Steve Watts Posted August 21, 2015 Report Share Posted August 21, 2015 The job of forum grammar police is a hazardous one, especially with automatic spell check! To be fair I usually only join the grammar police against those who cock up when nitpicking on others! (The number of times I bite my tongue on a "should of" comment!!!) Slight fail on my part there! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ten minutes of rough Posted August 21, 2015 Report Share Posted August 21, 2015 Noted.[/quote OK, would you like to edit it then?...Can't be looking like a load of thick Wurzels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cityexile Posted August 21, 2015 Report Share Posted August 21, 2015 I really hope it is 532. Otherwise we could be in for a hiding. Most of our problems this year have been when we have played 335! I know it was a break, but on highlights, the length of time for the Leeds second goal where only our back three were on screen, at this level, was frankly absurd! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redtucks Posted August 21, 2015 Report Share Posted August 21, 2015 It's IT'S, for the love of your God!!!!! However, it's also love OF your God, for God's sake!!!!!!! May your Gods go with you!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CiderHider Posted August 21, 2015 Report Share Posted August 21, 2015 Dont we have a good record at Boro though? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrahamC Posted August 21, 2015 Report Share Posted August 21, 2015 Most of our problems this year have been when we have played 335! I know it was a break, but on highlights, the length of time for the Leeds second goal where only our back three were on screen, at this level, was frankly absurd! Pretty sure 3-3-5 is cheating.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cityexile Posted August 21, 2015 Report Share Posted August 21, 2015 Pretty sure 3-3-5 is cheating.... Rush goalie of course... ...3-2-5 I might have meant! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cidered abroad Posted August 21, 2015 Report Share Posted August 21, 2015 To be fair I usually only join the grammar police against those who cock up when nitpicking on others! (The number of times I bite my tongue on a "should of" comment!!!) Slight fail on my part there! Surely it should be "should have"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foghornred Posted August 21, 2015 Report Share Posted August 21, 2015 I said last season that the way that we line up players like Albert would have a field day next season,lets see if I am right ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeAman08 Posted August 21, 2015 Report Share Posted August 21, 2015 I agree with the original post. It could be a field day for Albert. Could be. Though I imagine Joe will be helping quite a bit this match. Think we need a strong defender to replace Williams if only to cover Joe who is one of our best attackers. Whereas the right side the WB should be a decent defender to cover Ayling when he goes forward. If Derrick just stayed back and played the simple pass he wouldn't be picked out as much. He has been suspect defensively which doesn't help when he makes mistakes on the ball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Watts Posted August 21, 2015 Report Share Posted August 21, 2015 Surely it should be "should have"? Hence the quotes...! I agree with the original post. It could be a field day for Albert. Could be. Though I imagine Joe will be helping quite a bit this match. Think we need a strong defender to replace Williams if only to cover Joe who is one of our best attackers. Whereas the right side the WB should be a decent defender to cover Ayling when he goes forward. If Derrick just stayed back and played the simple pass he wouldn't be picked out as much. He has been suspect defensively which doesn't help when he makes mistakes on the ball. On the subject of the right side we do need to get Little fit if we are to continue with wing backs as Fredericks looks like a right back being asked to play right back. He doesn't seem comfortable with the position at all. I think Joe will be key in trying to nullify Albert tomorrow, but as others have said they're not a one man team so we need to be tight across the park to get something out of the game. I did say to someone on Weds though, as someone said above, it would be utterly typical of City to end up winning this type of game! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.png.b717f72c0320930c89b72b5fcf5f7a26.png)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.