Super Performance

[Bris Red]

I wouldn't say he was our weakest more than he was average compared to the rest of the lads who IMO were class.

I still don't see why people think Ribeiro will be better than Brad. From what I've seen of Brad in pre-season he looks very very good whereas Ribs (who has also looked decent) hasn't even played a full competitive game for us. I'm all for competition but Brad is one of the best RBs in this league and I would only replace his due to suspension or injury.

Try telling that to the 12 year olds who basically ruined the EE atmosphere today.

Thats a bit of a strange comment to come out with, i dont see how anyone did or could ''ruine'' the atmosphere of the EE.

[dargla]

I wouldn't say he was our weakest more than he was average compared to the rest of the lads who IMO were class.

I still don't see why people think Ribeiro will be better than Brad. From what I've seen of Brad in pre-season he looks very very good whereas Ribs (who has also looked decent) hasn't even played a full competitive game for us. I'm all for competition but Brad is one of the best RBs in this league and I would only replace his due to suspension or injury.

Try telling that to the 12 year olds who basically ruined the EE atmosphere today.

Is that not what I said except you sugar coated it

[Redbarn]

This all does sound very encouraging abeit this being a friendly. I like the comments

about Hartley. Hope we now have a midfield general in the mould of Gerry Gow.

Not getting carried away though.

Paul Hartley's physique, height and general appearance definately remind me of a mixture between Gerry Gow, Bobby Kellard and Tommy Docherty all rolled into one. A class act.

I think we could be in for a very exciting season.

[Pickle Rick]

We played very well today and the play linked up especially well at times, things look like they're coming together, the 3 up from had good chemistry as did the back three (with Lesjal) and the whole of midfield. I havn't been a fan of this formation and was a bit scepticle when GJ first employed it but we do make more chances this way it seems. The more we played this way last season, the better things looked.

Plus players like McIndoe and Sproule (who are normally wide) can still play a role centrally as we make a lot of space on the pitch playing like this!

Whilst its nice to win, todays victory doesn't mean that City will storm the CCC this season. Nor did the 0-4 stuffing against Ajax suggest that City will be in a relegation battle.

Friendlies by their very nature are tame affairs with neither side wanting to incur injuries with the season proper just two weeks away. Thats why there was such a small attendence today. Hardly anyone is interested.

Its all about players getting match fit and getting used to each other and not much else. I can't remember the last time I went to game with nothing riding on the outcome.

The message is 'don't read too much into todays win'. The real test starts in two weeks time at Preston.

Thanks for the reminder, now I know why we have friendly matches

What was the attendance today?

It was 3777. Wolves had more fans turn up than Ajax but less 'vocal support'.

[megansdad]

having travelled down from London for the game I was surprised by the poor attendance 12 quid and free for under 16s is a bargain. impressed by what I saw with allthe new signings having a good game and the team passing the ball\along the ground. very promising.

[red man dan]

Some people don't think much of the team to be fair. Because we didn't thrash Weymouth by as much as one or two

Today's football was the best, entertainment wise, we have seen at Ashton Gate for a couple of seasons. It was proven today that if the Centre Halves continue to make good use of the ball then with a central midfield player in Hartley who is different class this mystery "link" position occupied by Lee Johnson, the "vital cog", simply isn't required.

I am delighted that todays performance was good, it sounded like it. Last week against Cheltenham however, it was clear that LJ had a large impact on cohesiveness throughout the side, it was no mystery, and he was a very 'vital cog' in that match. I said at the time, on the basis of what had been seen thus far, that LJ should play with Hartley. I also said that GJ would try out different partnerships and formations during the remainder of the games, pointing out that as yet Hartley and Elliot had not played together as a partnership against 'testing' sides. If today, the massive void between defense/MF/attack that was so evident at Cheltenham was not an issue and the poor structure that was on show in the first half at Cheltenham was now sorted then by all means there is definate issue with regards to whether LJ is needed to play that 'link' role. BUT seriously, lets not make out that he doesnt play that role and that its a mystery. You may not agree that it is the best option for LJ to start, but if you know anything about football, which im sure you do, you cant honestly say that his role as the 'link' player doesnt and didnt exist...SURELY?

