Match Report: The most proud you can be in a 3-0 defeat

[Olé]

We lost 3-0 and Watford dominated the chances but there should be nothing other than pride in today's performance. For a few periods (first 15, start and end of the second half) we were the better footballing side, we stood up to them at the back and then went toe to toe with a Prem side's first team, playing I think with 6 players of 21 or under and two teenage debutants. We also did this by playing our way out from the back, not just sitting men behind the ball and hoofing it long hoping for a few set pieces to cause an upset.

 

Incidentally, if there were any set pieces to be won, the Premiership ref was not going to give them against the Premiership team, I don't recall him giving us a single one today and in a novelty cameo from Gustav Engvall - who to his credit got in position for our two best chances of the match - there should have been a penalty as their player clung on to Gustav for dear life while through on goal, the ref playing and being satisfied with a curious advantage even though the chance ended with Engvall (honest to a fault) eventually surrendering and crumbling to the floor under the close attention.

 

To be clear, Watford created plenty of chances, moving the ball at pace between players in the channels and looking for the diagonal runs all the time, but most were easily snuffed out by an impressive defence in which Magnússon was faultless for an hour - he is so much better at CB than his recent outings at LB - and all four of the back players worked hard to stay close to opponents and cut out or block every pass.

 

We didn't have much to get excited about in the first half - Woodrow and Taylor were both particularly poor as supposed senior players in the team - but we never looked out of our depth, and once Watford were in front we came out of shell if anything, twice Opi Edwards - confidence belying the sort of rabbit in headlights youth debuts we used to always see - was released on the right. Once squaring for Woodrow to fire past the post, and once racing in on goal but firing over.

 

In the second half we swapped Pack for Korey and City came out with their tails up, and evidently commiting a few players further forward, although Woodrow was doing a poor impression of Reid as far as laying the ball off to bring others into play, and Taylor, as seems increasingly the case, plays with a slight hesitancy and reluctance to commit to 50-50 forward balls. Instead it was Watford who smacked a shot onto the bar, and went two in front from close range.

 

Then suddenly the players, more solid and self confident than the 2-0 suggested, went at the game with more belief in their ability to attack. A slick move worked their defence on our left and from tbe resultant perfect cross, Taylor drifted in at the far post but nodded a poor downward header well wide. It was a carbon copy of Reid's goal at the same end earlier in the season but without any of the same ability.

 

On came the forgotten man - Gustav Engvall - looking closer to 30 than 20 and possibly a tad overweight, but he'd have our clearest chance of the game so far as another bright move with the ball released Eliasson past the full back on the right, and his drilled low cross found Engvall ghosting inside the six yard box but touching wide under pressure from a defender. Not long after Engvall would again get clear inside their back four - both amazing and deceptive considering how slow and uncultured he looks - and as he closed in on goal the defender spent what seemed an age hauling him back with the referee waving advantage. In the end he couldn't get a shot away and surrendered the ball but as feeble as it looked, he seemed harshly treated by a ref who gave us nothing.

 

Woodrow went off for Hinds - his last contribution to a largely poor performance being a square ball out of play as City broke - and with his first sight of the ball Hinds would create room outside the box and drill a trademark 25 yard shot low to the right of the keeper but easily claimed. Watford scored a flattering third as we pressed for a consolation - not flattering on chances, they had certainly piled into us from all angles, but flattering based on how solid we looked for long periods. 

 

In the end we were "well" beaten but there is nothing but pride for that performance. To be able to slot two teenage debutants into that team, and have them immediately adopt all the same positioning, press and self belief  is the mark of a club now operating in a way more accustomed to the biggest European clubs where every young player knows the tactics and is ready to go. 

 

Edwards was never overrawed or lacked belief even when he lost the ball, never felt sorry for himself as we used to see from old school youth players, bounced straight back and more often than not made a difference with his next contribution. Lemonheigh-Evans meanwhile didn't see a lot of the ball but looked so mature in central midfield. Once in each half he received a ball and dropped a shoulder and left a Premiership midfielder for dead. These are the things that make you beam from ear to ear and believe in the future of the club. As an added extra, Lloyd Kelly, now the older mentor at whatever age he is (19?) was the best City player on the pitch. 

 

As a long time City fan said to me after - this team we are building will be above Watford in the bigger picture soon enough. This going to be both some team and some club. The talent and more importantly the organisation (talent is nothing without leadership) is absolutely everywhere. 

