Live blog: Barnet v City

This live event has finished

Latest

  • Team News
  • Match Updates
  • Twitter Reaction
  • Full-time Report
  • Leave Your Comments

5:05pm

Apologies again for the delays today but there were problems with the mobile signal all afternoon.

5:04pm

Barnet 2 Bradford City 0

Wayward City’s promotion ambitions suffered a hefty setback with defeat at struggling Barnet this afternoon.
The visitors rattled off shot after shot - 21 in total - but failed to make any of them count and instead slipped to their second defeat in eight days.
The loss also dropped the Bantams one place to eighth – and out of the play-off positions.
City bossed the first half but – like the second at Morecambe on New Year’s Day – could not turn their control into a breakthrough. And they paid the price four minutes before the break.
James Hanson fired an early drive across goal, Gary Jones adopted a shoot-on-sight policy from his role behind the front two and Nahki Wells was just over with a shot on the turn.
Barnet had offered nothing at that point but then suddenly stole into the lead when lone striker Taiwo Atieno turned in Elliot Johnson’s low cross.
Phil Parkinson threw on Kyel Reid to liven City up for the second half and Wells almost levelled within two minutes.
But things went immediately from bad to worse as Barnet doubled their advantage, John Oster finishing off after good work from Andy Yiadom and Ricky Holmes on the edge of the City box.
City looked shaken up and Atieno nodded over before they could regain some composure.
Alan Connell came on as a third striker in a frantic bid to save the game. But when Hanson headed home Reid’s cross, the centre forward was judged to be offside.
City thought they should have had a penalty when Hanson was shoved and as the ball came back in the box, Connell missed a gilt-edged chance to score.

4:50pm

Make that 18 City shots off target ...

4:43pm

Now Turgott shoots wide, City's 15th attempt off target.

4:42pm

Hanson pushed over in box but nothing given. Ball comes straight back into the goalmouth and Connell puts it over bar. Should have been a penalty; should have been a goal.

4:40pm

Jones curls free-kick wide of right post. City gone to three at the back but no sign of a comeback on cards.

4:35pm

Hanson heads home from Reid cross - but the "goal" is ruled out for offside. Turgott coming on for Darby as Parkinson throws the dice for final time.

4:30pm

Reid has an ambitious shot from distance which Stack watches bounce wide. Sub then gets an earful from his manager.

4:29pm

City win second corner of game which flashes across Barnet goal. Only need the slightest of touches to pull one back but the ball passes harmlessly wide.

4:28pm

Jones kick nodded down by Atkinson, more shouts for hand ball against Barnet but referee Heywood unimpressed.

4:28pm

Atkinson nudged over to give City free-kick 30 yards out to right of goal.

4:26pm

Holmes exploits extra space to drive in from left and thump in a shot which Duke does well to parry at near post.

4:25pm

City gone three up front now as they chase the game.

4:24pm

Connell on for Ravenhill, 66min

4:23pm

Connell getting ready to come on.

4:22pm

Another signal problem but we're back just as Reid slices shot almost to the corner flag. No imminent sign of a City comeback.

4:14pm

City claiming hand ball as Jones shot blocked by sliding Barnet defender but nothing given.

4:13pm

Wells launches counter-attack which Stack half clears with unconvincing punch out. Darby helps loose ball back to Wells who cannot get over his half-volley.

4:11pm

Barnet well on top, Yiadom finds Oster on left and his cross headed over by Atieno. City lost the plot since going 2-0 down.

4:09pm

Barnet now on top and City rocking. Bees pressure forces a corner as game changes completely.

4:06pm

And Barnet make it 2-0 as day goes from bad to worse for City. Yiadom causes problems up the hill, Holmes holds ball up edge of box and lays sideways to OSTER to easily beat Duke.

4:04pm

Reid immediately fouled level with edge of Barnet penalty area. Good free-kick from Jones is headed out by Stephens in front of his keeper.

4:04pm

Reid immediately fouled level with edge of Barnet penalty area. Good free-kick from Jones is headed out by Stephens in front of his keeper.

4:03pm

Kyel Reid replaces Ritchie Jones for second half.

4:03pm

Apologies again for delays, mobile signal keeps going here.

Barnet 1-0 up with 41st minute goal from their first shot on target. Elliot Johnson drives low cross from left which ATIENO taps home against the run of play.

3:39pm

Hanson seizes on mistake by Iro to feed Wells, whose shot on the turn is only inches over. Closest so far from City.

3:38pm

Poor header from Gary Jones in front of goal fails to test Stack.

3:38pm

Edgar Davids getting very animated with Barnet team. Barnet fans getting animated with Davids' five-man midfield.

3:36pm

Dipping shot from Gary Jones is well saved by Stack diving to his right. Good effort from the City skipper.

3:35pm

Hanson has a go from 20 yards out but it's well over bar. City looking the brightest team so far.

3:31pm

Doyle long throw nodded out by Iro as far as edge of box where Darby has a decent pop, which flies into terrace.

3:27pm

Gary Jones shoved in back to win free-kick 30 yards out. Skipper takes it but fires straight into wall.

Barnet try to break but McArdle heads away any danger.

3:25pm

Phil Parkinson obliges the away fans with a wave as another City break cut short by a careless pass.

3:24pm

Good keeping by Duke at near post to claim Holmes cross as Barnet broke menacingly.

3:23pm

Wells again wastes good chance to create something from Hanson flick-on.

3:21pm

Ravenhill sends Wells away on right wing but his cross is poor and easily taken by keeper.

3:20pm

Duke hurried into conceding cheap throw-in midway inside the City half. Doyle deals with it again.

3:19pm

Gary Jones finds room to drive forward for shot but Stack gathers low down to his left.

3:19pm

Rithcie Jones caught in possession by Holmes but Doyle alert to danger to cut out passed aimed for Atieno.

3:14pm

Gary Jones has space for shot but drives into the terrace behind Barnet goal.

3:14pm

Jones corner cleared at near post. City still on attack through McArdle

3:13pm

City get first corner gifted to them by Stephens.

3:12pm

Atieno clever skill to get past Good into City box but Doyle makes important block at expense of corner. Fuller cross flicked across goal and wide by Byrne.

3:12pm

Wells flagged offside trying to break down right but it's been positive start from visitors.

3:09pm

Hanson having some early joy against the Barnet defence. Atkinson finding some room in midfield.

3:09pm

Sorry about the delay because of the poor signal. City kicking up the infamous slope first half and have first chance through James Hanson cross shot just wide from Ritchie Jones pass.

2:51pm

2:44pm

Apologies in advance but the Vodafone signal at Underhill is very poor.

2:37pm

2:36pm

City will be dusting off the voltage cherry/pink shirts this afternoon. For once and once only, they will also be wearing the same coloured socks!

2:31pm

Interesting to see that Darren Bent is back from hamstring injury and starting for Aston Villa v Ipswich this afternoon.

2:28pm

2:27pm

Edgar Davids is still injured for Barnet so the Dutchman will be on a watching brief this afternoon.

BARNET: Stack, Fuller, Stephens, Iro, Johnson, Yiadom, Oster, Holems, Weston, Byrne, Atieno. Subs: Kamdjo, Brown, Hyde, Barker, Holwijn, Thompson, Cowler.

2:04pm

Leading scorer Nahki Wells is back in from the start for this afternoon's trip to Barnet.

Wells replaces Zavon Hines, as he had done at half-time against Morecambe on New Year's Day.

With Curtis Good extending his loan from Newcastle until February 2, one Australian replaces another at left back. James Meredith did  not make the trip after feeling ill.

It is likely that City will persist with the diamond midfield with Ricky Ravenhill in front of the back four and Gary Jones playing furthest forward.

Carl McHugh returns to the bench after missing the last three games with a calf problem.

CITY: Duke; Darby, McArdle, Doyle, Good; Ravenhill, R Jones, Atkinson, G Jones (diamond we think); Wells, Hanson. Subs: Connell, Turgott, Reid, Hines, Brown, McHugh, McLaughlin

1:47pm

1:47pm

Comments (71)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

3:13pm Sat 5 Jan 13

Freddy says...

* Pleased to see Wells back from illness.
*
With Reid--Connell - and Hines on The Bench. There is an interest Strike Force available --if needed ?.
*
* Pleased to see Wells back from illness. * With Reid--Connell - and Hines on The Bench. There is an interest Strike Force available --if needed ?. * Freddy

3:50pm Sat 5 Jan 13

340stopper says...

goal to Barnet on 40 mins !
goal to Barnet on 40 mins ! 340stopper

4:20pm Sat 5 Jan 13

bahamianbantam says...

2-0 down against 3rd from bottom - 4 points from last four games - sorry ain't good enough and way off even play-offs. Whose kidding who?
Midfield couldn't score to save their lives neither can Hanson.
Season of consolidation now but they would be daft enough to win Tuesday.
Can't use tiredness as excuse - maybe Shawn is right! Amazing when PP was making noises about new contract.
2-0 down against 3rd from bottom - 4 points from last four games - sorry ain't good enough and way off even play-offs. Whose kidding who? Midfield couldn't score to save their lives neither can Hanson. Season of consolidation now but they would be daft enough to win Tuesday. Can't use tiredness as excuse - maybe Shawn is right! Amazing when PP was making noises about new contract. bahamianbantam

4:49pm Sat 5 Jan 13

cookie_brighton says...

what is happening.....commen
tary is as if city are playing shyte........plenty of chances but not putting them away.....shots going wide and over the bar, to make it worse......Villa have gone ahead 2 - 1
CTID
what is happening.....commen tary is as if city are playing shyte........plenty of chances but not putting them away.....shots going wide and over the bar, to make it worse......Villa have gone ahead 2 - 1 CTID cookie_brighton

4:50pm Sat 5 Jan 13

Bantam76 says...

We need a serious bout of shooting practice - need to be hitting the target and making their 'keeper work! All these shots off target mean nothing! I know it's a numbers game, but it helps if they're on target!
We need a serious bout of shooting practice - need to be hitting the target and making their 'keeper work! All these shots off target mean nothing! I know it's a numbers game, but it helps if they're on target! Bantam76

4:51pm Sat 5 Jan 13

BigFigure says...

bahamianbantam wrote:
2-0 down against 3rd from bottom - 4 points from last four games - sorry ain't good enough and way off even play-offs. Whose kidding who?
Midfield couldn't score to save their lives neither can Hanson.
Season of consolidation now but they would be daft enough to win Tuesday.
Can't use tiredness as excuse - maybe Shawn is right! Amazing when PP was making noises about new contract.
Way off play offs? Only on goal difference.....long way to go this season
[quote][p][bold]bahamianbantam[/bold] wrote: 2-0 down against 3rd from bottom - 4 points from last four games - sorry ain't good enough and way off even play-offs. Whose kidding who? Midfield couldn't score to save their lives neither can Hanson. Season of consolidation now but they would be daft enough to win Tuesday. Can't use tiredness as excuse - maybe Shawn is right! Amazing when PP was making noises about new contract.[/p][/quote]Way off play offs? Only on goal difference.....long way to go this season BigFigure

4:53pm Sat 5 Jan 13

tyker2 says...

shocking, shocking. Away form is no where near good enough
shocking, shocking. Away form is no where near good enough tyker2

4:55pm Sat 5 Jan 13

bahamianbantam says...

Should have got at least 10 points in last four games - instead a paltry 4 points mainly through a late Connell super goal against Accrington.
You won't win promotion if you can't score!
Apart from that victory what a terrible December/January!
As I said be daft enough to beat Villa or lose 5-0!
Should have got at least 10 points in last four games - instead a paltry 4 points mainly through a late Connell super goal against Accrington. You won't win promotion if you can't score! Apart from that victory what a terrible December/January! As I said be daft enough to beat Villa or lose 5-0! bahamianbantam

4:57pm Sat 5 Jan 13

340stopper says...

We loose, stats say it all ;
BCFC shots on goal - 23
goals scored - nil
opposition shots on goal - 5
goals scored - 0
We loose, stats say it all ; BCFC shots on goal - 23 goals scored - nil opposition shots on goal - 5 goals scored - 0 340stopper

4:59pm Sat 5 Jan 13

Pablo says...

I am at a loss to understand PP's thinking in his team selection. We gave the initiative to Barnet with a negative looking starting line up.

I turned off the radio in disgust.

When everyone was clamouring for the Board to sign up PP a few weeks ago, I argued against this on the basis that we'd won nothing yet and could be headed for mid table by the end of February, if we had a string of bad results.

Seems I was wrong. At this rate we'll be mid table by end January.

If you can't beat Morecambe and get turned over by the likes of Barnet, due to going into those games with unambitious line ups, you just don't deserve to go up.

How is PP going to explain this shambles?
I am at a loss to understand PP's thinking in his team selection. We gave the initiative to Barnet with a negative looking starting line up. I turned off the radio in disgust. When everyone was clamouring for the Board to sign up PP a few weeks ago, I argued against this on the basis that we'd won nothing yet and could be headed for mid table by the end of February, if we had a string of bad results. Seems I was wrong. At this rate we'll be mid table by end January. If you can't beat Morecambe and get turned over by the likes of Barnet, due to going into those games with unambitious line ups, you just don't deserve to go up. How is PP going to explain this shambles? Pablo

5:02pm Sat 5 Jan 13

tingleyb says...

perhaps the players are beginning to believe their own hype?. Don't care about stats - its goals that win games. We need fresh blood (and quickly) if we are to regain the initiative in the promotion race. It is this, not the cup, that matters most to true fans CTID
perhaps the players are beginning to believe their own hype?. Don't care about stats - its goals that win games. We need fresh blood (and quickly) if we are to regain the initiative in the promotion race. It is this, not the cup, that matters most to true fans CTID tingleyb

5:13pm Sat 5 Jan 13

Rambo says...

Im confused at PPs tactics in the last few games - other teams are worried about our wingers but we've played without them and with no width at all. It didn't work against Rochdale but did pretty well in the 25 odd games before that.

Hanson is useless with a set-up like today, he hardly had any crosses and had to work with long balls and his back to goal. Then it gets people on his back.

My worry is also tiredness setting in, and the ease at which a lot of goals have been going in over the last 6 weeks or so.
Im confused at PPs tactics in the last few games - other teams are worried about our wingers but we've played without them and with no width at all. It didn't work against Rochdale but did pretty well in the 25 odd games before that. Hanson is useless with a set-up like today, he hardly had any crosses and had to work with long balls and his back to goal. Then it gets people on his back. My worry is also tiredness setting in, and the ease at which a lot of goals have been going in over the last 6 weeks or so. Rambo

5:17pm Sat 5 Jan 13

yorkiebantam says...

People on here make me laugh. If we were not creating chances I might start to feel despondent. Every team has a bad patch in a season and this is ours, new blood and a few alternatives and we will come again. Thank the lord not all City supporters are as negative as the majority I read on here. CTID.
People on here make me laugh. If we were not creating chances I might start to feel despondent. Every team has a bad patch in a season and this is ours, new blood and a few alternatives and we will come again. Thank the lord not all City supporters are as negative as the majority I read on here. CTID. yorkiebantam

5:33pm Sat 5 Jan 13

KnightMcCall says...

yorkiebantam wrote:
People on here make me laugh. If we were not creating chances I might start to feel despondent. Every team has a bad patch in a season and this is ours, new blood and a few alternatives and we will come again. Thank the lord not all City supporters are as negative as the majority I read on here. CTID.
Thank you for showing that not every city fan is a negative; whinging defeatist fool. A couple of poor and depressing results and some want wholesale changes and a raft of scapegoats. This team will bounce back.
[quote][p][bold]yorkiebantam[/bold] wrote: People on here make me laugh. If we were not creating chances I might start to feel despondent. Every team has a bad patch in a season and this is ours, new blood and a few alternatives and we will come again. Thank the lord not all City supporters are as negative as the majority I read on here. CTID.[/p][/quote]Thank you for showing that not every city fan is a negative; whinging defeatist fool. A couple of poor and depressing results and some want wholesale changes and a raft of scapegoats. This team will bounce back. KnightMcCall

5:37pm Sat 5 Jan 13

Cityman23 says...

We've seen this kind of thing before. Teams with a 'big' match on the following Tuesday/Wednesday can fall prey to teams they should be a certainty to beat. No-one wants to pick up an injury and miss out in what could be one of the biggest games in their careers. Okay to 'us' fans PROMOTION to the 'third' division is key, but to players a possible semi-final appearance from individuals who may not play at the top level has got to figure highly in their estimations. So Iam disappointed but not totally surprised at this result.

Yes, losing to Barnet is pretty bad, but it's out of the way now and Tuesday looms LARGE!! The result in this match will likely determine whether we have a 'chance' in the second leg or not.

Next Saturday's home game is lready shaping up as a 'must win' and 'PP' needs to make two/three shrewd aquisitions during the 'window' to give us more 'depth.'
We've seen this kind of thing before. Teams with a 'big' match on the following Tuesday/Wednesday can fall prey to teams they should be a certainty to beat. No-one wants to pick up an injury and miss out in what could be one of the biggest games in their careers. Okay to 'us' fans PROMOTION to the 'third' division is key, but to players a possible semi-final appearance from individuals who may not play at the top level has got to figure highly in their estimations. So Iam disappointed but not totally surprised at this result. Yes, losing to Barnet is pretty bad, but it's out of the way now and Tuesday looms LARGE!! The result in this match will likely determine whether we have a 'chance' in the second leg or not. Next Saturday's home game is lready shaping up as a 'must win' and 'PP' needs to make two/three shrewd aquisitions during the 'window' to give us more 'depth.' Cityman23

5:38pm Sat 5 Jan 13

balbrigganfc says...

As sensationally predicted, Bar net could easily storm away with all three points, if City did not give them respect and take them seriously.

In a world that is consistently inconsistent, nobody makes predictions like me, Nobody!

Predicting City to lose, win and draw more games this season. It's the way I predict em!

Come on you Bantams, CTID
As sensationally predicted, Bar net could easily storm away with all three points, if City did not give them respect and take them seriously. In a world that is consistently inconsistent, nobody makes predictions like me, Nobody! Predicting City to lose, win and draw more games this season. It's the way I predict em! Come on you Bantams, CTID balbrigganfc

6:00pm Sat 5 Jan 13

lawsonio123 says...

