Bristol Boy Posted May 20, 2004 Posted May 20, 2004 Napoleon once said, "Give me a Lucky General, not a great one" Last night DW bacame a lucky general because, without a shadow of doubt, he screwed up his team selection, apart from the subs and even then you have to ask why Miller wasn't in the picture and you know I'm not a Miller Fan. If anyone wondered if DW was a negative or positive person/manager, last night proved the former to be true. You don't start at home with two left backs.Well, not against Hartlepool you don't.Real Madrid might be another matter! It invites pressure and you give the ball away, which we did ad nauseum. Peacocks injury with no direct replacement (Miller) caused us to become disjointed for a period and that could have cost us the game. One things for sure, if we don't have a more attacking policy in the final it'll be Chesterfraud & Barnsley, not Leeds & Sunderland PHILLIPS: 7/10 Did what he had to do. CAREY: 7/10 Solid in defence but didn't contribute enough going forward BUTLER: 7/10 A cool head amongst a sea of panic. COLES: 7/10 Solid enough. HILL: 7/10 See Carey ROUGIER:6/10 Not his usual self and wasn't helped when moving to the centre. Did OK, but better wide. DOHERTY:6/10 Not as effective as he normally is and bypassed mostly due to Wilsons whoosh football and to big a gap between midfield and attack.No width on the left until late on stopped the flow of our football. TINNION:6/10 See Doherty. WOODMAN:4/10 Ineffective and out of position.Not his fault DW's. ROBERTS:7/10 Goal marks him up from a six.CR was his normal mercurial, frustrating self.Needs to "get his head up" when in possesion, but looked our only hope of a goal for a long time. PEACOCK: 5/10 Seemed to injure himself! GOODFELLOW: 7/10 Immediate impact and a cracking goal+assist.Now has one less league goal than Miller and a must for Cardiff. MURRAY: 6/10 Not quite the old Scott but getting closer.Clearly needs games and made us look more of a threat, particularly when linking with CR. LITA: Not really on long enough
NailseaRed Posted May 20, 2004 Posted May 20, 2004 BCFC : 10/10 we're all going to cardiff we're all going cardiff lalalala Sorry can't be bothered to analyse the game, still in a state of sheer joy lalalalala cardiff lalalala cardiff
Guest Royal4ever Posted May 20, 2004 Posted May 20, 2004 Get real, you won the game, no matter what happens it seems as if you will always find something to moan about. No manager would be able to succeed here if that's your attitude. Read my comments about Wilson in this thread http://www.otib.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=13010
The Humble Realist Posted May 20, 2004 Posted May 20, 2004 ii thought woodman played well. He wasnt outstanding i admit and i agree i wasnt his fault sumtimes it was DW but it hoguht he was one of our better players- jsut my opnino though
elko Posted May 20, 2004 Posted May 20, 2004 Not much point in overcriticising any players is there? they all did what they had to do - win the game.
cityboy Posted May 20, 2004 Posted May 20, 2004 Am I the only person in Bristol that thought Woody had a good game? Infact, apart from the (priceless) goal, I though Goody was much more ineffective. Still, we won and that's all that matters.
Guest stevey2005 Posted May 20, 2004 Posted May 20, 2004 i think we should of started with goodfellow (not because he got the goal) but because hes mroe attacking and we needed wingers to attack all the time whereas woodman is more of a defensive player ....anyway doesnt matter now were going to cardiff!!!!!!!!
Guest Royal4ever Posted May 20, 2004 Posted May 20, 2004 Tony Butler has been around, always big and brave, and you won't be able to buy much better.
JudgeRed Posted May 20, 2004 Posted May 20, 2004 Royal4ever - What a good post you put up thank you. Hope you stick around for a long time to come and make city your second team to support. It has always been frustrating to support Bristol city i admit DW does baffles me with some of the choices he make (ie substutions, team selections etc) may be this is why De canio and DW fell out @ Sheff Wed. But yes i do agree we do have one of the best British managers in the country. I'd rather have him than a forigner (sp).
