Hoops We Get Done Again

[Blagdon red]

Now online:

Hoops We Get Done Again

[Chappers]

Bit harsh on Johnson, dropping him completely for next week. Good report though.

[Rowley Birkin]

Good post.

I tend to agree the balance of the side could be a lot better, players should be playing in their strongest position.

If that means certain players having to step out of the limelight, for the good of the team, and to benefit our shape, then so be it.

G.J. must know this, but the sooner he takes pressure off certain players, I feel it'll be to the teams benefit.

Isn't Richard Keogh still around too, giving us a wealth of options at the back ?

It's time for G.J. to make some tough calls.

[Bristol Boy]

Good post.

I tend to agree the balance of the side could be a lot better, players should be playing in their strongest position.

If that means certain players having to step out of the limelight, for the good of the team, and to benefit our shape, then so be it.

G.J. must know this, but the sooner he takes pressure off certain players, I feel it'll be to the teams benefit.

Isn't Richard Keogh still around too, giving us a wealth of options at the back ?

It's time for G.J. to make some tough calls.

Spot On and Keogh, whilst persona non grata, is definetly a better bet in the CCC than Vasko & McCombe.

As you rightly say, it's time for some tough decisions and, in the past, GJ's come up with the goods.I truly hope he does that again if we are to avoid performances like Palace & yesterday.

It keeping with most, if not all, of the games we've lost, we never looked like winning yesterday or even drawing however, in a lot of the games we've won, it's been real skin of the teeth stuff up until the last minute.

[robins72]

The problem is the player with pace was left on the bench(Fontaine) so we were left with two central defenders who were static and kept lumping the ball forward continueusly! Very frustrating to watch too.

[SE23Red]

The problem is the player with pace was left on the bench(Fontaine) so we were left with two central defenders who were static and kept lumping the ball forward continueusly! Very frustrating to watch too.

I'd agree with that. We have two CBs who have proved they can deal with the pace and movement of the forwards at this level and two that have not. We had to spend the first 45 minutes watching the two that have not do nothing to dispel that view.

Okay Carey is injured and is a huge loss, but the other capable defender was on the bench due to the never change a winning team philosophy. If GJ can take the plaudits for pairing JM and TV for the tall, static Blackpool attack then he has to take the blame for either not seeing or not acting on the fact the QPR attack offered a very different threat.

In the short term I hope GJ's selection policy is a little more flexible, but in the long term I think JM or TV will have to make way for a championship quality CB.

[robins72]

I'd agree with that. We have two CBs who have proved they can deal with the pace and movement of the forwards at this level and two that have not. We had to spend the first 45 minutes watching the two that have not do nothing to dispel that view.

Okay Carey is injured and is a huge loss, but the other capable defender was on the bench due to the never change a winning team philosophy. If GJ can take the plaudits for pairing JM and TV for the tall, static Blackpool attack then he has to take the blame for either not seeing or not acting on the fact the QPR attack offered a very different threat.

In the short term I hope GJ's selection policy is a little more flexible, but in the long term I think JM or TV will have to make way for a championship quality CB.

The thing that annoyed me was that after 10 minutes you could see that Mccombe and Vasko were struggling with Agyemangs pace so why didnt he take one of them off then instead of enduring a nightmare 45 minutes!! We could have easily been 4 nil down at half time and Gary really needs to think about changing tactics earlier in matches, rather than wait until half time.

[Henry]

Spot On and Keogh, whilst persona non grata, is definetly a better bet in the CCC than Vasko & McCombe.

Vasko, who kept Italys strikeforce in his back pocket, is definetly a better bet then Keogh, who struggled whilst on loan in League One.

Mccombe is a dffierent story though, but still perfer him for the strong and direct striker, then the headless chicken, Keogh.

[Hicksy-BCFC]

Vasko, who kept Italys strikeforce in his back pocket, is definetly a better bet then Keogh, who struggled whilst on loan in League One.

Mccombe is a dffierent story though, but still perfer him for the strong and direct striker, then the headless chicken, Keogh.