It is more than a couple of games it as be ongoing for awhile now It pains me to say it but recent Results are no way good enough. I still believe in Mr parkinson but that faith is getting a bit of a hammering now. Why is our Centre Forward employed in our own Penalty arrear keep him up the field.Are our Defenders not up to it. Attack as always been the way out of Div 2 Hanson scored goals last year but cannot do so in his own half.Hopefully things will change but time is running out and runs like ours are hard to stop.COME ON CITY
It is more than a couple of games it as be ongoing for awhile now It pains me to say it but recent Results are no way good enough. I still believe in Mr parkinson but that faith is getting a bit of a hammering now. Why is our Centre Forward employed in our own Penalty arrear keep him up the field.Are our Defenders not up to it. Attack as always been the way out of Div 2 Hanson scored goals last year but cannot do so in his own half.Hopefully things will change but time is running out and runs like ours are hard to stop.COME ON CITY lawsonio123

6:10pm Sat 5 Jan 13

lonniejockstrap says...

Pablo wrote:
I am at a loss to understand PP's thinking in his team selection. We gave the initiative to Barnet with a negative looking starting line up.

I turned off the radio in disgust.

When everyone was clamouring for the Board to sign up PP a few weeks ago, I argued against this on the basis that we'd won nothing yet and could be headed for mid table by the end of February, if we had a string of bad results.

Seems I was wrong. At this rate we'll be mid table by end January.

If you can't beat Morecambe and get turned over by the likes of Barnet, due to going into those games with unambitious line ups, you just don't deserve to go up.

How is PP going to explain this shambles?
So you think we shouldn't extend PP's contract unless he actually wins something? interesting! You want us on the Manager merry-go-round again it appears and this, in spite of having made such a massive improvement on the field and raised so much money through Cup games.
Ah, but of course, you don't think he has proved he can be a good manager yet do you? Your post appears very immature in that you are basically saying PP should be sacked on the basis of recent results and disregarding everything that has gone before. And this from a so called supporter who can't ever be bothered to listen to how the Team, he implies to care about so much, is doing on the radio.

To me you just come across as someone who just takes the opportunity to criticise and do the Club as much harm from your persistent negative criticisms and negativity in general as possible.

Whether or not you get beat by Barnet or can't beat Morecambe is irrelevant. We must have been beating somebody because of the position we are in. Where we are at the end of the season is what matters of course and we are starting 2013 from a decent position.

I didn't hear much from you at all when we were doing so well in the league and Cup, but I'm sure you won't be able to keep off here whilst ever there is something to moan about.

And you turned the radio off before the game even started because of a 'negative looking line up' -hope non of the players gave up as easy as you- how many shots did this negative line have? Oh I forgot all your criticism is based on a game you couldn't be bothered listening to!
[quote][p][bold]Pablo[/bold] wrote: I am at a loss to understand PP's thinking in his team selection. We gave the initiative to Barnet with a negative looking starting line up. I turned off the radio in disgust. When everyone was clamouring for the Board to sign up PP a few weeks ago, I argued against this on the basis that we'd won nothing yet and could be headed for mid table by the end of February, if we had a string of bad results. Seems I was wrong. At this rate we'll be mid table by end January. If you can't beat Morecambe and get turned over by the likes of Barnet, due to going into those games with unambitious line ups, you just don't deserve to go up. How is PP going to explain this shambles?[/p][/quote]So you think we shouldn't extend PP's contract unless he actually wins something? interesting! You want us on the Manager merry-go-round again it appears and this, in spite of having made such a massive improvement on the field and raised so much money through Cup games. Ah, but of course, you don't think he has proved he can be a good manager yet do you? Your post appears very immature in that you are basically saying PP should be sacked on the basis of recent results and disregarding everything that has gone before. And this from a so called supporter who can't ever be bothered to listen to how the Team, he implies to care about so much, is doing on the radio. To me you just come across as someone who just takes the opportunity to criticise and do the Club as much harm from your persistent negative criticisms and negativity in general as possible. Whether or not you get beat by Barnet or can't beat Morecambe is irrelevant. We must have been beating somebody because of the position we are in. Where we are at the end of the season is what matters of course and we are starting 2013 from a decent position. I didn't hear much from you at all when we were doing so well in the league and Cup, but I'm sure you won't be able to keep off here whilst ever there is something to moan about. And you turned the radio off before the game even started because of a 'negative looking line up' -hope non of the players gave up as easy as you- how many shots did this negative line have? Oh I forgot all your criticism is based on a game you couldn't be bothered listening to! lonniejockstrap

6:26pm Sat 5 Jan 13

Victor Clayton says...

imo we are too negative, don't stretch teams enough and don't give the striker's enough of a chance . maybe understandable against the top teams, (especially when jh had a bit of form going). but against the lower ones? and the shame is we are a cracking side.
imo we are too negative, don't stretch teams enough and don't give the striker's enough of a chance . maybe understandable against the top teams, (especially when jh had a bit of form going). but against the lower ones? and the shame is we are a cracking side. Victor Clayton

6:27pm Sat 5 Jan 13

KnightMcCall says...

lonniejockstrap wrote:
Pablo wrote:
I am at a loss to understand PP's thinking in his team selection. We gave the initiative to Barnet with a negative looking starting line up.

I turned off the radio in disgust.

When everyone was clamouring for the Board to sign up PP a few weeks ago, I argued against this on the basis that we'd won nothing yet and could be headed for mid table by the end of February, if we had a string of bad results.

Seems I was wrong. At this rate we'll be mid table by end January.

If you can't beat Morecambe and get turned over by the likes of Barnet, due to going into those games with unambitious line ups, you just don't deserve to go up.

How is PP going to explain this shambles?
So you think we shouldn't extend PP's contract unless he actually wins something? interesting! You want us on the Manager merry-go-round again it appears and this, in spite of having made such a massive improvement on the field and raised so much money through Cup games.
Ah, but of course, you don't think he has proved he can be a good manager yet do you? Your post appears very immature in that you are basically saying PP should be sacked on the basis of recent results and disregarding everything that has gone before. And this from a so called supporter who can't ever be bothered to listen to how the Team, he implies to care about so much, is doing on the radio.

To me you just come across as someone who just takes the opportunity to criticise and do the Club as much harm from your persistent negative criticisms and negativity in general as possible.

Whether or not you get beat by Barnet or can't beat Morecambe is irrelevant. We must have been beating somebody because of the position we are in. Where we are at the end of the season is what matters of course and we are starting 2013 from a decent position.

I didn't hear much from you at all when we were doing so well in the league and Cup, but I'm sure you won't be able to keep off here whilst ever there is something to moan about.

And you turned the radio off before the game even started because of a 'negative looking line up' -hope non of the players gave up as easy as you- how many shots did this negative line have? Oh I forgot all your criticism is based on a game you couldn't be bothered listening to!
Well said. good post from cityman too.
[quote][p][bold]lonniejockstrap[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Pablo[/bold] wrote: I am at a loss to understand PP's thinking in his team selection. We gave the initiative to Barnet with a negative looking starting line up. I turned off the radio in disgust. When everyone was clamouring for the Board to sign up PP a few weeks ago, I argued against this on the basis that we'd won nothing yet and could be headed for mid table by the end of February, if we had a string of bad results. Seems I was wrong. At this rate we'll be mid table by end January. If you can't beat Morecambe and get turned over by the likes of Barnet, due to going into those games with unambitious line ups, you just don't deserve to go up. How is PP going to explain this shambles?[/p][/quote]So you think we shouldn't extend PP's contract unless he actually wins something? interesting! You want us on the Manager merry-go-round again it appears and this, in spite of having made such a massive improvement on the field and raised so much money through Cup games. Ah, but of course, you don't think he has proved he can be a good manager yet do you? Your post appears very immature in that you are basically saying PP should be sacked on the basis of recent results and disregarding everything that has gone before. And this from a so called supporter who can't ever be bothered to listen to how the Team, he implies to care about so much, is doing on the radio. To me you just come across as someone who just takes the opportunity to criticise and do the Club as much harm from your persistent negative criticisms and negativity in general as possible. Whether or not you get beat by Barnet or can't beat Morecambe is irrelevant. We must have been beating somebody because of the position we are in. Where we are at the end of the season is what matters of course and we are starting 2013 from a decent position. I didn't hear much from you at all when we were doing so well in the league and Cup, but I'm sure you won't be able to keep off here whilst ever there is something to moan about. And you turned the radio off before the game even started because of a 'negative looking line up' -hope non of the players gave up as easy as you- how many shots did this negative line have? Oh I forgot all your criticism is based on a game you couldn't be bothered listening to![/p][/quote]Well said. good post from cityman too. KnightMcCall

6:29pm Sat 5 Jan 13

KnightMcCall says...

balbrigganfc wrote:
As sensationally predicted, Bar net could easily storm away with all three points, if City did not give them respect and take them seriously.

In a world that is consistently inconsistent, nobody makes predictions like me, Nobody!

Predicting City to lose, win and draw more games this season. It's the way I predict em!

Come on you Bantams, CTID
Can you post tonights lotto numbers please; that should perk us all up.
[quote][p][bold]balbrigganfc[/bold] wrote: As sensationally predicted, Bar net could easily storm away with all three points, if City did not give them respect and take them seriously. In a world that is consistently inconsistent, nobody makes predictions like me, Nobody! Predicting City to lose, win and draw more games this season. It's the way I predict em! Come on you Bantams, CTID[/p][/quote]Can you post tonights lotto numbers please; that should perk us all up. KnightMcCall

6:32pm Sat 5 Jan 13

Pablo says...

lonniejockstrap wrote:
Pablo wrote:
I am at a loss to understand PP's thinking in his team selection. We gave the initiative to Barnet with a negative looking starting line up.

I turned off the radio in disgust.

When everyone was clamouring for the Board to sign up PP a few weeks ago, I argued against this on the basis that we'd won nothing yet and could be headed for mid table by the end of February, if we had a string of bad results.

Seems I was wrong. At this rate we'll be mid table by end January.

If you can't beat Morecambe and get turned over by the likes of Barnet, due to going into those games with unambitious line ups, you just don't deserve to go up.

How is PP going to explain this shambles?
So you think we shouldn't extend PP's contract unless he actually wins something? interesting! You want us on the Manager merry-go-round again it appears and this, in spite of having made such a massive improvement on the field and raised so much money through Cup games.
Ah, but of course, you don't think he has proved he can be a good manager yet do you? Your post appears very immature in that you are basically saying PP should be sacked on the basis of recent results and disregarding everything that has gone before. And this from a so called supporter who can't ever be bothered to listen to how the Team, he implies to care about so much, is doing on the radio.

To me you just come across as someone who just takes the opportunity to criticise and do the Club as much harm from your persistent negative criticisms and negativity in general as possible.

Whether or not you get beat by Barnet or can't beat Morecambe is irrelevant. We must have been beating somebody because of the position we are in. Where we are at the end of the season is what matters of course and we are starting 2013 from a decent position.

I didn't hear much from you at all when we were doing so well in the league and Cup, but I'm sure you won't be able to keep off here whilst ever there is something to moan about.

And you turned the radio off before the game even started because of a 'negative looking line up' -hope non of the players gave up as easy as you- how many shots did this negative line have? Oh I forgot all your criticism is based on a game you couldn't be bothered listening to!
Lonnie, please advise where I stated that PP should be sacked.

For your information, I've posted after virtually every match - win or lose. Not like you to get your facts wrong, lonnie!

If the manager names another negative looking formation, given our position and the quality of the oppositon, then I'm not wasting my time listening to the inevitable outcome. Better things to do- unlike you of course, lonnie.

I feel sorry for those poor souls who travelled down to watch a match that we approached with such a lack of ambition.
[quote][p][bold]lonniejockstrap[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Pablo[/bold] wrote: I am at a loss to understand PP's thinking in his team selection. We gave the initiative to Barnet with a negative looking starting line up. I turned off the radio in disgust. When everyone was clamouring for the Board to sign up PP a few weeks ago, I argued against this on the basis that we'd won nothing yet and could be headed for mid table by the end of February, if we had a string of bad results. Seems I was wrong. At this rate we'll be mid table by end January. If you can't beat Morecambe and get turned over by the likes of Barnet, due to going into those games with unambitious line ups, you just don't deserve to go up. How is PP going to explain this shambles?[/p][/quote]So you think we shouldn't extend PP's contract unless he actually wins something? interesting! You want us on the Manager merry-go-round again it appears and this, in spite of having made such a massive improvement on the field and raised so much money through Cup games. Ah, but of course, you don't think he has proved he can be a good manager yet do you? Your post appears very immature in that you are basically saying PP should be sacked on the basis of recent results and disregarding everything that has gone before. And this from a so called supporter who can't ever be bothered to listen to how the Team, he implies to care about so much, is doing on the radio. To me you just come across as someone who just takes the opportunity to criticise and do the Club as much harm from your persistent negative criticisms and negativity in general as possible. Whether or not you get beat by Barnet or can't beat Morecambe is irrelevant. We must have been beating somebody because of the position we are in. Where we are at the end of the season is what matters of course and we are starting 2013 from a decent position. I didn't hear much from you at all when we were doing so well in the league and Cup, but I'm sure you won't be able to keep off here whilst ever there is something to moan about. And you turned the radio off before the game even started because of a 'negative looking line up' -hope non of the players gave up as easy as you- how many shots did this negative line have? Oh I forgot all your criticism is based on a game you couldn't be bothered listening to![/p][/quote]Lonnie, please advise where I stated that PP should be sacked. For your information, I've posted after virtually every match - win or lose. Not like you to get your facts wrong, lonnie! If the manager names another negative looking formation, given our position and the quality of the oppositon, then I'm not wasting my time listening to the inevitable outcome. Better things to do- unlike you of course, lonnie. I feel sorry for those poor souls who travelled down to watch a match that we approached with such a lack of ambition. Pablo

6:35pm Sat 5 Jan 13

doneBD4 says...

Our quest for 50 point and saftey.
We can forget a playoff spot.

The wheels have started to come off.

PP f**ked it up again today. And he want a new contract, fat chance!!!
Our quest for 50 point and saftey. We can forget a playoff spot. The wheels have started to come off. PP f**ked it up again today. And he want a new contract, fat chance!!! doneBD4

6:46pm Sat 5 Jan 13

Pablo says...

doneBD4 wrote:
Our quest for 50 point and saftey.
We can forget a playoff spot.

The wheels have started to come off.

PP f**ked it up again today. And he want a new contract, fat chance!!!
Care to comment on this post, lonnie and knightmccall?

It seems to accurately sum up PP's tactical nous today.
[quote][p][bold]doneBD4[/bold] wrote: Our quest for 50 point and saftey. We can forget a playoff spot. The wheels have started to come off. PP f**ked it up again today. And he want a new contract, fat chance!!![/p][/quote]Care to comment on this post, lonnie and knightmccall? It seems to accurately sum up PP's tactical nous today. Pablo

6:52pm Sat 5 Jan 13

BigFigure says...

Just a thought....is 40 shots in the last two games an indication of a negative approach? Or just crap finishing?
Just a thought....is 40 shots in the last two games an indication of a negative approach? Or just crap finishing? BigFigure

7:02pm Sat 5 Jan 13

fantam says...

He obviously is not a competent manager othrwise he would not have kept faith with him. Hanson hasn't a clue, could not score if he had an open goal,never takes a penalty, that's how deadl he is.J ust get rid of him and open up new possibilities of forwards,He;s never done ANYHING and NEVER will,
He obviously is not a competent manager othrwise he would not have kept faith with him. Hanson hasn't a clue, could not score if he had an open goal,never takes a penalty, that's how deadl he is.J ust get rid of him and open up new possibilities of forwards,He;s never done ANYHING and NEVER will, fantam

7:32pm Sat 5 Jan 13

Rambo says...

BigFigure wrote:
Just a thought....is 40 shots in the last two games an indication of a negative approach? Or just crap finishing?
When you use that as a stat, crap finishing. But we are not testing keepers enough - every time its wide or over. Its not like we're playing against possessed goalkeepers.

The lack of goals from the strikers at the moment, as well as the lack of goals from midfield convinces me we need to strengthen those areas quickly. Someone on Facebook mentioned McCalls second season where we completely crumbled from about March when we were in 3rd and totally ran out of steam and had no plan B.
I don't think we have the quality at the moment to go for the auto places but I fear a bad month and we could slip out of the play-offs, as packed as it is.
[quote][p][bold]BigFigure[/bold] wrote: Just a thought....is 40 shots in the last two games an indication of a negative approach? Or just crap finishing?[/p][/quote]When you use that as a stat, crap finishing. But we are not testing keepers enough - every time its wide or over. Its not like we're playing against possessed goalkeepers. The lack of goals from the strikers at the moment, as well as the lack of goals from midfield convinces me we need to strengthen those areas quickly. Someone on Facebook mentioned McCalls second season where we completely crumbled from about March when we were in 3rd and totally ran out of steam and had no plan B. I don't think we have the quality at the moment to go for the auto places but I fear a bad month and we could slip out of the play-offs, as packed as it is. Rambo

8:10pm Sat 5 Jan 13

gary turner says...

did'nt Barnet beat Gillingham a week or so ago, this is just a lean period, it will pass and we will be better than ever. we do need to get shots on target though with a player getting through to pick up the dregs. We will come good soon, I hope, ready for the play-offs.
did'nt Barnet beat Gillingham a week or so ago, this is just a lean period, it will pass and we will be better than ever. we do need to get shots on target though with a player getting through to pick up the dregs. We will come good soon, I hope, ready for the play-offs. gary turner

8:26pm Sat 5 Jan 13

Freddy says...

