tinman-is-god Posted June 18, 2009 Report Share Posted June 18, 2009 On the Fanzine Fanzone section of The Times website, there is a blog up about City's lack of midfield flair (see link) - http://timesonline.typepad.com/fanzine_fan...flair.html#more Article suggests that City could do a lot worse than going for Lallana at Southampton and Bailey at Charlton. Also, if you want to make a comment, feel free to do it on the 'Comments' section of the blog page. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrdc Posted June 18, 2009 Report Share Posted June 18, 2009 Looks great and will keep an eye on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lack of Action Man Posted June 18, 2009 Report Share Posted June 18, 2009 From a quick glance I agree with pretty much all of Richard Browns article. Edit: more here - http://www.fansonline.net/bristolcity/article.php?id=349 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinman-is-god Posted June 18, 2009 Author Report Share Posted June 18, 2009 From a quick glance I agree with pretty much all of Richard Browns article. Edit: more here - http://www.fansonline.net/bristolcity/article.php?id=349 I think that a lot of what was said in that article is what City fans are thinking. It seems quite obvious to me that we need midfielders and it looks like i'm not the only one that thinks that, although i don't wish for the thread to turn into a GJ bashing as that is not what it is intended to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garlicbread Posted June 18, 2009 Report Share Posted June 18, 2009 I think that a lot of what was said in that article is what City fans are thinking. It seems quite obvious to me that we need midfielders and it looks like i'm not the only one that thinks that, although i don't wish for the thread to turn into a GJ bashing as that is not what it is intended to do. Excellent piece. Shows that selling Carle was a very bad move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SJC Posted June 18, 2009 Report Share Posted June 18, 2009 re Garlicbread We made a 100% profit on a player who, for all his apparent appeal, contributed very little and has gone on to contribute very little at his new club this season. Add to this, not that I'm directly aware as such, the rumoured 'off the field' reasoning for his departure then for all my disappointment at the time, I think it must be concluded as a shrewd and necessary piece of business by the club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SJC Posted June 18, 2009 Report Share Posted June 18, 2009 In regard to the piece in general, I agree and disagree. Whilst Lee Johnson could clearly be replaced for the good of the team so could, and with much greater reason, McAllister and Sproule. So why is it that once again the finger is pointed at Lee Johnson. It appears we are looking to strengthen in central midfield but right midfield and striker are a much greater priority, not that we cant or wont address all three, and therefore aiming what appears a bit of a backhand (sorry Rich!) at LJ, especially after Elliott had an injury plagued below average season, seems unnecessary at best. Yes Lee Johnson could be replaced to the benefit of the team but he has only seen success during his time here, whether that be literal or relative, and thus outing him as a primary hurdle on our path to progression is very unfair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lager loud Posted June 19, 2009 Report Share Posted June 19, 2009 In regard to the piece in general, I agree and disagree. Whilst Lee Johnson could clearly be replaced for the good of the team so could, and with much greater reason, McAllister and Sproule. So why is it that once again the finger is pointed at Lee Johnson. It appears we are looking to strengthen in central midfield but right midfield and striker are a much greater priority, not that we cant or wont address all three, and therefore aiming what appears a bit of a backhand (sorry Rich!) at LJ, especially after Elliott had an injury plagued below average season, seems unnecessary at best. Yes Lee Johnson could be replaced to the benefit of the team but he has only seen success during his time here, whether that be literal or relative, and thus outing him as a primary hurdle on our path to progression is very unfair. The article says that "The biggest problem...is on the right hand side of midfield" and goes on to highlight Ivan Sproule's serious shortcomings. So he does get a much bigger finger pointed at him. And the article is about the problems of the midfield, so McAllister isn't relevant. I thought it was a well-considered piece, which didn't fall in the "LJ-bashing" category, and I think many City fans would agree with it. I know a lot of the LJ threads have been done to death in the past, but does that mean no-one is allowed to suggest the team might be improved with a better player in his place? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SJC Posted June 19, 2009 Report Share Posted June 19, 2009 Of course not and apologies if I mis-read/misinterpeted the piece. Having read the article though I felt that Lee Johnson was, as he often is on there boards, unnecessarily singled out. Ill say again, yes he could clearly be replaced to the benefit of the team, but on what grounds do other players, including the two mentioned, Basso, Orr and Mcindoe could be added based on last season escape criticism while Lee Johnson continues to find himself in the firing line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lager loud Posted June 19, 2009 Report Share Posted June 19, 2009 I'd only looked at the link to the Times blog when I posted. The City Fans Online article has a slightly different emphasis - but I still think it tries to be a balanced piece. Of course, there are other players in the team whose positions could be questioned -and the ones mentioned by SJC could certainly fall into that category. But if you asked me "What one improvement to the team's performances would have made most difference to our League position last season?" 