Agree with that, why I would have played Vasko and Fontaine.

Vasko whilst at times has struggled to come to terms with English football, but overall has experience and knowledge to draw on of international football of a high calibre.

McCombe doesn't, I rate the fella as a team man and commitment which is why I hate seeing him get torn apart like I have recently.

In regard to Fontaine not starting, surely there has to be another reason than just keeping the same back four vs Blackpool??

If that was the reason then it's ridiculous. QPR away and Blackpool home are not remotely the same attacking threat.

[Haster]

Now online:

Hoops We Get Done Again

u said about 4-4-2 doesnt work because we havent got 2 forwards that gel!! thats because we keep changing it and not giving them time to gel.

[REDOXO]

Bristol Boy's assessment of the match mirrored mine.

It was worrying that it took a full half of sheer `bloody murder` before Fontaine came on to releive the Mafaking that was our centre back duo.

The hammering that McCombe and Vasko took was compounded by our complete inability to win ANY second phase ball at either end and the complete failure to compete in the first half by the midfield duo (Elliott/LJ) combine this with how easily we lost the ball in attack after it had been humped forward to Adebola...We were a bit of a mess

However we lost we must move on and learn as a result of the result.

The substitution of GJ may herald the arrival of NC as a candidate to partner Elliott and the return of Carey could not come quickly enough...The biggest problem I would contend lay with our forwards...The missing Trundle would have given Rangers much more to think about than our less than lively pairing from yesterday, but with his dodgy mouth not withstanding the boy needs to really find some form for the run in

[Brum Red]

FAO Bristol Boy

I've been reading your report and ratings for a while now,and while they are well writen and make some good points,i would like to give my opinion (which,going by your post count,you have done in excess of 10,700 times).

While i would love to see us win every game,it will never happen.After every game that we do not win,people like yourself come on here and debate what went well,what we could have done better.That is the point of a forum.I agree with you that it would have made sense to play Fontaine to inject a bit of pace to help us counter the QPR strikers,and i would also like to see Carle in a central role.

What i have a problem with is the way you come across as a bit of a know it all.It is very easy to criticise from the stands.It is not as easy to put in a flawless performance on the pitch every week.I doubt very much whether if you met Vasko and McCombe they would appreciate you comparing them to the Chuckle Brothers(Although I think Vasko may not have heard of them).

We are performing above all expectations,generally playing good football,and i personally am extremely happy to be a City fan at the moment.We are in a league where every team has the capability to beat every other team.and i am glad that this result was an exception rather than the norm.The report reads as if we are a team of no hopers bottom of the league.We are not.

You give your suggestions at the end of the report.If you were manager and played that team,your own tactics,motivated them accordingly and saw them lose,what then?Would you accept that football is not an exact science,and that the opposition team is allowed to play well and win?Or would a City side managed by Bristol Boy romp to the Premier League undefeated,winning the Champions League next season?Because that is the impression that i get judging by your postings.

You also state in another post that we have "massive issues all over the field".I would suggest that as we were (abeit very briefly) top - yes TOP - i will say it again - TOP - of the Championship yesterday,we do not.A little tinkering perhaps,but that is all.I would say that you are one of the "doom and gloom merchants" that Gary Johnson has mentioned in his post match interview.

We may not have played well yesterday.Some players may have made mistakes.Gary Johnson may not have called every single decision perfectly.But this is life.It is not perfect.

We lost a game,but we are third in the Championship.Those F1 Ferraris are pretty quick,but where is the boot space?That Jennifer Lopez is alright but she could do with losing a bit of weight from her bum.That tower in Pisa looks ok,but its got a bit of a lean on it.....

I look forward to you dissecting my post

[redrebel]

FAO Bristol Boy

I've been reading your report and ratings for a while now,and while they are well writen and make some good points,i would like to give my opinion (which,going by your post count,you have done in excess of 10,700 times).

While i would love to see us win every game,it will never happen.After every game that we do not win,people like yourself come on here and debate what went well,what we could have done better.That is the point of a forum.I agree with you that it would have made sense to play Fontaine to inject a bit of pace to help us counter the QPR strikers,and i would also like to see Carle in a central role.

