to moan about, why dont we just support our team unconditionally. Every player, every decision, every minute of every fooking game.

There isnt one player on the face of the fooking planet who doesnt acknowledge that if the supporters are behind them then it gives them a lift.

Sometimes as supporters we piss all over some players whilst others are put on a pedastal and why?? What makes Andy King exempt from critisism but Gallagher is open season? Is it because King came up through the youth ranks? Are we that desperate to have another Joachim, Heskey et al?

For christ sake, if we were as good at encouragement as we are critisism, the atmosphere at the Walkers would be electric.

I do support the team and the decisions, but if we can't express opinions about players and changes in games then what the fook is the forum for!

I think Sven is fantastic, Gally is tallented but struggles for a position and I would have kept Kingy on and brought Dyer on at Watford. Does that stop me supporting City and the management?? NO. It just means that I was asking others whther they felt the same as me, or whether they could understand the approach Sven took. I have received some good responses referring to Oakley releasing Abe to get forward and saving King for the festive period, so I thought it was a worthwhile debate. I have not one said that it makes Gally a bad player or Sven a bad manager. I suppose that's why we love footie so much because we all have opinions.

By the way - check my posting history - I try and be positive and supportive of the team and the management at all times.

[Trav Le Bleu]

Why did King go off?

Because he is al-Qaeda's new secret weapon.

Missed that one Wikileaks!

[Kitchandro]

If people are saying King was playing shit then fine I can't argue as I wasn't there but when he's our main goal threat he's always got it in him to pop up in the right place.

And if he had to go off we should have brought Moussa or Dyer on. We were in the ascendency and we should have seized the initiative. Oakley isn't a bad player on his day but he's not really a threat going forward.

I think Sven got that one wrong.

[StanSP]

Stringer has just said that Sven confirmed to him King wasn't injured on Saturday, meaning he wasn't having any impact on the game and things needed changing.

[Bettsj2]

If people are saying King was playing shit then fine I can't argue as I wasn't there but when he's our main goal threat he's always got it in him to pop up in the right place.

And if he had to go off we should have brought Moussa or Dyer on. We were in the ascendency and we should have seized the initiative. Oakley isn't a bad player on his day but he's not really a threat going forward.

I think Sven got that one wrong.

Bringing Dyer on would have changed the shape and taken away our momentum. Bringing Oakley on kept the shape of the team the same and allowed us to carry on playing the way we were, get the equaliser and look like winning the game. It's true that Oakley isn't a goal threat, but in those situations, keeping shape is the most important thing. Changing it would have meant a 10 minute spell of re-adjustment which at that point wouldnt have been helpful at all.

We didnt lose the game because King went off, just as we didnt go two nil down because he was on the pitch.

Football just goes like that sometimes. Nobody is to blame (apart from Weale on the second goal perhaps). As a team we didnt do enough on the whole.

It's a disapointing defeat after the Forest result just as the Bristol defeat was after Derby. It seems at the minute that inconsistency is our consistency.