 

Steele 6

Vyner 6

Kelly 8

Magnússon 7

Flint 7

Smith 6

Lemonheigh-Evans 7 (8 for a debut)

Edwards 7 (8 for a debut)

Eliasson 6

Taylor 5

Woodrow 5

 

Pack 6

Engvall 6

Hinds 6

[GrahamC]

Cheers Rob, good stuff as ever.

[Slippin cider]

Just need an interview with Johnson now then .....

[Sleepy1968]

Thanks @Olé. Your report suggests we were a bit better than it sounded on the radio. I do hope we don't lose Mags in the transfer window.

I loved Opie Edwards post match interview on bctv.  Full of enthusiasm. Brilliant.

[Jerseybean]

Thank you as always Ole the sense of pride you instil is tangible and hugely encouraging. Especially enjoyed the final paragraph. 

[AppyDAZE]

Lemonheigh-Evans fock me what a name whether he goes on to be something or not.

Forbes P-M my son ,you have just been trumped (not Donalded)

 

[cidered abroad]

Thanks again Ole.

I've seen Opi Edwards twice this season in under 23's and was impressed each time.

Junior Bent reincarnated! Let's hope he's better at one on one's with keepers.

[BTRFTG]

I'm 100% behind your sentiment but fear glasses less rose tinted are required if we are truly to progress.

At no point were we: "the better footballing side." In every department they were light years better than us in respect of their passing, movement and positioning - but so they should be given they've recruited players far beyond our means. I'm also not for knocking the youngsters but if you think Kelly was our best player then the fact his weaknesses were exploited throughout and he remained someway off the pace tells its own story. He's young and like a novice hurdler is open to improvement but improvement he very much needs at this level.

As you report the one positive to take from today was the attitude and performance of both debutants. Lemonhead did mostly the right things and was competitive against far more skilled opponents for the first hour. Edwards (worryingly I'm not sure where he's supposed to play but the further up the pitch the better) was excellent first time out and other than losing his man in the build-up for their first did little wrong. I loved his positive attitude.

And then there's the bit you underplay.

Today's forward line was quite possibly the most inept I've witnessed in many a decade and the old adage, 'we were lucky to get nil', was never more apt. The one positive from Woodrow is he's possibly answered the old conundrum as to whether it was John Kerr or Paul Williams who was the least talented striker ever to don a City shirt? It's neither with that accolade falling to him. Engvall returned from the Iron Stoves and looked and played like one, or perhaps a middle aged, chartered accountant from KPMG? I'm not bothered he's honest (many of the best strikers are and were woeful cheats and thugs,) but rather  more concerned he's impotent in the opponent's half. Johnson needs to put up or shut up and  release the training ground footage showing what Eliasen 'does' for he sure as hell does the square root of zip on the park. Taylor has a nice touch and runs the routes and channels well but the fact he scored so many at The Gas serves only to show what an utterly, utterly woeful standard of football they play in. He's this generation's Liam Robinson.

Whilst its great we are building for the future therein lies the conundrum, that's a future in the Football League. Were we to scrape out of this division we've 4 or fewer players technically able to compete in the Premier and like all clubs before us, we'd need a whole squad of lower budget '2nd strings' to help us bounce up and down between the leagues in the hope of becoming remotely competitive at that level.

It's been a pretty good ride so far and the cup games were a distraction we could have done without but the well organised, motivated and performing sides Johnson is putting out will never compensate for the high risk strategy of swamping midfield with nobody upfront. Yes we've been unlucky with injuries in that department but in addition to finding out how useful those players are when they return, we'll also find out just how good our midfield is when parity in numbers is restored.

 

[Fordy62]

4 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

I'm 100% behind your sentiment but fear glasses less rose tinted are required if we are truly to progress.

At no point were we: "the better footballing side." In every department they were light years better than us in respect of their passing, movement and positioning - but so they should be given they've recruited players far beyond our means. I'm also not for knocking the youngsters but if you think Kelly was our best player then the fact his weaknesses were exploited throughout and he remained someway off the pace tells its own story. He's young and like a novice hurdler is open to improvement but improvement he very much needs at this level.

As you report the one positive to take from today was the attitude and performance of both debutants. Lemonhead did mostly the right things and was competitive against far more skilled opponents for the first hour. Edwards (worryingly I'm not sure where he's supposed to play but the further up the pitch the better) was excellent first time out and other than losing his man in the build-up for their first did little wrong. I loved his positive attitude.

And then there's the bit you underplay.