If hartley and Elliot can bring about a structured team and keep the side gelled together then fantastic, Elliot has other attributes that LJ does not and is a great player, i have never doubted that. Today seems to suggest that Elliot and Hartley can work together without sacrificeing the balance/structure of the team and if that is the case then I would start Elliot ahead of LJ, for the obvious reasons, but lets not make out that LJ has been playing a non existent role at this club over the past few years, years in which he has been of vital importance to the side, years in which we have enjoyed fantastic success. If the time has come where we have found a team in which LJ is not the best option, then he doesnt start, its simple, but lets not dismiss what he has brought to the team by suggesting his percieved role is one of 'mystery'. Personally I find that disrespectful and footballing wise very wrong, its blatently obvious what he does as a player and what his position and role in the team has been.

[internetjef]

I am delighted that todays performance was good, it sounded like it. Last week against Cheltenham however, it was clear that LJ had a large impact on cohesiveness throughout the side, it was no mystery, and he was a very 'vital cog' in that match. I said at the time, on the basis of what had been seen thus far, that LJ should play with Hartley. I also said that GJ would try out different partnerships and formations during the remainder of the games, pointing out that as yet Hartley and Elliot had not played together as a partnership against 'testing' sides. If today, the massive void between defense/MF/attack that was so evident at Cheltenham was not an issue and the poor structure that was on show in the first half at Cheltenham was now sorted then by all means there is definate issue with regards to whether LJ is needed to play that 'link' role. BUT seriously, lets not make out that he doesnt play that role and that its a mystery. You may not agree that it is the best option for LJ to start, but if you know anything about football, which im sure you do, you cant honestly say that his role as the 'link' player doesnt and didnt exist...SURELY?

If hartley and Elliot can bring about a structured team and keep the side gelled together then fantastic, Elliot has other attributes that LJ does not and is a great player, i have never doubted that. Today seems to suggest that Elliot and Hartley can work together without sacrificeing the balance/structure of the team and if that is the case then I would start Elliot ahead of LJ, for the obvious reasons, but lets not make out that LJ has been playing a non existent role at this club over the past few years, years in which he has been of vital importance to the side, years in which we have enjoyed fantastic success. If the time has come where we have found a team in which LJ is not the best option, then he doesnt start, its simple, but lets not dismiss what he has brought to the team by suggesting his percieved role is one of 'mystery'. Personally I find that disrespectful and footballing wise very wrong, its blatently obvious what he does as a player and what his position and role in the team has been.

After todays showing i think the following is clear

A) marv and hartley works

B) Hartley can do the link job, and does it well

I reckon we are very well set in the middle now with those two plus LJ and Skuse competing. Plus if we do persist in playing a player in 'the hole' then it might mean that williams may still have an opportunity here in a position he actually enjoys.

good times and a great performance. Thought Haynes was excellent

Almost hope we dont sign a big target man anymore as if we do im not sure we will see the same good footie we did today

[silverfox]

Almost hope we dont sign a big target man anymore as if we do im not sure we will see the same good footie we did today

Agree. As soon as Akinde came on, Boom wooshed it up to him at the first opportunity, adopting the target man approach we saw with Dele last season. The performance prior to that proved we can do better, with slick, measured approach work on the deck. And we managed a lot of possession football in the second half, not quite up to the standard of Ajax, but pretty damn close!

[beaverface]

It's a sign of the times at present that people cannot go and today's crowd of 4,700 odd proved that. What annoys me though is that there are a couple on here who post nothing but negative tripe and clearly don't go to ANY game let alone Cheltenham away in pre-season!!

What did people think of the keeper? I thought he looked a decent enough standard.

Fair play to the keeper, he didn't do anything wrong. Seemed to have good positional sense, knew when to come for the ball and when to leave the ball. Made a couple of reasonable saves, one from open play and one from a free kick.

