Alessandro

1 minute ago, Shtanley said:

Actually thought Pisano was quite good on Saturday. 2 right footers on the left is slightly worrying. I guess Taylor is better at dropping deep than Eisa. 

The selection is not an issue for me after Saturday - thought Pisano did an excellent job, as did Kelly who was really excellent.

Given injuries I think it's our best option right now until Dasilva is ready.

The goals came from individual errors by Webster and Hunt. 

Very frustrating again.

Boro have done nothing and scored 2 goals from two chances.

First one took a lucky bounce and on another day, with a different ref, could have been a foul by the very physical Assom on Webster.

Second one could have been a foul on Hunt by the, again, very physical Assom. 

Or maybe we are just powder-puff?

Either way too easy, much too easy for Boro

1 minute ago, Esmond Million's Bung said:

You may be correct, Paterson certainly owes us a performance that is for sure, however the wider issue for me is this last season all over again, lose 2 right backs and only sign one, this season lose 2 centre backs and only sign one, I would have thought that there should be a lesson in there somewhere.

Agreed - seems crazy to be in the position of having 2 centre backs out already and having to play a makeshift CB in a RB that's not in great form.

2 minutes ago, Esmond Million's Bung said:

Pity about Eliasson, he is defensively far better than Paterson, I would normally say that Paterson's goal last week saved his place, but LJ does have an incredibly soft spot for him so I suspect that it wouldn't matter.

As @BobBobSuperBob suggested, could well be 4-4-2. That would be the more defensive option and makes sense to help out Pisano with both Baker and Wright out.

Thus it makes sense, just, to go with Pato instead of Eliasson in the number 10 role despite his below par performances and Watkins over Eliasson for his extra physicality. 

We'll find out shortly!

Just now, Esmond Million's Bung said:

?

 

looks like it:

M

Hunt Pisano Webster Kelly

Brownhill Smith Pack

Watkins Weimann Pato

4-3-3

15 minutes ago, Shtanley said:

Eliasson vs Friend is the battle I'm looking forward to seeing.

You bloody love Eliasson don't you! 

Come on Shtanley, admit the #mancrush - you must be delighted he's getting plenty of game time!

2 hours ago, Esmond Million's Bung said:

Firstly I didn't ask you specifically, the word 'you' was not mentioned, the again was because I had asked another poster the same question. Next I will try to make that clearer.

Secondly let me clear one misrepresentation here, I have no problem with playing the ball out of the back, but playing it slow was not working in any way shape or form and was and will hardly ever work for us, if we continue to play that style we will lose more than we win.

The first highlighted portion is nonsense every bit of it, my point being for 1 hour we were totally non threatening, only after their 2nd goal did we suddenly change our style from languid to a higher intensity and that is where our first goal came from fast incisive not slow languid and it was borne out of nothing other than necessity.

The 2nd highlighted portion, the urgency came out of necessity and nothing whatsoever to do with any managerial genius or anything else, we would have played the same to the bitter end of a nil/nil draw had we not gone 2-0 nil down and needed to change something that was never going to work in the first place, so the comment about playing flat out for 90 minutes was a silly one.

As for the last sentence honestly if you truly believe that carry on because it was simply not true, we never stuck to our game plan, we changed to a more up tempo style, we had to change, we had no alternative but to change and we changed to style that suits us better especially against the Bolton's of this division.

Middlesborough home next Saturday, is that a "never expected anything out of that game" get out clause for LJ?

 

In your opinion.....in my opinion, you're talking overly negative nonsense. As i've said already, I think you're exaggerating the 'languid' and 'slow' pace at which we play it out the back and as i've said already, and others seem to too, I think it's too easy to forget the way opposition affect a game. As Ole wrote in his report, this game was ours but for a silly 3 minutes.

I still believe we stuck to our game plan and style of play, and simply upped the tempo. The style of play was the same. Happy to agree to disagree.