Today's forward line was quite possibly the most inept I've witnessed in many a decade and the old adage, 'we were lucky to get nil', was never more apt. The one positive from Woodrow is he's possibly answered the old conundrum as to whether it was John Kerr or Paul Williams who was the least talented striker ever to don a City shirt? It's neither with that accolade falling to him. Engvall returned from the Iron Stoves and looked and played like one, or perhaps a middle aged, chartered accountant from KPMG? I'm not bothered he's honest (many of the best strikers are and were woeful cheats and thugs,) but rather  more concerned he's impotent in the opponent's half. Johnson needs to put up or shut up and  release the training ground footage showing what Eliasen 'does' for he sure as hell does the square root of zip on the park. Taylor has a nice touch and runs the routes and channels well but the fact he scored so many at The Gas serves only to show what an utterly, utterly woeful standard of football they play in. He's this generation's Liam Robinson.

Whilst its great we are building for the future therein lies the conundrum, that's a future in the Football League. Were we to scrape out of this division we've 4 or fewer players technically able to compete in the Premier and like all clubs before us, we'd need a whole squad of lower budget '2nd strings' to help us bounce up and down between the leagues in the hope of becoming remotely competitive at the that level.

It's been a pretty good ride so far and the cup games were a distraction we could have done without but the well organised, motivated and performing sides Johnson is putting out will never compensate for the high risk strategy of swamping midfield with nobody upfront. Yes we've been unlucky with injuries in that department but in addition to finding out how useful those players are when they return, we'll also find out just how good our midfield is when parity in numbers is restored.

 

Wow. You’re like The Green Goblin to Olé’s Spider-Man. What a fight this would be!

[BTRFTG]

2 minutes ago, Fordy62 said:

Wow. You’re like The Green Goblin to Olé’s Spider-Man. What a fight this would be!

No, we'd be the League of Justice as we're both rooting for the same righteous cause. 

[Second City Exile]

Excellent post. Would only disagree with the Lemonheigh-Evans assessment-otherwise,spot on !!

[Alex_BCFC]

We were never the better side - our mostly youth team had great attitude but we were smashed for pretty much the whole game. We had one decent chance that Taylor headed wide at 2-0 down.

Expected result and good to some youth players but most of them need time out on loan before they can realistically play for City st pour current level and I would include Kelly in that too.  

[stortfordred]

36 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

I'm 100% behind your sentiment but fear glasses less rose tinted are required if we are truly to progress.

At no point were we: "the better footballing side." In every department they were light years better than us in respect of their passing, movement and positioning - but so they should be given they've recruited players far beyond our means. I'm also not for knocking the youngsters but if you think Kelly was our best player then the fact his weaknesses were exploited throughout and he remained someway off the pace tells its own story. He's young and like a novice hurdler is open to improvement but improvement he very much needs at this level.

As you report the one positive to take from today was the attitude and performance of both debutants. Lemonhead did mostly the right things and was competitive against far more skilled opponents for the first hour. Edwards (worryingly I'm not sure where he's supposed to play but the further up the pitch the better) was excellent first time out and other than losing his man in the build-up for their first did little wrong. I loved his positive attitude.

And then there's the bit you underplay.

Today's forward line was quite possibly the most inept I've witnessed in many a decade and the old adage, 'we were lucky to get nil', was never more apt. The one positive from Woodrow is he's possibly answered the old conundrum as to whether it was John Kerr or Paul Williams who was the least talented striker ever to don a City shirt? It's neither with that accolade falling to him. Engvall returned from the Iron Stoves and looked and played like one, or perhaps a middle aged, chartered accountant from KPMG? I'm not bothered he's honest (many of the best strikers are and were woeful cheats and thugs,) but rather  more concerned he's impotent in the opponent's half. Johnson needs to put up or shut up and  release the training ground footage showing what Eliasen 'does' for he sure as hell does the square root of zip on the park. Taylor has a nice touch and runs the routes and channels well but the fact he scored so many at The Gas serves only to show what an utterly, utterly woeful standard of football they play in. He's this generation's Liam Robinson.

Whilst its great we are building for the future therein lies the conundrum, that's a future in the Football League. Were we to scrape out of this division we've 4 or fewer players technically able to compete in the Premier and like all clubs before us, we'd need a whole squad of lower budget '2nd strings' to help us bounce up and down between the leagues in the hope of becoming remotely competitive at that level.

It's been a pretty good ride so far and the cup games were a distraction we could have done without but the well organised, motivated and performing sides Johnson is putting out will never compensate for the high risk strategy of swamping midfield with nobody upfront. Yes we've been unlucky with injuries in that department but in addition to finding out how useful those players are when they return, we'll also find out just how good our midfield is when parity in numbers is restored.

