sylofox Posted 21 March 2015 Posted 21 March 2015 Just met our Marcin at King cross he was absolutely gutted with today said it keeps happening and it's killing him, nice fella looked seemed genuinely upset Says it all really. Just shows instead of slagging NP and players off we should get more behind them and come out fighting for them.
foxfanazer Posted 21 March 2015 Posted 21 March 2015 If Nuge had scored that outrageous effort first half!
lifted*fox Posted 21 March 2015 Posted 21 March 2015 Nugent was on the ball, should have knocked it out. He still had the ball, albeit he'd knocked it slightly further on and then Rose clattered into him whilst getting none of the ball. If anything it was a free kick in our direction. Anyone saying it was a nailed on pen is either ****ing blind or using it to justify their negative outlook on what, really was a pretty positive game from us today. Also, we didn't sit back at 2-2 but Spurs did have a period of possession. Just because the other team has the ball for a few minutes doesn't mean we've suddenly changed to negative tactics. Sometimes the opposition wins the ball and kicks it around a bit. That's how football works.
Guest Cujek Posted 21 March 2015 Posted 21 March 2015 Nugent was on the ball, should have knocked it out. He still had the ball, albeit he'd knocked it slightly further on and then Rose clattered into him whilst getting none of the ball. If anything it was a free kick in our direction. Anyone saying it was a nailed on pen is either ****ing blind or using it to justify their negative outlook on what, really was a pretty positive game from us today. Also, we didn't sit back at 2-2 but Spurs did have a period of possession. Just because the other team has the ball for a few minutes doesn't mean we've suddenly changed to negative tactics. Sometimes the opposition wins the ball and kicks it around a bit. That's how football works. best post all day.
StanSP Posted 21 March 2015 Posted 21 March 2015 Nugent was on the ball, should have knocked it out. He still had the ball, albeit he'd knocked it slightly further on and then Rose clattered into him whilst getting none of the ball. If anything it was a free kick in our direction. Anyone saying it was a nailed on pen is either ****ing blind or using it to justify their negative outlook on what, really was a pretty positive game from us today. Also, we didn't sit back at 2-2 but Spurs did have a period of possession. Just because the other team has the ball for a few minutes doesn't mean we've suddenly changed to negative tactics. Sometimes the opposition wins the ball and kicks it around a bit. That's how football works. But we let them have possession too easily. We could have continued to pressure them but we backed off slightly. The tempo in our play dipped when in fact we were on the up and could have carried on getting at them. So yeah, I know the opposition has the ball and kicks it about but it's as if we let them do it and kill our momentum.
ealingfox Posted 21 March 2015 Posted 21 March 2015 Hard to argue with most of what Pearson says there, if as I've seen said Mike Dean wouldn't speak to our side after the game he certainly should have mentioned that, although Pearson was correct in saying there would be no point speaking to him. When he talked about the length of time Dean took to give it - did he give it straight away without thinking or did he take ages before giving it without asking the lino or anything?
st albans fox Posted 21 March 2015 Posted 21 March 2015 Would have been good to get something but today was the last 'free hit' before chelsea. I've resigned myself to our fate but would be good to make a fist of it by winning some home games.
Guest ttfn Posted 21 March 2015 Posted 21 March 2015 we scored in the first half too so that should keep that ttfn character quiet for at least a week, hallelujah Made my season.
Vicki Vixen Posted 21 March 2015 Posted 21 March 2015 Says it all really. Just shows instead of slagging NP and players off we should get more behind them and come out fighting for them. Sorry pal, replied to the wrong post. I agree with you by the way.
Fez of Mahrez Posted 21 March 2015 Posted 21 March 2015 I must be blind because I'm not negative but it looked a penalty to me. I can't understand all the anger about it. Nugent plays it into Rose's path and then obstructs him. I'd be furious if that wasn't given against us.
lifted*fox Posted 21 March 2015 Posted 21 March 2015 But we let them have possession too easily. We could have continued to pressure them but we backed off slightly. The tempo in our play dipped when in fact we were on the up and could have carried on getting at them. So yeah, I know the opposition has the ball and kicks it about but it's as if we let them do it and kill our momentum. But when we got our 2nd goal things change. Spurs then feel the need to get at us again so they up their tempo. That means we have to knock it up another gear to stay on top, an extra gear up from the one which saw us get a 2nd goal. There's all sorts of factors that change when someone scores. We may have took a tiny bit of pressure off but I don't believe it was too the point of calling 'sitting back'. The whole 'when we equalised we sat back' or 'we resigned to a draw' are just cliché sentences that people come out with because it sounds like a valid excuse. Just words, words with no real substance.