Also seems cool on the ball, he won't try to boot the ball and give away possession cheaply, looks like he'll try and find a player nearby with a pass.

He did have one dodgy kick which did lead to a chance for Wolves, but luckily they didn't take it. However I would say that the dodgy kick was with his swinger, and not his natural right foot so I'd let him off that.

All-in-all if we signed him, apart from shot stopping ability(which we didn't get to see today), he looks no worse or better than Basso, so would be ideal replacement to battle it out with Gherkin.

[Henry]

Agree. As soon as Akinde came on, Boom wooshed it up to him at the first opportunity, adopting the target man approach we saw with Dele last season. The performance prior to that proved we can do better, with slick, measured approach work on the deck. And we managed a lot of possession football in the second half, not quite up to the standard of Ajax, but pretty damn close!

Mccombe was doing that all game, Akinde had nothing to do with it. Carey and Fontaine is the way forward

[silverfox]

Mccombe was doing that all game.

Not in comparison to last season he wasn't. He was making a conscious effort to keep it down, whilst occasionally reverting to his natural game of hoofball. It's all a bit academic really. He won't be number one choice and I agree with your way forward. Boom's strength in the air will be all that is missed.

[Keith_Lemon]

McCombe is not good enough for this league, was poor last season, and the league is alot stronger this year, rather have Carey & Fontaine any day of the week. If we got another centre back in, I wouldnt be sad to see him go.

Im not saying I dislike him because he did a brilliant job in league 1 for us, and personally he's a league 1 player at best.

[BCFC RED]

Could someone please desribe the goals of haynes and maynard?

[Port Said Red]

Could someone please desribe the goals of haynes and maynard?

Maynard picked out Haynes wide right with a good pass, Haynes neatly cut inside the full back, drew the keeper slighly and curled it into the far bottom corner with the outside of his right foot. My only criticism wold be his reluctance to use his left foot at all, but if he can finish like that every time it wont be an issue.

Maynards goal was almost out of nothing. As with last season it shows his ability to hit a ball well, when he strikes it early. I would guess he was around 25 yards out and centre of goal, Hennessey wasn't that far off his line but it went high and dipped over him pretty central into the top of the net. cracker.

[BCFC RED]

Maynard picked out Haynes wide right with a good pass, Haynes neatly cut inside the full back, drew the keeper slighly and curled it into the far bottom corner with the outside of his right foot. My only criticism wold be his reluctance to use his left foot at all, but if he can finish like that every time it wont be an issue.

Maynards goal was almost out of nothing. As with last season it shows his ability to hit a ball well, when he strikes it early. I would guess he was around 25 yards out and centre of goal, Hennessey wasn't that far off his line but it went high and dipped over him pretty central into the top of the net. cracker.

Nice! thanks

[21. Marcham]

Thats a bit of a strange comment to come out with, i dont see how anyone did or could ''ruine'' the atmosphere of the EE.

I didn't mean it in that sense. It was like someone started off a certain song and half way through someone else would start off a different one because they didn't like the other one. And when we scored and all the chavs tried 'charging' the Wolves fans I couldn't help but laugh. Oh and forgot to mention they were singing the 'CSF' song!

[ciderup]

I didn't mean it in that sense. It was like someone started off a certain song and half way through someone else would start off a different one because they didn't like the other one. And when we scored and all the chavs tried 'charging' the Wolves fans I couldn't help but laugh. Oh and forgot to mention they were singing the 'CSF' song!

I agree, the EE is not about that atall. Go somewhere else and sing your 'firm' garbage and let us support the team!