 

Can’t say I disagree with any of the assessments from today’s game although I’m not sure we can make judgements on the whole season from this one performance. It was a shot to nothing. 

I thought Engvall did ok when he came on but then again we had been woeful up front before then. Taylor’s occasional glimpses of form were almost immediately wrecked by an awful pass or a stumble. 

 I didn’t notice Vyner very much but Kelly was ok when he had the ball but boy he’s slow. He may improve and he’s definitely got the physique but for me the jury is out. 

Steele was good and should be a shoo-in for Tuesday. We were good at centre half too, both Maggs and Flint putting a shift in. I think Deeney had worked Flint out  after halftime tho. 

Two other positives for me were Lemon and Edwards. Both willing to give it a go. You never know but if we were  to play either one of them in a team when they had more experience around them, then they could do Ok. 

For me Eliasson and Woodrow looked like they should only be picked again if we’re desperate. 

 

I just hope Smith’s injury ain’t too bad. Shocking tackle. 

[The Journalist]

36 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

I'm 100% behind your sentiment but fear glasses less rose tinted are required if we are truly to progress.

At no point were we: "the better footballing side." In every department they were light years better than us in respect of their passing, movement and positioning - but so they should be given they've recruited players far beyond our means. I'm also not for knocking the youngsters but if you think Kelly was our best player then the fact his weaknesses were exploited throughout and he remained someway off the pace tells its own story. He's young and like a novice hurdler is open to improvement but improvement he very much needs at this level.

As you report the one positive to take from today was the attitude and performance of both debutants. Lemonhead did mostly the right things and was competitive against far more skilled opponents for the first hour. Edwards (worryingly I'm not sure where he's supposed to play but the further up the pitch the better) was excellent first time out and other than losing his man in the build-up for their first did little wrong. I loved his positive attitude.

And then there's the bit you underplay.

Today's forward line was quite possibly the most inept I've witnessed in many a decade and the old adage, 'we were lucky to get nil', was never more apt. The one positive from Woodrow is he's possibly answered the old conundrum as to whether it was John Kerr or Paul Williams who was the least talented striker ever to don a City shirt? It's neither with that accolade falling to him. Engvall returned from the Iron Stoves and looked and played like one, or perhaps a middle aged, chartered accountant from KPMG? I'm not bothered he's honest (many of the best strikers are and were woeful cheats and thugs,) but rather  more concerned he's impotent in the opponent's half. Johnson needs to put up or shut up and  release the training ground footage showing what Eliasen 'does' for he sure as hell does the square root of zip on the park. Taylor has a nice touch and runs the routes and channels well but the fact he scored so many at The Gas serves only to show what an utterly, utterly woeful standard of football they play in. He's this generation's Liam Robinson.

Whilst its great we are building for the future therein lies the conundrum, that's a future in the Football League. Were we to scrape out of this division we've 4 or fewer players technically able to compete in the Premier and like all clubs before us, we'd need a whole squad of lower budget '2nd strings' to help us bounce up and down between the leagues in the hope of becoming remotely competitive at that level.

It's been a pretty good ride so far and the cup games were a distraction we could have done without but the well organised, motivated and performing sides Johnson is putting out will never compensate for the high risk strategy of swamping midfield with nobody upfront. Yes we've been unlucky with injuries in that department but in addition to finding out how useful those players are when they return, we'll also find out just how good our midfield is when parity in numbers is restored.

 

I think you've made some superb points here - we shouldn't be afraid to recognise our own limitations.

I'd certainly pull you up on the bit I've bolded, though. I think we have to be careful to remember where exactly we've come from in such a short space of time. I think we're building for better than that, personally, but we're not trying to go from A to B over night.

[Xiled]

37 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

No, we'd be the League of Justice as we're both rooting for the same righteous cause. 

I haven't seen any of the game so I can't disagree with anything you've written. It's in contrast with Rob's piece but football is all about opinions.

Taking the aggregate of both viewpoints, I know for certain that we would struggle like mad in the Premier League with this squad. And I agree, we only have a handful of players who could perform at that level and not look out of place.

But, I'm interested in trajectory and momentum. While last season was horrible at times, this squad is now a thousand miles down the road compared to the Championship team that was relegated to League One in 2013.

I've only ever asked for progress and that's what I've seen in huge amounts since the Ashton Gate transformation started and Steve Cotterill began winning games with us. LJ has settled into the job and has given us an incredible view of what might be possible.