28 minutes ago, Esmond Million's Bung said:

Look, you get **** all for playing pretty football, for an hour we controlled possession that was it, but we created absolutely nothing, that is a fact, it took the sting of conceding 2 goals to inject any urgency into our play whatsoever.

We do not have the midfield to play that languid style, because they all run out of ideas in and around the opponents box and because of the length of time to get there even shit teams will have numbers making even more confusing for our midfield, LJ should have by now solved that riddle, we do however have the midfield to play at a higher tempo, especially if either Smith, Brownhill or Pack are on the bench ready to come on, look at the difference in the last 30 minutes when played with urgency, we caught them light at the back and actually created chances, again I ask please point me to a chance in the first 60 minutes?

Firstly, you haven't already asked me to point out a chance, so you can't ask me again. As i've already said, we may have created very little in the first, but that was largely in part to the way in which Bolton sat back and chocked the final third. Should we have done better though, yes, as i've already said.

But a game is not played over 60 minutes, so that's irrelevant. What is, is that IMO after 60 minutes we still continued to play in very much the same style as the first 60 minutes. Out of the back, languid as you call it, with Marlon playing that QB role. That's how our first goal came ironically. Keeping possession, working the spaces and finding a killer pass from a good run. 

That's how we continued to play to the very end of the game, out of the back, perhaps with more urgency, but you can't play flat out for 90 minutes. We were looking for the runs and channels (which we did a lot in the first half) the difference for me was that the game stretched and opened up and those passes and runs into the channels started to come off. That made it look a different game all of a sudden.

Despite being 2-0 up, Bolton for me were naive and I believe we kept doing our thing, stuck to our game plan and we got the goals and very nearly the winner. 

43 minutes ago, Esmond Million's Bung said:

And cannot recall a worthwhile chance before we went 2-0 down, you must agree that as soon as we went 2-0  down and started to inject some pace and playing with passion instead of the boring, negative, languid getting nowhere things improve WTF wait until we are 2-0 down?, Paterson (the goal apart) was poor yet again, Bolton were shit, our final ball, crossing, free kicks, corners and long balls were poor all day and the facts about LJ are irrefutable.

What was harsh?

Although I see where you are coming from, I think you're overly harsh again, but it's all opinions. I do agree that we should play with more urgency and thrust in the final third more often. But we controlled the ball and looked good in possession for 70% of the game today, playing against an anti-football team who, AT HOME, put 11 men behind the ball and hoped to catch us on the break or score from a set piece.

Whatever you say about LJ and this team, they look to play football and have a go. At least it's not what many teams do in this division, like Bolton, set up to survive. I can't imagine what you and many others would say if LJ set us up, at home, to only sit 11 behind the ball and look to catch people on the break. 

2 minutes ago, Marina's Rolls Royce said:

 

 

In respect of your first comment- I really do think that watching a game is 100% totally different to listening to a game- and I don't believe anyone has said you're not allowed an opinion- more that it's the wrong opinion based solely on a non visual commentary.

The second quote is just how you are Andy. You dislike Lee Johnson so much and in every way that it clouds your ability to see that a point- any point , whilst not ideal, is ok having gone 2-0 down. If any score other than a win is going to do your head in then I suggest you seek another outlet for your angst. 

Personally, I'm ok about it and believe we'll get better but have no real expectation that we're destined for anything other than an ok season. Lee would never have sold his best players if he had any say in it and given the chance would happily have spent millions more on better recruits. But we're Bristol City not Man City.

Absolutely. 

Sounds so simple, but all three of those "star" players that left us, left because they chose to. 

All had the chance to stay, we wanted them all to stay, all chose to leave. It's time to move on and for people to stop holding it against the club IMO.

11 minutes ago, Bri Stool City said:

You do know they are likely to be one of the favs to go down dont you

Maybe so. But it's a tough place to go, despite being down the bottom last season, their home form was decent and they picked up some good wins. They play cynically and the crowd are just as bad, on the ref's back the whole game.