Guest bristolbred Posted May 20, 2004 Posted May 20, 2004 What's the Evil Post have to say for itself today??.
deadratinmycider Posted May 20, 2004 Posted May 20, 2004 I think Butler was absoultely outstanding last night, again. He's really had some good games since the turn of the April when all the big games started. He seemed more composed on the ball, and nearly played a perfect pass to Peacock again (which he crossed for Roberts to slam home, only for defender to stick a last ditch foot in the way) Okay so we didn't play nearly well enough, but we are there. Cardiff here we come. Spot on Tom, Butler has been immense in the play offs. He's a big game player.
edson Posted May 20, 2004 Posted May 20, 2004 Napoleon once said, "Give me a Lucky General, not a great one" Last night DW bacame a lucky general because, without a shadow of doubt, he screwed up his team selection, apart from the subs and even then you have to ask why Miller wasn't in the picture and you know I'm not a Miller Fan. I'd agree with that. If we had lost last night, I feel DW's position would have been untenable, having left his £300k striker out of the squad, leaving us with no cover for Peacock when he went off injured. It looked as though is over-reliance on Peacock would finally be his undoing. However, we won, thanks in no small part to the 'last throw of the dice' substitutions by DW, and that is all that matters in a game like that. So leaving Miller out becomes irrelevant, in those terms. On such drmatic moments as the closing minutes of last night, fortunes and careers can turn. Maybe last night was such a moment for DW and Bristol City. We shall see.
Redminster Posted May 20, 2004 Posted May 20, 2004 You really are a glass is half empty kind of chap, aren't you Bristol Boy? WE ARE ONE GAME AWAY FROM PROMOTION TO THE FIRST DIVISION. By all means criticise the team IF AND ONLY IF we don't get promoted. Cheer up mate, we're all going to Cardiff!
bobby Posted May 20, 2004 Posted May 20, 2004 Am I the only person in Bristol that thought Woody had a good game? Infact, apart from the (priceless) goal, I though Goody was much more ineffective. No - I thought Woodman looked pretty good in his role on the left. Put in some great crosses, pushed forward and took all the set piece plays - back to his confident best. Also thought Scotty looked more like his old self with those quick runs down the right, picked out by Tins with long raking balls forward. For me Butler would have got man of the match - he was outstanding. I too was surprised not to see Miller on the bench, but have to say Lita and Goodfellow linked up well and provided the build up to the winner - spot on subs in my view!
jimmyb Posted May 20, 2004 Posted May 20, 2004 I'd agree with that. If we had lost last night, I feel DW's position would have been untenable, having left his £300k striker out of the squad, leaving us with no cover for Peacock when he went off injured. It looked as though is over-reliance on Peacock would finally be his undoing. However, we won, thanks in no small part to the 'last throw of the dice' substitutions by DW, and that is all that matters in a game like that. So leaving Miller out becomes irrelevant, in those terms. On such drmatic moments as the closing minutes of last night, fortunes and careers can turn. Maybe last night was such a moment for DW and Bristol City. We shall see. 3 bouts of luck 1) peacock going off - if he hadn't would roberts have even still been on pitch?? tragically roberts and rougier seemed to have more of an understanding than roberts and peacock 2) they hit the post 3) there centre half getting freak nose break - after that they looked very unsettled at the back especially when the kitchen sink was projected in their direction
Gerry Gows' Tash Posted May 20, 2004 Posted May 20, 2004 Someone at work reakons they finished with 10 men - is that true ?
Show Me The Money! Posted May 20, 2004 Posted May 20, 2004 Don't you think its cool that we have a squad where we can have these discussions on who should be playing and who shouldn't Woodman, Bell, Murray, Rougier, Goodfellow, Roberts, Peacock, Miller, Lita I'm glad we have so many options. COME ON YOU REDS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Beezey Posted May 20, 2004 Posted May 20, 2004 They did finish with ten men. Another of there players limped off after the second goal and they had used all there subs
myoudale Posted May 20, 2004 Posted May 20, 2004 PHILLIPS: 7/10 Did what he had to do. CAREY: 7/10 Solid in defence but didn't contribute enough going forward BUTLER: 7/10 A cool head amongst a sea of panic. COLES: 7/10 Solid enough. HILL: 7/10 See Carey ROUGIER:6/10 Not his usual self and wasn't helped when moving to the centre. Did OK, but better wide. DOHERTY:6/10 Not as effective as he normally is and bypassed mostly due to Wilsons whoosh football and to big a gap between midfield and attack.No width on the left until late on stopped the flow of our football. TINNION:6/10 See Doherty. WOODMAN:4/10 Ineffective and out of position.Not his fault DW's. ROBERTS:7/10 Goal marks him up from a six.CR was his normal mercurial, frustrating self.Needs to "get his head up" when in possesion, but looked our only hope of a goal for a long time. PEACOCK: 5/10 Seemed to injure himself! GOODFELLOW: 7/10 Immediate impact and a cracking goal+assist.Now has one less league goal than Miller and a must for Cardiff. MURRAY: 6/10 Not quite the old Scott but getting closer.Clearly needs games and made us look more of a threat, particularly when linking with CR. LITA: Not really on long enough where you at the same game i was ?? butler was very panicy at times woodman was clearly my man of the match played extremly well his corners would good his crossing was good, he would of certainly got no less than a 8 1/2 roberts crossing was poor and he didnt really get involved as he usually does yeah he grabbed the winner but his performance didnt warrent the man of the match
Admin Ian M Posted May 20, 2004 Admin Posted May 20, 2004 roberts crossing was poor and he didnt really get involved as he usually does yeah he grabbed the winner but his performance didnt warrent the man of the match Yeah I was particularly disgusted by the cross he put in for our equaliser. Ok so he set up our equaliser and scored our winner, but what else did he do?
