City 1 - 1 Nottingham Forest

[Jay]

[HambrookRed]

I'd agree with most of it. I thought BOOM BOOM did a great job in dealing with almost every ball in the air, granted his accuracy may not have been perfect but the most important thing is that he "got rid".

Was very very dissapointed in Betsy yesterday. He had sooo much of the ball and i don't recall a single time he really tried to attack ( ala Murray ). He simply waited for some backup and laid the ball off to them. I could do that.

[bucksred]

I thought Boom Boom, was marginally behind Lee johnson, who I finally saw a performance from, which justified the hype he gets on here.

Our strike force is a major worry for me...they aint going to be good enough, should we get promotion.

[samo]

[Richy P]

Think this is one of the times I disagree with you. On the balance of things a point is a very good result. Forest made it very difficult for us, and for a promotion team were very defensive come the second half, and the majority of the first. I thought Brooker and Jevons deserved a better mark for their efforts, as at the end of the day it was going to be a game decided on one chance, and their keeper is no slouch.

The fact is, this is the squad we have now until the end of the year, all very well saying the wingers aren't good enough, but we can't change them and need to support them through what seems to be a lack of confidence, especially betsy. Apart from the odd stutter McCombe looked pretty solid at the back as well.

Brooker still looks unfit, and needs games to get scoring again. Once he scores, I feel the gates will open so to speak, but he needs to stay injury free and he will be good enough. Enoch looked slighlty sluggish when he came on. As for jevons, i feel some of the hold up play, passing etc has been his best since hes been here without scoring, from the games i've seen anyway.

[Bristol Boy]

Think this is one of the times I disagree with you. On the balance of things a point is a very good result.

I didn't say it was a bad result

Forest made it very difficult for us, and for a promotion team were very defensive come the second half, and the majority of the first. I thought Brooker and Jevons deserved a better mark for their efforts, as at the end of the day it was going to be a game decided on one chance, and their keeper is no slouch.

I agree about Smith, however with strikers, I'm sorry but it's all about end product-ie, goals and with six in our last seven home games, including some pretty second rate oposition, we aren't scoring enough and that has to be a concern.

The fact is, this is the squad we have now until the end of the year, all very well saying the wingers aren't good enough, but we can't change them and need to support them through what seems to be a lack of confidence, especially betsy.

On what I've seen I'd have Murray in if he is fit.I'm not unsupportive of anyone, however, it's a review not a pep talk and I write what I see.Playing several positions may not have helped but the fact of the matter is that GJ spent a fair amount of money on Betsy and he looks inferior to what we have as a striker or a wide player

Apart from the odd stutter McCombe looked pretty solid at the back as well.

He looked shaky for most of the first half, particularly as Forest didn't put us under great pressure after they scored.He gave away some clumsy free kicks in the second period that could have been costly.I've missed about four of our 52 games this season and that wasn't one of his better performances.

Brooker still looks unfit, and needs games to get scoring again.

I'm afraid that's been the case all season

Once he scores, I feel the gates will open so to speak, but he needs to stay injury free and he will be good enough.

We've got six games left-When's it going to happen??

Enoch looked slighlty sluggish when he came on. As for jevons, i feel some of the hold up play, passing etc has been his best since hes been here without scoring, from the games i've seen anyway.

Neither looked like scoring, Enochs got one and that was kicked against him, since January

[Will Rollason]

T As for jevons, i feel some of the hold up play, passing etc has been his best since hes been here without scoring, from the games i've seen anyway.

mmmmm, a few reports mention Jevo being one on one with the keeper and missing ....so if you werent there you would

probably picture him racing through on goal and cocking it up whereas he actually got a decent shot off as he fell in the area

and Smith made ANOTHER good save with his legs. He linked really well a few times in the first half when we put together some

quality passing play and , in general, his touch is as good as anyone elses at this club. His limitations are a lack of pace and

physical presence but he brings other things to our team imo.

[SimplyRed]

Yes, a good result AND a good performance, and one that 99% of City fans would've taken at 3pm, including myself.

It was so important not to lose.

However, I do think that the game highlighted our lack of accuracy and fear of shooting, not only from the strikers, but from midfield as well - and I think that is a major concern for our run in.

That we dominated the moajority of the game is without doubt and our quality, performance and creativity in large parts of the game was matchless, but there is still that nagging doubt that our strikers and midfielders can deliver killer goals when required.

Brooker, while being a constant pain in the side to the Forest defence, lacked a decent first touch while Jevons, Johnson and Skuse were guilty of some glaring misses that would have eased the pressure. Betsy had probably one of his poorest games for us, while in contrast, Wilson had one of his best.

But most frustrating, I think we overplayed too much on the edge of the box, when a strike at goal might have been more fruitful.