* I must agree that I thought Players would not want an injury today. For obvious reasons--were they pulling out of tackles etc. Not showing enough aggression. I wonder--but can not prove it!.( Shame we don't have more Players--Those that did not give max. effort today--could have been dropped!.)
*
To try and take some positives. 21 Shots at the Target--is encouraging--albeit that not enough were on target. ( More Training Perhaps??)
*
Looking at the League Table --the difference of 3 points is self evident at the top from a play off slot to automatic promotion. But somehow --we are not a game in hand any more--to Clubs above City.
*
Today's game was another CUP FINAL--Barnet are fighting for their lives --AGAIN!. Teams that are fighting for survival, will play out of their skins to win a match. I feel --City--should have been totally aware, of what would occur today.
*
Looking forward to Tuesday now---Onwards and Upwards as a certain Chairman used to say??!!.
*
Waiting for the depressive comment from "Sean of Richmond"- next??!!.
*
*
* I must agree that I thought Players would not want an injury today. For obvious reasons--were they pulling out of tackles etc. Not showing enough aggression. I wonder--but can not prove it!.( Shame we don't have more Players--Those that did not give max. effort today--could have been dropped!.) * To try and take some positives. 21 Shots at the Target--is encouraging--albeit that not enough were on target. ( More Training Perhaps??) * Looking at the League Table --the difference of 3 points is self evident at the top from a play off slot to automatic promotion. But somehow --we are not a game in hand any more--to Clubs above City. * Today's game was another CUP FINAL--Barnet are fighting for their lives --AGAIN!. Teams that are fighting for survival, will play out of their skins to win a match. I feel --City--should have been totally aware, of what would occur today. * Looking forward to Tuesday now---Onwards and Upwards as a certain Chairman used to say??!!. * Waiting for the depressive comment from "Sean of Richmond"- next??!!. * * Freddy

8:34pm Sat 5 Jan 13

Birky_Neil says...

340stopper wrote:
We loose, stats say it all ;
BCFC shots on goal - 23
goals scored - nil
opposition shots on goal - 5
goals scored - 0
we cannot always expect Wells to get the goals. Hanson ha what a joke. If he is good for the team defending then play him as a defender! Lack of goals elsewhere is costing us to especially in Midfield. Hanson are you a goal scorer or just a flick on merchant? Guiseley maybe you should be hunting one of your former players down!
[quote][p][bold]340stopper[/bold] wrote: We loose, stats say it all ; BCFC shots on goal - 23 goals scored - nil opposition shots on goal - 5 goals scored - 0[/p][/quote]we cannot always expect Wells to get the goals. Hanson ha what a joke. If he is good for the team defending then play him as a defender! Lack of goals elsewhere is costing us to especially in Midfield. Hanson are you a goal scorer or just a flick on merchant? Guiseley maybe you should be hunting one of your former players down! Birky_Neil

9:18pm Sat 5 Jan 13

cullboy says...

City win no one posts, loose your all on!
City win no one posts, loose your all on! cullboy

10:05pm Sat 5 Jan 13

macca1969 says...

All teams go through a lean spell and hopefully this is ours. Barnet hammered Gillingham only a week or so ago so were always a dangerous side to play. In top if that we have had major injuries and illness in the team and the big cup distraction. A few players back and a couple if new recruits and we will come again,personally I still think we will go up automatically but whatever happens this team and management have earned our support so lets get behind them!!
All teams go through a lean spell and hopefully this is ours. Barnet hammered Gillingham only a week or so ago so were always a dangerous side to play. In top if that we have had major injuries and illness in the team and the big cup distraction. A few players back and a couple if new recruits and we will come again,personally I still think we will go up automatically but whatever happens this team and management have earned our support so lets get behind them!! macca1969

10:24pm Sat 5 Jan 13

bcfc1903 says...

Disappointing...we had the chances to at least get a point and looking at the stats we should probably have beaten Barnet. We can't afford to dwell on this result...luckily we have Villa at home on Tuesday with absolutely no pressure on our players but a ton of pressure on Villa players. You look at this game in the cold light of day and if BCFC can't beat Barnet then what chance BCFC getting a draw or better against a premiership club is nil.....but it's a funny old game as that result will have absolutely no bearing on the game on Tuesday night.

**
We shout with pride...we'll never hide...Claret and Amber.
Disappointing...we had the chances to at least get a point and looking at the stats we should probably have beaten Barnet. We can't afford to dwell on this result...luckily we have Villa at home on Tuesday with absolutely no pressure on our players but a ton of pressure on Villa players. You look at this game in the cold light of day and if BCFC can't beat Barnet then what chance BCFC getting a draw or better against a premiership club is nil.....but it's a funny old game as that result will have absolutely no bearing on the game on Tuesday night. ** We shout with pride...we'll never hide...Claret and Amber. bcfc1903

10:35pm Sat 5 Jan 13

doubledigiter says...

cludedfor the last two games - meaning we have been without out two best central midfielders playing together. Doyle is more than capeable of playing anywhere on the park - centre back included - but when you take him out of the centre of the park - and away from Jones as a partner - then it's going to change the dynamic of the team. Jones has subsequently played further up the pitch in the last 2 games due to this forced reshuffle of the team and has not been as effective understandably. Today's game, whilst hugely frustrating, just seemed to sum up to me that at the moment we are going through one of those frustrating patches that all teams go through. I am certain that if the manager could have 2 fully fit 1st choice centre backs , fully fit 1st choice left back 2 first choice fully fit wingers and centre mids and 2 fully fit 1st choice strikers then he would play 4-4-2 home and away every week and probably come away with far more wins than losses or defeats. BUT we dont have those choices. McCardle needs a break but can't have one, Mchugh is still injured, Meredith is still ill, Doyle is having to play centre back, Hines and Reid are still not 100% fit and firing after being out for a while and Wells the same after his recent illness. Yet in the last 2 games we have still dominated the games but just not taken our numerous chances. That itself is a real concern of course but that will happen to every team from day 1 of the season to the final day. We are going through that patch now but it will change. We have dropped out of the play off zone for the first time ALL season. BUT we are still only 3 points off an aoutomatic promotion spot with TWENTY games to go. Another SIXTY points to play for! Lets stay positive and stay behind the players and management all the way to the end of the season!
cludedfor the last two games - meaning we have been without out two best central midfielders playing together. Doyle is more than capeable of playing anywhere on the park - centre back included - but when you take him out of the centre of the park - and away from Jones as a partner - then it's going to change the dynamic of the team. Jones has subsequently played further up the pitch in the last 2 games due to this forced reshuffle of the team and has not been as effective understandably. Today's game, whilst hugely frustrating, just seemed to sum up to me that at the moment we are going through one of those frustrating patches that all teams go through. I am certain that if the manager could have 2 fully fit 1st choice centre backs [McCardle and McHugh], fully fit 1st choice left back [Meredith] 2 first choice fully fit wingers and centre mids [ Reid, Hines/Atko, Jones and Doyle] and 2 fully fit 1st choice strikers [ Hanson and Wells] then he would play 4-4-2 home and away every week and probably come away with far more wins than losses or defeats. BUT we dont have those choices. McCardle needs a break but can't have one, Mchugh is still injured, Meredith is still ill, Doyle is having to play centre back, Hines and Reid are still not 100% fit and firing after being out for a while and Wells the same after his recent illness. Yet in the last 2 games we have still dominated the games but just not taken our numerous chances. That itself is a real concern of course but that will happen to every team from day 1 of the season to the final day. We are going through that patch now but it will change. We have dropped out of the play off zone for the first time ALL season. BUT we are still only 3 points off an aoutomatic promotion spot with TWENTY games to go. Another SIXTY points to play for! Lets stay positive and stay behind the players and management all the way to the end of the season! doubledigiter

10:55pm Sat 5 Jan 13

340stopper says...

BigFigure wrote:
Just a thought....is 40 shots in the last two games an indication of a negative approach? Or just crap finishing?
It's a shame Hannah is not ten inches taller so he could learn to defend corners and free kicks and then maybe just maybe he would be allowed to try and convert all the chances we are making and wasting.Oh i forgot he would have to refrain from tweeting also i would imagine.
[quote][p][bold]BigFigure[/bold] wrote: Just a thought....is 40 shots in the last two games an indication of a negative approach? Or just crap finishing?[/p][/quote]It's a shame Hannah is not ten inches taller so he could learn to defend corners and free kicks and then maybe just maybe he would be allowed to try and convert all the chances we are making and wasting.Oh i forgot he would have to refrain from tweeting also i would imagine. 340stopper

11:07pm Sat 5 Jan 13

shoesmaker4 says...

very good post and very well put doubled digiter although i think we will need a few more additions to the squad to get us over the line and into leauge one , im also really impresed with the team now and good look to the lads on tuesday for another ground breaking result lets get behind this team and parki come on city
very good post and very well put doubled digiter although i think we will need a few more additions to the squad to get us over the line and into leauge one , im also really impresed with the team now and good look to the lads on tuesday for another ground breaking result lets get behind this team and parki come on city shoesmaker4

2:25am Sun 6 Jan 13

Bradford1903 says...

Easily the most disappointing result of the season for me, if u want to get promotion then you have got to be beating the likes of Barnet.

Can't help feeling that the formation was a contributory factor; it looked like a set up that was designed to nullify the opposition, which perhaps would've been understandable againgst one of our promotion rivals, but not against a team battling to stay in the division.

We've better players than Barnet, so let's go with a straight 4-4-2, with Reid on the left and let them worry about us.

Nearly every week we are ahead of the opposition on goal attempts, but struggle to turn our dominance into goals and wins.

I think Hanson is a key member of the squad, but you've got to be honest, and say that his goalscoring touch has completely deserted him in the last 3 months.

We need to bring someone in who at the very least can challenge him for a place in that target man role.

While I think we are having a pretty good season, part of me is torn. On one hand we are challenging for promotion, after a terrible couple of years, although I would argue we should've been doing every season in this division. On the other hand this team is more than capable of finishing top 3, and the play offs are a lottery at the best of times, particularly in this division where there will be little difference between the sides; you might as well toss a coin.

If we want to get promotion we have to finish in the top 3, be more clinical, and have got to be beating the likes of Barnet.
Easily the most disappointing result of the season for me, if u want to get promotion then you have got to be beating the likes of Barnet. Can't help feeling that the formation was a contributory factor; it looked like a set up that was designed to nullify the opposition, which perhaps would've been understandable againgst one of our promotion rivals, but not against a team battling to stay in the division. We've better players than Barnet, so let's go with a straight 4-4-2, with Reid on the left and let them worry about us. Nearly every week we are ahead of the opposition on goal attempts, but struggle to turn our dominance into goals and wins. I think Hanson is a key member of the squad, but you've got to be honest, and say that his goalscoring touch has completely deserted him in the last 3 months. We need to bring someone in who at the very least can challenge him for a place in that target man role. While I think we are having a pretty good season, part of me is torn. On one hand we are challenging for promotion, after a terrible couple of years, although I would argue we should've been doing every season in this division. On the other hand this team is more than capable of finishing top 3, and the play offs are a lottery at the best of times, particularly in this division where there will be little difference between the sides; you might as well toss a coin. If we want to get promotion we have to finish in the top 3, be more clinical, and have got to be beating the likes of Barnet. Bradford1903

3:19am Sun 6 Jan 13

lonniejockstrap says...

Pablo wrote:
lonniejockstrap wrote:
Pablo wrote:
I am at a loss to understand PP's thinking in his team selection. We gave the initiative to Barnet with a negative looking starting line up.

I turned off the radio in disgust.

When everyone was clamouring for the Board to sign up PP a few weeks ago, I argued against this on the basis that we'd won nothing yet and could be headed for mid table by the end of February, if we had a string of bad results.

Seems I was wrong. At this rate we'll be mid table by end January.

If you can't beat Morecambe and get turned over by the likes of Barnet, due to going into those games with unambitious line ups, you just don't deserve to go up.

How is PP going to explain this shambles?
So you think we shouldn't extend PP's contract unless he actually wins something? interesting! You want us on the Manager merry-go-round again it appears and this, in spite of having made such a massive improvement on the field and raised so much money through Cup games.
Ah, but of course, you don't think he has proved he can be a good manager yet do you? Your post appears very immature in that you are basically saying PP should be sacked on the basis of recent results and disregarding everything that has gone before. And this from a so called supporter who can't ever be bothered to listen to how the Team, he implies to care about so much, is doing on the radio.

To me you just come across as someone who just takes the opportunity to criticise and do the Club as much harm from your persistent negative criticisms and negativity in general as possible.

Whether or not you get beat by Barnet or can't beat Morecambe is irrelevant. We must have been beating somebody because of the position we are in. Where we are at the end of the season is what matters of course and we are starting 2013 from a decent position.

I didn't hear much from you at all when we were doing so well in the league and Cup, but I'm sure you won't be able to keep off here whilst ever there is something to moan about.

And you turned the radio off before the game even started because of a 'negative looking line up' -hope non of the players gave up as easy as you- how many shots did this negative line have? Oh I forgot all your criticism is based on a game you couldn't be bothered listening to!
Lonnie, please advise where I stated that PP should be sacked.

For your information, I've posted after virtually every match - win or lose. Not like you to get your facts wrong, lonnie!

If the manager names another negative looking formation, given our position and the quality of the oppositon, then I'm not wasting my time listening to the inevitable outcome. Better things to do- unlike you of course, lonnie.

I feel sorry for those poor souls who travelled down to watch a match that we approached with such a lack of ambition.
Didn't say you stated PP should be sacked, why do you suggest I did? You are suggesting PP should not be offered a new contract by the board. sooooo, if the board take your advice what is the outcome? think about it! - are you unable to connect the dots together? Anyway, you were so wrong about your opinions on Will Atkinson what makes you think anyone gives two hoots about your opposition to giving PP another contract?

Why am I not surprised that you say you have better things to do than listen to the radio commentary on how the team you pretend to support is doing, but you don't -apparently- have better things to do with your time than spending it posting negative criticism of that same team and manager.

You of course have no way of knowing how ambitious the approach to the game was because you wasn't even prepared to listen to the game on the radio!

If Barnet should have been such a walk-over as you seem to be implying -in your 1st post- how come Gillingham and Burton lost to them and Exeter only managed a draw with them during the last few weeks? Maybe you had better things to do with your time than to give any consideration to Barnet's recent form?

“A critic is someone who never actually goes to the battle, yet who afterwards comes out shooting the wounded”

Tyne Daly
[quote][p][bold]Pablo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lonniejockstrap[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Pablo[/bold] wrote: I am at a loss to understand PP's thinking in his team selection. We gave the initiative to Barnet with a negative looking starting line up. I turned off the radio in disgust. When everyone was clamouring for the Board to sign up PP a few weeks ago, I argued against this on the basis that we'd won nothing yet and could be headed for mid table by the end of February, if we had a string of bad results. Seems I was wrong. At this rate we'll be mid table by end January. If you can't beat Morecambe and get turned over by the likes of Barnet, due to going into those games with unambitious line ups, you just don't deserve to go up. How is PP going to explain this shambles?[/p][/quote]So you think we shouldn't extend PP's contract unless he actually wins something? interesting! You want us on the Manager merry-go-round again it appears and this, in spite of having made such a massive improvement on the field and raised so much money through Cup games. Ah, but of course, you don't think he has proved he can be a good manager yet do you? Your post appears very immature in that you are basically saying PP should be sacked on the basis of recent results and disregarding everything that has gone before. And this from a so called supporter who can't ever be bothered to listen to how the Team, he implies to care about so much, is doing on the radio. To me you just come across as someone who just takes the opportunity to criticise and do the Club as much harm from your persistent negative criticisms and negativity in general as possible. Whether or not you get beat by Barnet or can't beat Morecambe is irrelevant. We must have been beating somebody because of the position we are in. Where we are at the end of the season is what matters of course and we are starting 2013 from a decent position. I didn't hear much from you at all when we were doing so well in the league and Cup, but I'm sure you won't be able to keep off here whilst ever there is something to moan about. And you turned the radio off before the game even started because of a 'negative looking line up' -hope non of the players gave up as easy as you- how many shots did this negative line have? Oh I forgot all your criticism is based on a game you couldn't be bothered listening to![/p][/quote]Lonnie, please advise where I stated that PP should be sacked. For your information, I've posted after virtually every match - win or lose. Not like you to get your facts wrong, lonnie! If the manager names another negative looking formation, given our position and the quality of the oppositon, then I'm not wasting my time listening to the inevitable outcome. Better things to do- unlike you of course, lonnie. I feel sorry for those poor souls who travelled down to watch a match that we approached with such a lack of ambition.[/p][/quote]Didn't say you stated PP should be sacked, why do you suggest I did? You are suggesting PP should not be offered a new contract by the board. sooooo, if the board take your advice what is the outcome? think about it! - are you unable to connect the dots together? Anyway, you were so wrong about your opinions on Will Atkinson what makes you think anyone gives two hoots about your opposition to giving PP another contract? Why am I not surprised that you say you have better things to do than listen to the radio commentary on how the team you pretend to support is doing, but you don't -apparently- have better things to do with your time than spending it posting negative criticism of that same team and manager. You of course have no way of knowing how ambitious the approach to the game was because you wasn't even prepared to listen to the game on the radio! If Barnet should have been such a walk-over as you seem to be implying -in your 1st post- how come Gillingham and Burton lost to them and Exeter only managed a draw with them during the last few weeks? Maybe you had better things to do with your time than to give any consideration to Barnet's recent form? “A critic is someone who never actually goes to the battle, yet who afterwards comes out shooting the wounded” Tyne Daly lonniejockstrap

6:22am Sun 6 Jan 13

tyker2 says...

I think there are some very informed opinions on this game. I would just add that all the shots in the world mean nothing unless the onion bag is hit regularly.

Are so many chances being created or are these long speculative shots being easily saved or simply missing the target. If chances are not being created then I worry for the immediate future

I note that a lot of the clubs in this division are already adding players to their squads; we seem to be behind the race at present
I think there are some very informed opinions on this game. I would just add that all the shots in the world mean nothing unless the onion bag is hit regularly. Are so many chances being created or are these long speculative shots being easily saved or simply missing the target. If chances are not being created then I worry for the immediate future I note that a lot of the clubs in this division are already adding players to their squads; we seem to be behind the race at present tyker2

8:07am Sun 6 Jan 13

bahamianbantam says...