Guest bcfcsols Posted May 20, 2004 Posted May 20, 2004 What's the Evil Post have to say for itself today??. I was shocked that Doherty got an 8 rating which was the same as Robbo, although their huge article summed the game and ground up well.
edson Posted May 20, 2004 Posted May 20, 2004 Yeah I was particularly disgusted by the cross he put in for our equaliser. Ok so he set up our equaliser and scored our winner, but what else did he do? Honestly, Madger, the way you go on about it, anyone would think Roberts had saved Wilson's job and turned our whole season round in the space of five minutes.
Guest bcfcsols Posted May 20, 2004 Posted May 20, 2004 Honestly, Madger, the way you go on about it, anyone would think Roberts had saved Wilson's job and turned our whole season round in the space of five minutes. priceless
edson Posted May 20, 2004 Posted May 20, 2004 I too was surprised not to see Miller on the bench, but have to say Lita and Goodfellow linked up well and provided the build up to the winner - spot on subs in my view! I wasn't surprised. I don't think anything Danny does surprises me anymore. Appalled, yes, but not surprised. He got away with it through outrageous good fortune. Nothing more nothing less.
Admin Maesknoll Posted May 20, 2004 Admin Posted May 20, 2004 roberts crossing was poor and he didnt really get involved as he usually does yeah he grabbed the winner but his performance didnt warrent the man of the match I'm bloody speechless.... Except for one sentence: Roberts has been the most exciting player of the season , amongst a plethora of poor performance........
Bristol Boy Posted May 22, 2004 Author Posted May 22, 2004 You really are a glass is half empty kind of chap, aren't you Bristol Boy? WE ARE ONE GAME AWAY FROM PROMOTION TO THE FIRST DIVISION. By all means criticise the team IF AND ONLY IF we don't get promoted. Cheer up mate, we're all going to Cardiff! Perhaps if you watched more games, you'd realise that we could easily have lost the first leg 3-1 and drawn last night. when we deserved to win, particularly given our second half performance. Of course, all that really matters is the result and as always, you always learn more from a defeat than a victory on the basis that the end justifies the means. As I've said on many occasions, DW has had four years at AG and, UP TO NOW, won the LDV, once. That's it. If we go up, he can rightly say that he has achieved a significant goal.If we don't he should resign the same day. Four years, millions invested, plus an Academy, should get you out of this division and this years negative selections will only be justified if that happens. It's not about Glasses being half full or half empty, it's about believing what you see and not seeing the world through Red Tinted Specs. Reality
Bristol Boy Posted May 22, 2004 Author Posted May 22, 2004 where you at the same game i was ?? butler was very panicy at times woodman was clearly my man of the match played extremly well his corners would good his crossing was good, he would of certainly got no less than a 8 1/2 roberts crossing was poor and he didnt really get involved as he usually does yeah he grabbed the winner but his performance didnt warrent the man of the match butler was very panicy at times Some of those replying to this thread say Butler he was MOM. If you thought Woodman was MOM and played in some great crosses, I should buy the video and count the number of chances he created..NONE. Roberts crossed the ball for Goodfellow to score after making an intelligent run wide. Lita flicked the ball on for Goodfellow to hook the ball on for Roberts to make an excellent run and score. That's what happened in the game I watched. I also went to the game at Hartlepool and, once again, DW's negativity could have blown it.
Bristol Boy Posted May 22, 2004 Author Posted May 22, 2004 I wasn't surprised. I don't think anything Danny does surprises me anymore. Appalled, yes, but not surprised. He got away with it through outrageous good fortune. Nothing more nothing less. Spot On, Sir!
Milo Posted May 23, 2004 Posted May 23, 2004 I'm not sure why leaving Miller out has received such criticism when Rougier was able to provide cover for the 'physical front man' position. I know that he plays well on the right but he played a blinder for Brentford against us earlier in the season playing up front. Some of the people criticising Rougier up front were arguing that he was a player capable of playing out of position on the left side of midfield only a few days ago. The best player at our club who was not in the starting XI was Murray - a right winger, who could comfortably replace Rougier allowing Rougier to go up front. How can it be 'outrageous good fortune' when Wilson had planned for it (and were you really 'outraged' by his good fortune in the circumstances)? On a different matter, I agree with BB's comment about the defensive nature of the team. Sure, we got a result in the end, but on 86 minutes I was p####d off that we had such a defence minded team and that it had taken 10 minutes after conceeding the goal before making an attacking substitution.
