Jump to content
IGNORED

Mcburnie no 10


Antman

Recommended Posts

If that’s how you spell it.

he’s on 13 for the season but yesterday looked truly awful. Uninterested and totally off the pace and unable to get involved. Couldn’t see why he was leading their line. (Great for us mind!)

Fammy had a poor one yesterday, but is so much better by comparison, yet takes so much flak from certain fans.

C’est la guerre!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good player, good touch, good movement.  Looked decent first half hour, but Kalas was awesome against him.  Once Wright got to grips with Celina, there was no service, and in the second half he just went deeper and deeper to avoid Kalas.

Think we need to give City’d defence the credit for McBurnie nit having a good game.  Seen him several times and he’s usually much better than that.

Well played our defence!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Antman said:

If that’s how you spell it.

he’s on 13 for the season but yesterday looked truly awful. Uninterested and totally off the pace and unable to get involved. Couldn’t see why he was leading their line. (Great for us mind!)

Fammy had a poor one yesterday, but is so much better by comparison, yet takes so much flak from certain fans.

C’est la guerre!

 

 

 

If you thought he was uninterested in the game....  you should have seen his warm up.  I spent 15 minutes watching the Swansea warm up and the enthusiasm that came from the whole team was questionable but McBurnie's effort was laughable. don't see the hype on that performance. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, steviestevieneville said:

He dropped deeper because he couldn’t get any change out of kalas . I think he’s still in his pocket now. 

Very much this.

We forced McBurnie to drop really deep to collect the ball with the result that by the second half he was more or less a spectator.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Antman said:

If that’s how you spell it.

he’s on 13 for the season but yesterday looked truly awful. Uninterested and totally off the pace and unable to get involved. Couldn’t see why he was leading their line. (Great for us mind!)

Fammy had a poor one yesterday, but is so much better by comparison, yet takes so much flak from certain fans.

C’est la guerre!

 

 

We saw things differently. I thought he was always in the game and showed some good touches. I was surprised, particularly in the second half just how deep and wide right he was going to get the ball. He was never going to be effective from there and that was his and Swnsea's undoing. I thought that he looked decent on the ball but from too deep a starting position.

I thought Fam had a decent, hard-working game. He has the touch of an anvil but he kept their defenders occupied (and would have scored had not Wiemann touched it and been ruled offside?) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mcburnie would be a great asset. He has good touch good movement isnt afraid to get stuck in where it hurts is good in the air and he scores goals. Wht's not to like about him. Yesterday  Mcburnie and most of the Swansea squad were pissed off at what happened in the week when half the side was touted for sale including his mate Dan James who was sat around in Leeds for 5 hrs waiting after being told he was going to be sold to Leeds then the plug was pulled at the eleventh hour. Mcburnie posted a tweet showing one of the Simpsons throwing a frisbee into an empty park (cos all his mates had gone). The whole squad was in a state of shock. Not taking anything away  from City's performance which was excellent but expect to see Swansea slide down the table from here on in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Antman said:

If that’s how you spell it.

he’s on 13 for the season but yesterday looked truly awful. Uninterested and totally off the pace and unable to get involved. Couldn’t see why he was leading their line. (Great for us mind!)

Fammy had a poor one yesterday, but is so much better by comparison, yet takes so much flak from certain fans.

C’est la guerre!

Celina wore no 10 for them....McBurnie is no 9....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, phantom said:

Ex rovers there's a good enough reason not to like him 

Thought he was ineffective yesterday, like above didn't look interested, not the same player that played well for Barnsley against us

Blimey, you’re right. He got away lightly then yesterday, crowd wise I mean

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, phantom said:

Ex rovers there's a good enough reason not to like him 

Thought he was ineffective yesterday, like above didn't look interested, not the same player that played well for Barnsley against us

Played 5 times for them on loan in 2016, hardly ex Gas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would put the 'blame ' squarely with Webster and Kalas, another faultless performance forcing their strikers to feed off scraps and go looking for the ball. I'd also say again, I feel sorry for Fam , he plays as THE MOST isolated of isolated strikers. We are getting more support around him, than when this run began, but a lot of it comes from the wide areas. Paterson plays more of a forward thinking MF , not even an attacking MF or number 10. It is a very studded style and is evolving continuously , the entertainment is improving and the players look more comfortable in their roles but it does leave Diedhiou ploughing a lonely furrow .  His touch is sometimes poor, but he works hard with no complaint , with luck we will continue to improve and may start getting more chances to FD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Antman said:

If that’s how you spell it.

he’s on 13 for the season but yesterday looked truly awful. Uninterested and totally off the pace and unable to get involved. Couldn’t see why he was leading their line. (Great for us mind!)

Fammy had a poor one yesterday, but is so much better by comparison, yet takes so much flak from certain fans.

C’est la guerre!

 

 

Not a lot you can do when your either in Kalas pocket or Webster's and when he did drop deeper he got smacked up by Brownhill & Pack.... ?. All that said I've seen him a few times and I'd rather have him than FD up top his movement and touch is truly abysmal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What struck me most about Swansea was: 1- They were pretty soft . Very few crunching tackles and whilst they could certainly play the ball around had no end product 

2- They reminded me of us in our first Season back at this level .  Too honest and  lacking the type of “ professionalism” that we see from so many of the sides in this division . 

Have to say that with the added goings on off the pitch , next season could be a shocker for them to be honest . Such a shame when you recall the quality of their football when they got to the Prem ! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Antman said:

If that’s how you spell it.

he’s on 13 for the season but yesterday looked truly awful. Uninterested and totally off the pace and unable to get involved. Couldn’t see why he was leading their line. (Great for us mind!)

Fammy had a poor one yesterday, but is so much better by comparison, yet takes so much flak from certain fans.

C’est la guerre!

As ever, it's odd how we see things. I thought McBurnie was fairly starved of supply. Swansea seemed to be guilty of what we are all too often: passing it round with no thrust. He moved about but, on his own, was easily covered by our outstanding centre-backs. Personally didn't think he looked awful, uninterested or off the pace (I'd certainly say he ran around a bit, trying to get something going), just cut off from the other 10 team-mates. Mirrors criticism of us at our worst this season. Thought he dropped deeper a few times and, on one of these occasions, had a mazy dribble up the pitch as he most likely felt he'd have to do it himself. There was one chance in the first half, in which he positioned himself mm perfectly, but Webster, in front of him, got the thinnest of thin headers to skim the ball over his head. Without that touch I'd wager McBurnie would have buried it, 0-1, different game.

As for Fam, I thought he was no better/no worse than usual. Possibly better, even, than some recent games as he didn't really miss any chances (that I recall). Some of his usual terrible traits were on show - inability to trap the ball - whilst he avoided some of his others: I remember him laying the ball off at least once before taking five touches and giving it away. His headed touch for the killer second goal, along with some excellent flick-ons, meant, for me, he had one of his better games, by his own standard. Must say, also, I don't hear any flak around me in Section82, but that's not to say there are some, as I know there must be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...