In order to get to the Play Offs we probably need at least 75 points - auto promotion probably 82. We have just won TWO away games this season - we certainly need a run of a dozen games unbeaten.
Unfortunately we have a midfield that can't score and a defence that is now leaky. Added to negative tactics and a terrible shot to on target ratio we need consistency.
Posters here quite rightly try to be positive.but the facts speak against any serious challenge. Yet I will be cheering soon come Tuesday. PP might just get it right
In order to get to the Play Offs we probably need at least 75 points - auto promotion probably 82. We have just won TWO away games this season - we certainly need a run of a dozen games unbeaten. Unfortunately we have a midfield that can't score and a defence that is now leaky. Added to negative tactics and a terrible shot to on target ratio we need consistency. Posters here quite rightly try to be positive.but the facts speak against any serious challenge. Yet I will be cheering soon come Tuesday. PP might just get it right bahamianbantam

8:23am Sun 6 Jan 13

Birky_Neil says...

tyker2 wrote:
I think there are some very informed opinions on this game. I would just add that all the shots in the world mean nothing unless the onion bag is hit regularly.

Are so many chances being created or are these long speculative shots being easily saved or simply missing the target. If chances are not being created then I worry for the immediate future

I note that a lot of the clubs in this division are already adding players to their squads; we seem to be behind the race at present
I totally agree with you there. Keep seeing additions to other league 2 clubs all the time but we have not really made any. I know we have got the young lads on loan but they are barely out of their school uniforms and not got enough experience in my eyes. Half of these young kids that go on Loan end up being released by the clubs and they struggle to get a team to play for. Only because they are from a prem club does not mean they will be amazing in league two!
Also agree with somebody on here that we should at least get somebody in to give Hanson some competition as he knows he is gonna be picked week in week out and ATM he is not coming up with the goods.
[quote][p][bold]tyker2[/bold] wrote: I think there are some very informed opinions on this game. I would just add that all the shots in the world mean nothing unless the onion bag is hit regularly. Are so many chances being created or are these long speculative shots being easily saved or simply missing the target. If chances are not being created then I worry for the immediate future I note that a lot of the clubs in this division are already adding players to their squads; we seem to be behind the race at present[/p][/quote]I totally agree with you there. Keep seeing additions to other league 2 clubs all the time but we have not really made any. I know we have got the young lads on loan but they are barely out of their school uniforms and not got enough experience in my eyes. Half of these young kids that go on Loan end up being released by the clubs and they struggle to get a team to play for. Only because they are from a prem club does not mean they will be amazing in league two! Also agree with somebody on here that we should at least get somebody in to give Hanson some competition as he knows he is gonna be picked week in week out and ATM he is not coming up with the goods. Birky_Neil

10:10am Sun 6 Jan 13

COLATS says...

lonniejockstrap wrote:
Pablo wrote:
I am at a loss to understand PP's thinking in his team selection. We gave the initiative to Barnet with a negative looking starting line up.

I turned off the radio in disgust.

When everyone was clamouring for the Board to sign up PP a few weeks ago, I argued against this on the basis that we'd won nothing yet and could be headed for mid table by the end of February, if we had a string of bad results.

Seems I was wrong. At this rate we'll be mid table by end January.

If you can't beat Morecambe and get turned over by the likes of Barnet, due to going into those games with unambitious line ups, you just don't deserve to go up.

How is PP going to explain this shambles?
So you think we shouldn't extend PP's contract unless he actually wins something? interesting! You want us on the Manager merry-go-round again it appears and this, in spite of having made such a massive improvement on the field and raised so much money through Cup games.
Ah, but of course, you don't think he has proved he can be a good manager yet do you? Your post appears very immature in that you are basically saying PP should be sacked on the basis of recent results and disregarding everything that has gone before. And this from a so called supporter who can't ever be bothered to listen to how the Team, he implies to care about so much, is doing on the radio.

To me you just come across as someone who just takes the opportunity to criticise and do the Club as much harm from your persistent negative criticisms and negativity in general as possible.

Whether or not you get beat by Barnet or can't beat Morecambe is irrelevant. We must have been beating somebody because of the position we are in. Where we are at the end of the season is what matters of course and we are starting 2013 from a decent position.

I didn't hear much from you at all when we were doing so well in the league and Cup, but I'm sure you won't be able to keep off here whilst ever there is something to moan about.

And you turned the radio off before the game even started because of a 'negative looking line up' -hope non of the players gave up as easy as you- how many shots did this negative line have? Oh I forgot all your criticism is based on a game you couldn't be bothered listening to!
Nice one, wot a pleblo? We will bounce back. Just wish he,d get Doyle back in midfield.
[quote][p][bold]lonniejockstrap[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Pablo[/bold] wrote: I am at a loss to understand PP's thinking in his team selection. We gave the initiative to Barnet with a negative looking starting line up. I turned off the radio in disgust. When everyone was clamouring for the Board to sign up PP a few weeks ago, I argued against this on the basis that we'd won nothing yet and could be headed for mid table by the end of February, if we had a string of bad results. Seems I was wrong. At this rate we'll be mid table by end January. If you can't beat Morecambe and get turned over by the likes of Barnet, due to going into those games with unambitious line ups, you just don't deserve to go up. How is PP going to explain this shambles?[/p][/quote]So you think we shouldn't extend PP's contract unless he actually wins something? interesting! You want us on the Manager merry-go-round again it appears and this, in spite of having made such a massive improvement on the field and raised so much money through Cup games. Ah, but of course, you don't think he has proved he can be a good manager yet do you? Your post appears very immature in that you are basically saying PP should be sacked on the basis of recent results and disregarding everything that has gone before. And this from a so called supporter who can't ever be bothered to listen to how the Team, he implies to care about so much, is doing on the radio. To me you just come across as someone who just takes the opportunity to criticise and do the Club as much harm from your persistent negative criticisms and negativity in general as possible. Whether or not you get beat by Barnet or can't beat Morecambe is irrelevant. We must have been beating somebody because of the position we are in. Where we are at the end of the season is what matters of course and we are starting 2013 from a decent position. I didn't hear much from you at all when we were doing so well in the league and Cup, but I'm sure you won't be able to keep off here whilst ever there is something to moan about. And you turned the radio off before the game even started because of a 'negative looking line up' -hope non of the players gave up as easy as you- how many shots did this negative line have? Oh I forgot all your criticism is based on a game you couldn't be bothered listening to![/p][/quote]Nice one, wot a pleblo? We will bounce back. Just wish he,d get Doyle back in midfield. COLATS

10:23am Sun 6 Jan 13

BCFC1234 says...

Congratulations Mr Lawn on yesterdays heroics.
Congratulations Mr Lawn on yesterdays heroics. BCFC1234

10:26am Sun 6 Jan 13

Hearts Bantam says...

Watching the game yesterday it was clear from the outset the PP didn't want to lose the game and the set up reflected that. It was disappointing as Barnet certainly looked shorn of confidence and in the first half and to be fair we should have had the quality to make their goalie warm his hands ...or indeed get Bianca Gascoigne to write something down in her notebook to say City had done something. But we didn't and paid the price with a breakaway goal.
The other thing that this system highlighted was that with no width our forwards and midfield had nothing to run on to. Nobody and I mean nobody consistently got to the byline or anywhere near it to deliver a ball for us to attack. Yeah we can all blame Hanson but I sure as hell wouldn't want to be him if we are expecting him to contribute effectively by lumping balls at him 20 to 30 yards away with his back to goal marked by two mahooosive CHs. He won his share but the point being even when he did you cannot expect the fella to hit anyone when under pressure all the time. Give us width and something for and our midfielders to attack facing forward!
Watching the game yesterday it was clear from the outset the PP didn't want to lose the game and the set up reflected that. It was disappointing as Barnet certainly looked shorn of confidence and in the first half and to be fair we should have had the quality to make their goalie warm his hands ...or indeed get Bianca Gascoigne to write something down in her notebook to say City had done something. But we didn't and paid the price with a breakaway goal. The other thing that this system highlighted was that with no width our forwards and midfield had nothing to run on to. Nobody and I mean nobody consistently got to the byline or anywhere near it to deliver a ball for us to attack. Yeah we can all blame Hanson but I sure as hell wouldn't want to be him if we are expecting him to contribute effectively by lumping balls at him 20 to 30 yards away with his back to goal marked by two mahooosive CHs. He won his share but the point being even when he did you cannot expect the fella to hit anyone when under pressure all the time. Give us width and something for and our midfielders to attack facing forward! Hearts Bantam

10:35am Sun 6 Jan 13

Rambo says...

bahamianbantam wrote:
In order to get to the Play Offs we probably need at least 75 points - auto promotion probably 82. We have just won TWO away games this season - we certainly need a run of a dozen games unbeaten.
Unfortunately we have a midfield that can't score and a defence that is now leaky. Added to negative tactics and a terrible shot to on target ratio we need consistency.
Posters here quite rightly try to be positive.but the facts speak against any serious challenge. Yet I will be cheering soon come Tuesday. PP might just get it right
Its actually 3 but no, I pretty much agree with all that.

Too many games are put down as a 'bad day at the office' - rubbish. Rotherham was. But people are using it every time we fail to win. It also puts more pressure on the home results and we really should be killing games off if we want to be up there. The last 4 away have been Bristol, Southend, Morecambe and Barnet. All were winnable from the positions we were in but we choked in every one.

I've also pointed out my concerns about the lack of midfield goals and the defence over the last 6 weeks - the goals that have been going in have been a big worry, in December we conceded 3, 4, 4, 2, and a poor one against Stanley. Many of those were preventable.

Thing is I've seen enough football to realise if you don't take advantage you will lose out. Our away form has been poor but teams around us haven't been doing too well either which has kept us in it. But we have to do it for ourselves. We've 20 games left. Soon it will be 15, then 10 then we'll be in the home stretch. We HAVE to win/kill off these away games, it comes down to that.

I hope we don't collapse completely like McCalls second season when we were 3rd in March then lost 9 in 10 or something. That still lingers in the mind.
[quote][p][bold]bahamianbantam[/bold] wrote: In order to get to the Play Offs we probably need at least 75 points - auto promotion probably 82. We have just won TWO away games this season - we certainly need a run of a dozen games unbeaten. Unfortunately we have a midfield that can't score and a defence that is now leaky. Added to negative tactics and a terrible shot to on target ratio we need consistency. Posters here quite rightly try to be positive.but the facts speak against any serious challenge. Yet I will be cheering soon come Tuesday. PP might just get it right[/p][/quote]Its actually 3 but no, I pretty much agree with all that. Too many games are put down as a 'bad day at the office' - rubbish. Rotherham was. But people are using it every time we fail to win. It also puts more pressure on the home results and we really should be killing games off if we want to be up there. The last 4 away have been Bristol, Southend, Morecambe and Barnet. All were winnable from the positions we were in but we choked in every one. I've also pointed out my concerns about the lack of midfield goals and the defence over the last 6 weeks - the goals that have been going in have been a big worry, in December we conceded 3, 4, 4, 2, and a poor one against Stanley. Many of those were preventable. Thing is I've seen enough football to realise if you don't take advantage you will lose out. Our away form has been poor but teams around us haven't been doing too well either which has kept us in it. But we have to do it for ourselves. We've 20 games left. Soon it will be 15, then 10 then we'll be in the home stretch. We HAVE to win/kill off these away games, it comes down to that. I hope we don't collapse completely like McCalls second season when we were 3rd in March then lost 9 in 10 or something. That still lingers in the mind. Rambo

10:35am Sun 6 Jan 13

BCFC1234 says...

Congratulations Mr Lawn on yesterdays heroics from all at Bradford Council. May I suggest to get off your ego trip, concentrate on your own business and not that of the councils.
Congratulations Mr Lawn on yesterdays heroics from all at Bradford Council. May I suggest to get off your ego trip, concentrate on your own business and not that of the councils. BCFC1234

10:56am Sun 6 Jan 13

dannbradfc says...

lonniejockstrap wrote:
Pablo wrote:
I am at a loss to understand PP's thinking in his team selection. We gave the initiative to Barnet with a negative looking starting line up.

I turned off the radio in disgust.

When everyone was clamouring for the Board to sign up PP a few weeks ago, I argued against this on the basis that we'd won nothing yet and could be headed for mid table by the end of February, if we had a string of bad results.

Seems I was wrong. At this rate we'll be mid table by end January.

If you can't beat Morecambe and get turned over by the likes of Barnet, due to going into those games with unambitious line ups, you just don't deserve to go up.

How is PP going to explain this shambles?
So you think we shouldn't extend PP's contract unless he actually wins something? interesting! You want us on the Manager merry-go-round again it appears and this, in spite of having made such a massive improvement on the field and raised so much money through Cup games.
Ah, but of course, you don't think he has proved he can be a good manager yet do you? Your post appears very immature in that you are basically saying PP should be sacked on the basis of recent results and disregarding everything that has gone before. And this from a so called supporter who can't ever be bothered to listen to how the Team, he implies to care about so much, is doing on the radio.

To me you just come across as someone who just takes the opportunity to criticise and do the Club as much harm from your persistent negative criticisms and negativity in general as possible.

Whether or not you get beat by Barnet or can't beat Morecambe is irrelevant. We must have been beating somebody because of the position we are in. Where we are at the end of the season is what matters of course and we are starting 2013 from a decent position.

I didn't hear much from you at all when we were doing so well in the league and Cup, but I'm sure you won't be able to keep off here whilst ever there is something to moan about.

And you turned the radio off before the game even started because of a 'negative looking line up' -hope non of the players gave up as easy as you- how many shots did this negative line have? Oh I forgot all your criticism is based on a game you couldn't be bothered listening to!
Very funny and also very hypocritical that LONNIE.....

Don't you also remember commenting on how you also switched off the radio prior to a game when you heard that Syers wasn't playing. Well i do. You also said it was too negative......

does that mean that all your criticisms of Pablo above apply to yourself??
[quote][p][bold]lonniejockstrap[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Pablo[/bold] wrote: I am at a loss to understand PP's thinking in his team selection. We gave the initiative to Barnet with a negative looking starting line up. I turned off the radio in disgust. When everyone was clamouring for the Board to sign up PP a few weeks ago, I argued against this on the basis that we'd won nothing yet and could be headed for mid table by the end of February, if we had a string of bad results. Seems I was wrong. At this rate we'll be mid table by end January. If you can't beat Morecambe and get turned over by the likes of Barnet, due to going into those games with unambitious line ups, you just don't deserve to go up. How is PP going to explain this shambles?[/p][/quote]So you think we shouldn't extend PP's contract unless he actually wins something? interesting! You want us on the Manager merry-go-round again it appears and this, in spite of having made such a massive improvement on the field and raised so much money through Cup games. Ah, but of course, you don't think he has proved he can be a good manager yet do you? Your post appears very immature in that you are basically saying PP should be sacked on the basis of recent results and disregarding everything that has gone before. And this from a so called supporter who can't ever be bothered to listen to how the Team, he implies to care about so much, is doing on the radio. To me you just come across as someone who just takes the opportunity to criticise and do the Club as much harm from your persistent negative criticisms and negativity in general as possible. Whether or not you get beat by Barnet or can't beat Morecambe is irrelevant. We must have been beating somebody because of the position we are in. Where we are at the end of the season is what matters of course and we are starting 2013 from a decent position. I didn't hear much from you at all when we were doing so well in the league and Cup, but I'm sure you won't be able to keep off here whilst ever there is something to moan about. And you turned the radio off before the game even started because of a 'negative looking line up' -hope non of the players gave up as easy as you- how many shots did this negative line have? Oh I forgot all your criticism is based on a game you couldn't be bothered listening to![/p][/quote]Very funny and also very hypocritical that LONNIE..... Don't you also remember commenting on how you also switched off the radio prior to a game when you heard that Syers wasn't playing. Well i do. You also said it was too negative...... does that mean that all your criticisms of Pablo above apply to yourself?? dannbradfc

11:08am Sun 6 Jan 13

Edinburgh -bantam says...

Some clubs have bogey teams, some players bogey grounds, City seem to have bogey shirts.

The last time City lost an away league match, before yesterday, it was against Burton Albion.Davies and Oliver were injured and Ravenhill was sent off.The away strip that day was pink!

Surely it's time to ditch it.
Some clubs have bogey teams, some players bogey grounds, City seem to have bogey shirts. The last time City lost an away league match, before yesterday, it was against Burton Albion.Davies and Oliver were injured and Ravenhill was sent off.The away strip that day was pink! Surely it's time to ditch it. Edinburgh -bantam

11:16am Sun 6 Jan 13

dannbradfc says...

Fans are over-reacting too early here. We have had our best season for years. Yes we have spent more money on wages than in other seasons and expect a return of sorts, but we have survived a very bad injury list and are still right bang in there.

Our recent form is hopefully a blip. We are actually lucky that Connell got that late winner against accrington as we were poor in that half and the christmas period would have been alot worse. I repeat though that with the injuries we have done well to stay in there. To be fair i did say that this was a 'dodgy' game with Villa looming. Its got to be in the players minds etc

What we should be asking however is why the manager has chosen to go negative in the past few games.

We have a better side than both Barnet and Morecambe so why not go to show this and take the game to them?

Our use of wingers as got us the success we have enjoyed thus far, so why change. If its for tiredness i'd argue that we lost points anyway so how does that help us? (Just ask Rafa- it doesn't work). Players prefer to play than train as well so we should always where possible play our best 11 then change if form drops etc. We were too negative and narrow against two sides we are better than.

those citing how many shots we had discount those on target. Stats can prove anything. How many of those shots were long range? miles off goal etc.

We do need another striker as competition. We saw how we performed without Hanson. Anyone pointing the finger solely his way need to ask how many goals Nahki scored in this recent period as well.

I stated how the central midfield wouldn't score many at the beginning of the season and this is proving correct. The reliance is on a very few players to score. If the opposition negate this, then we have problems.

Rochdale were a great example of how Parkinson was out-thought. Prknson should have done something about this 20 mins into the game e.g. tried 433 or 352, but left it as it was when it clearly wasn't working but in his defence he at least admitted his part in that defeat and i admire that honesty.