Guest Cidergal Posted May 23, 2004 Posted May 23, 2004 WOODMAN:4/10 Ineffective and out of position.Not his fault DW's. How is it Danny's fault that Craig played badly? I'm guessing you're saying that because he's a defender but he's a professional footballer, this is what he gets payed for. Surely he should be able to play Left midfield and Left back?!?! Not exactly like Danny put Steve Phillips up front!! I agree that maybe Danny should have played two wingers but it's nobody's fault but Woodys that he didn't have a good game!
Bristol Boy Posted May 23, 2004 Author Posted May 23, 2004 I'm not sure why leaving Miller out has received such criticism when Rougier was able to provide cover for the 'physical front man' position. I know that he plays well on the right but he played a blinder for Brentford against us earlier in the season playing up front. Some of the people criticising Rougier up front were arguing that he was a player capable of playing out of position on the left side of midfield only a few days ago. The best player at our club who was not in the starting XI was Murray - a right winger, who could comfortably replace Rougier allowing Rougier to go up front. How can it be 'outrageous good fortune' when Wilson had planned for it (and were you really 'outraged' by his good fortune in the circumstances)? On a different matter, I agree with BB's comment about the defensive nature of the team. Sure, we got a result in the end, but on 86 minutes I was p####d off that we had such a defence minded team and that it had taken 10 minutes after conceeding the goal before making an attacking substitution. I know that he plays well on the right but he played a blinder for Brentford against us earlier in the season playing up front. Rougier played wide right for Brentford and caused MH all kinds of problems. Some of the people criticising Rougier up front were arguing that he was a player capable of playing out of position on the left side of midfield only a few days ago. Rougier played wide left for a while when Bell was carried off and looked our best chance of a goal.He also played wide left regularly for Hibs. If he goes left, then our "best player, not in the team," Murray, comes in and plays right where he can link with Roberts. I'm no Miller fan but he played up front with Roberts in our best away perforamce, 4-1 at.................Brighton! Brighton are a negative team by their own admission and if people think we had some luck against H'Pool, you should have seen them against Swinetown. If Wilson goes with Woodman wide again......and I'm convinced he will if Bell's not fit, then we'll allow Leon Knight to pick our pocket and it'll be panic stations for the last ten minutes.
Bristol Boy Posted May 23, 2004 Author Posted May 23, 2004 How is it Danny's fault that Craig played badly? I'm guessing you're saying that because he's a defender but he's a professional footballer, this is what he gets payed for. Surely he should be able to play Left midfield and Left back?!?! Not exactly like Danny put Steve Phillips up front!! I agree that maybe Danny should have played two wingers but it's nobody's fault but Woodys that he didn't have a good game! You can only be expected to play to the best of your ability. wherever you play and whoever you are. It's called positional sense and it's something that you are coached in and you develop into a role. CW's a left back and a defender so, for example, he has played right back on occasions.......it's still in defence. When you are moved to attack, as winger,wide right midfield, that's totally different.You receive the ball in more advanced areas, have less space and time and need to get into the box ala Goodfellow (Goal) not like CW (didn't get in their box once) It also invites pressure because defenders from the opposition can get forward and you have less possesion as a result. For example, going by what you say, Marc Goodfellow should be able to play centre half. That is absolute nonsense.
Guest Cidergal Posted May 23, 2004 Posted May 23, 2004 You can only be expected to play to the best of your ability. wherever you play and whoever you are. It's called positional sense and it's something that you are coached in and you develop into a role. CW's a left back and a defender so, for example, he has played right back on occasions.......it's still in defence. When you are moved to attack, as winger,wide right midfield, that's totally different.You receive the ball in more advanced areas, have less space and time and need to get into the box ala Goodfellow (Goal) not like CW (didn't get in their box once) It also invites pressure because defenders from the opposition can get forward and you have less possesion as a result. For example, going by what you say, Marc Goodfellow should be able to play centre half. That is absolute nonsense. Obiously Marc Goodfellow couldn't play centre back, I am saying that Left Midfield and Left Back's are very simalar positions. Both left backs and right backs are expected to move forward and help the attack anyway so Woodman, being a left back, should naturally do that. Ashley Cole and Wayne Bridge are classic examples of this. Fantastic defenders and fantastic going forward. Though Woodman isn't as this level of course, Mickey Bell is! He plays left back and left midfield and copes with it very well.
