Rob k

****

Absolutely, and I'll be the first to acknowledge that.

Pre-match, having seen the line-up, it looked odd.  I thought it looked as though it was going to be 3 at the back, with Osborne at wingback, with only Pack as a defensive minded midfielder.  And I personally thought that would be disastrous.

As it was, he went 4 at the back (gladly), and had Pack taking the corners (about time). 

Credit to SC for that (though it's what I'd have done weeks ago!)

I'm the first to criticise SC when he gets it wrong so more than happy to give credit where it's due when he gets it right.

thats awful, hope no one got hurt, is Orients place on the Heathrow flightpath?... nevermind anyway at least we won!!

Hahaha.....made me chuckle that!!

Hahaha I'm in Cornwall for the weekend!!! Thank **** in not there by the sounds of it! N

There is a reason for that mate

Which is?

Hahaha baker saying we're seeing a master class

How about you say it like it is for a change instead of not wanting to upset your mates.

3 ******* mistakes is what it is.

Is he?

No!

COTTERILL OUT 

At least he's doing better than SOD.........

Flint & parish in should do better shocker!!!!

Shocker for Bopara mind

Aye nearly 1 in 2 ratio this season is awful. Lets find the p45. If you expect a striker to be bettering that god help the rooney's van persies of this world. It seems only Ronaldo and Messi are the ones hitting high enough standards to keep their jobs!

Results may not be based your successes or failures. If baldock hit 50 but we got relegated, would he get sacked because of the failure of the team? If we somehow got promoted this season, but baldock didn't score again, but help set up many goals for others, would he get sacked for not scoring goals, yet as a team we were successful?

We're getting off topic, Sam Baldock himself agrees with what I've been saying so that's good enough for me,

Time to leave this thread now as we're not going to agree but for once it's been good to debate without it resorting to to much abuse!!

You have no idea what he is on then? Now he has dropped a division and taken a hit on wages that must mean he doesn't have to be as prolific going by that sort of logic, yet he has already scored more goals than last season!

Sorry what he earns has no correlation to what he scores. If he were in a team of nickey hunt's and him, how many do you think he would score?

If he was prolific before he joined us people may have a point. He wasn't.

All you can ever ask for from someone who wants the wages is the commitment and effort. Everything after that is a bonus, due the nature of being in a team you rely on others. No one can call into question Baldocks effort or commitment.

Fair play you must have a decent boss if all they want is commitment and effort - mine demands that but if I did not produce results I would get flack and rightly so.

Okay that is BS, He asked for the wages as would any player, So he has to live up to the wages he is on, That he wanted, Which I believe are high championship low prem wages!!

If we could swap Baldock for let's say Wieman, Similar player and similar wages who would swap? I certainly would

Spot on, if your paid a certain amount then you have to earn your bunce, it's no different in any profession.

Wrong... Possibly Wells but he might well do

Anyway, it's hardly Baldock fault we paid 1m for him!!

No not his fault, however, I bet he's being paid to be a 1m striker .

Excruciating interview, he still looked haunted by the missed header.

Agreed, was horrible to watch.

I thank you for this. Someone finally brought relevant stats to the table and should be enough to close this topic.

Yes Baldock misses chances but so do other strikers that are apparently rated on here

It's not that Baldock misses chances, it's 'the' chances he's missed'n

It's just funny isn't it. People jump on the "unclinical" bandwagon, and he's been one of the most clinical in the league.

But hey, let's not let facts get in the way, they don't mean anything.

You surley have seen the same games as me, the ones where SB has missed very easy chances he should have scored??

no there is a 6 page thread because idiots like you bowie and taylor10 are making him a scapegoat like you always do

first it was Johnson then Elliot, fontaine now its baldock its as if city fans want to destroy players simply because they are jealous of them and their ability

If city could defend it would be a different season all together

To blame a striker who is scoring 1 in 2 games for the postion we are in or for dropped point is frankly moronic

The problem is no bite in midfield and a poor centre back who god.......we........sod spent a shit load of money on

******* hell, nobody is disputing that his goals return is bad, what were saying is if he takes his easy chances the games will be different, I guarantee if you spoke to SB he would more than likely agree he should be on more goals with the chances he's had.

The defence is an issue but for a completely different thread, just because they have been awful it should not excuse the chances SB has missed and I'm unsure why you would try and use the defence as a justification for this?

Let me be clear here, I like SB, he's hard working and seems a decent level headed bloke, I just think he should be putting away more of the chances he's had.

No. Does it make what I said any less true though?

If Baldock takes his chances today it's a different game altogether - as it could have been on Wednesday v Watford.

So it wasn't the non existent defending for the two goals that cost us today? We shouldn't have to rely on scoring three to win, especially at home.

Right....Are you actually Sam Baldock?

Yeah but it was wrong then and still is.

It could be more........

No one seems to be backing it up thougj. Yet plenty are referring to it. Even on radio.

It seems to have become a truth to hang baldock with.

If I could be bothered I would go back through player!! However I can't so for that reason I will stop quoting that number until it's proven.

No idea where 22 has come from, but prior to today Baldock has had

12 goals

36 shots on target.

I'd be suprised if 22 was accurate

It was on here the other day it was 20 missed 1 on 1s.

More on target and less off than Assombalonga.

Tidy.

Which emphasises the point in a way. As BA has more goals.