Overall wewould have settled for where we are at the beginning of the season. My concerns still remain about lack of potential scoring areas in the side. I also have great concerns over Duke, with any high ball at set-pieces and corenrs and this could cost us a big game i feel e.g. a play-off game. (hopefully not, obviously). He's a great shot stopper but its definately a problem area for city despite having some big lads to defend in there.

We need to get back to what we were doing best e.g. been competitive, showing great effort/team spirit and attacking with wide-players. Don't be negative against teams that we are clearly better than. Go for 3 points and we will still be top 7 and the return of defenders hopefully will see us to our aims.......
Fans are over-reacting too early here. We have had our best season for years. Yes we have spent more money on wages than in other seasons and expect a return of sorts, but we have survived a very bad injury list and are still right bang in there. Our recent form is hopefully a blip. We are actually lucky that Connell got that late winner against accrington as we were poor in that half and the christmas period would have been alot worse. I repeat though that with the injuries we have done well to stay in there. To be fair i did say that this was a 'dodgy' game with Villa looming. Its got to be in the players minds etc What we should be asking however is why the manager has chosen to go negative in the past few games. We have a better side than both Barnet and Morecambe so why not go to show this and take the game to them? Our use of wingers as got us the success we have enjoyed thus far, so why change. If its for tiredness i'd argue that we lost points anyway so how does that help us? (Just ask Rafa- it doesn't work). Players prefer to play than train as well so we should always where possible play our best 11 then change if form drops etc. We were too negative and narrow against two sides we are better than. those citing how many shots we had discount those on target. Stats can prove anything. How many of those shots were long range? miles off goal etc. We do need another striker as competition. We saw how we performed without Hanson. Anyone pointing the finger solely his way need to ask how many goals Nahki scored in this recent period as well. I stated how the central midfield wouldn't score many at the beginning of the season and this is proving correct. The reliance is on a very few players to score. If the opposition negate this, then we have problems. Rochdale were a great example of how Parkinson was out-thought. Prknson should have done something about this 20 mins into the game e.g. tried 433 or 352, but left it as it was when it clearly wasn't working but in his defence he at least admitted his part in that defeat and i admire that honesty. Overall wewould have settled for where we are at the beginning of the season. My concerns still remain about lack of potential scoring areas in the side. I also have great concerns over Duke, with any high ball at set-pieces and corenrs and this could cost us a big game i feel e.g. a play-off game. (hopefully not, obviously). He's a great shot stopper but its definately a problem area for city despite having some big lads to defend in there. We need to get back to what we were doing best e.g. been competitive, showing great effort/team spirit and attacking with wide-players. Don't be negative against teams that we are clearly better than. Go for 3 points and we will still be top 7 and the return of defenders hopefully will see us to our aims....... dannbradfc

11:20am Sun 6 Jan 13

audal says...

It certainly isn't all Hansons fault, that blame lays on the system deployed by pp because all a cf. thrives on are balls being directed to him from the bye lines not hoofed upfield or even crossed behind him, so the wingers need to get past their defenders and cut the ball back and stop Hanson running up and down the field because his job must be to score not defend. Freddy must remember the likes of Webb et al.
It certainly isn't all Hansons fault, that blame lays on the system deployed by pp because all a cf. thrives on are balls being directed to him from the bye lines not hoofed upfield or even crossed behind him, so the wingers need to get past their defenders and cut the ball back and stop Hanson running up and down the field because his job must be to score not defend. Freddy must remember the likes of Webb et al. audal

11:23am Sun 6 Jan 13

COLATS says...

tyker2 wrote:
I think there are some very informed opinions on this game. I would just add that all the shots in the world mean nothing unless the onion bag is hit regularly.

Are so many chances being created or are these long speculative shots being easily saved or simply missing the target. If chances are not being created then I worry for the immediate future

I note that a lot of the clubs in this division are already adding players to their squads; we seem to be behind the race at present
It's easy to add player, quality players take a little longer as we saw in the summer? I,ve no doubt he will bring in the right players then watch us go. In the summer everyone said they would be happy with a top ten finish, now after we drop a few points people want parky sacked?? Unbelievable .
[quote][p][bold]tyker2[/bold] wrote: I think there are some very informed opinions on this game. I would just add that all the shots in the world mean nothing unless the onion bag is hit regularly. Are so many chances being created or are these long speculative shots being easily saved or simply missing the target. If chances are not being created then I worry for the immediate future I note that a lot of the clubs in this division are already adding players to their squads; we seem to be behind the race at present[/p][/quote]It's easy to add player, quality players take a little longer as we saw in the summer? I,ve no doubt he will bring in the right players then watch us go. In the summer everyone said they would be happy with a top ten finish, now after we drop a few points people want parky sacked?? Unbelievable . COLATS

11:41am Sun 6 Jan 13

Freddy says...

*
BCFC1234 says...
10:35am Sun 6 Jan 13

Congratulations Mr Lawn on yesterdays heroics from all at Bradford Council. May I suggest to get off your ego trip, concentrate on your own business and not that of the councils.
*
GOSH !!!!--A member of the Council, who can spell, and count to FOUR !!.
*
May I suggest--1234--You take great notice of what the City Supporters are saying above, in endorsing Mark Lawn's comments.
*
When the next elections occur---many of those impotent Councillors-- (that have totally ruined- what was once a GREAT CITY). Will NOT be returned. The above observations- are a general reflection of the Majority of Opinions- in The Catchment Area of Bradford- as a whole. Including many areas from outside those areas-as well.
*
*
* BCFC1234 says... 10:35am Sun 6 Jan 13 Congratulations Mr Lawn on yesterdays heroics from all at Bradford Council. May I suggest to get off your ego trip, concentrate on your own business and not that of the councils. * GOSH !!!!--A member of the Council, who can spell, and count to FOUR !!. * May I suggest--1234--You take great notice of what the City Supporters are saying above, in endorsing Mark Lawn's comments. * When the next elections occur---many of those impotent Councillors-- (that have totally ruined- what was once a GREAT CITY). Will NOT be returned. The above observations- are a general reflection of the Majority of Opinions- in The Catchment Area of Bradford- as a whole. Including many areas from outside those areas-as well. * * Freddy

11:56am Sun 6 Jan 13

spleen ventor says...

Edinburgh -bantam wrote:
Some clubs have bogey teams, some players bogey grounds, City seem to have bogey shirts.

The last time City lost an away league match, before yesterday, it was against Burton Albion.Davies and Oliver were injured and Ravenhill was sent off.The away strip that day was pink!

Surely it's time to ditch it.
They won in pink at Oxford and at Watford in the League Cup....and at Barnet 4-0 last season!
As for the game yesterday...(I was there so couldn't turn it off!)...far too negative in the first half, we played four central midfielders in midfield and were far too narrow. Ravenhill was the type of player we needed last year in our predicament but this year he should be no where near the first team, all he did yesterday was try and kick people and constantly give the ball away, Scott Brown should be considered before him.
Hanson was a completely different player in the second half when we introduced some width, he was unlucky to have what appeared to be a perfectly good goal disallowed and should have had a penalty for a blatant push. Unfortunately it was a Wells miss at 1-0 that turned the game, seconds later the ball was up the other end and it was 2-0. After that we huffed and puffed and were camped out around their penalty box but without really creating a decent chance.
A very disappointing result yes but with 20 games still to go and the right reinforcements in the transfer widow all is not lost.
[quote][p][bold]Edinburgh -bantam[/bold] wrote: Some clubs have bogey teams, some players bogey grounds, City seem to have bogey shirts. The last time City lost an away league match, before yesterday, it was against Burton Albion.Davies and Oliver were injured and Ravenhill was sent off.The away strip that day was pink! Surely it's time to ditch it.[/p][/quote]They won in pink at Oxford and at Watford in the League Cup....and at Barnet 4-0 last season! As for the game yesterday...(I was there so couldn't turn it off!)...far too negative in the first half, we played four central midfielders in midfield and were far too narrow. Ravenhill was the type of player we needed last year in our predicament but this year he should be no where near the first team, all he did yesterday was try and kick people and constantly give the ball away, Scott Brown should be considered before him. Hanson was a completely different player in the second half when we introduced some width, he was unlucky to have what appeared to be a perfectly good goal disallowed and should have had a penalty for a blatant push. Unfortunately it was a Wells miss at 1-0 that turned the game, seconds later the ball was up the other end and it was 2-0. After that we huffed and puffed and were camped out around their penalty box but without really creating a decent chance. A very disappointing result yes but with 20 games still to go and the right reinforcements in the transfer widow all is not lost. spleen ventor

1:03pm Sun 6 Jan 13

Spenvalleyspartan says...

We will not achieve promotion from this division with Hanson taking up that pivitol centre forward role! Simple as that! A big centre forward to replace him is essential for our promotion aspects! He is the only player in the team to never get subbed simply because we havn't got any competition for that position! Failure to rectify this and we'll probably miss out again this year! However on a more positive note if Parkys gets the right bloke in with the rest of the team we have automatic would not be impossible!
We will not achieve promotion from this division with Hanson taking up that pivitol centre forward role! Simple as that! A big centre forward to replace him is essential for our promotion aspects! He is the only player in the team to never get subbed simply because we havn't got any competition for that position! Failure to rectify this and we'll probably miss out again this year! However on a more positive note if Parkys gets the right bloke in with the rest of the team we have automatic would not be impossible! Spenvalleyspartan

2:29pm Sun 6 Jan 13

Victor Clayton says...

Spenvalleyspartan wrote:
We will not achieve promotion from this division with Hanson taking up that pivitol centre forward role! Simple as that! A big centre forward to replace him is essential for our promotion aspects! He is the only player in the team to never get subbed simply because we havn't got any competition for that position! Failure to rectify this and we'll probably miss out again this year! However on a more positive note if Parkys gets the right bloke in with the rest of the team we have automatic would not be impossible!
while I am not a hanson fan, who ever plays in this position will need better service and support .
[quote][p][bold]Spenvalleyspartan[/bold] wrote: We will not achieve promotion from this division with Hanson taking up that pivitol centre forward role! Simple as that! A big centre forward to replace him is essential for our promotion aspects! He is the only player in the team to never get subbed simply because we havn't got any competition for that position! Failure to rectify this and we'll probably miss out again this year! However on a more positive note if Parkys gets the right bloke in with the rest of the team we have automatic would not be impossible![/p][/quote]while I am not a hanson fan, who ever plays in this position will need better service and support . Victor Clayton

2:49pm Sun 6 Jan 13

Prisoner Cell Block A says...

Observation from one who attended yesterday....

We set up no to lose.


We have played the diamond formation in the last two games, any chance that is in preparation for the Villa game, whilst still thinking we had enough in reserve to pick up decent points from the last two matches?

Sooner we get these cups out of the way, a striker to at least push JH for a place and our first choice team on the pitch the better.

We are still in a much better position on and off the field than we have been for a decade. Majority of matches have been an attacking treat, the games we have lost we haven't lost by capitulating as we have done in the past. Things going a little awry at the minute but let's consider it a blip, pick ourselves up and battle again.

I don't think it is any coincidence that our dip has coincided with the need to use the loan market, that isn't to say the lads who have come in haven't been quality, they just don't have the same affinity and team spirit the small squad we started with have. This alone can drag you through games, it cdan't take chances for you though, you have to do that yourself.

I listened yesterday, Hanson didn't seem to do anything deserving of his lovely scapegoat tag many seem to have given him. Battled, created, should have won a penalty and was pushed and pulled all game yet again. If you are a City fan cut him a bit of slack, maybe the pressure heaped on him by himself and the coaching staff is enough to motivate him, any extra may drag him further down.
Observation from one who attended yesterday.... We set up no to lose. We have played the diamond formation in the last two games, any chance that is in preparation for the Villa game, whilst still thinking we had enough in reserve to pick up decent points from the last two matches? Sooner we get these cups out of the way, a striker to at least push JH for a place and our first choice team on the pitch the better. We are still in a much better position on and off the field than we have been for a decade. Majority of matches have been an attacking treat, the games we have lost we haven't lost by capitulating as we have done in the past. Things going a little awry at the minute but let's consider it a blip, pick ourselves up and battle again. I don't think it is any coincidence that our dip has coincided with the need to use the loan market, that isn't to say the lads who have come in haven't been quality, they just don't have the same affinity and team spirit the small squad we started with have. This alone can drag you through games, it cdan't take chances for you though, you have to do that yourself. I listened yesterday, Hanson didn't seem to do anything deserving of his lovely scapegoat tag many seem to have given him. Battled, created, should have won a penalty and was pushed and pulled all game yet again. If you are a City fan cut him a bit of slack, maybe the pressure heaped on him by himself and the coaching staff is enough to motivate him, any extra may drag him further down. Prisoner Cell Block A

3:16pm Sun 6 Jan 13

lonniejockstrap says...

dannbradfc wrote:
lonniejockstrap wrote:
Pablo wrote:
I am at a loss to understand PP's thinking in his team selection. We gave the initiative to Barnet with a negative looking starting line up.

I turned off the radio in disgust.

When everyone was clamouring for the Board to sign up PP a few weeks ago, I argued against this on the basis that we'd won nothing yet and could be headed for mid table by the end of February, if we had a string of bad results.

Seems I was wrong. At this rate we'll be mid table by end January.

If you can't beat Morecambe and get turned over by the likes of Barnet, due to going into those games with unambitious line ups, you just don't deserve to go up.

How is PP going to explain this shambles?
So you think we shouldn't extend PP's contract unless he actually wins something? interesting! You want us on the Manager merry-go-round again it appears and this, in spite of having made such a massive improvement on the field and raised so much money through Cup games.
Ah, but of course, you don't think he has proved he can be a good manager yet do you? Your post appears very immature in that you are basically saying PP should be sacked on the basis of recent results and disregarding everything that has gone before. And this from a so called supporter who can't ever be bothered to listen to how the Team, he implies to care about so much, is doing on the radio.

To me you just come across as someone who just takes the opportunity to criticise and do the Club as much harm from your persistent negative criticisms and negativity in general as possible.

Whether or not you get beat by Barnet or can't beat Morecambe is irrelevant. We must have been beating somebody because of the position we are in. Where we are at the end of the season is what matters of course and we are starting 2013 from a decent position.

I didn't hear much from you at all when we were doing so well in the league and Cup, but I'm sure you won't be able to keep off here whilst ever there is something to moan about.

And you turned the radio off before the game even started because of a 'negative looking line up' -hope non of the players gave up as easy as you- how many shots did this negative line have? Oh I forgot all your criticism is based on a game you couldn't be bothered listening to!
Very funny and also very hypocritical that LONNIE.....

Don't you also remember commenting on how you also switched off the radio prior to a game when you heard that Syers wasn't playing. Well i do. You also said it was too negative......

does that mean that all your criticisms of Pablo above apply to yourself??
Yes I do remember that Dann. But it would only have been hypocritical of me if I then come on here and talked about how the team played when I wasn't there or listened to the game. If Pablo wants to turn off the radio fine, but he then needs to stop making up a case for criticising based on something he hasn't witnessed or listened to.

Dann, thanks for the expert advice on virtue, coming from someone who sunk the the depths of encouraging supporters to shout abuse at and so create an atmosphere of intimidation against another human being simply because he was not up to your expectations is quite amusing. Your glass house must be made of bullet proof windows Dann.

By the way you are also another one who has gone very quite whilst we have been doing well. You were massively overt in your criticism of PP last season but you haven't had much to say at all this season because he appears to have been undermining your previous criticisms and accept you had been wrong about him has been too difficult for you. No doubt you will be back to moaning about PP again if the results don't improve.

We have many experts coming on here when the team is struggling piling on the negative criticism. Those that present positive criticism I have no real problem with, particularly when they have some balanced evidence to support what they say. Unfortunately, Pablo and his ilk are simply destructive in their approach.
[quote][p][bold]dannbradfc[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lonniejockstrap[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Pablo[/bold] wrote: I am at a loss to understand PP's thinking in his team selection. We gave the initiative to Barnet with a negative looking starting line up. I turned off the radio in disgust. When everyone was clamouring for the Board to sign up PP a few weeks ago, I argued against this on the basis that we'd won nothing yet and could be headed for mid table by the end of February, if we had a string of bad results. Seems I was wrong. At this rate we'll be mid table by end January. If you can't beat Morecambe and get turned over by the likes of Barnet, due to going into those games with unambitious line ups, you just don't deserve to go up. How is PP going to explain this shambles?[/p][/quote]So you think we shouldn't extend PP's contract unless he actually wins something? interesting! You want us on the Manager merry-go-round again it appears and this, in spite of having made such a massive improvement on the field and raised so much money through Cup games. Ah, but of course, you don't think he has proved he can be a good manager yet do you? Your post appears very immature in that you are basically saying PP should be sacked on the basis of recent results and disregarding everything that has gone before. And this from a so called supporter who can't ever be bothered to listen to how the Team, he implies to care about so much, is doing on the radio. To me you just come across as someone who just takes the opportunity to criticise and do the Club as much harm from your persistent negative criticisms and negativity in general as possible. Whether or not you get beat by Barnet or can't beat Morecambe is irrelevant. We must have been beating somebody because of the position we are in. Where we are at the end of the season is what matters of course and we are starting 2013 from a decent position. I didn't hear much from you at all when we were doing so well in the league and Cup, but I'm sure you won't be able to keep off here whilst ever there is something to moan about. And you turned the radio off before the game even started because of a 'negative looking line up' -hope non of the players gave up as easy as you- how many shots did this negative line have? Oh I forgot all your criticism is based on a game you couldn't be bothered listening to![/p][/quote]Very funny and also very hypocritical that LONNIE..... Don't you also remember commenting on how you also switched off the radio prior to a game when you heard that Syers wasn't playing. Well i do. You also said it was too negative...... does that mean that all your criticisms of Pablo above apply to yourself??[/p][/quote]Yes I do remember that Dann. But it would only have been hypocritical of me if I then come on here and talked about how the team played when I wasn't there or listened to the game. If Pablo wants to turn off the radio fine, but he then needs to stop making up a case for criticising based on something he hasn't witnessed or listened to. Dann, thanks for the expert advice on virtue, coming from someone who sunk the the depths of encouraging supporters to shout abuse at and so create an atmosphere of intimidation against another human being simply because he was not up to your expectations is quite amusing. Your glass house must be made of bullet proof windows Dann. By the way you are also another one who has gone very quite whilst we have been doing well. You were massively overt in your criticism of PP last season but you haven't had much to say at all this season because he appears to have been undermining your previous criticisms and accept you had been wrong about him has been too difficult for you. No doubt you will be back to moaning about PP again if the results don't improve. We have many experts coming on here when the team is struggling piling on the negative criticism. Those that present positive criticism I have no real problem with, particularly when they have some balanced evidence to support what they say. Unfortunately, Pablo and his ilk are simply destructive in their approach. lonniejockstrap

5:44pm Sun 6 Jan 13

KnightMcCall says...

dannbradfc wrote:
Fans are over-reacting too early here. We have had our best season for years. Yes we have spent more money on wages than in other seasons and expect a return of sorts, but we have survived a very bad injury list and are still right bang in there.