[Tunley Legend]

I am delighted that todays performance was good, it sounded like it. Last week against Cheltenham however, it was clear that LJ had a large impact on cohesiveness throughout the side, it was no mystery, and he was a very 'vital cog' in that match. I said at the time, on the basis of what had been seen thus far, that LJ should play with Hartley. I also said that GJ would try out different partnerships and formations during the remainder of the games, pointing out that as yet Hartley and Elliot had not played together as a partnership against 'testing' sides. If today, the massive void between defense/MF/attack that was so evident at Cheltenham was not an issue and the poor structure that was on show in the first half at Cheltenham was now sorted then by all means there is definate issue with regards to whether LJ is needed to play that 'link' role. BUT seriously, lets not make out that he doesnt play that role and that its a mystery. You may not agree that it is the best option for LJ to start, but if you know anything about football, which im sure you do, you cant honestly say that his role as the 'link' player doesnt and didnt exist...SURELY?

If hartley and Elliot can bring about a structured team and keep the side gelled together then fantastic, Elliot has other attributes that LJ does not and is a great player, i have never doubted that. Today seems to suggest that Elliot and Hartley can work together without sacrificeing the balance/structure of the team and if that is the case then I would start Elliot ahead of LJ, for the obvious reasons, but lets not make out that LJ has been playing a non existent role at this club over the past few years, years in which he has been of vital importance to the side, years in which we have enjoyed fantastic success. If the time has come where we have found a team in which LJ is not the best option, then he doesnt start, its simple, but lets not dismiss what he has brought to the team by suggesting his percieved role is one of 'mystery'. Personally I find that disrespectful and footballing wise very wrong, its blatently obvious what he does as a player and what his position and role in the team has been.

I know you have stronger feelings on the LJ issue than I do. I wasn't really meaning to disrespect LJ and the use of the word "mystery" probably was the wrong choice. I agree that LJ had a good game up at Cheltenham but my point is that if the central defenders actually look to pass the ball forwards and do it properly then you don't need a "link" player. I felt that Fontaine, Nyatanga and to a slightly lesser extent McCombe all did that very well today. Personally I would use LJ as cover for Hartley should he be injured or lose form and on occasions where we are away from home and it is better for us to employ three central midfield players.

I know he is 32 but Hartley has a great range of passing, composure, gets others playing and moving, has a great set piece delivery and is generally a class act. I also believe that you must have a "ball winner" in a Championship midield and therefore one of Elliott or Skuse would get picked every time by me. The only time I would consider a Hartley/Johnson partnership would be if we were chasing a game against a team with the proverbial bus parked in their own penalty area!!

[chinapig]

I know you have stronger feelings on the LJ issue than I do. I wasn't really meaning to disrespect LJ and the use of the word "mystery" probably was the wrong choice. I agree that LJ had a good game up at Cheltenham but my point is that if the central defenders actually look to pass the ball forwards and do it properly then you don't need a "link" player. I felt that Fontaine, Nyatanga and to a slightly lesser extent McCombe all did that very well today. Personally I would use LJ as cover for Hartley should he be injured or lose form and on occasions where we are away from home and it is better for us to employ three central midfield players.

I know he is 32 but Hartley has a great range of passing, composure, gets others playing and moving, has a great set piece delivery and is generally a class act. I also believe that you must have a "ball winner" in a Championship midield and therefore one of Elliott or Skuse would get picked every time by me. The only time I would consider a Hartley/Johnson partnership would be if we were chasing a game against a team with the proverbial bus parked in their own penalty area!!

A pleasure to read Dan's intelligent original post and your equally good response. Such a change from the prejudice and near rage that so often features. Flattery over, I'm not sure I agree about the so-called "link" role. It struck me yesterday that Hartley frequently took the ball of the defence and many of his passes were short, intended to get a move started, change direction etc. He was helped by some good movement in front of him from the front two and especially Clarkson I thought. When there was no forward pass on he would give it back to a defender and start again. I couldn't help thinking what abuse Lee would have got from some around me if he did that. So I'm not sure they are so different but Hartley has obviously done it at a higher level. The man has the class that comes from keeping the game simple and not trying to split the defence with every ball.