What i have a problem with is the way you come across as a bit of a know it all.It is very easy to criticise from the stands.It is not as easy to put in a flawless performance on the pitch every week.I doubt very much whether if you met Vasko and McCombe they would appreciate you comparing them to the Chuckle Brothers(Although I think Vasko may not have heard of them).

We are performing above all expectations,generally playing good football,and i personally am extremely happy to be a City fan at the moment.We are in a league where every team has the capability to beat every other team.and i am glad that this result was an exception rather than the norm.The report reads as if we are a team of no hopers bottom of the league.We are not.

You give your suggestions at the end of the report.If you were manager and played that team,your own tactics,motivated them accordingly and saw them lose,what then?Would you accept that football is not an exact science,and that the opposition team is allowed to play well and win?Or would a City side managed by Bristol Boy romp to the Premier League undefeated,winning the Champions League next season?Because that is the impression that i get judging by your postings.

You also state in another post that we have "massive issues all over the field".I would suggest that as we were (abeit very briefly) top - yes TOP - i will say it again - TOP - of the Championship yesterday,we do not.A little tinkering perhaps,but that is all.I would say that you are one of the "doom and gloom merchants" that Gary Johnson has mentioned in his post match interview.

We may not have played well yesterday.Some players may have made mistakes.Gary Johnson may not have called every single decision perfectly.But this is life.It is not perfect.

We lost a game,but we are third in the Championship.Those F1 Ferraris are pretty quick,but where is the boot space?That Jennifer Lopez is alright but she could do with losing a bit of weight from her bum.That tower in Pisa looks ok,but its got a bit of a lean on it.....

I look forward to you dissecting my post

I fail to understand the point that because we are third it somehow can mitigate such an abysmal performance as yesterday where in terms of selection, tactics ,desire and effort we were second rate.The logic of your argument that however poor we are we should accept this because we have previously done so well is a recipe fpr disaster.

[Brum Red]

I fail to understand the point that because we are third it somehow can mitigate such an abysmal performance as yesterday where in terms of selection, tactics ,desire and effort we were second rate.The logic of your argument that however poor we are we should accept this because we have previously done so well is a recipe fpr disaster.

We played poorly yesterday and came second.You can complain about the performance all you want.I am just happy that we are third in the table and had an off day.It happens.

[Hicksy-BCFC]

We played poorly yesterday and came second.You can complain about the performance all you want.I am just happy that we are third in the table and had an off day.It happens.

Yes an off-day happens.

However yesterday saw serious selection flaws which created some of the issues we faced.

I can live with off days, some of the other problems which were highlighted yesterday I find more worrying.

Be this if we were 3rd or 23rd.

[Brum Red]

Ok.I wont argue with your view on that.That wasnt my reason for posting.Hopefully back to winning ways next time out.

[Bristol Boy]

Vasko, who kept Italys strikeforce in his back pocket, is definetly a better bet then Keogh, who struggled whilst on loan in League One.

Mccombe is a dffierent story though, but still perfer him for the strong and direct striker, then the headless chicken, Keogh.

Different standard & style of football and Italy, with one up front, against three central defenders, when the ball is mostly on the deck, is vastly different from week in, week out, in the CCC.Keogh wasn't awarded young player of the year and offered a new contract because he was hopeless and, although he won't get it, he deserves a chance to see if he could do better than yesterday.The same might well apply to Noble Ribiero & Skuse

Agree with that, why I would have played Vasko and Fontaine.

Vasko whilst at times has struggled to come to terms with English football, but overall has experience and knowledge to draw on of international football of a high calibre.

McCombe doesn't, I rate the fella as a team man and commitment which is why I hate seeing him get torn apart like I have recently.

In regard to Fontaine not starting, surely there has to be another reason than just keeping the same back four vs Blackpool??

If that was the reason then it's ridiculous. QPR away and Blackpool home are not remotely the same attacking threat.