Our recent form is hopefully a blip. We are actually lucky that Connell got that late winner against accrington as we were poor in that half and the christmas period would have been alot worse. I repeat though that with the injuries we have done well to stay in there. To be fair i did say that this was a 'dodgy' game with Villa looming. Its got to be in the players minds etc

What we should be asking however is why the manager has chosen to go negative in the past few games.

We have a better side than both Barnet and Morecambe so why not go to show this and take the game to them?

Our use of wingers as got us the success we have enjoyed thus far, so why change. If its for tiredness i'd argue that we lost points anyway so how does that help us? (Just ask Rafa- it doesn't work). Players prefer to play than train as well so we should always where possible play our best 11 then change if form drops etc. We were too negative and narrow against two sides we are better than.

those citing how many shots we had discount those on target. Stats can prove anything. How many of those shots were long range? miles off goal etc.

We do need another striker as competition. We saw how we performed without Hanson. Anyone pointing the finger solely his way need to ask how many goals Nahki scored in this recent period as well.

I stated how the central midfield wouldn't score many at the beginning of the season and this is proving correct. The reliance is on a very few players to score. If the opposition negate this, then we have problems.

Rochdale were a great example of how Parkinson was out-thought. Prknson should have done something about this 20 mins into the game e.g. tried 433 or 352, but left it as it was when it clearly wasn't working but in his defence he at least admitted his part in that defeat and i admire that honesty.

Overall wewould have settled for where we are at the beginning of the season. My concerns still remain about lack of potential scoring areas in the side. I also have great concerns over Duke, with any high ball at set-pieces and corenrs and this could cost us a big game i feel e.g. a play-off game. (hopefully not, obviously). He's a great shot stopper but its definately a problem area for city despite having some big lads to defend in there.

We need to get back to what we were doing best e.g. been competitive, showing great effort/team spirit and attacking with wide-players. Don't be negative against teams that we are clearly better than. Go for 3 points and we will still be top 7 and the return of defenders hopefully will see us to our aims.......
Interesting post Dann. Well thought out and on the face of it well-balanced.

no-one can answer most of your queries about formation except PP but some have pointed out that Reid and Hines are not at full fitness so perhaps not ready to play too much footie in too short a space of time. Hines has struggled in his last two appearances anyway. Thompson is obviously injured so perhaps the formation is the best option with the players that are fit and ready to play.

The back four has struggled of late so playing too much of an attacking side can backfire as it did against Rochdale. PP was getting slated for not packing midfield after that result. The return of McHugh may allow a bit more "go-forward" from midfield.

I share your concerns over Duke and over the number of goals the team is scoring. This CANNOT be levelled at just one player (i.e. Hanson). Teams score and teams concede. Plenty of good chances are being missed by plenty of players.

The negatrons; i.e. those that only have much to say after a defeat are back out in force based on results and clearly without any consideration for how complicated the reality of football management is. Suggesting that the manager who has seen us to the Semi's of the League Cup has no tactical nous is just ridiculous. It makes a nice change to see that someone (i.e. you) has actually looked at the bigger picture and isn't just reacting to personal frustration in the light of a disappointing couple of weeks.
[quote][p][bold]dannbradfc[/bold] wrote: Fans are over-reacting too early here. We have had our best season for years. Yes we have spent more money on wages than in other seasons and expect a return of sorts, but we have survived a very bad injury list and are still right bang in there. Our recent form is hopefully a blip. We are actually lucky that Connell got that late winner against accrington as we were poor in that half and the christmas period would have been alot worse. I repeat though that with the injuries we have done well to stay in there. To be fair i did say that this was a 'dodgy' game with Villa looming. Its got to be in the players minds etc What we should be asking however is why the manager has chosen to go negative in the past few games. We have a better side than both Barnet and Morecambe so why not go to show this and take the game to them? Our use of wingers as got us the success we have enjoyed thus far, so why change. If its for tiredness i'd argue that we lost points anyway so how does that help us? (Just ask Rafa- it doesn't work). Players prefer to play than train as well so we should always where possible play our best 11 then change if form drops etc. We were too negative and narrow against two sides we are better than. those citing how many shots we had discount those on target. Stats can prove anything. How many of those shots were long range? miles off goal etc. We do need another striker as competition. We saw how we performed without Hanson. Anyone pointing the finger solely his way need to ask how many goals Nahki scored in this recent period as well. I stated how the central midfield wouldn't score many at the beginning of the season and this is proving correct. The reliance is on a very few players to score. If the opposition negate this, then we have problems. Rochdale were a great example of how Parkinson was out-thought. Prknson should have done something about this 20 mins into the game e.g. tried 433 or 352, but left it as it was when it clearly wasn't working but in his defence he at least admitted his part in that defeat and i admire that honesty. Overall wewould have settled for where we are at the beginning of the season. My concerns still remain about lack of potential scoring areas in the side. I also have great concerns over Duke, with any high ball at set-pieces and corenrs and this could cost us a big game i feel e.g. a play-off game. (hopefully not, obviously). He's a great shot stopper but its definately a problem area for city despite having some big lads to defend in there. We need to get back to what we were doing best e.g. been competitive, showing great effort/team spirit and attacking with wide-players. Don't be negative against teams that we are clearly better than. Go for 3 points and we will still be top 7 and the return of defenders hopefully will see us to our aims.......[/p][/quote]Interesting post Dann. Well thought out and on the face of it well-balanced. no-one can answer most of your queries about formation except PP but some have pointed out that Reid and Hines are not at full fitness so perhaps not ready to play too much footie in too short a space of time. Hines has struggled in his last two appearances anyway. Thompson is obviously injured so perhaps the formation is the best option with the players that are fit and ready to play. The back four has struggled of late so playing too much of an attacking side can backfire as it did against Rochdale. PP was getting slated for not packing midfield after that result. The return of McHugh may allow a bit more "go-forward" from midfield. I share your concerns over Duke and over the number of goals the team is scoring. This CANNOT be levelled at just one player (i.e. Hanson). Teams score and teams concede. Plenty of good chances are being missed by plenty of players. The negatrons; i.e. those that only have much to say after a defeat are back out in force based on results and clearly without any consideration for how complicated the reality of football management is. Suggesting that the manager who has seen us to the Semi's of the League Cup has no tactical nous is just ridiculous. It makes a nice change to see that someone (i.e. you) has actually looked at the bigger picture and isn't just reacting to personal frustration in the light of a disappointing couple of weeks. KnightMcCall

6:25pm Sun 6 Jan 13

Victor Clayton says...

KnightMcCall wrote:
dannbradfc wrote:
Fans are over-reacting too early here. We have had our best season for years. Yes we have spent more money on wages than in other seasons and expect a return of sorts, but we have survived a very bad injury list and are still right bang in there.

Our recent form is hopefully a blip. We are actually lucky that Connell got that late winner against accrington as we were poor in that half and the christmas period would have been alot worse. I repeat though that with the injuries we have done well to stay in there. To be fair i did say that this was a 'dodgy' game with Villa looming. Its got to be in the players minds etc

What we should be asking however is why the manager has chosen to go negative in the past few games.

We have a better side than both Barnet and Morecambe so why not go to show this and take the game to them?

Our use of wingers as got us the success we have enjoyed thus far, so why change. If its for tiredness i'd argue that we lost points anyway so how does that help us? (Just ask Rafa- it doesn't work). Players prefer to play than train as well so we should always where possible play our best 11 then change if form drops etc. We were too negative and narrow against two sides we are better than.

those citing how many shots we had discount those on target. Stats can prove anything. How many of those shots were long range? miles off goal etc.

We do need another striker as competition. We saw how we performed without Hanson. Anyone pointing the finger solely his way need to ask how many goals Nahki scored in this recent period as well.

I stated how the central midfield wouldn't score many at the beginning of the season and this is proving correct. The reliance is on a very few players to score. If the opposition negate this, then we have problems.

Rochdale were a great example of how Parkinson was out-thought. Prknson should have done something about this 20 mins into the game e.g. tried 433 or 352, but left it as it was when it clearly wasn't working but in his defence he at least admitted his part in that defeat and i admire that honesty.

Overall wewould have settled for where we are at the beginning of the season. My concerns still remain about lack of potential scoring areas in the side. I also have great concerns over Duke, with any high ball at set-pieces and corenrs and this could cost us a big game i feel e.g. a play-off game. (hopefully not, obviously). He's a great shot stopper but its definately a problem area for city despite having some big lads to defend in there.

We need to get back to what we were doing best e.g. been competitive, showing great effort/team spirit and attacking with wide-players. Don't be negative against teams that we are clearly better than. Go for 3 points and we will still be top 7 and the return of defenders hopefully will see us to our aims.......
Interesting post Dann. Well thought out and on the face of it well-balanced.

no-one can answer most of your queries about formation except PP but some have pointed out that Reid and Hines are not at full fitness so perhaps not ready to play too much footie in too short a space of time. Hines has struggled in his last two appearances anyway. Thompson is obviously injured so perhaps the formation is the best option with the players that are fit and ready to play.

The back four has struggled of late so playing too much of an attacking side can backfire as it did against Rochdale. PP was getting slated for not packing midfield after that result. The return of McHugh may allow a bit more "go-forward" from midfield.

I share your concerns over Duke and over the number of goals the team is scoring. This CANNOT be levelled at just one player (i.e. Hanson). Teams score and teams concede. Plenty of good chances are being missed by plenty of players.

The negatrons; i.e. those that only have much to say after a defeat are back out in force based on results and clearly without any consideration for how complicated the reality of football management is. Suggesting that the manager who has seen us to the Semi's of the League Cup has no tactical nous is just ridiculous. It makes a nice change to see that someone (i.e. you) has actually looked at the bigger picture and isn't just reacting to personal frustration in the light of a disappointing couple of weeks.
Hanson is a striker, so when he fails to take decent chances he has to accept he has failed to do his job properly . the same as when duke makes a balls up.
[quote][p][bold]KnightMcCall[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]dannbradfc[/bold] wrote: Fans are over-reacting too early here. We have had our best season for years. Yes we have spent more money on wages than in other seasons and expect a return of sorts, but we have survived a very bad injury list and are still right bang in there. Our recent form is hopefully a blip. We are actually lucky that Connell got that late winner against accrington as we were poor in that half and the christmas period would have been alot worse. I repeat though that with the injuries we have done well to stay in there. To be fair i did say that this was a 'dodgy' game with Villa looming. Its got to be in the players minds etc What we should be asking however is why the manager has chosen to go negative in the past few games. We have a better side than both Barnet and Morecambe so why not go to show this and take the game to them? Our use of wingers as got us the success we have enjoyed thus far, so why change. If its for tiredness i'd argue that we lost points anyway so how does that help us? (Just ask Rafa- it doesn't work). Players prefer to play than train as well so we should always where possible play our best 11 then change if form drops etc. We were too negative and narrow against two sides we are better than. those citing how many shots we had discount those on target. Stats can prove anything. How many of those shots were long range? miles off goal etc. We do need another striker as competition. We saw how we performed without Hanson. Anyone pointing the finger solely his way need to ask how many goals Nahki scored in this recent period as well. I stated how the central midfield wouldn't score many at the beginning of the season and this is proving correct. The reliance is on a very few players to score. If the opposition negate this, then we have problems. Rochdale were a great example of how Parkinson was out-thought. Prknson should have done something about this 20 mins into the game e.g. tried 433 or 352, but left it as it was when it clearly wasn't working but in his defence he at least admitted his part in that defeat and i admire that honesty. Overall wewould have settled for where we are at the beginning of the season. My concerns still remain about lack of potential scoring areas in the side. I also have great concerns over Duke, with any high ball at set-pieces and corenrs and this could cost us a big game i feel e.g. a play-off game. (hopefully not, obviously). He's a great shot stopper but its definately a problem area for city despite having some big lads to defend in there. We need to get back to what we were doing best e.g. been competitive, showing great effort/team spirit and attacking with wide-players. Don't be negative against teams that we are clearly better than. Go for 3 points and we will still be top 7 and the return of defenders hopefully will see us to our aims.......[/p][/quote]Interesting post Dann. Well thought out and on the face of it well-balanced. no-one can answer most of your queries about formation except PP but some have pointed out that Reid and Hines are not at full fitness so perhaps not ready to play too much footie in too short a space of time. Hines has struggled in his last two appearances anyway. Thompson is obviously injured so perhaps the formation is the best option with the players that are fit and ready to play. The back four has struggled of late so playing too much of an attacking side can backfire as it did against Rochdale. PP was getting slated for not packing midfield after that result. The return of McHugh may allow a bit more "go-forward" from midfield. I share your concerns over Duke and over the number of goals the team is scoring. This CANNOT be levelled at just one player (i.e. Hanson). Teams score and teams concede. Plenty of good chances are being missed by plenty of players. The negatrons; i.e. those that only have much to say after a defeat are back out in force based on results and clearly without any consideration for how complicated the reality of football management is. Suggesting that the manager who has seen us to the Semi's of the League Cup has no tactical nous is just ridiculous. It makes a nice change to see that someone (i.e. you) has actually looked at the bigger picture and isn't just reacting to personal frustration in the light of a disappointing couple of weeks.[/p][/quote]Hanson is a striker, so when he fails to take decent chances he has to accept he has failed to do his job properly . the same as when duke makes a balls up. Victor Clayton

6:50pm Sun 6 Jan 13

Pablo says...

lonniejockstrap wrote:
Pablo wrote:
lonniejockstrap wrote:
Pablo wrote:
I am at a loss to understand PP's thinking in his team selection. We gave the initiative to Barnet with a negative looking starting line up.

I turned off the radio in disgust.

When everyone was clamouring for the Board to sign up PP a few weeks ago, I argued against this on the basis that we'd won nothing yet and could be headed for mid table by the end of February, if we had a string of bad results.

Seems I was wrong. At this rate we'll be mid table by end January.

If you can't beat Morecambe and get turned over by the likes of Barnet, due to going into those games with unambitious line ups, you just don't deserve to go up.

How is PP going to explain this shambles?
So you think we shouldn't extend PP's contract unless he actually wins something? interesting! You want us on the Manager merry-go-round again it appears and this, in spite of having made such a massive improvement on the field and raised so much money through Cup games.
Ah, but of course, you don't think he has proved he can be a good manager yet do you? Your post appears very immature in that you are basically saying PP should be sacked on the basis of recent results and disregarding everything that has gone before. And this from a so called supporter who can't ever be bothered to listen to how the Team, he implies to care about so much, is doing on the radio.

To me you just come across as someone who just takes the opportunity to criticise and do the Club as much harm from your persistent negative criticisms and negativity in general as possible.

Whether or not you get beat by Barnet or can't beat Morecambe is irrelevant. We must have been beating somebody because of the position we are in. Where we are at the end of the season is what matters of course and we are starting 2013 from a decent position.

I didn't hear much from you at all when we were doing so well in the league and Cup, but I'm sure you won't be able to keep off here whilst ever there is something to moan about.

And you turned the radio off before the game even started because of a 'negative looking line up' -hope non of the players gave up as easy as you- how many shots did this negative line have? Oh I forgot all your criticism is based on a game you couldn't be bothered listening to!
Lonnie, please advise where I stated that PP should be sacked.

For your information, I've posted after virtually every match - win or lose. Not like you to get your facts wrong, lonnie!

If the manager names another negative looking formation, given our position and the quality of the oppositon, then I'm not wasting my time listening to the inevitable outcome. Better things to do- unlike you of course, lonnie.

I feel sorry for those poor souls who travelled down to watch a match that we approached with such a lack of ambition.
Didn't say you stated PP should be sacked, why do you suggest I did? You are suggesting PP should not be offered a new contract by the board. sooooo, if the board take your advice what is the outcome? think about it! - are you unable to connect the dots together? Anyway, you were so wrong about your opinions on Will Atkinson what makes you think anyone gives two hoots about your opposition to giving PP another contract?

Why am I not surprised that you say you have better things to do than listen to the radio commentary on how the team you pretend to support is doing, but you don't -apparently- have better things to do with your time than spending it posting negative criticism of that same team and manager.

You of course have no way of knowing how ambitious the approach to the game was because you wasn't even prepared to listen to the game on the radio!

If Barnet should have been such a walk-over as you seem to be implying -in your 1st post- how come Gillingham and Burton lost to them and Exeter only managed a draw with them during the last few weeks? Maybe you had better things to do with your time than to give any consideration to Barnet's recent form?

“A critic is someone who never actually goes to the battle, yet who afterwards comes out shooting the wounded”

Tyne Daly
Lonnie, a person is sacked if he/she is dismissed within the term of a contract. When a contract ends, and it isn't renewed, that person has NOT been sacked. Probably a bit too subtle for you.

Also, on the subject of grammar, it's " you WEREN'T even prepared..", not "you WASN'T even prepared...".