[Ashton1]

[red man dan]

I know you have stronger feelings on the LJ issue than I do. I wasn't really meaning to disrespect LJ and the use of the word "mystery" probably was the wrong choice. I agree that LJ had a good game up at Cheltenham but my point is that if the central defenders actually look to pass the ball forwards and do it properly then you don't need a "link" player. I felt that Fontaine, Nyatanga and to a slightly lesser extent McCombe all did that very well today. Personally I would use LJ as cover for Hartley should he be injured or lose form and on occasions where we are away from home and it is better for us to employ three central midfield players.

I know he is 32 but Hartley has a great range of passing, composure, gets others playing and moving, has a great set piece delivery and is generally a class act. I also believe that you must have a "ball winner" in a Championship midield and therefore one of Elliott or Skuse would get picked every time by me. The only time I would consider a Hartley/Johnson partnership would be if we were chasing a game against a team with the proverbial bus parked in their own penalty area!!

Fair enough, i accpet your points there and agree. It just struck a wrong chord with me that you had used the word 'mystery' as I felt it 'appeared' to be unessasary jibe at LJ and belittled what i believe to have been a fairly important role at the club that LJ has played over recent successful times. Don't get me wrong, although I admire and am thankful for the effort that LJ has put into his career at City I am not one to allow this to get in the way of my judement of whether or not he should play. He is actually a very unique player in that with certain teams (as with the way we played at cheltenham and have done over aprx 2 seasons) he is the better option for the team despite not being the better individual player. It sounds weird but i'm sure you understand what I mean. Personally as said before I would have had LJ starting based on how the team set up and played at Cheltenham, not just because of what LJ does on the pitch himself, but largely because of what the other players do. Some people may not accept this 'link' role, but I have to say it clearly does exist or at least has existed becasue of the way we as a team have played. I dont think elliot by himself can play that role. However there now appears to be an other factor, as you have mentioned. If either a)hartley can can do enough of that 'link' role without losing too much of his own game or b) as you mentoined happened yesterday, the defense make more use of the ball are more intelligent with it then really that role that LJ is not required to bring the team together. If either of the above or indeed a combination of the above happens, then I would start with Elliot above LJ, he is a stronger player, a ball winner, alot of things LJ has not been and I doubt could be. I truely believe though that up untill the above the scenarios, LJ despite his downfalls, has been the best option for the team despite not being the better player, he has been that better option becasue elsewhere the team has lacked something NOT because he is better than Elliot who is a better individual player and in a side where he can play his game Elliot will be suberb. I am excited by the prospect of a City side that can accomidate the attributes of Elliot, as he is a VERY good player and ,if as it sounds it may be, we now have a team structure that suits Elliot more than LJ then we will be all the better for it. I think what it comes down to, is that LJ is very good in a side that needs bringing together and his strenghs lie as much in lessining others weaknesses as it does in his own 'general' MF ability, where as Elliot is the better option in a side where the team is already structured and he can play to his strenghs as a rugged midfielf player. I agree it is very important to have a tough tackling MF player, but up untill now that was always at the expense of the player who i believe had a more imperative input to the side and therefore I agreed with sacrificeoing the former for the latter. Now, hopefully, with Hartley involved and the team playing as they appeared to have yesterday, then Elliot will be the best option.

As i say, I am a fan of LJ for what he given to this club, and of what he as a player has bought to this club in his role of recent times but I am also a City fan who wants the best players playing for the best team outcome. If that no longer includes LJ and there are better options, then that is what I want to see. BUT i for one will only be pleased by the fact that as a team we have progressed and bettered ourselves through LJ's omition, where as unfortunately others i am afraid will delight more so in the fact that LJ no longer gets in the team rather than the fact it has made us better. I find that a shame, given the great attitude he has shown and the great effort he has given us and it will be a sad day IF at our first home game next season there is sound of 'delight' when LJ's name is read out amongst the substitutes.

[Ray White]

Am I the only person who thought Jamie McAllister was bloody rubbish yesterday, definitely the worst player on our side. On a positive note I'm more than happy for us to sign Lejsal, and those who are saying his kicking was a bit woolly, it was in terms of goal kicks in the first half but he cant half kick the ball a long way from a drop kick.