If you can see a reason then please let me know.

u said about 4-4-2 doesnt work because we havent got 2 forwards that gel!! thats because we keep changing it and not giving them time to gel.

Actually, IMHO, it's because we haven't got any forwards of the requisite quality and, with two up front, we revert to hoofball.

I fail to understand the point that because we are third it somehow can mitigate such an abysmal performance as yesterday where in terms of selection, tactics ,desire and effort we were second rate.The logic of your argument that however poor we are we should accept this because we have previously done so well is a recipe fpr disaster.

Spot On.

[samo]

However we end up lining up next week I do think it's a good thing for Carle to have been left at home by the Socceroos (sorry fella) and that the team will have a full week of training with Adebola rather than just 48 hours.

The comment in Bristol Boy's match report about hoping his (Big Dele's) arrival does not also signal the arrival of long ball is spot on, but I also think our tendancy to revert to that tactic yesterday may have been due to the lack of time the team have had to 'gel' with him. Watching footage of him playing for Coventry he does not tend simply the type of player who lives off the long ball 9although he can operate like this), but has the ability to do a bit more if given a variety of passes (long, short, high and on the floor).

This may have been a terrible perfrmance, but those who witnessed our second half against Blackpool could have believed a more dynamic team might have taken something from us. This gives us a week to alter things and prepare for a game against a team in awful form (Wednesday) and, as I mentioned at the top, the whole squad should be availalbe (and anyone listening in on World could hear just how much Carey was wanting to get back on the pitch a knock some heads together) allowing GJ to look over all his options.

It's going to feel like a long week, but I do think we'll bounce back. I'm not being a 'happy clapper' just looking for the silver lining.

[gamon]

FAO Bristol Boy

I've been reading your report and ratings for a while now,and while they are well writen and make some good points,i would like to give my opinion (which,going by your post count,you have done in excess of 10,700 times).

While i would love to see us win every game,it will never happen.After every game that we do not win,people like yourself come on here and debate what went well,what we could have done better.That is the point of a forum.I agree with you that it would have made sense to play Fontaine to inject a bit of pace to help us counter the QPR strikers,and i would also like to see Carle in a central role.

What i have a problem with is the way you come across as a bit of a know it all.It is very easy to criticise from the stands.It is not as easy to put in a flawless performance on the pitch every week.I doubt very much whether if you met Vasko and McCombe they would appreciate you comparing them to the Chuckle Brothers(Although I think Vasko may not have heard of them).

We are performing above all expectations,generally playing good football,and i personally am extremely happy to be a City fan at the moment.We are in a league where every team has the capability to beat every other team.and i am glad that this result was an exception rather than the norm.The report reads as if we are a team of no hopers bottom of the league.We are not.

You give your suggestions at the end of the report.If you were manager and played that team,your own tactics,motivated them accordingly and saw them lose,what then?Would you accept that football is not an exact science,and that the opposition team is allowed to play well and win?Or would a City side managed by Bristol Boy romp to the Premier League undefeated,winning the Champions League next season?Because that is the impression that i get judging by your postings.

You also state in another post that we have "massive issues all over the field".I would suggest that as we were (abeit very briefly) top - yes TOP - i will say it again - TOP - of the Championship yesterday,we do not.A little tinkering perhaps,but that is all.I would say that you are one of the "doom and gloom merchants" that Gary Johnson has mentioned in his post match interview.

We may not have played well yesterday.Some players may have made mistakes.Gary Johnson may not have called every single decision perfectly.But this is life.It is not perfect.

We lost a game,but we are third in the Championship.Those F1 Ferraris are pretty quick,but where is the boot space?That Jennifer Lopez is alright but she could do with losing a bit of weight from her bum.That tower in Pisa looks ok,but its got a bit of a lean on it.....

I look forward to you dissecting my post

Get over yourself.

If it weren't for people like Bristol Boy providing needed criticism then there would be no progress.

[Bristol Boy]

FAO Bristol Boy

I've been reading your report and ratings for a while now,and while they are well writen and make some good points,i would like to give my opinion (which,going by your post count,you have done in excess of 10,700 times).