Like PP, you really must try harder in the presentation of your posts, if you want me to take you seriously. At least we've both turned off the radio in disgust. You kept that quiet, you little tinker!
[quote][p][bold]lonniejockstrap[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Pablo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lonniejockstrap[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Pablo[/bold] wrote: I am at a loss to understand PP's thinking in his team selection. We gave the initiative to Barnet with a negative looking starting line up. I turned off the radio in disgust. When everyone was clamouring for the Board to sign up PP a few weeks ago, I argued against this on the basis that we'd won nothing yet and could be headed for mid table by the end of February, if we had a string of bad results. Seems I was wrong. At this rate we'll be mid table by end January. If you can't beat Morecambe and get turned over by the likes of Barnet, due to going into those games with unambitious line ups, you just don't deserve to go up. How is PP going to explain this shambles?[/p][/quote]So you think we shouldn't extend PP's contract unless he actually wins something? interesting! You want us on the Manager merry-go-round again it appears and this, in spite of having made such a massive improvement on the field and raised so much money through Cup games. Ah, but of course, you don't think he has proved he can be a good manager yet do you? Your post appears very immature in that you are basically saying PP should be sacked on the basis of recent results and disregarding everything that has gone before. And this from a so called supporter who can't ever be bothered to listen to how the Team, he implies to care about so much, is doing on the radio. To me you just come across as someone who just takes the opportunity to criticise and do the Club as much harm from your persistent negative criticisms and negativity in general as possible. Whether or not you get beat by Barnet or can't beat Morecambe is irrelevant. We must have been beating somebody because of the position we are in. Where we are at the end of the season is what matters of course and we are starting 2013 from a decent position. I didn't hear much from you at all when we were doing so well in the league and Cup, but I'm sure you won't be able to keep off here whilst ever there is something to moan about. And you turned the radio off before the game even started because of a 'negative looking line up' -hope non of the players gave up as easy as you- how many shots did this negative line have? Oh I forgot all your criticism is based on a game you couldn't be bothered listening to![/p][/quote]Lonnie, please advise where I stated that PP should be sacked. For your information, I've posted after virtually every match - win or lose. Not like you to get your facts wrong, lonnie! If the manager names another negative looking formation, given our position and the quality of the oppositon, then I'm not wasting my time listening to the inevitable outcome. Better things to do- unlike you of course, lonnie. I feel sorry for those poor souls who travelled down to watch a match that we approached with such a lack of ambition.[/p][/quote]Didn't say you stated PP should be sacked, why do you suggest I did? You are suggesting PP should not be offered a new contract by the board. sooooo, if the board take your advice what is the outcome? think about it! - are you unable to connect the dots together? Anyway, you were so wrong about your opinions on Will Atkinson what makes you think anyone gives two hoots about your opposition to giving PP another contract? Why am I not surprised that you say you have better things to do than listen to the radio commentary on how the team you pretend to support is doing, but you don't -apparently- have better things to do with your time than spending it posting negative criticism of that same team and manager. You of course have no way of knowing how ambitious the approach to the game was because you wasn't even prepared to listen to the game on the radio! If Barnet should have been such a walk-over as you seem to be implying -in your 1st post- how come Gillingham and Burton lost to them and Exeter only managed a draw with them during the last few weeks? Maybe you had better things to do with your time than to give any consideration to Barnet's recent form? “A critic is someone who never actually goes to the battle, yet who afterwards comes out shooting the wounded” Tyne Daly[/p][/quote]Lonnie, a person is sacked if he/she is dismissed within the term of a contract. When a contract ends, and it isn't renewed, that person has NOT been sacked. Probably a bit too subtle for you. Also, on the subject of grammar, it's " you WEREN'T even prepared..", not "you WASN'T even prepared...". Like PP, you really must try harder in the presentation of your posts, if you want me to take you seriously. At least we've both turned off the radio in disgust. You kept that quiet, you little tinker! Pablo

9:52pm Sun 6 Jan 13

lonniejockstrap says...

Pablo wrote:
lonniejockstrap wrote:
Pablo wrote:
lonniejockstrap wrote:
Pablo wrote:
I am at a loss to understand PP's thinking in his team selection. We gave the initiative to Barnet with a negative looking starting line up.

I turned off the radio in disgust.

When everyone was clamouring for the Board to sign up PP a few weeks ago, I argued against this on the basis that we'd won nothing yet and could be headed for mid table by the end of February, if we had a string of bad results.

Seems I was wrong. At this rate we'll be mid table by end January.

If you can't beat Morecambe and get turned over by the likes of Barnet, due to going into those games with unambitious line ups, you just don't deserve to go up.

How is PP going to explain this shambles?
So you think we shouldn't extend PP's contract unless he actually wins something? interesting! You want us on the Manager merry-go-round again it appears and this, in spite of having made such a massive improvement on the field and raised so much money through Cup games.
Ah, but of course, you don't think he has proved he can be a good manager yet do you? Your post appears very immature in that you are basically saying PP should be sacked on the basis of recent results and disregarding everything that has gone before. And this from a so called supporter who can't ever be bothered to listen to how the Team, he implies to care about so much, is doing on the radio.

To me you just come across as someone who just takes the opportunity to criticise and do the Club as much harm from your persistent negative criticisms and negativity in general as possible.

Whether or not you get beat by Barnet or can't beat Morecambe is irrelevant. We must have been beating somebody because of the position we are in. Where we are at the end of the season is what matters of course and we are starting 2013 from a decent position.

I didn't hear much from you at all when we were doing so well in the league and Cup, but I'm sure you won't be able to keep off here whilst ever there is something to moan about.

And you turned the radio off before the game even started because of a 'negative looking line up' -hope non of the players gave up as easy as you- how many shots did this negative line have? Oh I forgot all your criticism is based on a game you couldn't be bothered listening to!
Lonnie, please advise where I stated that PP should be sacked.

For your information, I've posted after virtually every match - win or lose. Not like you to get your facts wrong, lonnie!

If the manager names another negative looking formation, given our position and the quality of the oppositon, then I'm not wasting my time listening to the inevitable outcome. Better things to do- unlike you of course, lonnie.

I feel sorry for those poor souls who travelled down to watch a match that we approached with such a lack of ambition.
Didn't say you stated PP should be sacked, why do you suggest I did? You are suggesting PP should not be offered a new contract by the board. sooooo, if the board take your advice what is the outcome? think about it! - are you unable to connect the dots together? Anyway, you were so wrong about your opinions on Will Atkinson what makes you think anyone gives two hoots about your opposition to giving PP another contract?

Why am I not surprised that you say you have better things to do than listen to the radio commentary on how the team you pretend to support is doing, but you don't -apparently- have better things to do with your time than spending it posting negative criticism of that same team and manager.

You of course have no way of knowing how ambitious the approach to the game was because you wasn't even prepared to listen to the game on the radio!

If Barnet should have been such a walk-over as you seem to be implying -in your 1st post- how come Gillingham and Burton lost to them and Exeter only managed a draw with them during the last few weeks? Maybe you had better things to do with your time than to give any consideration to Barnet's recent form?

“A critic is someone who never actually goes to the battle, yet who afterwards comes out shooting the wounded”

Tyne Daly
Lonnie, a person is sacked if he/she is dismissed within the term of a contract. When a contract ends, and it isn't renewed, that person has NOT been sacked. Probably a bit too subtle for you.

Also, on the subject of grammar, it's " you WEREN'T even prepared..", not "you WASN'T even prepared...".

Like PP, you really must try harder in the presentation of your posts, if you want me to take you seriously. At least we've both turned off the radio in disgust. You kept that quiet, you little tinker!
I'll work on me grammar -constable Pablo of the grammar police- if you work on realising that if we don't extend PP's contract the end result is the same. Everything to do with long-term planning, with the foundations that have been put in place, goes out the window and we're back on the Managerial roundabout. I know you have better things to do Pablo but see if you can squeeze in a bit of thinking as regards not allowing PP to continue developing what he has achieved so far. If he didn't have his contract renewed it would basically amount to a sacking because we would be cutting short what needs to be a long term term appointment. I have been saying for a while now that we need Managerial stability at the Club. I was saying it when we had Managers struggling to keep us out of the relegation places and I am certainly sticking with that plea now that we have a Manager who has done so well so far for the Club this season. Do you work in the demolition business by any chance?

I would thrilled to hear your plans on how we should build on where we are now as a Club. Tell us what it is that's wrong and that you would be able to solve it by not continuing with PP. And tell us how, in what way this would work. Let's hear it Pablo!

Hope my grammar and spelling is up to scratch officer.
[quote][p][bold]Pablo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lonniejockstrap[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Pablo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lonniejockstrap[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Pablo[/bold] wrote: I am at a loss to understand PP's thinking in his team selection. We gave the initiative to Barnet with a negative looking starting line up. I turned off the radio in disgust. When everyone was clamouring for the Board to sign up PP a few weeks ago, I argued against this on the basis that we'd won nothing yet and could be headed for mid table by the end of February, if we had a string of bad results. Seems I was wrong. At this rate we'll be mid table by end January. If you can't beat Morecambe and get turned over by the likes of Barnet, due to going into those games with unambitious line ups, you just don't deserve to go up. How is PP going to explain this shambles?[/p][/quote]So you think we shouldn't extend PP's contract unless he actually wins something? interesting! You want us on the Manager merry-go-round again it appears and this, in spite of having made such a massive improvement on the field and raised so much money through Cup games. Ah, but of course, you don't think he has proved he can be a good manager yet do you? Your post appears very immature in that you are basically saying PP should be sacked on the basis of recent results and disregarding everything that has gone before. And this from a so called supporter who can't ever be bothered to listen to how the Team, he implies to care about so much, is doing on the radio. To me you just come across as someone who just takes the opportunity to criticise and do the Club as much harm from your persistent negative criticisms and negativity in general as possible. Whether or not you get beat by Barnet or can't beat Morecambe is irrelevant. We must have been beating somebody because of the position we are in. Where we are at the end of the season is what matters of course and we are starting 2013 from a decent position. I didn't hear much from you at all when we were doing so well in the league and Cup, but I'm sure you won't be able to keep off here whilst ever there is something to moan about. And you turned the radio off before the game even started because of a 'negative looking line up' -hope non of the players gave up as easy as you- how many shots did this negative line have? Oh I forgot all your criticism is based on a game you couldn't be bothered listening to![/p][/quote]Lonnie, please advise where I stated that PP should be sacked. For your information, I've posted after virtually every match - win or lose. Not like you to get your facts wrong, lonnie! If the manager names another negative looking formation, given our position and the quality of the oppositon, then I'm not wasting my time listening to the inevitable outcome. Better things to do- unlike you of course, lonnie. I feel sorry for those poor souls who travelled down to watch a match that we approached with such a lack of ambition.[/p][/quote]Didn't say you stated PP should be sacked, why do you suggest I did? You are suggesting PP should not be offered a new contract by the board. sooooo, if the board take your advice what is the outcome? think about it! - are you unable to connect the dots together? Anyway, you were so wrong about your opinions on Will Atkinson what makes you think anyone gives two hoots about your opposition to giving PP another contract? Why am I not surprised that you say you have better things to do than listen to the radio commentary on how the team you pretend to support is doing, but you don't -apparently- have better things to do with your time than spending it posting negative criticism of that same team and manager. You of course have no way of knowing how ambitious the approach to the game was because you wasn't even prepared to listen to the game on the radio! If Barnet should have been such a walk-over as you seem to be implying -in your 1st post- how come Gillingham and Burton lost to them and Exeter only managed a draw with them during the last few weeks? Maybe you had better things to do with your time than to give any consideration to Barnet's recent form? “A critic is someone who never actually goes to the battle, yet who afterwards comes out shooting the wounded” Tyne Daly[/p][/quote]Lonnie, a person is sacked if he/she is dismissed within the term of a contract. When a contract ends, and it isn't renewed, that person has NOT been sacked. Probably a bit too subtle for you. Also, on the subject of grammar, it's " you WEREN'T even prepared..", not "you WASN'T even prepared...". Like PP, you really must try harder in the presentation of your posts, if you want me to take you seriously. At least we've both turned off the radio in disgust. You kept that quiet, you little tinker![/p][/quote]I'll work on me grammar -constable Pablo of the grammar police- if you work on realising that if we don't extend PP's contract the end result is the same. Everything to do with long-term planning, with the foundations that have been put in place, goes out the window and we're back on the Managerial roundabout. I know you have better things to do Pablo but see if you can squeeze in a bit of thinking as regards not allowing PP to continue developing what he has achieved so far. If he didn't have his contract renewed it would basically amount to a sacking because we would be cutting short what needs to be a long term term appointment. I have been saying for a while now that we need Managerial stability at the Club. I was saying it when we had Managers struggling to keep us out of the relegation places and I am certainly sticking with that plea now that we have a Manager who has done so well so far for the Club this season. Do you work in the demolition business by any chance? I would thrilled to hear your plans on how we should build on where we are now as a Club. Tell us what it is that's wrong and that you would be able to solve it by not continuing with PP. And tell us how, in what way this would work. Let's hear it Pablo! Hope my grammar and spelling is up to scratch officer. lonniejockstrap

9:42am Mon 7 Jan 13

dannbradfc says...

KnightMcCall wrote:
dannbradfc wrote: Fans are over-reacting too early here. We have had our best season for years. Yes we have spent more money on wages than in other seasons and expect a return of sorts, but we have survived a very bad injury list and are still right bang in there. Our recent form is hopefully a blip. We are actually lucky that Connell got that late winner against accrington as we were poor in that half and the christmas period would have been alot worse. I repeat though that with the injuries we have done well to stay in there. To be fair i did say that this was a 'dodgy' game with Villa looming. Its got to be in the players minds etc What we should be asking however is why the manager has chosen to go negative in the past few games. We have a better side than both Barnet and Morecambe so why not go to show this and take the game to them? Our use of wingers as got us the success we have enjoyed thus far, so why change. If its for tiredness i'd argue that we lost points anyway so how does that help us? (Just ask Rafa- it doesn't work). Players prefer to play than train as well so we should always where possible play our best 11 then change if form drops etc. We were too negative and narrow against two sides we are better than. those citing how many shots we had discount those on target. Stats can prove anything. How many of those shots were long range? miles off goal etc. We do need another striker as competition. We saw how we performed without Hanson. Anyone pointing the finger solely his way need to ask how many goals Nahki scored in this recent period as well. I stated how the central midfield wouldn't score many at the beginning of the season and this is proving correct. The reliance is on a very few players to score. If the opposition negate this, then we have problems. Rochdale were a great example of how Parkinson was out-thought. Prknson should have done something about this 20 mins into the game e.g. tried 433 or 352, but left it as it was when it clearly wasn't working but in his defence he at least admitted his part in that defeat and i admire that honesty. Overall wewould have settled for where we are at the beginning of the season. My concerns still remain about lack of potential scoring areas in the side. I also have great concerns over Duke, with any high ball at set-pieces and corenrs and this could cost us a big game i feel e.g. a play-off game. (hopefully not, obviously). He's a great shot stopper but its definately a problem area for city despite having some big lads to defend in there. We need to get back to what we were doing best e.g. been competitive, showing great effort/team spirit and attacking with wide-players. Don't be negative against teams that we are clearly better than. Go for 3 points and we will still be top 7 and the return of defenders hopefully will see us to our aims.......
Interesting post Dann. Well thought out and on the face of it well-balanced. no-one can answer most of your queries about formation except PP but some have pointed out that Reid and Hines are not at full fitness so perhaps not ready to play too much footie in too short a space of time. Hines has struggled in his last two appearances anyway. Thompson is obviously injured so perhaps the formation is the best option with the players that are fit and ready to play. The back four has struggled of late so playing too much of an attacking side can backfire as it did against Rochdale. PP was getting slated for not packing midfield after that result. The return of McHugh may allow a bit more "go-forward" from midfield. I share your concerns over Duke and over the number of goals the team is scoring. This CANNOT be levelled at just one player (i.e. Hanson). Teams score and teams concede. Plenty of good chances are being missed by plenty of players. The negatrons; i.e. those that only have much to say after a defeat are back out in force based on results and clearly without any consideration for how complicated the reality of football management is. Suggesting that the manager who has seen us to the Semi's of the League Cup has no tactical nous is just ridiculous. It makes a nice change to see that someone (i.e. you) has actually looked at the bigger picture and isn't just reacting to personal frustration in the light of a disappointing couple of weeks.
Ta. I actually wonder if PP's change in tactics is also a reaction to the Rochdale game.

He was quite self-critical over that. If it is a feel it is unwise to change what was working based on that one game. Yes they (Rochdale) had clearly worked out a plan to beat our system and it worked very well. Rather than change our system which as done well in previous games what we need is a plan B. if a team is clearly combatting what we do.

It would be somewhat of a panic reaction to now go negative again based on one beating......

