Corky Posted 26 November 2011 Posted 26 November 2011 A point at Pompey is fine Sven Don't take much notice of DANGEROUS TIGER. He's very anti-Pearson. We could win 8-0 and he'd still complain.
z-layrex Posted 26 November 2011 Posted 26 November 2011 The ones who phone in to bitch and complain are always the ones who staed at home rather than travel miles to the game.
Captain... Posted 26 November 2011 Posted 26 November 2011 Didn't Pearson play 4-3-3 last spell here? Swear it was Wellens - King - Spearing Waggy - Howard - Gally Correct me if I'm wrong. Might be interesting when hes made a cpl of signing he will revert to a 4 - 2 - 3 - 1 away from home if we buy a decent target man. Would be much better in getting draws and nicking a win away. I think 4 - 4 - 2 is a bit exposed away from home from all teams and I thinki he has to learn from the master SAF who sets his team up dependant on the opposition and whether Utd are home or away. Just a thought. Anway well done boys, can't complain with 4 points from 6. They said on the Radio we were lined up as 4-2-3-1 after we scored Howard up top Nuge - Danns - Dyer behind Howard so it is on his mind
marko Posted 26 November 2011 Posted 26 November 2011 The ones who phone in to bitch and complain are always the ones who staed at home rather than travel miles to the game. They also base their opinions on what those two idiots on the airwaves are spouting.
Libertine Dream Posted 26 November 2011 Posted 26 November 2011 Good away point against a strong home team. Never looked like losong and we were strong at the back and had some promising oppurtunities going forward. I'm positive for this season as we will get stronger when NP has more time with this squad. Had a plan B, good change of formation and the whole game felt like a Pearson-type performance. No frustration during the game like under Sven even if we struggled at times towards the end of the first half. Great away performance which we could have won had the ball fell differently on occasion or end product was better. We'll be hard to beat from now on.
PegguyArphexad Posted 26 November 2011 Posted 26 November 2011 At the match. Thought it was a good performance apart from the final third. I really want Dyer to do well, but he just lacks the end product. I thought Beckford looked pretty good today, I am sure under Pearson we will start to see the best from him. Fratton Park is not the easiest place to go. A point won and so its onwards and upwards...
Dr The Singh Posted 26 November 2011 Posted 26 November 2011 We should be beating these, but point is not end of of the world, BUT pressure now builds for Tuesday!!!
leicesterisme Posted 26 November 2011 Posted 26 November 2011 Towards the end it sounded like Dyer was knackered why not bring on Fernandes or Bamba to help see out the game. NP always used to frustrate me with his substitutions I can see this time around will be no different. Don't really see your point seeing as we did see out the game without using these 2?
Dr The Singh Posted 26 November 2011 Posted 26 November 2011 Don't really see your point seeing as we did see out the game without using these 2? His point is poo, we need attacking width, other then dyer we have none
I am Rod Hull Posted 26 November 2011 Posted 26 November 2011 His point is poo, we need attacking width, other then dyer we have none You like width Singhy ?
Dr The Singh Posted 26 November 2011 Posted 26 November 2011 You like width Singhy ? I dunno brother, sexually width is not an issue i'm not in a position to be fussy, but on the pitch, if we play 442, and with the limitations we have in attacking options on the the widths, you could say, I like width! Can Shlup play on the wings, and can Singh get poon on foxestalk, they are 2 questions i would like answered!
Thracian Posted 26 November 2011 Posted 26 November 2011 What a bizzare post given the absolute slating you were giving Pearson at every single opportunity just two weeks ago. Didn't expect someone with such a high regard for his own opinion to be so comically fickle. . With three points for a win, it is no secret I favour positive football and have my beliefs about how that can be achieved. But because I might criticise a manager's "cautious" or "defensive" football doesn't mean I'd call the bloke when he doesn't deserve it. Or fail to praise him when he's entitled to some credit. Pearson doesn't play in the games he manages. If he goes away from home and uses a single striker, ball-holders on the wing, has just two or three potential scorers and his team fails to score or have more than the odd strike on goal then that's his fault. Because he didn't give us a chance of doing anything else. If he plays with width and uses two strikers as part of five or more potential scorers then he has set up to give us a chance of winning and deserves some understanding if we fail to do so. And the more so if his team selection is dictated by limitations he could do nothing about as yet. So in what way have I been fickle? After 54 years supporting City and 45 years with my wife I'd hardly say "fickle" was part of my nature. Even on here I've never been "fickle" about my belief in and commitment to attacking football. Just because I haven't always agreed with Pearson's approach and have sometimes been bored to distraction by his football, doesn't mean I don't recognise the abilities he has got. Nor does my criticism blind me to what seems to be a sincere desire on Pearson's part to improve on past mistakes. or prevent me hoping that he succeeds. As for having belief in my own opinion I can see no merit in being otherwise. But how ironic it is that you mention the "high regard" I have for my own opinion while you criticise me for what you see as changing tack. If I was actually so blinkered, I wouldn't dream of modifying my views when, in fact, I'm forever adjusting my opinions. Take Konchesky. I've criticised his "nothing" balls, those floated crosses that achieve nothing. But against Palace I gave Konchesky 10 for varying his final ball so effectively and accurately and helping to make three goals. There were other positive aspects to his game as well and I said so. Today, it seemed he was more like the Konchesky I criticise. Gallagher is another example. One day I'll bemoan us playing a guy who's too slow to beat anyone fo pace or who fails to close the opposition down with any conviction or who wastes one corner after another with substandard delivery. But that doesn't stop me praising wonderful stirkes that help us win a game or the odd cracking free kick. Credit where it's due even it it confounds your deepest convicttions.