We deserved all 3 points today, mainly because we took the game to Forest after they scored. It was obvious they were hoping to sit on the 1-0 lead and soak up the pressure and when we scored just before the break, I really though we would go on to win. Not to be though, and I just wonder how many times we will rue our inability to turn superiority into goals in the run-in.

[samo]

Just a side note but, after a long and interesting thread about Andy Smith during the build up to the Forest game, was anyone else who attended the Donny match not a touch surprised he was not in the squad at all?

Although Enoch didn't have a mare against Forest by any stretch, I think Smith might have proved an interesting replacement for the hard-work of Brooker in the second half.

Just a thought, as I don't know if it had been mentioned.

[Bristol Boy]

I agree with you re pussyfooting in front of goal, so I was surprised to see we actually had 18 shots at goal - mind you, only one on target according to the stats but I can remember their keeper making a few saves so the stats are not to be trusted.

That was in contrast to the last few games where players have been shooting from outside the box under instruction from Johnson.

Hopefully, that'll be put right during the week before the Swansea game.

Looking at the highlights on World, their keeper made three good saves.

One from McCombe's header, one from Jevons and one from, wait for it, Cole Skuse, that Orr scored from.

Lee Johnson hit a scorcher wide, but the rest was tepid and my point in the review is that it's been like that for the last seven home games and, to be honest the last two aways.

We have to many players who abregate responsibility when, as you have said, a shot would be more productive.If we had Billy Sharp or a fully fit & firing Brooker we'd be ten points clear and we could still rue not signing quality in January or before the recent deadline, I hope not.

[Bristol Boy]

Just a side note but, after a long and interesting thread about Andy Smith during the build up to the Forest game, was anyone else who attended the Donny match not a touch surprised he was not in the squad at all?

Although Enoch didn't have a mare against Forest by any stretch, I think Smith might have proved an interesting replacement for the hard-work of Brooker in the second half.

Just a thought, as I don't know if it had been mentioned.

Although I don't think Smith is the answer, merely on the basis that he doesn't score goals, I do think he'd do well, as Bas, did next to SB.One another note, and I'm a fan, is Brooker the right man particularly if we go up??

[Port Said Red]

One another note, and I'm a fan, is Brooker the right man particularly if we go up??

I worry about his first touch. I don't believe it is good enough for the next level. He has the strength and tenacity for any level but the ball bounces away from him to often for my liking.

[Lordofthebling]

A point was a great result and you have to think of the psychological factor in games like this.

Call me biased, but we battered them in the second half and they had no answer back. We deserve to be 4 points clear and hopefully both teams will realise that the positions they are in are what is deserved at the end of the season.

[Guest Ron]

Don't agree Betsy was at fault for the first goal, he went in on Commons, one on side, leaving Orr to cover if Commons got away. Instead, Orr stood 5-10 yards away, watching the ball, and then when Betsy lost it to Commons, Orr was too far away to do anything about it. Cue Betsy making his feelings known.

[samo]

Although I don't think Smith is the answer, merely on the basis that he doesn't score goals, I do think he'd do well, as Bas, did next to SB.One another note, and I'm a fan, is Brooker the right man particularly if we go up??

I imagine we will see most of the squad at some point over the Easter weekend due to the close proximity of the two games, so I will be looking to see how Smith might be utilised. He is a livewire if nothing else, and I agree about him possibly playing a similar role to Bas alongside a now (hopefully) fully fit SB.

As for Brooker playing at another level I'm unsure. I think he can, when both fit and in form, provide defenses at any level with serious problems due to the fact he presents not just the obvious physical threat but also can be tricky on the deck.

Interestingly I caught the Reading-Spurs game yesterday and watched his former strike partner Lita playing up top next to Dave Kitson. I though how since Lita left SB hasn't ever had a small, fast player next to him in a front two, and also watched how similar Kitson was to SB in terms of his role next to Lita.

Obviously this term has not been representative of SB best form, but looking back to the Northampton game on Sky very early on I think we saw the best example of his abilities. When JMW came on to replace Jevons Brooker improved immensely, being freed up by the space Jennison created with his running. Brooker's finish came from having received the ball to feet for once and turning to face a defence that was having to monitor the movement of JMW. Unfortunately his incarceration and subsequent injury and illnesses put paid to the majority of the season.

I think IF promoted Brooker would prove an important asset, but to really see him at his best I think he requires a fast, channel running partner to disrupt defenses with him. If he is relied upon to be the focus of an attack, and forced to burden the majority of a defenses' attention I think he suffers. He clearly is not a target man in the Steve Torpey or Wayne Allison mode but I don't think he needs to play alongside one either. His game is better on the ground with his back to goal, not in the air or scrapping for every ball.

Those are just my thoughts, and I might be way off the mark, I just think if you look at when he is most effective it was next to a fast, agile (and, granted, very talented) partner in Lita, not being played as the one-dimensional target man or next to one.