Not as much lately and thank you for replying.

While i would love to see us win every game,it will never happen.After every game that we do not win,people like yourself come on here and debate what went well,what we could have done better.That is the point of a forum.I agree with you that it would have made sense to play Fontaine to inject a bit of pace to help us counter the QPR strikers,and i would also like to see Carle in a central role.

As you say, that's the point of a Forum and thanks for agreeing with those points.Having followed City for 42 years I have long since given up on winning every week and if a performance is terrific I am happy to review that and rate the players on that basis.Having been asked to do the R&R by the ST, I am on here, win, lose or draw.

What i have a problem with is the way you come across as a bit of a know it all.It is very easy to criticise from the stands.It is not as easy to put in a flawless performance on the pitch every week.I doubt very much whether if you met Vasko and McCombe they would appreciate you comparing them to the Chuckle Brothers(Although I think Vasko may not have heard of them).

I've met them both and that light hearted jibe was probably about a thousand times less than what they got from GJ.It was also a lot less than they got from behind the goal and it wasn't me booing or leaving early, although I was highly cheesed off.In terms of criticism, I'm more than happy to dicuss that face to face and what I saw yesterday was unacceptable, as was our performance against Palace.GJ agreed with that, however, he is the only one who can make changes.In terms of the R&R I review what I see.

We are performing above all expectations,generally playing good football,and i personally am extremely happy to be a City fan at the moment.We are in a league where every team has the capability to beat every other team.and i am glad that this result was an exception rather than the norm.The report reads as if we are a team of no hopers bottom of the league.We are not.

The review covered yesterdays game when we were dire.If we play brilliantly next week, I'll review that game on it's merits or if I'm reviewing the season to date, that'll reflect the entire thirty games.That seems to be the right way to do it.

You give your suggestions at the end of the report.If you were manager and played that team,your own tactics,motivated them accordingly and saw them lose,what then?Would you accept that football is not an exact science,and that the opposition team is allowed to play well and win?Or would a City side managed by Bristol Boy romp to the Premier League undefeated,winning the Champions League next season?Because that is the impression that i get judging by your postings.

Teams win, draw & lose and football isn't an exact science.I could have merely written that we were poor, had a bad day at the office and left it at that.However, week in, week out, that wouldn't make interesting reading, attract the website hits or provoke debate.As you ask, I would never play Nick Carle of the right of midfield and I wouldn't play two up top until we had a quality partnership.Unlike some people, I actually try to analyse what went wrong and offer suggestions for improvement.

Other reports may focus on just reporting what happened and not looking at why-I found those pretty boring if I've attended a game and the TV normally shows highlights, making those reports relatively redundant.Pundits in the media do the same thing and top clubs like Man Utd, Liverpool & Tottm face disection on a daily basis.

You also state in another post that we have "massive issues all over the field".I would suggest that as we were (abeit very briefly) top - yes TOP - i will say it again - TOP - of the Championship yesterday,we do not.A little tinkering perhaps,but that is all.I would say that you are one of the "doom and gloom merchants" that Gary Johnson has mentioned in his post match interview.

My comments relate to yesterdays game during which we were second best to a team lying in 18th place and who had been beaten by Cardiff a few days earlier when, some of their fans would tell you, they had a better team out.The fact that we were Top, Third or Fifteenth isn't relevant.What happens if we lose the next five games and end up in 9th or 10th place? Do we say, Well, things can't be that bad because "we were" or "we're still...." We were also poor against Palace and poor for half the game against Blackpool, picking up three points from nine.

My point is that needs to be addressed, wouldn't you agree?

Gary looks upon any differing opinion as negativity.It's not and that's his problam not mine, as is team selection & tactics.I've been quick enough to praise that on many occassions, so I have no problem criticising the team when it all goes wrong.

We may not have played well yesterday.Some players may have made mistakes.Gary Johnson may not have called every single decision perfectly.

All true

But this is life.It is not perfect.

