firstdivision

5 minutes ago, Bristol Oil Services said:

That's not a "feeling," that's a thought (a fearful one). Which can probably be traced back to Alan Curbishley and Charlton and all that. Or even back to 1982, and all that.

Do you ever think about clubs where they got things right and things worked out really well? I wonder what that feels like?

What do you think?

 

It doesn’t have to be a fearful one. It can be a pragmatic one, too. I think ‘don’t sell’. Anyway, it’s all very well talking about selling the club. We’d need the right buyer. And someone interested to buy. 

2 minutes ago, firstdivision said:

Well, it was considerably better than we managed for a hundred years.

…except a few years in the 70s.

19 minutes ago, KegCity said:

The bar really is on the floor isn’t it? We’ve done the bare minimum if we’re being honest.  I doubt not going bust, building a new ground and losing a playoff final was the dream when SL took over.

Well, it was considerably better than we managed for a hundred years.

22 minutes ago, Keepers Ball said:

forget the bloody stadium. Always gets brought up when the Lannsdowns get questioned. its not even ours ffs. We get to play in it.

Nothing more. We just get to use what is part of the Sporting legacy that includes the sodding rugby and basketball

No, I’m not going to forget the stadium. 

2 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

Oh yeah, totally get your point, I’m not claiming it’s easy. Just saying that imo the current lot can take us no further and no further is nowhere near far enough for the level of investment imo…….total failure for that amount of investment imo.

Well, we’ve a redeveloped ground and a new training ground and a team that’s been in the Championship for the last seven years. A while back, we got within one match of the PL for the first time since 1976. On average, we’ve done ok compared to our history. My feeling is ‘be careful what you wish for.’

I also can’t help the feeling that there’s someone somewhere who might have done better than 28 defeats in 52 games.

21 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

Time to change ownership tbh.

Who are the new buyers? 

22 minutes ago, old_eastender said:

Williams has done ok. 

Bell has to come off at HT.

Of course he does. I’d have taken him off after ten minutes. Although I wouldn’t have played him. It’s not fair on the lad. He’s not ready for the Championship. He’s certainly not ready for right defence or whatever he’s trying to play. 

7 minutes ago, And Its Smith said:

Bentley 6

Bell 2

Kalas 5

Klose 5

Dasilva 6

James 2

Williams 2

Scott 4

weimann 5

Martin 4

Semenyo 4

Bell 2? As many as that? 

15 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Today we got to see a bit more of Robbie Cundy….a full 45+5 mins of him.

What did we all think?

I’d like to see more of him before I make a judgement. He was solid enough yesterday. But the game was effectively over soon after he came on, so the pressure on our defence was very different from, say, defending a 1-0 lead or if the game were level going into a tense last twenty. Forest were in cruise control. 

42 minutes ago, Spike said:

You see it from the angle behind the goal, 100% a deflection

Yes. Definitely. 
Wasn’t clear at the ground or from the halfway line camera.

2 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Camera Angle from Bentley’s far post looking back towards Johnson shows it clearly.  What angle are you seeing, zoomed in from half way line camera.  I doubt you’d pick it up from that.

Just watched Sky highlights….yeah, you won’t pick it up from their camera angles, unless you look really carefully at the change in spin on the ball.

https://www.skysports.com/watch/video/sports/12552415/nottm-forest-2-0-bristol-city-championship-highlights

Robinstv showed a camera angle from beyond the far post…and it was clear on that.

It’s weird how Sky’s halfway-line camera gives little indication of a deflection, albeit I was viewing it on my phone on the way back. Even at the ground, albeit from the opposite end, we had no sense of a deflection. Just looked a really weird goal. Bentley’s body reaction doesn’t suggest he was wrong-footed either. But I’m happy to take your word for it. Going to watch in HD on Quest.

The bottom line is we were dreadful, though. 2-0 was a very conservative score line.
Forest second match of the week (with postponement at Bournemouth); our third. Might have made a difference. We looked leaden. 
 

3 minutes ago, italian dave said:

I said exactly the same after the game Dave. The one positive was seeing Cundy play a full 45 mins (first time?) and doing so well. I’ve had my doubts about him from the few cameos so far, but he looked good today. The only other positive was not conceding in injury time.

Ref was shockingly inconsistent, yes.

Scott takes out one of their players after that player has made a pass - stops him going for the return pass), ref plays advantage then when the play next stops books Scott. No more than 5 mins later, Forest player takes out a City player in exactly the same way, play continues, when it next stops ref calls the Forest player over and speaks to him. No card. 