4 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Read a thread that said we were terrible defensively- however thanks, your assessment puts me a bit more at ease.

Dunno if it's a good or bad sign that 2 goals conceded from 2 shots on target. Or just one of those things maybe.

Time will tell. But I actually thought we were more street wise today and controlled the ball very well. They didn't have us under the cosh for more than 5 or 10 minutes, and away from home that is decent going. 

I'm not saying we were superb, but I think it's easy to see 2 goals conceded and think, uh-oh, defence is an issue. But actually I'm not sure that was a fair reflection. They had 31% possession and 2 shots on target and never really got a foot hold in the game in term's of possession or pressure IMO.

1 minute ago, The Original OTIB said:

Out-muscled? Baker literally stands off and watches him until the last second when it's too late. Dreadful; and the watching and skip for the second... jeez....

http://www.skysports.com/watch/video/sports/football/competitions/championship/11470177/bolton-2-2-bristol-city

Turn of phrase. Either way, what I meant was he lost his battle with Buckley. You need your defenders to win their duels every corner.

IIRC just before the second goal, Brownhill put Baker in trouble at the back. He fouled under pressure. Starting protesting with the ref. It was taken quickly. So he was out of position, still poor though.

I'll look again but that Pack should have got his laces through the cross though.

13 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I'm not too unhappy- 2-0 down to 2-2, it's a point gained in that sense. We lost at Bolton last year, FWIW.

Sounds like we were shaky at the back- considering the churn, plus the absences of Frankie and Diddhiou however we will improve I think.

Bolton are not a good side by any stretch, but they are one of those who if anything like last season are horrible to play against. Listening on radio, sounded like the chance Eisa missed at the end was gilt edged...

On early evidence, don't think we'll go down but nor will we threaten the top 6 too much.

Actually I don't think we were shaky at all.

We kept them shut out the whole first half, and they scored from their only real chances in the second.

The 1st goal - attacker outmuscles defender at corner. 2nd a series of little errors and concentration lapse. What the sky highlights don't show is the freekick given away played quickly just before the goal with the one moment in the game of all round general confusion.

I don't remember them troubling our goal much other than that, maybe one cross/shot saved by the keeper - who I thought looked pretty solid, especially with ball at feet. One particular pass out the back under a bit of pressure sent us quickly away to create a good chance up the other end.

Nice to be on the right end of a comeback for once.

Sucker punch 1st goal from a corner. The second, mistakes all round. Baker, Brownhill and Pack IIRC all ball watching. Sometimes we over play it and get punished, that felt like one of those times.

Great comeback though and spirit, Bolton away is not easy. They're physical and cynical but we should take heart from getting back in it.

Pack, tremendous pass to pick out Weimann, who I read at least once a day on here won't score many goals, is 2 in 2.

Pato with a very good finish for the equaliser, but otherwise very very frustrating. Misplaced passes and control, one very poor set piece at the death.

Impressed with Weimann, Watkins, Kelly was assured. 

Very nearly nicked it at the end when Taylor outmuscled his man and scrapped a sqaure ball to Eisa, who was just beaten by the defender who poked it agonisingly wide for a corner.

7 minutes ago, Southport Red said:

Good City following here, poor turnout from Bolton esp given its their first home game. 

City done a lot of passing, mostly side to side. Tactic seems to be the ball over the top but all have been iverhit so far. 

Stand outs so far

Kelly (Joe who?)

Webster appears to be a footballer

Brownhill ( although often he us the deepest lying player collecting the ball from the goalie)

Pato one ling range shot otgerwise nothing

Eliasson not in the game at all

O’Dowda has had to contest 5 headers, havent seen the ball played to his feet yet. 

Wiemann a lot of good rubs which noone is spotting. 

Pack not in the game

Baker solid. 