I'm quite aware of that and all I've done is pointed out what went wrong, IMHO and some possible solutions-You're more than welcome to disagree, but you can't review one game or a perfrmance on the basis of what has happened previously or what may happen in the future

We lost a game,but we are third in the Championship.Those F1 Ferraris are pretty quick,but where is the boot space?That Jennifer Lopez is alright but she could do with losing a bit of weight from her bum.That tower in Pisa looks ok,but its got a bit of a lean on it.....

And we need to learn lessons, not avoid discussion on the basis that everything was OK before if we are to remain and improve on third.Mistakes were made, learn from them, eradicate them and move on.Looking at it the way in which you elude to, we'd never change anything.

I look forward to you dissecting my post.

Post dissected

[Bristol Boy]

However we end up lining up next week I do think it's a good thing for Carle to have been left at home by the Socceroos (sorry fella) and that the team will have a full week of training with Adebola rather than just 48 hours.

The comment in Bristol Boy's match report about hoping his (Big Dele's) arrival does not also signal the arrival of long ball is spot on, but I also think our tendancy to revert to that tactic yesterday may have been due to the lack of time the team have had to 'gel' with him. Watching footage of him playing for Coventry he does not tend simply the type of player who lives off the long ball 9although he can operate like this), but has the ability to do a bit more if given a variety of passes (long, short, high and on the floor).

This may have been a terrible perfrmance, but those who witnessed our second half against Blackpool could have believed a more dynamic team might have taken something from us. This gives us a week to alter things and prepare for a game against a team in awful form (Wednesday) and, as I mentioned at the top, the whole squad should be availalbe (and anyone listening in on World could hear just how much Carey was wanting to get back on the pitch a knock some heads together) allowing GJ to look over all his options.

It's going to feel like a long week, but I do think we'll bounce back. I'm not being a 'happy clapper' just looking for the silver lining.

Hopefully we'll bounce back and I don't understand why we went route one so often yesterday and after reverting to 4-4-2 at Palace.

The idea is simple, big Dele or Enoch gets up and flicks tha ball on to Byfield who outpaces the defence and tucks it away.The wingers get to the byeline and cut back balls to the far post for the big guy to power in and the smaller striker to get across the first defender.All good stuff, however, when the big guy doesn't get the flick on we need to win the second ball and that didn't happen yesterday or at Palace on nearly enough occassions.Byfield's not the quickest or that powerful so that theory tends to fall down a tad as well.

Neither did our wide players get to the byeline and cross balls enough and Nick Carle's role on the right wing saw him trying to move into central midfield, thus taking LJ's space and seeing us play in three quarters of the pitch.QPR utilised that space and isolated Orr by playing balls in behind him and in between both full backs and the centre halves for their first two goals.In fact, I think that LJ & NC collided in the build up to their second goal?

[samo]

Hopefully we'll bounce back and I don't understand why we went route one so often yesterday and after reverting to 4-4-2 at Palace.

The idea is simple, big Dele or Enoch gets up and flicks tha ball on to Byfield who outpaces the defence and tucks it away.The wingers get to the byeline and cut back balls to the far post for the big guy to power in and the smaller striker to get across the first defender.All good stuff, however, when the big guy doesn't get the flick on we need to win the second ball and that didn't happen yesterday or at Palace on nearly enough occassions.Byfield's not the quickest or that powerful so that theory tends to fall down a tad as well.

Neither did our wide players get to the byeline and cross balls enough and Nick Carle's role on the right wing saw him trying to move into central midfield, thus taking LJ's space and seeing us play in three quarters of the pitch.QPR utilised that space and isolated Orr by playing balls in behind him and in between both full backs and the centre halves for their first two goals.In fact, I think that LJ & NC collided in the build up to their second goal?

Would you suggest that a five-man central midfield (with a combination of Johnson, Elliot, Carle and Noble) flanked with McIndoe and Sproule with Adebola upfront might actually be better at breaking down teams? despite his key goals I think Byfield has really not made a case for a starting place (nor Trundle) and really should be moved back to the bench, from where his record and ability to 'affect the game' has been much more significant.