Guest claloudav Posted May 23, 2004 Posted May 23, 2004 PEACOCK: 5/10 Seemed to injure himself! maybe peacock will prove us wrong in the final........
RedUn Posted May 23, 2004 Posted May 23, 2004 You can only be expected to play to the best of your ability. wherever you play and whoever you are. It's called positional sense and it's something that you are coached in and you develop into a role. CW's a left back and a defender so, for example, he has played right back on occasions.......it's still in defence Craig Woodman carried out the task his manager asked of him extremely well on Wednesday, that is, with due regard to the defensive aspects of the role - something our first-choice wide left man Aaron Brown is far better at than many give him credit for. As usual, Woody seldom gave possession away, quietly broke up a number of their forward moves, put in some decent crosses including corners from the right with good shape and pace; he also had a very decent effort from 20yds charged down (one of very few on the night) which you've somehow managed to overlook. Your award of 4/10 is therefore not a fair assessment of the player's performance, rather a "toys out of the pram" job on your part, only measuring your disappointment that Wilson didn't pick the team you wanted to see.
Bristol Boy Posted May 23, 2004 Author Posted May 23, 2004 Obiously Marc Goodfellow couldn't play centre back, I am saying that Left Midfield and Left Back's are very simalar positions. Both left backs and right backs are expected to move forward and help the attack anyway so Woodman, being a left back, should naturally do that. Ashley Cole and Wayne Bridge are classic examples of this. Fantastic defenders and fantastic going forward. Though Woodman isn't as this level of course, Mickey Bell is! He plays left back and left midfield and copes with it very well. So, following your example when hasn't Sven decided to play Coles in front of Bridge or vica versa? I'll tell you why. It's because it's vastly different receiving the ball at left back, facing the opposition goal, then it is from the left back and having to take on defender in close proximity. Bell has scored, not once,in 20 starts and is half the player he was, although, I's start him left midfield in place of Woodman, if that's the choice.
Bristol Boy Posted May 23, 2004 Author Posted May 23, 2004 Craig Woodman carried out the task his manager asked of him extremely well on Wednesday, that is, with due regard to the defensive aspects of the role - something our first-choice wide left man Aaron Brown is far better at than many give him credit for. As usual, Woody seldom gave possession away, quietly broke up a number of their forward moves, put in some decent crosses including corners from the right with good shape and pace; he also had a very decent effort from 20yds charged down (one of very few on the night) which you've somehow managed to overlook. Your award of 4/10 is therefore not a fair assessment of the player's performance, rather a "toys out of the pram" job on your part, only measuring your disappointment that Wilson didn't pick the team you wanted to see. Don't make personal remarks about "toys out of prams." If you thought Woodman played well at Harlepool & AG, terrific that's your prerogative. Don't decend to juvenile remarks. Either way, answer this, if DW agreed, don't you think he'd have left him on?
Guest wolverhampton cider ed Posted May 23, 2004 Posted May 23, 2004 Whats everyone doing on the forum at this time of night not trying to sneak a ticket from somewhere on the ofchance I hope.
edson Posted May 24, 2004 Posted May 24, 2004 I'm not sure why leaving Miller out has received such criticism when Rougier was able to provide cover for the 'physical front man' position. I know that he plays well on the right but he played a blinder for Brentford against us earlier in the season playing up front. Some of the people criticising Rougier up front were arguing that he was a player capable of playing out of position on the left side of midfield only a few days ago. The best player at our club who was not in the starting XI was Murray - a right winger, who could comfortably replace Rougier allowing Rougier to go up front. How can it be 'outrageous good fortune' when Wilson had planned for it (and were you really 'outraged' by his good fortune in the circumstances)? You cannot see why people might criticise the manager for not having his recently acquired £300k+ striker available, when Peacock got injured? You know, I think I actually believe you. By the way, 'outrageous', when used in the context you refer to in my post can mean 'outlandish' or 'extraordinary'. I think that perfectly describes our good fortune in the closing minutes of that game. Or should my support of the team blind me from the honest truth of the matter?
bucksred Posted May 24, 2004 Posted May 24, 2004 Woody was our best player until Scotty came on to replace him. We WERE bloody lucky too...Robbo is MOTM solely for getting the goal which takes us to Cardiff..the team as a whole were average, none of the fire we had playing Plymouth or QPR..why?? Why in the name of God did Danny boy not even have Miller on the bench? WE gotta play a hell of a lot better than that to win at Cardiff...we can do it.. Red Army, Red Army, Red Army..we can do it now, C'mon you Reeeeeeeedz!!
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.