So, not perfect, but definitely heading in the right direction. And if our debutants didn't look out of place against a first string Watford, I'll take that for today.

Thanks for both reports @Olé and @BTRFTG - great writing.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Gotta say though I really enjoy Ole's reports. They seem they can be a bit rose tinted at times..or red tinted perhaps.

Thought so after one or 2 wins earlier in the season just a bit of overhype tbh.

Or positive thinking depends on interpretation. This seems like one duchy report I feel.

In the interest of balance also, vs a first team Premier League side...not entirely.

I know a Watford fan and he told me they have 6 injuries currently. I know we do too, and I know they are PL but anyway.

[BTRFTG]

5 minutes ago, The Journalist said:

I think we're building for better than that

Should have made clear, all the non-playoff activities are high quality. The point I was trying to get across was no matter how good the youth development squad when one moves from Championship to Premier it's all about buying-in and the kids developed, unless they are rocking-horse exceptional, lose out. That's the nature of the game these days and reflects the differential in financing between the leagues. We're doing the right thing in getting a squad ready to compete at the top of The Championship, the sadness being that if reaching the promised land those developed are unlikely to be good enough. Watford today were a bought-in squad as demonstrated by our less knowledgible fans delighting in chanting 'who' at every one of their players whom, truth be told,  we'd take at the drop of a hat.

[OldlandReddies]

Kids did well against a strong Watford side. Unlike Brentford, Cardiff, Villa, Sheff W and QPR who can all hang their heads in shame after failing against lower league teams.

[Northern Red]

2 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Gotta say though I really enjoy Ole's reports. They seem they can be a bit rose tinted at times..or red tinted perhaps.

Thought so after one or 2 wins earlier in the season just a bit of overhype tbh.

Or positive thinking depends on interpretation. This seems like one duchy report I feel.

In the interest of balance also, vs a first team Premier League side...not entirely.

I know a Watford fan and he told me they have 6 injuries currently. I know we do too, and I know they are PL but anyway.

To be fair to @Olé, he's quite prepared to be critical when he feels it's merited, there just hasn't been much need for it this season. Certainly some of last season's match reports were scathing, even the odd one where we'd won like Burton away.

[Olé]

52 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

And then there's the bit you underplay.

Today's forward line was quite possibly the most inept I've witnessed in many a decade and the old adage, 'we were lucky to get nil', was never more apt. The one positive from Woodrow is he's possibly answered the old conundrum as to whether it was John Kerr or Paul Williams who was the least talented striker ever to don a City shirt? It's neither with that accolade falling to him. Engvall returned from the Iron Stoves and looked and played like one, or perhaps a middle aged, chartered accountant from KPMG?

No you're 100% right. I only underplayed this bit - though I thought I dropped enough hints in the report - because I thought it would lack class to speak so highly of being proud and then tear into two back up forwards (and their replacement). But you're right, they were largely awful as outlets.

Like I said, there is something about the way Taylor is playing recently (relative to, say, Derby last season, and obviously excluding the Man Utd winner) where he just seems to plant a foot a yard or two short of an opponent on a 50-50 ball and hope to take advantage of a mistake rather than force one. Colloquially I'd say "trying to be too cute". Being rude I'd say he just doesn't get stuck in or exert himself like the rest of them do. I couldn't honestly say he "leaves everything out there" on the pitch.

As for Woodrow - he was poor at Hull, poor at QPR and poor today. I think he has something about him but nowhere near enough for this level. He can combine well in space in midfield but he is no target man and he is no forward runner. His rep at Burton was finishing crosses and scoring with headers. We're just not playing that game. 

With Engvall just turning up was going to be a bonus. I said he looked closer to 30 than 20 and echo your sentiment, although I would say that getting into the two positions he did, was not simply a fluke, Woodrow didn't manage it, I don't know if Engvall has deceptive pace or the positioning of a true finisher - not to say he was any good, but it's worth saying that he got into positions neither Taylor nor Woodrow got into.

Eliasson didn't show as one of our better players today but on him I think you're being harsh. There are flashes of a player there. I think he is quite shy and nervous and prone to fading out of matches he starts, and he didn't stand out today, but he has the ability (he changed the game at Hull) and I thought he was sensible defensively today, which is one of the reasons Leko didn't stick.

[Mr Popodopolous]

6 minutes ago, Northern Red said:

To be fair to @Olé, he's quite prepared to be critical when he feels it's merited, there just hasn't been much need for it this season. Certainly some of last season's match reports were scathing, even the odd one where we'd won like Burton away.