The fact Noble has seemingly moved back into first team contention (even replacing Johnson this week) suggests he is still seen as an option for GJ (when at one stage this had not seemed to be the case) and with Ipswich having beaten Wednesday this weekend playing with a 4-5-1 I'd be interested if we looked to try this against them.

[Nibor]

Going route one was one of the major concerns I had about signing a player like Adebola, the less excuse you give players with limited distribution skills like Orr and McCombe to hoof it the better.

I hope direct cack isn't going to be the norm not just because it's poor to watch but because it is playing to our weaknesses not our strengths and we always put in shit performances and lose when we try it.

We have no quick striker to play off a target man and our midfield is creative and attacking not the big and physical sorts to scrap after knock downs that a long ball side needs. It just doesn't suit us and should be avoided.

As for this myth that GJ doesn't make unforced changes to a winning side, it's not true. He has done this before and should have done yesterday, Fontaine and Sproule both should have started and that was my opinion before a ball was kicked, not in hindsight.

[samo]

Going route one was one of the major concerns I had about signing a player like Adebola, the less excuse you give players with limited distribution skills like Orr and McCombe to hoof it the better.

I hope direct cack isn't going to be the norm not just because it's poor to watch but because it is playing to our weaknesses not our strengths and we always put in shit performances and lose when we try it.

We have no quick striker to play off a target man and our midfield is creative and attacking not the big and physical sorts to scrap after knock downs that a long ball side needs. It just doesn't suit us and should be avoided.

As for this myth that GJ doesn't make unforced changes to a winning side, it's not true. He has done this before and should have done yesterday, Fontaine and Sproule both should have started and that was my opinion before a ball was kicked, not in hindsight.

In Adebola's first interview he was gushing about the type of passing football we play and although he does have the ability to play the long ball I don't believe that is why GJ brought him in.

I totally agree with you about certain players using a big man as an 'out' and this may at times have plus points (Blackpool at home a good example; I feel a player like Dele would have caused them no end of problems in the second half) but our most impressive and sucessful spell was when we refused to allow teams like Watford, Barnsley and Burnely to force us into a 'might v might' struggle and played football against them, getting valuable wins from it.

With teams like Wednesday, Scunny and Palace up next who play by a similar set of rules than those I've mentioned we need to remain true to the way of playing that has brought us ich rewards so far. Our strength is clearly in our midfield options and I'd argue that over the next few games we've gain very little from fielding more than one up top. Carle, Noble, Johnson, Elliot and (to a lesser extent) Skuse offer us a wealth of potetnial options here, all of which could be seen as far more positive than having a off-form front pair.

[Brum Red]

Good dissection Bristol Boy.

I agree with a lot of what you said,and you make your points well.One of my concerns was that we as fans tend to lose perspective when looking at one game in isolation.It is often said that you are only as good as your last game,but we must not be so quick to forget what we have already achieved,and the old adage that you don't become a bad player overnight.Yes,there are things to work on,but look at QPR - what a difference between the Cardiff game and our game.Hopefully you will be giving us a glowing review against Wednesday.

[Brum Red]

Get over yourself.

If it weren't for people like Bristol Boy providing needed criticism then there would be no progress.

We have progressed from bottom of League One to top of the Championship since Gary Johnson arrived.Our position was rightly criticised pior to his arrival.Look where we are now.I have seen immense progression in both our results and style of football.We have done so much in such a short space of time that i,personally,am going to keep the criticism to a minimum for now.As a supporter i am just going to try and support.

As for the "Get over yourself" i don't know what you mean

[Bristol Boy]

Would you suggest that a five-man central midfield (with a combination of Johnson, Elliot, Carle and Noble) flanked with McIndoe and Sproule with Adebola upfront might actually be better at breaking down teams? despite his key goals I think Byfield has really not made a case for a starting place (nor Trundle) and really should be moved back to the bench, from where his record and ability to 'affect the game' has been much more significant.

