Wortho Posted 2 January 2012 Posted 2 January 2012 Great win. Not sure if this formation will work in the future, Palarse did have six chages to their team.
Matt Posted 2 January 2012 Posted 2 January 2012 Pleased with a much needed win, Tom Kennedy had a great game by the sound of it, hopefully a turning point, Beckford is a lazy twat. People said Yakubu was lazy, atleast he scored goals.
Guest BlueBrett Posted 2 January 2012 Posted 2 January 2012 Kennedy and Bamba were absolutely excellent and Schlupp was just about the best player on the pitch for most of his minutes. Moore did OK I thought - he was really keen and got stuck in but a bit dodgy on the ball, probably just desperate to avoid making any mistakes. Also Beckford actually looked interested and lively when he came on. Hopefully the first step towards some form.
Haydos Posted 2 January 2012 Posted 2 January 2012 Players who do not deserve to play for us ever again : Weale, Oakley, Dyer, Wellens and Howard at a push Gallagher. What? Deserve? Because we're massive and such a fantastically run club? Dick head.
acooling08 Posted 2 January 2012 Posted 2 January 2012 After veing 5 points off the play offs for so long pissing about with Home draws, we slipped down to 7 points away last week. After today it's only 4. On the up (slowly)
FrankieADZ Posted 2 January 2012 Posted 2 January 2012 there more bitching on this forum than in a bloody woman's hair salon must take alot of effort to be bitter even tho we've won.
Happy Fox Posted 2 January 2012 Posted 2 January 2012 What? Deserve? Because we're massive and such a fantastically run club? Dick head. Calm down I was only alluding to the fact that these players are our deadwood and won't help us in our promotion push that is all.
Kitchandro Posted 2 January 2012 Posted 2 January 2012 Players who do not deserve to play for us ever again : Weale, Oakley, Dyer, Wellens and Howard at a push Gallagher. Deserve is not the right word. Weale isn't good enough and I'd consider replacing him. He's a liability these days. Oakley isn't good enough. Dyer isn't good enough. Wellens is probably past it, maybe he's good enough for the bench occassionally. Howard is past it. But, you can't just say he 'deosn't deserve' to play for us because of the sending off. It was stupid and ridiculous but it was a mistake. He's not good enough anymore but there's no need for this overreaction. Other players have done similar things do they not 'deserve' to play for us again either? I don't know what you're on about in regards to Gallagher, he's a good player who knows where the goal is, he's been surely right up there with goals and assists in recent games. If he's considered a midifielder he's better than all the others we've got. Even with the necessary additions this month I'd say he's good enough to compete for a starting spot.
Babylon Posted 2 January 2012 Posted 2 January 2012 Players who do not deserve to play for us ever again : Weale, Oakley, Dyer, Wellens and Howard at a push Gallagher. Why exactly don't they deserve to play for us again? Why do people feel the need to be ridiculously over the top. Is it because people don't want to be lost in the crowd on here, so they have to come out with outlandish statements?
surrifox Posted 2 January 2012 Posted 2 January 2012 palace think they were hard done by! If Bamba had put his first half header 6 ins either side of the keeper it would have been 3-1 at half time and not at all flattered by it. Palace kept attacking in the last 20 mins and we kept giving the ball back to them but they never looked a potent threat or likely to break down our defence
Happy Fox Posted 2 January 2012 Posted 2 January 2012 Deserve was the wrong word, all I am saying is those above players I mentioned will not help us in our promotion push whatsoever.
Kitchandro Posted 2 January 2012 Posted 2 January 2012 palace think they were hard done by! If Bamba had put his first half header 6 ins either side of the keeper it would have been 3-1 at half time and not at all flattered by it. Palace kept attacking in the last 20 mins and we kept giving the ball back to them but they never looked a potent threat or likely to break down our defence TBF they sounded hard done by on the radio. We didn't get out of our half in the 2nd period! We took our chances and they didn't, though.
dannythefox Posted 2 January 2012 Posted 2 January 2012 Players who do not deserve to play for us ever again : Weale, Oakley, Dyer, Wellens and Howard at a push Gallagher. Wrong word! Weale, Oakley, Dyer, Wellens and Howard are not good enough any more that is all. As for Gallagher he's got the best right foot in our team ok he's not fast but he knows where the net is.
Charl91 Posted 2 January 2012 Posted 2 January 2012 Gallagher I think is a good player. His only problem is he is inconsistent, he's either great or useless. Dyer also can offer something off the bench, but probably shouldn't be starting.
Happy Fox Posted 2 January 2012 Posted 2 January 2012 Gallagher I think is a good player. His only problem is he is inconsistent, he's either great or useless. Dyer also can offer something off the bench, but probably shouldn't be starting. Gallagher is distinctly average and isn't someone I would rest my hopes on getting promotion lets be clear here that is the aim. Dyer is shit certainly not good enough at all.