Physical contact and challenges allowed throughout, with some leniency, except when it comes to Semenyo, who’s penalised every time he comes into contact with a red shirt. So frustrating. 

I think the reason he booked Scott and not Colback (I think it was him) was because he’d already warned Scott once for the same offence and he hadn’t warned Colback. It was actually a consistent piece of refereeing. 
On another day, Bond’s constant whistle for our minor misdemeanours would have got me going but we were so bad, it was hard to complain about the ref.

2 hours ago, REDOXO said:

Positives Cundy did well. James got a few minutes. Bentley excellent. 
 

Negatives pretty much everything else! Particularly the final ball and Pring being made to look like a cart horse. 

I’m not even sure we got into a position to play many final balls - it was that bad, wasn’t it. A complete waste of a day.

19 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Yes, big deflection….did you watch it on the wireless?

Really, Dave. I was at the game and I’ve see it many times back and I can’t see anything obvious. 

5 minutes ago, sh1t_ref_again said:

Thought both goals were deflections

Second one definitely wasn’t. 

The Messiah said the first goal was a deflection in his post-match interview. Was it? I’ve watched it back about ten times and I just can’t see one. It looked like a really really poor piece of goalkeeping from DB who otherwise made some excellent saves. It looked the softest goal imaginable, which is very unlike us.

That apart, it was a 2-0 thrashing. 
 

15 minutes ago, Red Army 75 said:

Pretty hard to disagree with NP

Best of the season? Doesn’t say much for our season really. Surely our performance at Preston a few weeks ago was better than tonight. Preston couldn’t have complained if we’d dropped them four or five. 

Some people seem easily pleased. I thought it was quite a ordinary game between two tired-looking teams. Our first-half display was pedestrian. We put a lot into Saturday after all. And Coventry, who’ve been playing a lot recently, were quite cautious. Neither Benarous nor Bell are ready yet (not their faults). Bell either misplaced, under hit or mishit just about every attempted creative pass or cross. Scott is much more of a threat further up the pitch, so it was a shame he had to play so deep because of our lack of resources. 
And we lost - again - a match late on that we shouldn’t have lost. Sick of seeing away fans - any fans - celebrating late winners. Especially galling tonight because I thought Coventry were nothing special. They barely did just enough
Cheesed off. Or words to the effect.

40 minutes ago, Gazred said:

None of them? I'm not just talking about tonight. Thought Scotts look 50/50 though and could of been given.

It could only have been given by the ref who took charge of Posh v Lincoln at the end of last season, the bloke that reffed our game at Villa a couple of years back, or the bloke that reffed our home match against QPR about three years ago. 
 

6 minutes ago, Gazred said:

Have to say i feel slightly robbed of at least a point tonight. We make mistakes but get fully punished every time. No luck on pen shouts as we well know either.

That’s because none of them were penalties.

Best away goal feelings 

Martin Hirst (Eastville)

Tom Ritchie (Meadow Lane)

Paul Mardon (City Ground)

Trevor Morgan (Sealand Road)

Lee Tomlin (Craven Cottage)

17 hours ago, Nickybee said:

Away goals :

Hirst vs Rovers (Cup) - won the match

Gillies vs Coventry (Div 1) - kept us up

Riley vs Bolton (FRT) - icing on the cake

Ritchie vs Notts County (Cup) - equaliser (we were Div 4, they were Div 1)

Agard vs WBA (Cup) - 5000 fans went crazy

Tom Ritchie v Notts County. Now, that was such an exciting away day. Great memory.  We seemed to have more fans in the away end than they had in the rest of the ground. We were on our way back from the depths. 

11 hours ago, redsapper said:

Andy Cole?

He was the best young player I’ve seen play for us before Scott. He was a little older when he signed, though, from memory (20/21yo - something like that). I meant teenager really.
 

13 hours ago, GrahamC said:

Scott is just remarkable.

For an 18 year old who is really best as a creative midfielder, to cover the amount of ground, put in the challenges & use the ball as sublimely as he does is incredibly impressive.

Obvious he will go to the top, but what maturity & intelligence he shows in games.

In over fifty years of watching this club, he’s the best young player we’ve had by a significant distance.

54 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

Yeah, let’s immediately condemn the kid as not good enough.

Did I do that? I don’t think so. Strange reply.

7 hours ago, Harry said:

 

Kalas loses Crooks then gets completely under the ball. 
Cundy jumps at the same time as Crooks, but Crooks has a ‘running’ jump and is already 2 inches taller than Cundy anyway, so literally nothing Cundy could do with that, against one of the best aerial threats in the division, left unmarked and unblocked for a free run. 

You see what you want to see. That’s fine by me.