All Bolton have done is foul, how did they ever beat West Brom?  Hoping I don’t find out second half. 

Can’t agree that Pack isn’t in the game. Playing the quarter back role solidly for me.

Pretty dominant first half, probably 60/70% possession and I bet the fouls are high for them. Very cynical.

Lacking that killer instinct right now, but to be fair they’re putting plenty behind the ball. 

Paterson has dropped deep a lot to get involved, so Weimann has looked isolated at times.

O’Dowda keeps wanting to come inside, so little width left and Niclas largly quiet first half. 

We look solid if unspectacular, but solid, haven’t been threatened at all yet. 

Need more in the final third, I’d like to see us stretch wide rather than go for the one touches all the time to our trick/pace through the crowded middle.

kelly excellent, keeper looks good too.(kiss of death)

Make no mistakes that was not a good performance today, but it was a scrappy game at times with Barnsley fighting for their lives.

Good to see us come back to equalise and a win against Brentford would make 4 points from this bank holiday weekend a decent return.

As I said a few weeks ago, I don't think we have enough in us to do it, but fair play the boys are hanging on in there.

Not a great first half - looked casual and sloppy from the off and not surprised when we went a goal down. 

Wright could have been sent off on another day for that body check. 

Thought Bryan made some key tackles/blocks but hasn't really got forward - probably because Pato is all over the place and having another poor game. One or two shocking passes.

Great finish from Fam. Brownhill looks lively. Ref a bit of a homer. Couple of handballs he ignored and one throw in looked nailed on ours and went the other way which got LJ riled up.

Better since we scored though.

Time to take Famara off, slipping out the game. Let's get Walsh on.

4 minutes ago, Esmond Million's Bung said:

I agree and the crowd are on their backs and they are quickly losing whatever little discipline that they had.

I don’t trust this referee, the important thing now is to not allow the crowd any hope and LJ has to get his substitutions spot on.

Great team performance but Pack having a great game and Smith probably the best player on the field.

Time for Lee to show he has learned from his mistakes and make the right subs, especially if we are under the cosh, but not the most defensive of benches though...

Expect we'll see Walsh and maybe Pato.

HT

Smith stand out. Reid excellent and Famara doing well. 

Kent having his best game, putting in a shift for the team and always an outlet going forward.

Leeds very physical, but generally we are matching them. Wouldn't be surprised to see them have someone sent off the way they're lunging in.

More goals in this game for us - expect them to throw everything and the kitchen sink at us in the 2nd half, so let's put the game to bed early and get a 3rd.

11 minutes ago, Major Isewater said:

No one has replied to my earlier question . 

Because they worked together will LJ have an advantage over Heckingbottom ? or will Heckingbottom have the advantage ? 

What do you think ? 

I'm going for LJ . He's the boss . 

9 minutes ago, Bar BS3 said:

We’ve done alright V Barnsley in LJ Vs Hecky fixtures. 

This.

9 minutes ago, RedNight said:

Barnsley fans suggest Heckingbottom thrived off LJ's success/ work. 

Copied his style both on and off the pitch. Will be interesting. I feel we've always had the upper hand on Heckingbottoms Barnsley. Heckingbottoms Leeds could be a different story.. 

A lot of Barnsley fans actually liked everyone to believe that Heckingbottom was the secret to LJ’s ‘success’ at Barnsley. LJ was the face and Hecky put in all the hard work - hence they were very happy when he took over and were glad to see the back of LJ.

Edit - sorry @JamesBCFC - wrote this just as you must have posted the same thing!

#BristolCity v Leeds United: Fielding, Wright, Flint, Magnússon, Bryan, Brownhill, Smith, Pack, Kent, Diédhiou, Reid. Subs: Steele, Kelly, Walsh, Eliasson, Paterson, Woodrow, Diony. #LDSvBRC

Reading OTIB this week this is the team I think many wanted to see - Maggers CB, Pato rested.

COYR