'd answer "creativity from midfield". On the occasions when we managed to move the ball through midfield (Charlton away, Reading away, Norwich away) we looked like a really good team. But we didn't do it often enough to push for a top 6 finish. I happen to agree with Rich that the weakest link in the midfield was on the right wing, where I'm personally convinced that Ivan Sproule hasn't got what it takes to start for us at this level. After that, though, I'd look at the creativitiy from the centre - which is not just about wether LJ is good enough, but about how we can get the most out of the players we've got or can acquire: - could a Skuse/Elliot combination create enough? - is Williams the answer, and can he stay fit? - should we play five in the middle? - if we play two defensive players in the middle, does that free up the wide plyers to keep chalk on their boots? I think all the above are fair questions (and there are others, about midfield and about other parts of the team- but for me it does come back to that belief that something needs to be different in central midfield for us to move on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinman-is-god Posted June 19, 2009 Author Report Share Posted June 19, 2009 Of course not and apologies if I mis-read/misinterpeted the piece. Having read the article though I felt that Lee Johnson was, as he often is on there boards, unnecessarily singled out. Ill say again, yes he could clearly be replaced to the benefit of the team, but on what grounds do other players, including the two mentioned, Basso, Orr and Mcindoe could be added based on last season escape criticism while Lee Johnson continues to find himself in the firing line. As i said in the article, my primary concern is with the right hand side and that is why Ivan Sproule came in for particular critiscism. I do though, however, believe that LJ really is a weak link in the team. I didn't talk much about LJ in the article beacuse if i had given it more of a mention, it would have turned into a blog about LJ's shortcomings rather that Ivan Sproule's. I have nothing against LJ, he works hard, does well at covering when the centre halves go upfield and is a good bloke. But he is not, unfortunately, good enough to justify a starting role in a team that would be good enough to go up, in my opinion. I would still keep him in the squad, would be a decent player to bring on. I think Basso did OK last year, kept plenty of clean sheets but I would agree with you that Orr and McIndoe need to improve. Both were under-par last season and need to get back to their 07/08 form. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lack of Action Man Posted June 19, 2009 Report Share Posted June 19, 2009 re Garlicbread We made a 100% profit on a player who, for all his apparent appeal, contributed very little and has gone on to contribute very little at his new club this season. Add to this, not that I'm directly aware as such, the rumoured 'off the field' reasoning for his departure then for all my disappointment at the time, I think it must be concluded as a shrewd and necessary piece of business by the club. It can never be a 100% profit on him. We had to pay his wages after all. Entirely un-necessary piece of business imo of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SJC Posted June 19, 2009 Report Share Posted June 19, 2009 I meant on face value but clearly you are right. In business terms we bought something and then sold it on at an inflated price a short time later making a profit. Not an ideal scenario in regard to football clearly but the club, in theory, was slightly richer, or at least certainly no worse off, than it was 6 months earlier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garlicbread Posted June 21, 2009 Report Share Posted June 21, 2009 re Garlicbread We made a 100% profit on a player who, for all his apparent appeal, contributed very little and has gone on to contribute very little at his new club this season. Add to this, not that I'm directly aware as such, the rumoured 'off the field' reasoning for his departure then for all my disappointment at the time, I think it must be concluded as a shrewd and necessary piece of business by the club. And why would you care about what he does on his days off, so long as he perfoms on the pitch..which he was doing. People prefer to listen to Johnsons babble about him, which was way below the belt and was only done to slur the player as the bad guy. This report shows that Johnson was very unshrewd to sell him, the worst deal he's ever done...and gutting when our creative player last season scored 2 goals and didnt do much else. He couldve been the difference between getting more wins at home and finishing in the playoffs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Horsman Posted June 21, 2009 Report Share Posted June 21, 2009 Excellent piece. Shows that selling Carle was a very bad move. The bad move imo was not adequately replacing Carle, because we missed having another 'club in the bag' in midfield to shake things up, when we looked creatively barren. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lack of Action Man Posted June 21, 2009 Report Share Posted June 21, 2009 I meant on face value but clearly you are right. In business terms we bought something and then sold it on at an inflated price a short time later making a profit. Not an ideal scenario in regard to football clearly but the club, in theory, was slightly richer, or at least certainly no worse off, than it was 6 months earlier. Yeah I can see where you're coming from. It does make you wonder though, what on earth must the books at clubs like Chelsea and Liverpool (not so much Man Utd anymore) with the simply absurd wages being currently dished out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Army 79 Posted June 21, 2009 Report Share Posted June 21, 2009 And why would you care about what he does on his days off, so long as he perfoms on the pitch..which he was doing. People prefer to listen to Johnsons babble about him, which was way below the belt and was only done to slur the player as the bad guy. This report shows that Johnson was very unshrewd to sell him, the worst deal he's ever done...and gutting when our creative player last season scored 2 goals and didnt do much else. He couldve been the difference between getting more wins at home and finishing in the playoffs How many assists did Carle have when he played for us? For an attacking player scoring 0 goals in half a season doesn't really prove to me what we have missed from him. We done well to double his price tag. Infact when Williams is fit and playing through the Centre he is twice the player Carle will ever be. I agree with another post not replacing Carle was the mistake bit short when Williams isn't available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garlicbread Posted June 21, 2009 Report Share Posted June 21, 2009 How many assists did Carle have when he played for us? For an attacking player scoring 0 goals in half a season doesn't really prove to me what we have missed from him. We done well to double his price tag. Infact when Williams is fit and playing through the Centre he is twice the player Carle will ever be. I agree with another post not replacing Carle was the mistake bit short when Williams isn't available. Not true mate, he had plenty of influence in the team during the run in when we finished 4th, far more creativity than Lee Johnson and was really starting to settle ....He had quite a few assists... 2 of of which were in the playoffs when he ran the show. Too many people like to say he was no good now thats he's been sold. Fact is he was a decent player who would certainly have made a positive contribution last season and as a result, we may well have finished higher than 10th. ...and before you do, saying he liked a tipple does absolutely nothing to justify selling him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Army 79 Posted June 21, 2009 Report Share Posted June 21, 2009 Not true mate, he had plenty of influence in the team during the run in when we finished 4th, far more creativity than Lee Johnson and was really starting to settle ....He had quite a few assists... 2 of of which were in the playoffs when he ran the show. Too many people like to say he was no good now thats he's been sold. Fact is he was a decent player who would certainly have made a positive contribution last season and as a result, we may well have finished higher than 10th. ...and before you do, saying he liked a tipple does absolutely nothing to justify selling him Don't really care if he liked a tipple or disliked didn't even mention anything about him having a tipple its on the pitch that matters. At the end of the day Carle left almost a year ago its old news now. I rate Williams much more highly and he has done a better job on the pitch than Carle and I feel he adds more to the team. Scores a few as well. Agree with most posters that it is the Midfield that we need to improve on and a attacking midfielder is a must. Williams as much as I rate him isn't always available and when he isn't around we don't have anyone of that type who can take on the opposition and make things happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinman-is-god Posted June 23, 2009 Author Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 Don't really care if he liked a tipple or disliked didn't even mention anything about him having a tipple its on the pitch that matters. At the end of the day Carle left almost a year ago its old news now. I rate Williams much more highly and he has done a better job on the pitch than Carle and I feel he adds more to the team. Scores a few as well. Agree with most posters that it is the Midfield that we need to improve on and a attacking midfielder is a must. Williams as much as I rate him isn't always available and when he isn't around we don't have anyone of that type who can take on the opposition and make things happen. Williams has proved to be a decent replacement for Carle but neither player is really good enough in my opinion. We need a leading attacking central midfielder who is going to consistently perform and we also need end product from this individual. As has been stated, Carle did not score in 17, and Williams has got 3 in about 30, so in around 50 appearences the pair scored three times, nowhere near good enough. Williams is a good squadie and definetly worth keeping, but we need better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted June 30, 2009 Report Share Posted June 30, 2009 Not true mate, he had plenty of influence in the team during the run in when we finished 4th, far more creativity than Lee Johnson and was really starting to settle ....He had quite a few assists... 2 of of which were in the playoffs when he ran the show. Too many people like to say he was no good now thats he's been sold. Fact is he was a decent player who would certainly have made a positive contribution last season and as a result, we may well have finished higher than 10th. ...and before you do, saying he liked a tipple does absolutely nothing to justify selling him I agree with that mainly, seemed to improve as the season went on as shown by assists in the playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.