Kitchandro Posted 2 January 2012 Posted 2 January 2012 Gallagher is distinctly average and isn't someone I would rest my hopes on getting promotion lets be clear here that is the aim. Dyer is shit certainly not good enough at all. Well automatic promotion aint going to happen. Gallagher however was part of the side that got into the play-offs, which is the realistic aim. You don't have to rest your hopes on one player, but that doesn't mean they can't contribute. He is inconsistent and he has his faults, but those goals against Palace weren't distinctly average, neither were his free kicks against Portsmouth and he was the best player against Ipswich.
Happy Fox Posted 2 January 2012 Posted 2 January 2012 Well automatic promotion aint going to happen. Gallagher however was part of the side that got into the play-offs, which is the realistic aim. You don't have to rest your hopes on one player, but that doesn't mean they can't contribute. He is inconsistent and he has his faults, but those goals against Palace weren't distinctly average, neither were his free kicks against Portsmouth and he was the best player against Ipswich. Maybe not this season but next season that will be the aim no doubt about it, and can you really see Gally featuring I don't think he will be here. Fair enough that is your opinion I just don't think he would make NP's team in the near future as I am sure we will be signing two wingers and going to a conventional 4-4-2.
marbelladave Posted 2 January 2012 Posted 2 January 2012 So you're feeling a bit more confident then dave? Not particularly though our performance was much better than in recent weeks. As i have said elsewhere, january is crucial, if NFP can get the players he wants it could get very interesting...... TBF they sounded hard done by on the radio. We didn't get out of our half in the 2nd period! We took our chances and they didn't, though. Second half we reverted to type, 4-4-2 with Nugent and Schlupp up left us hopelessly exposed in the center, improved somewhat when Schlupp was pulled back to make it a 4-5-1. But our basic problems were all to obvious, no runners or anyone showing in midfield so our clearances went straight back to Palace who were in control throughout. Nugent and to a lesser extent Schlupp and Dyer were the only outlets ant they were very isolated, only Danns really making any effort to get up and support. Some positives though, Moore and Kennedy had excellent first halves and were decent second as was King in a largely defensive role. Schlupp was decent for the best part of an hour but needed to get closer to Nugent who was isolated and pretty ineffective.
brockmyster Posted 2 January 2012 Posted 2 January 2012 Gallagher for me is frustrating, technique wise etc u cant fault him but he doesnt challenge and hes too weak. Granted he will pop up with a good goal every now and then but he hasnt been that good this year what so ever.
foxfanazer Posted 2 January 2012 Posted 2 January 2012 Feels so good to get 3 points, and from a game I wasn't expecting us to get anything from! Brave selection by Pearson and although for most of the game it was backs to the wall, it is a big improvement and a massive 3 points. Need to win back to back now and finally start out season
Kitchandro Posted 2 January 2012 Posted 2 January 2012 Maybe not this season but next season that will be the aim no doubt about it, and can you really see Gally featuring I don't think he will be here. Fair enough that is your opinion I just don't think he would make NP's team in the near future as I am sure we will be signing two wingers and going to a conventional 4-4-2. Why not? Both Pearson and Sven have picked him, and for all his doubters he keeps answering them with a decent number of goals and assists. I'll be happy if we get two wingers in but that doesn't automatically mean Gallagher's finished. He offers something different to the conventional winger and when we lack players who dare to shoot Gallagher is important. The accuracy of his shooting from distance is actually pretyy impressive. I'm still not sure about the formation, it all depends on the players we get, not just in terms of wingers but strikers and centre mids too. Plus the defence sounded a lot more solid today than in recent games, who's to say the 5-3-2 isn't the way forward?
marbelladave Posted 2 January 2012 Posted 2 January 2012 Why not? Both Pearson and Sven have picked him, and for all his doubters he keeps answering them with a decent number of goals and assists. I'll be happy if we get two wingers in but that doesn't automatically mean Gallagher's finished. He offers something different to the conventional winger and when we lack players who dare to shoot Gallagher is important. The accuracy of his shooting from distance is actually pretyy impressive. I'm still not sure about the formation, it all depends on the players we get, not just in terms of wingers but strikers and centre mids too. Plus the defence sounded a lot more solid today than in recent games, who's to say the 5-3-2 isn't the way forward? The biggest benefit from the change in formation was the midfield, not the defence. It was no more than adequate first half, Mills and Bamba were uncertain and Tunchev pretty rusty but since Palace really only played one man up they always had the numbers. Palace never put our back 3 under real pressure and failed to attack behind our wingbacks, might have been very different had they done so. Second half was the usual City rubbish, giving tha ball back to Palace at every opportunity, we were fortunate that Palace were pretty poor today.....
Candidcamera Posted 2 January 2012 Posted 2 January 2012 Well done especially Nigel for his changes. The points are vital too.
seenitall Posted 2 January 2012 Posted 2 January 2012 The biggest benefit from the change in formation was the midfield, not the defence. It was no more than adequate first half, Mills and Bamba were uncertain and Tunchev pretty rusty but since Palace really only played one man up they always had the numbers. Palace never put our back 3 under real pressure and failed to attack behind our wingbacks, might have been very different had they done so. Second half was the usual City rubbish, giving tha ball back to Palace at every opportunity, we were fortunate that Palace were pretty poor today..... Can't believe Nige didn't turn us into Barcelona in the 47 hours between games - rubbish
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.