Guest Cujek Posted 21 March 2015 Posted 21 March 2015 Hard to argue with most of what Pearson says there, if as I've seen said Mike Dean wouldn't speak to our side after the game he certainly should have mentioned that, although Pearson was correct in saying there would be no point speaking to him. When he talked about the length of time Dean took to give it - did he give it straight away without thinking or did he take ages before giving it without asking the lino or anything? Everyone expecting a corner kick, Mike Dean about 10 seconds later (seemed that long anyway) gave a pen
lifted*fox Posted 21 March 2015 Posted 21 March 2015 I must be blind because I'm not negative but it looked a penalty to me. I can't understand all the anger about it. Nugent plays it into Rose's path and then obstructs him. I'd be furious if that wasn't given against us. I'm not angry about it particularly. A little annoyed I guess. I watched it back several times and anywhere else on the pitch it's either a nothing challenge or it goes in our favour. Nuge should have cleared it but he didn't but at no point did he foul Rose. Rose comes running across, goes shoulder to shoulder and nudges Nugent off the ball. I've watched it again and tried to see it the other way but it's just not happening .
Rincewind Posted 21 March 2015 Posted 21 March 2015 Sounded a decent game - for the neutral. Two errors two goals conceded early on, a poor referring decision from a referee who up to that point was having a decent game knocked City back. but you do not get points for being unlucky and in theory it evens out over the season. in all honesty can anyone say City are one of the three worst teams in the league? they have competed well in the majority games and conceded goals at the worst times. Early on, just before half time and just before the end in more games than other teams. They have lost by the odd goal in a few games and not really been thrashed eg. 5-0 what has been the heaviest defeat 3-0?
RedSoxUK Posted 21 March 2015 Posted 21 March 2015 Has anyone mentioned Vardy's performance today? Thought he did brilliant down that left side, great control, crossing, and tortured Kyle Walker. He was all over him today. Just a reminder that Kyle Walker is in the England squad.
StanSP Posted 21 March 2015 Posted 21 March 2015 But when we got our 2nd goal things change. Spurs then feel the need to get at us again so they up their tempo. That means we have to knock it up another gear to stay on top, an extra gear up from the one which saw us get a 2nd goal. There's all sorts of factors that change when someone scores. We may have took a tiny bit of pressure off but I don't believe it was too the point of calling 'sitting back'. The whole 'when we equalised we sat back' or 'we resigned to a draw' are just cliché sentences that people come out with because it sounds like a valid excuse. Just words, words with no real substance. Yeah it means we have to go up a gear so why didn't we? We did sit back because the midfield got closer to the defence and that sucked the forwards back closer to come and get the ball. They're not cliche sentences because that is what actually happened. How else would you want it described?
Guest ttfn Posted 21 March 2015 Posted 21 March 2015 pearson back in now? so fickle Yeah I figure if I say he is the right man for the job now it means that in 6 months' time whatever happens I can carefully select a post from my history and I'll have been proven right, happy days. Seriously though, days like today make days like last Saturday even worse.
foxfanazer Posted 21 March 2015 Posted 21 March 2015 When the owners sack Pearson they should look no further than foxestalk for his replacement. Plenty of football managers here
ScouseFox Posted 21 March 2015 Posted 21 March 2015 Seriously though i'm out. true tho. how come we can go to spurs score three (could've been more) and be unlucky to concede a few, yet whenever we play anyone at home we can't score or create anything. just crrrrrazy.
lifted*fox Posted 21 March 2015 Posted 21 March 2015 Yeah it means we have to go up a gear so why didn't we? We did sit back because the midfield got closer to the defence and that sucked the forwards back closer to come and get the ball. They're not cliche sentences because that is what actually happened. How else would you want it described? Does anyone consider we might have already been in our top gear whilst getting the 2 goals back? Maybe the extra effort over the course of that period was pretty tiring so when Spurs decide to notch it up a bit for 5 minutes it caught us out? It's not as black and white as people on here like to make out. What I'm trying to get at is that I'm sure we didn't intentionally take our foot off the gas and let them have possession. I'd imagine there's lots more factors that come into it.
StanSP Posted 21 March 2015 Posted 21 March 2015 Does anyone consider we might have already been in our top gear whilst getting the 2 goals back? Maybe the extra effort over the course of that period was pretty tiring so when Spurs decide to notch it up a bit for 5 minutes it caught us out? It's not as black and white as people on here like to make out. What I'm trying to get at is that I'm sure we didn't intentionally take our foot off the gas and let them have possession. I'd imagine there's lots more factors that come into it. Obviously it wasn't intentionally!
Guest CityFan 06 Posted 21 March 2015 Posted 21 March 2015 I think the players tried their absolute best today, judging from what I heard on BBC Radio Leicester. Scoring three goals away from home and not getting any points is disappointing. But, the best thing to do now is probably to move on and focus on the next games which is West Ham United at home.
Phube Posted 21 March 2015 Posted 21 March 2015 Gutted But... Okay, who's captained Kane in their Fantasy team? I know I have...
lifted*fox Posted 21 March 2015 Posted 21 March 2015 Obviously it wasn't intentionally! I know that, and you know that! There's plenty of people on here though that would have you believe we purposely ****ed it up by 'sitting back'. In some instances yes, I've seen us actually sit back and concede, but today wasn't one of those instances.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.