Fair point. Good shout, had forgotten about that one! Was thinking Ipswich away this season...listening on radio sounded like we dug in 2nd half but that wasn't necessarily reflected in report.

Like I say his reports are generally excellent though and fair too.

[BTRFTG]

6 minutes ago, Olé said:

I thought it would lack class to speak so highly of being proud and then tear into two back up forwards (and their replacement). But you're right, they were largely awful as outlets.

Giving praise is easy. Management is about those 'difficult conversations' one doesn't want to have but must.

Fine wordsmithing apart we should have cut to the chase and said those mentioned, at Championship level, are rubbish. And that's the sorry truth. Let's not look for highlights or excuses, let's move on and get in tools to do the job. Shy, nervous, honest. I don't want to see any of those traits in a City forward. They're adjectival excuses for not being able to cut the mustard. Hopefully that's Johnson's next priority, not easy, talent doesn't grow on trees, doesn't come cheap, but build we must.

[sab]

Ole- your reports are always a great read and i am always grateful. However today its rose tinted x 2. I was at qpr and today. Kelly was awful both matches and was a long way off the pace today. From what i  have seen so far he is no where near championship.

[AppyDAZE]

11 hours ago, AppyDAZE said:

Lemonheigh-Evans fock me what a name whether he goes on to be something or not.

Forbes P-M my son ,you have just been trumped (not Donalded)

 

Was just thinking, maybe Aden should become Aden Heigh-Ho I Said No Flint

[DaveInSA]

Nice report and insightful comments and opinions throughout.

My first game at AG for 15 years will be the second leg of the Man City game...!!

I’m sure I’ll be quick to pass judgement after that!

I’m now going to offer my opinion. I cannot stand the premier league, nor can I fathom that a footballer is worth £142m and over £150k per week.

SKY and their mates have ruined football.

So would I rather watch a team of young, talented mostly British footballers, pressing for promotion in the Championship, or a team of journeymen pros, milking the club for a paycheque in the Prem?

I’d go for the second every time. And maybe if we go up, these young lads step up and become Prem talent. And maybe they don’t. We’d be a very small fish in that Prem pond (we are already a smallish club in the Champs). 

I like the momentum comment by @Xiled. I’d like to see us build something we can be proud of, like Burnley have done. 

 

 

[1960maaan]

Thanks @Olé and @BTRFTG nice to get 2 opinions .
One thing, and I have my ever hopeful hat on , I'd give Eliasson more time. We had seen glimpses, few and far between maybe , but a few signs. I say this because of this years compared to last. Brownhill , ODowda , Patterson and even Joe Bryan were written of , or at least criticised last year . This year they are looking quality. Eliasson has a change of Country,Laegue and team to contend with, along with different styles and coaching.
Engval is another case. I don't see him in training and this is where LJ may have concerns, but I'd like to see him given a game or two as I can't see he'd be worse than Taylor or Woodrow. If he doesn't cut it , then offload. 
It's great to hear of academy players being talked so highly of, real promise for the future.

[Fordy62]

10 hours ago, BTRFTG said:

Giving praise is easy. Management is about those 'difficult conversations' one doesn't want to have but must.

Fine wordsmithing apart we should have cut to the chase and said those mentioned, at Championship level, are rubbish. And that's the sorry truth. Let's not look for highlights or excuses, let's move on and get in tools to do the job. Shy, nervous, honest. I don't want to see any of those traits in a City forward. They're adjectival excuses for not being able to cut the mustard. Hopefully that's Johnson's next priority, not easy, talent doesn't grow on trees, doesn't come cheap, but build we must.

Haven’t seen many of your posts before but going toe to toe with a forum heavyweight with aplomb makes me wonder why we haven’t heard more from you. 

And then it all becomes apparent in your last sentence... you’re actually Yoda!

[BTRFTG]

1 minute ago, JonDolman said:

Sorry, who at championship level are rubbish?

Our attacking (sic) players yesterday, as referenced in the thread.

[1960maaan]

3 minutes ago, JonDolman said:

Sorry, who at championship level are rubbish?

Taylor and Woodrow , do try and keep up 

 

 

 

 

Joking, joking 

 

 

I've lost my tin hat

[BTRFTG]

8 minutes ago, Fordy62 said:

why we haven’t heard more from you

I was around many years back but for some reason my account stopped working (followed a forum reformat.) Mods never did respond as to why? By chance something cropped up a few months back that I wanted to respond to and, strangely, my account was once again working.