seenitall Posted 26 November 2011 Posted 26 November 2011 Guys - Pearson is no more in control of this side after 2 games than Sven was after 13, nor will he be after 13 - dur, it takes more than that to build a team -
Dr The Singh Posted 26 November 2011 Posted 26 November 2011 . With three points for a win, it is no secret I favour positive football and have my beliefs about how that can be achieved. But because I might criticise a manager's "cautious" or "defensive" football doesn't mean I'd call the bloke when he doesn't deserve it. Or fail to praise him when he's entitled to some credit. Pearson doesn't play in the games he manages. If he goes away from home and uses a single striker, ball-holders on the wing, has just two or three potential scorers and his team fails to score or have more than the odd strike on goal then that's his fault. Because he didn't give us a chance of doing anything else. If he plays with width and uses two strikers as part of five or more potential scorers then he has set up to give us a chance of winning and deserves some understanding if we fail to do so. And the more so if his team selection is dictated by limitations he could do nothing about as yet. So in what way have I been fickle? After 54 years supporting City and 45 years with my wife I'd hardly say "fickle" was part of my nature. Even on here I've never been "fickle" about my belief in and commitment to attacking football. Just because I haven't always agreed with Pearson's approach and have sometimes been bored to distraction by his football, doesn't mean I don't recognise the abilities he has got. Nor does my criticism blind me to what seems to be a sincere desire on Pearson's part to improve on past mistakes. or prevent me hoping that he succeeds. As for having belief in my own opinion I can see no merit in being otherwise. But how ironic it is that you mention the "high regard" I have for my own opinion while you criticise me for what you see as changing tack. If I was actually so blinkered, I wouldn't dream of modifying my views when, in fact, I'm forever adjusting my opinions. Take Konchesky. I've criticised his "nothing" balls, those floated crosses that achieve nothing. But against Palace I gave Konchesky 10 for varying his final ball so effectively and accurately and helping to make three goals. There were other positive aspects to his game as well and I said so. Today, it seemed he was more like the Konchesky I criticise. Gallagher is another example. One day I'll bemoan us playing a guy who's too slow to beat anyone fo pace or who fails to close the opposition down with any conviction or who wastes one corner after another with substandard delivery. But that doesn't stop me praising wonderful stirkes that help us win a game or the odd cracking free kick. Credit where it's due even it it confounds your deepest convicttions. You need to drink more beer!!
Thracian Posted 26 November 2011 Posted 26 November 2011 You need to drink more beer!! Can't seem to get my Barbar's anymore!
Dr The Singh Posted 26 November 2011 Posted 26 November 2011 Can't seem to get my Barbar's anymore! I'm disapointed in you Thrac,everytime I have asked us for a drinkipoos you never turn up. Runour is you and councillor colin are bun chums!!!
Dr The Singh Posted 26 November 2011 Posted 26 November 2011 Guys - Pearson is no more in control of this side after 2 games than Sven was after 13, nor will he be after 13 - dur, it takes more than that to build a team - What orrafice do you speak from!!
I am Rod Hull Posted 26 November 2011 Posted 26 November 2011 What orrafice do you speak from!! His bun
vandamman Posted 26 November 2011 Posted 26 November 2011 Good result, Portsmouth are a good side at home. If Sven was still around, when we went down to 1-0, we would not have come back. Pearson is making good steps towards promotion. A win on Tuesday please.
lcfc_sam_p Posted 26 November 2011 Posted 26 November 2011 A win on tuesday would be massive. All the top sides are playing each other
Foxy Bingo Posted 26 November 2011 Posted 26 November 2011 Is it only me that thought it was a fantastic performance? We were all over them from start to finish and they only scored because of a MASSIVE deflection. Beckford even started to look decent! I know it's frustrating not being able to win 2 on the bounce and getting into the play offs etc but it will come! Win at home and draw away is all we have to do so seriously, stop criticising and get behind the team like we were at the game today. It was not a poor performance at all hence why all our fans clapped and sang at the end as if we'd won. Do you really think we'd have come from a goal down away from home under Sven? KEEP THE FAITH
Happy Fox Posted 26 November 2011 Posted 26 November 2011 Would have been nice to win today but wasn't to be, drawing the game now heaps more pressure on ourselves to get two wins from our next two games.
Salieri Posted 26 November 2011 Posted 26 November 2011 A win on tuesday would be massive. All the top sides are playing each other Blackpool are a tricky side, reckon it could be a cracking match with a few goals. They're not likely to sit back which could benefit us, 3-2 win.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.