Agreed

The fact Noble has seemingly moved back into first team contention (even replacing Johnson this week) suggests he is still seen as an option for GJ (when at one stage this had not seemed to be the case) and with Ipswich having beaten Wednesday this weekend playing with a 4-5-1 I'd be interested if we looked to try this against them.

Amen to that........but I won't hold my breath!

Going route one was one of the major concerns I had about signing a player like Adebola, the less excuse you give players with limited distribution skills like Orr and McCombe to hoof it the better.

Agreed and I was disappointed in our midfield for not demanding the ball from them.

I hope direct cack isn't going to be the norm not just because it's poor to watch but because it is playing to our weaknesses not our strengths and we always put in shit performances and lose when we try it.

For some reason, 4-4-2 brings out the worse in us and for me, it's having the spare midfielder to hit when we're in possession that maks that system effective, ala our performance against Sheff Utd.

We have no quick striker to play off a target man and our midfield is creative and attacking not the big and physical sorts to scrap after knock downs that a long ball side needs. It just doesn't suit us and should be avoided.

I would still be looking for an emergency loan striker of that variety and we missed the boat in that dept.

As for this myth that GJ doesn't make unforced changes to a winning side, it's not true. He has done this before and should have done yesterday, Fontaine and Sproule both should have started and that was my opinion before a ball was kicked, not in hindsight.

Mine to and if I never see Nick Carle on the right flank again it'll be to soon.

Good dissection Bristol Boy.

I agree with a lot of what you said,and you make your points well.One of my concerns was that we as fans tend to lose perspective when looking at one game in isolation.It is often said that you are only as good as your last game,but we must not be so quick to forget what we have already achieved,and the old adage that you don't become a bad player overnight.Yes,there are things to work on,but look at QPR - what a difference between the Cardiff game and our game.Hopefully you will be giving us a glowing review against Wednesday.

Over the last three games we've played decently for 45 mins, scoring one goal and conceeding 5.That needs to be addressed.If you go back over the last six games, we've scored five goals, so it isn't difficult to see where the problem lies.

Nobody wants to see City win more than me however I can't deny the evidence of my own eyes and the last three performances over ninety minutes have been largely unacceptable.

Not time to panic, but certainly time to act.

Thanks for you reply.

[Geoff65]

I enjoy Ian's reviews and the honest point of view that he provides on the match - as someone who doesnt get to the matches they provide information and really having a go at him just for reporting what he sees is a bit off.

Having said that there was one concern I have about the report and it's the idea that:

1. Keogh is championship standard or better than the McCombe and Vasko when in fact he hasnt been tried at this level - (whose fault is that?) and

2. Apparent desire to push his claims for a central defensive position ahead of other youngsters who havent been given their chance yet.

Apart from that I enjoyed this week's report - keep up the good heart felt reporting.

[Bristol Boy]

I enjoy Ian's reviews and the honest point of view that he provides on the match - as someone who doesnt get to the matches they provide information and really having a go at him just for reporting what he sees is a bit off.

Having said that there was one concern I have about the report and it's the idea that:

1. Keogh is championship standard or better than the McCombe and Vasko when in fact he hasnt been tried at this level - (whose fault is that?) and

2. Apparent desire to push his claims for a central defensive position ahead of other youngsters who havent been given their chance yet.

Apart from that I enjoyed this week's report - keep up the good heart felt reporting.

I'm always up for contrary opinion providing it's well thought out.

In terms of Keogh, he's worth a try based on his performances last season particularly those against Middlesborough, however, I would have liked to see us sign an expereinced/quality, CCC defender like Bobby Hassell whose name was mentioned, even if on loan and I suppose a loan's still possible.That coupled with a pacey striker and our squad would have looked far stronger.

I'd also like to see Ribeiro given a chance at right back.

Thanks for the kind comments.

[bcfc_4_life]

Now online:

Hoops We Get Done Again

Well written up report i felt BristolBoy

Having not being able to attend the QPR game, it's good to read a well thought out match report.

You say there about dropping LJ, do you think thats a possibility vs sheff weds?