[silverfox]

Am I the only person who thought Jamie McAllister was bloody rubbish yesterday, definitely the worst player on our side.

No you're not the only person. He can be a liability at times. Apparently George Burley was there - doubt McAllister did much to improve his chances of a first team start with Scotland.

[Nibor]

A pleasure to read Dan's intelligent original post and your equally good response. Such a change from the prejudice and near rage that so often features. Flattery over, I'm not sure I agree about the so-called "link" role. It struck me yesterday that Hartley frequently took the ball of the defence and many of his passes were short, intended to get a move started, change direction etc. He was helped by some good movement in front of him from the front two and especially Clarkson I thought. When there was no forward pass on he would give it back to a defender and start again. I couldn't help thinking what abuse Lee would have got from some around me if he did that. So I'm not sure they are so different but Hartley has obviously done it at a higher level. The man has the class that comes from keeping the game simple and not trying to split the defence with every ball.

The task of picking the ball up short from defence, bringing it forward and spreading it is one that needs doing for sure. But it should be the behaviour of every good midfielder and it is one of many things a midfielder must do.

What we don't need is someone who does that and only that to the exclusion of everything else. It's far too limited.

[21. Marcham]

The task of picking the ball up short from defence, bringing it forward and spreading it is one that needs doing for sure. But it should be the behaviour of every good midfielder and it is one of many things a midfielder must do.

What we don't need is someone who does that and only that to the exclusion of everything else. It's far too limited.

Yet another sensible post from Nibor.

(Mods; I think someones hacked his account)

[red man dan]

The task of picking the ball up short from defence, bringing it forward and spreading it is one that needs doing for sure. But it should be the behaviour of every good midfielder and it is one of many things a midfielder must do.

What we don't need is someone who does that and only that to the exclusion of everything else. It's far too limited.

Correct, and up untill now not all our midfielders were capable of doing that and for me niether Elliot nor skuse and indeed williams did pick the ball up from defense and so forth in the same manner and with the same ability that LJ did. For all Elliots/skuses pro's, that part of their game was simply NOT their best, but it WAS LJ's. Limited as it was for LJ, it was less of a sacrifice losing just what he lacked than losing the shape of the team and its ability to be cohesive.

What we dont need, is lack of cohesiveness, structure and shape. Its far too limited for the WHOLE team and not just an individual. If Hartley can do the things that IMO Elliot does NOT do, and if Hartley can provide the cohesiveness that LJ did without it taking away his own game, then Elliot is a far better choice to partner him. Even from the highlights of yesterdays game, it was clear to see the bunching that took place at Cheltenham did not appear to be a problem, that is great news. Whether it has come about form how we set up formation wise, or because of Hartley, or simply becasue it was worked on I dont know, but it looked promising. Can someone comment on the positions Hartley and Elliot took up yesterday, was one or the other sitting back more, one driving forward more??

[Nibor]

Correct, and up untill now not all our midfielders were capable of doing that and for me niether Elliot nor skuse and indeed williams did pick the ball up from defense and so forth in the same manner and with the same ability that LJ did. For all Elliots/skuses pro's, that part of their game was simply NOT their best, but it WAS LJ's. Limited as it was for LJ, it was less of a sacrifice losing just what he lacked than losing the shape of the team and its ability to be cohesive.

What we dont need, is lack of cohesiveness, structure and shape. Its far too limited for the WHOLE team and not just an individual. If Hartley can do the things that IMO Elliot does NOT do, and if Hartley can provide the cohesiveness that LJ did without it taking away his own game, then Elliot is a far better choice to partner him. Even from the highlights of yesterdays game, it was clear to see the bunching that took place at Cheltenham did not appear to be a problem, that is great news. Whether it has come about form how we set up formation wise, or because of Hartley, or simply becasue it was worked on I dont know, but it looked promising. Can someone comment on the positions Hartley and Elliot took up yesterday, was one or the other sitting back more, one driving forward more??

I completely disagree with you, I think Elliott, Williams and Skuse are and always have been perfectly competent at collecting the ball from defence, bringing it forward and passing it simple - this is not complex football that requires some massive creative gift or flair.

We were not even close to cohesive as a side with LJ in the first XI for the vast majority of last season for a variety of reasons not least of which is his limitation defensively leaving us with a weakness in the spine of the team. You are advocating his selection last season based on what I think is a complete misconception about how we played, certainly in the games I watched. For me LJ was not the best choice last season and definitely would not be in my top four choices this season.

It's not personal, I don't care who his dad is, nor do the vast majority of people who believe his selection is wrong (in fact that point is most often made by the people defending him). I admire his attitude and endeavour, he's just not anywhere near a good enough midfielder.

Our starting XI should contain Elliot and Hartley and if we want a three the player added should be Skuse or Williams.

[Port Said Red]

Am I the only person who thought Jamie McAllister was bloody rubbish yesterday, definitely the worst player on our side. On a positive note I'm more than happy for us to sign Lejsal, and those who are saying his kicking was a bit woolly, it was in terms of goal kicks in the first half but he cant half kick the ball a long way from a drop kick.

No you're not the only person. He can be a liability at times. Apparently George Burley was there - doubt McAllister did much to improve his chances of a first team start with Scotland.

Putting another view, I did think the system exposed him on the left side far more than it did Bradley on the right. Not quite sure why this should be, but Haynes did seem to do more work out on the right going forward and tracking back.

It's not necessarily that easy for a full back who occasionally gets forward, to just become a wing back, they are very different roles and there will be some adjustment.

[red man dan]

I completely disagree with you, I think Elliott, Williams and Skuse are and always have been perfectly competent at collecting the ball from defence, bringing it forward and passing it simple - this is not complex football that requires some massive creative gift or flair.

We were not even close to cohesive as a side with LJ in the first XI for the vast majority of last season for a variety of reasons not least of which is his limitation defensively leaving us with a weakness in the spine of the team. You are advocating his selection last season based on what I think is a complete misconception about how we played, certainly in the games I watched. For me LJ was not the best choice last season and definitely would not be in my top four choices this season.

It's not personal, I don't care who his dad is, nor do the vast majority of people who believe his selection is wrong (in fact that point is most often made by the people defending him). I admire his attitude and endeavour, he's just not anywhere near a good enough midfielder.

Our starting XI should contain Elliot and Hartley and if we want a three the player added should be Skuse or Williams.

Then clearly we see/saw a different game and have a different view of how we played and also see a different set of skills among the players we have. I dont believe any of elliot, skuse or williams provide balance and structure in the way that LJ does. We disagree, im not sure there is much else to say, other than that i'm right of course.

[Robbored]

We were not even close to cohesive as a side with LJ in the first XI for the vast majority of last season for a variety of reasons not least of which is his limitation defensively leaving us with a weakness in the spine of the team. You are advocating his selection last season based on what I think is a complete misconception about how we played, certainly in the games I watched. For me LJ was not the best choice last season and definitely would not be in my top four choices this season.

It's not personal, I don't care who his dad is, nor do the vast majority of people who believe his selection is wrong (in fact that point is most often made by the people defending him). I admire his attitude and endeavour, he's just not anywhere near a good enough midfielder.

I completely agree with your summary and thats why I was delighted to see a classy player like Hartley join the squad. His signing was a clear indicator that Gary Johnson had finally admitted that last years midfield was simply not strong enough. Just think back to the Brum game at AG last year to remember how much of a difference two good midfielders make. McFadden and Carslake were so much better than anything that City had on display and I left the stadium after that game thinking how lightwieght City had looked. It was only the fact that City wouldn't be up against midfields like that every week that cheered me up a little.

I still would like to see another midfielder sign for City before the start of the season but I can't see it happening.

Elliot and Hartley must be first choices and with a four man midfield Mcindoe and maybe Haynes/Williams or Skuse taking the other spots. I can only see LJ starting if City go 5 across the middle.