Lets do what we we do well and change only when nit isn't working....
[quote][p][bold]KnightMcCall[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]dannbradfc[/bold] wrote: Fans are over-reacting too early here. We have had our best season for years. Yes we have spent more money on wages than in other seasons and expect a return of sorts, but we have survived a very bad injury list and are still right bang in there. Our recent form is hopefully a blip. We are actually lucky that Connell got that late winner against accrington as we were poor in that half and the christmas period would have been alot worse. I repeat though that with the injuries we have done well to stay in there. To be fair i did say that this was a 'dodgy' game with Villa looming. Its got to be in the players minds etc What we should be asking however is why the manager has chosen to go negative in the past few games. We have a better side than both Barnet and Morecambe so why not go to show this and take the game to them? Our use of wingers as got us the success we have enjoyed thus far, so why change. If its for tiredness i'd argue that we lost points anyway so how does that help us? (Just ask Rafa- it doesn't work). Players prefer to play than train as well so we should always where possible play our best 11 then change if form drops etc. We were too negative and narrow against two sides we are better than. those citing how many shots we had discount those on target. Stats can prove anything. How many of those shots were long range? miles off goal etc. We do need another striker as competition. We saw how we performed without Hanson. Anyone pointing the finger solely his way need to ask how many goals Nahki scored in this recent period as well. I stated how the central midfield wouldn't score many at the beginning of the season and this is proving correct. The reliance is on a very few players to score. If the opposition negate this, then we have problems. Rochdale were a great example of how Parkinson was out-thought. Prknson should have done something about this 20 mins into the game e.g. tried 433 or 352, but left it as it was when it clearly wasn't working but in his defence he at least admitted his part in that defeat and i admire that honesty. Overall wewould have settled for where we are at the beginning of the season. My concerns still remain about lack of potential scoring areas in the side. I also have great concerns over Duke, with any high ball at set-pieces and corenrs and this could cost us a big game i feel e.g. a play-off game. (hopefully not, obviously). He's a great shot stopper but its definately a problem area for city despite having some big lads to defend in there. We need to get back to what we were doing best e.g. been competitive, showing great effort/team spirit and attacking with wide-players. Don't be negative against teams that we are clearly better than. Go for 3 points and we will still be top 7 and the return of defenders hopefully will see us to our aims.......[/p][/quote]Interesting post Dann. Well thought out and on the face of it well-balanced. no-one can answer most of your queries about formation except PP but some have pointed out that Reid and Hines are not at full fitness so perhaps not ready to play too much footie in too short a space of time. Hines has struggled in his last two appearances anyway. Thompson is obviously injured so perhaps the formation is the best option with the players that are fit and ready to play. The back four has struggled of late so playing too much of an attacking side can backfire as it did against Rochdale. PP was getting slated for not packing midfield after that result. The return of McHugh may allow a bit more "go-forward" from midfield. I share your concerns over Duke and over the number of goals the team is scoring. This CANNOT be levelled at just one player (i.e. Hanson). Teams score and teams concede. Plenty of good chances are being missed by plenty of players. The negatrons; i.e. those that only have much to say after a defeat are back out in force based on results and clearly without any consideration for how complicated the reality of football management is. Suggesting that the manager who has seen us to the Semi's of the League Cup has no tactical nous is just ridiculous. It makes a nice change to see that someone (i.e. you) has actually looked at the bigger picture and isn't just reacting to personal frustration in the light of a disappointing couple of weeks.[/p][/quote]Ta. I actually wonder if PP's change in tactics is also a reaction to the Rochdale game. He was quite self-critical over that. If it is a feel it is unwise to change what was working based on that one game. Yes they (Rochdale) had clearly worked out a plan to beat our system and it worked very well. Rather than change our system which as done well in previous games what we need is a plan B. if a team is clearly combatting what we do. It would be somewhat of a panic reaction to now go negative again based on one beating...... Lets do what we we do well and change only when nit isn't working.... dannbradfc

12:17pm Mon 7 Jan 13

dannbradfc says...

lonniejockstrap wrote:
dannbradfc wrote:
lonniejockstrap wrote:
Pablo wrote: I am at a loss to understand PP's thinking in his team selection. We gave the initiative to Barnet with a negative looking starting line up. I turned off the radio in disgust. When everyone was clamouring for the Board to sign up PP a few weeks ago, I argued against this on the basis that we'd won nothing yet and could be headed for mid table by the end of February, if we had a string of bad results. Seems I was wrong. At this rate we'll be mid table by end January. If you can't beat Morecambe and get turned over by the likes of Barnet, due to going into those games with unambitious line ups, you just don't deserve to go up. How is PP going to explain this shambles?
So you think we shouldn't extend PP's contract unless he actually wins something? interesting! You want us on the Manager merry-go-round again it appears and this, in spite of having made such a massive improvement on the field and raised so much money through Cup games. Ah, but of course, you don't think he has proved he can be a good manager yet do you? Your post appears very immature in that you are basically saying PP should be sacked on the basis of recent results and disregarding everything that has gone before. And this from a so called supporter who can't ever be bothered to listen to how the Team, he implies to care about so much, is doing on the radio. To me you just come across as someone who just takes the opportunity to criticise and do the Club as much harm from your persistent negative criticisms and negativity in general as possible. Whether or not you get beat by Barnet or can't beat Morecambe is irrelevant. We must have been beating somebody because of the position we are in. Where we are at the end of the season is what matters of course and we are starting 2013 from a decent position. I didn't hear much from you at all when we were doing so well in the league and Cup, but I'm sure you won't be able to keep off here whilst ever there is something to moan about. And you turned the radio off before the game even started because of a 'negative looking line up' -hope non of the players gave up as easy as you- how many shots did this negative line have? Oh I forgot all your criticism is based on a game you couldn't be bothered listening to!
Very funny and also very hypocritical that LONNIE..... Don't you also remember commenting on how you also switched off the radio prior to a game when you heard that Syers wasn't playing. Well i do. You also said it was too negative...... does that mean that all your criticisms of Pablo above apply to yourself??
Yes I do remember that Dann. But it would only have been hypocritical of me if I then come on here and talked about how the team played when I wasn't there or listened to the game. If Pablo wants to turn off the radio fine, but he then needs to stop making up a case for criticising based on something he hasn't witnessed or listened to. Dann, thanks for the expert advice on virtue, coming from someone who sunk the the depths of encouraging supporters to shout abuse at and so create an atmosphere of intimidation against another human being simply because he was not up to your expectations is quite amusing. Your glass house must be made of bullet proof windows Dann. By the way you are also another one who has gone very quite whilst we have been doing well. You were massively overt in your criticism of PP last season but you haven't had much to say at all this season because he appears to have been undermining your previous criticisms and accept you had been wrong about him has been too difficult for you. No doubt you will be back to moaning about PP again if the results don't improve. We have many experts coming on here when the team is struggling piling on the negative criticism. Those that present positive criticism I have no real problem with, particularly when they have some balanced evidence to support what they say. Unfortunately, Pablo and his ilk are simply destructive in their approach.
Qiute a random deflection and switch there LONNIE. Theres a politician in there somewhere. A little childish though to go off topic to attack myself in this process, but if it makes you happy then feel free. At least you were honest in your admitting that you also switched off the radio.

I guess your attack is regarding my wanting Taylor to go bye-bye's. Which i did and we've been here before. But it didn't stop Taylor himself attacking individual players and even the crowd to any media outlet that would listen. Indeed anyone other than himself. Perhaps thats why he left a well documented divided squad behind. I hated his brand of non-football which i saw as a crime to football and the name of entertainment. I wasn't quite as vitriolic as you suggest but i was definately glad to see him go. Even the stats and facts support this i feel.

As for been quiet lately i have a young baby and job which have kept me busy but i can understand how it may look.

Without going over old issues Parko has implemented many of the things i was criticising/question
ing him over. As indeed as the club off the field. Thus i feel justified and vindicated somewhat.

Interestingly PP has in recent games reverted to a negative/cautious formation and guess what we failed to score and lost points and ground. I am hoping its only a temporary tactic and that we go back to doing the things that have helped progress the side this season. last season was also to over cautious and i felt that we should have secured more points than we did.

I thus have nothing to admit about been wrong about him but actually i'm glad he has come around to our way of thinking e.g. the positive fans who want to impose our game on the opposition instead of been afraid to lose.

Nowhere has Parkon "undermined" my criticisms indeed he has fully endorsed them......

smaller squad
more quality
less loans
use the laon system as intended
442
wide-players/wingers

more mobility
less swapping and changing of players
team spirit ( a major plus under PP)

and various other so-called criticisms, which i would rather call POSITIVE improvements lonnie. Perhaps you wanted us to stay the same with invariably the same results. This as not been the case. As i say justified is the word.......
[quote][p][bold]lonniejockstrap[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]dannbradfc[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lonniejockstrap[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Pablo[/bold] wrote: I am at a loss to understand PP's thinking in his team selection. We gave the initiative to Barnet with a negative looking starting line up. I turned off the radio in disgust. When everyone was clamouring for the Board to sign up PP a few weeks ago, I argued against this on the basis that we'd won nothing yet and could be headed for mid table by the end of February, if we had a string of bad results. Seems I was wrong. At this rate we'll be mid table by end January. If you can't beat Morecambe and get turned over by the likes of Barnet, due to going into those games with unambitious line ups, you just don't deserve to go up. How is PP going to explain this shambles?[/p][/quote]So you think we shouldn't extend PP's contract unless he actually wins something? interesting! You want us on the Manager merry-go-round again it appears and this, in spite of having made such a massive improvement on the field and raised so much money through Cup games. Ah, but of course, you don't think he has proved he can be a good manager yet do you? Your post appears very immature in that you are basically saying PP should be sacked on the basis of recent results and disregarding everything that has gone before. And this from a so called supporter who can't ever be bothered to listen to how the Team, he implies to care about so much, is doing on the radio. To me you just come across as someone who just takes the opportunity to criticise and do the Club as much harm from your persistent negative criticisms and negativity in general as possible. Whether or not you get beat by Barnet or can't beat Morecambe is irrelevant. We must have been beating somebody because of the position we are in. Where we are at the end of the season is what matters of course and we are starting 2013 from a decent position. I didn't hear much from you at all when we were doing so well in the league and Cup, but I'm sure you won't be able to keep off here whilst ever there is something to moan about. And you turned the radio off before the game even started because of a 'negative looking line up' -hope non of the players gave up as easy as you- how many shots did this negative line have? Oh I forgot all your criticism is based on a game you couldn't be bothered listening to![/p][/quote]Very funny and also very hypocritical that LONNIE..... Don't you also remember commenting on how you also switched off the radio prior to a game when you heard that Syers wasn't playing. Well i do. You also said it was too negative...... does that mean that all your criticisms of Pablo above apply to yourself??[/p][/quote]Yes I do remember that Dann. But it would only have been hypocritical of me if I then come on here and talked about how the team played when I wasn't there or listened to the game. If Pablo wants to turn off the radio fine, but he then needs to stop making up a case for criticising based on something he hasn't witnessed or listened to. Dann, thanks for the expert advice on virtue, coming from someone who sunk the the depths of encouraging supporters to shout abuse at and so create an atmosphere of intimidation against another human being simply because he was not up to your expectations is quite amusing. Your glass house must be made of bullet proof windows Dann. By the way you are also another one who has gone very quite whilst we have been doing well. You were massively overt in your criticism of PP last season but you haven't had much to say at all this season because he appears to have been undermining your previous criticisms and accept you had been wrong about him has been too difficult for you. No doubt you will be back to moaning about PP again if the results don't improve. We have many experts coming on here when the team is struggling piling on the negative criticism. Those that present positive criticism I have no real problem with, particularly when they have some balanced evidence to support what they say. Unfortunately, Pablo and his ilk are simply destructive in their approach.[/p][/quote]Qiute a random deflection and switch there LONNIE. Theres a politician in there somewhere. A little childish though to go off topic to attack myself in this process, but if it makes you happy then feel free. At least you were honest in your admitting that you also switched off the radio. I guess your attack is regarding my wanting Taylor to go bye-bye's. Which i did and we've been here before. But it didn't stop Taylor himself attacking individual players and even the crowd to any media outlet that would listen. Indeed anyone other than himself. Perhaps thats why he left a well documented divided squad behind. I hated his brand of non-football which i saw as a crime to football and the name of entertainment. I wasn't quite as vitriolic as you suggest but i was definately glad to see him go. Even the stats and facts support this i feel. As for been quiet lately i have a young baby and job which have kept me busy but i can understand how it may look. Without going over old issues Parko has implemented many of the things i was criticising/question ing him over. As indeed as the club off the field. Thus i feel justified and vindicated somewhat. Interestingly PP has in recent games reverted to a negative/cautious formation and guess what we failed to score and lost points and ground. I am hoping its only a temporary tactic and that we go back to doing the things that have helped progress the side this season. last season was also to over cautious and i felt that we should have secured more points than we did. I thus have nothing to admit about been wrong about him but actually i'm glad he has come around to our way of thinking e.g. the positive fans who want to impose our game on the opposition instead of been afraid to lose. Nowhere has Parkon "undermined" my criticisms indeed he has fully endorsed them...... smaller squad more quality less loans use the laon system as intended 442 wide-players/wingers more mobility less swapping and changing of players team spirit ( a major plus under PP) and various other so-called criticisms, which i would rather call POSITIVE improvements lonnie. Perhaps you wanted us to stay the same with invariably the same results. This as not been the case. As i say justified is the word....... dannbradfc

2:58pm Mon 7 Jan 13

lonniejockstrap says...

Dann, you are wanting basically what everyone wants - including PP- which is: a winning, attacking and entertaining team. Unfortunately, its a little more difficult to produce all that, in every game, than some appear to appreciate. We took a 'positive' approach to Rotherham and got stuffed, we started off with a 'positive' approach against Rochdale and got stuffed. We took what you describe as a 'negative/cautious' approach to Morecambe and we were in control of the game, missed chances and drew. We took what you would call a 'negative/cautious' approach to Barnet and -according to media reports- we dominated the game were far more 'positive' than Barnet -who played with a lone striker- but lost.

Gillingham lost at home to Barnet on Boxing day do you think Gillingham set out to be 'positive' or 'negative/cautious'? If we can scientifically prove or at least show overwhelming evidence that one of these approaches is the solution for winning every game -whatever your definition of positive/negative/ca
utious' is -then every team can take this approach and every team will win! Oh hang on a minute, erm, that just is not going to work is it? Not even with what could be classed as a 'decent' league 2 side. Yep, we may win more than we lose. That's if we have all our players free from injury/sickness and can play the same team of first choice players -more or less- each game. But we haven't so we couldn't even if we had wanted to. When we more or less had our strongest team out playing with a 'positive' approach it still doesn't guarantee a win -as in Gillingham and Rotherham as just 2 examples.

I think we need to give PP a bit of credit for understanding how to put out a side that he thinks has the best chance of getting a result. Sometimes it works -as in the majority of our performances this season- and sometimes it doesn't.

PP needed time to get players to play the way he wants them to play. All Managers need time to instil methods, mentality, tactics or -if you like- their culture into the business that they have taken over. If this means replacing staff then that is what they will do. However, not only did you want Taylor out you were also very impatient with PP.

I wanted to stick with the same Manager for a while Dann remember!? Surely you remember that I spent plenty of time on here arguing against you and others who were wanting shut of Managers. The evidence of the previous 11 years or so suggested changing Managers regularly wasn't working.

And Dann, it may just be a coincidence that you now have time to post during a poor spell for the team -whilst still working and having a young child?-, but not when we were doing fantastically well -relatively speaking. I'm glad you understand how it looks. Could be like our shooting technique, just down to bad timing I suppose! Your post was balanced and constructively critical which I have no problem with. Pablo has a similar issues with his time management, he has better things to do with his time than to listen to City dominate Barnet but can find time to write and post out negative criticism of the Manager on here.

As I said to Pablo a couple of weeks ago its a doddle supporting and encouraging a winning team and Manager. It's easy to point out where things are wrong and find fault when we are struggling. The team/Club and Manager need our support most when things are not going well. That doesn't exclude constructive balanced criticism of course. I have disagreed with every managers decisions at some time or other but I have been wary of how my opinions could add to destabilising the Club in some-way during very critical times and chose to support rather than attack. Let the Chairmen decide how long the Manager stays I say, not the fans. Our Chairmen have the best interests of the Club at heart. Now is as important a time as any to get behind PP and the team in my opinion. PP knows what he is doing and the players can't be faulted for effort.

And finally, there was a very odd thing you seemed to suggest in your last paragraph Dann. Are you really questioning that I was content with my team loosing on a regular basis and being so close to relegation from the football league that it threatened our future at VP and possibly even the existence of the Club itself?
Dann, you are wanting basically what everyone wants - including PP- which is: a winning, attacking and entertaining team. Unfortunately, its a little more difficult to produce all that, in every game, than some appear to appreciate. We took a 'positive' approach to Rotherham and got stuffed, we started off with a 'positive' approach against Rochdale and got stuffed. We took what you describe as a 'negative/cautious' approach to Morecambe and we were in control of the game, missed chances and drew. We took what you would call a 'negative/cautious' approach to Barnet and -according to media reports- we dominated the game were far more 'positive' than Barnet -who played with a lone striker- but lost. Gillingham lost at home to Barnet on Boxing day do you think Gillingham set out to be 'positive' or 'negative/cautious'? If we can scientifically prove or at least show overwhelming evidence that one of these approaches is the solution for winning every game -whatever your definition of positive/negative/ca utious' is -then every team can take this approach and every team will win! Oh hang on a minute, erm, that just is not going to work is it? Not even with what could be classed as a 'decent' league 2 side. Yep, we may win more than we lose. That's if we have all our players free from injury/sickness and can play the same team of first choice players -more or less- each game. But we haven't so we couldn't even if we had wanted to. When we more or less had our strongest team out playing with a 'positive' approach it still doesn't guarantee a win -as in Gillingham and Rotherham as just 2 examples. I think we need to give PP a bit of credit for understanding how to put out a side that he thinks has the best chance of getting a result. Sometimes it works -as in the majority of our performances this season- and sometimes it doesn't. PP needed time to get players to play the way he wants them to play. All Managers need time to instil methods, mentality, tactics or -if you like- their culture into the business that they have taken over. If this means replacing staff then that is what they will do. However, not only did you want Taylor out you were also very impatient with PP. I wanted to stick with the same Manager for a while Dann remember!? Surely you remember that I spent plenty of time on here arguing against you and others who were wanting shut of Managers. The evidence of the previous 11 years or so suggested changing Managers regularly wasn't working. And Dann, it may just be a coincidence that you now have time to post during a poor spell for the team -whilst still working and having a young child?-, but not when we were doing fantastically well -relatively speaking. I'm glad you understand how it looks. Could be like our shooting technique, just down to bad timing I suppose! Your post was balanced and constructively critical which I have no problem with. Pablo has a similar issues with his time management, he has better things to do with his time than to listen to City dominate Barnet but can find time to write and post out negative criticism of the Manager on here. As I said to Pablo a couple of weeks ago its a doddle supporting and encouraging a winning team and Manager. It's easy to point out where things are wrong and find fault when we are struggling. The team/Club and Manager need our support most when things are not going well. That doesn't exclude constructive balanced criticism of course. I have disagreed with every managers decisions at some time or other but I have been wary of how my opinions could add to destabilising the Club in some-way during very critical times and chose to support rather than attack. Let the Chairmen decide how long the Manager stays I say, not the fans. Our Chairmen have the best interests of the Club at heart. Now is as important a time as any to get behind PP and the team in my opinion. PP knows what he is doing and the players can't be faulted for effort. And finally, there was a very odd thing you seemed to suggest in your last paragraph Dann. Are you really questioning that I was content with my team loosing on a regular basis and being so close to relegation from the football league that it threatened our future at VP and possibly even the existence of the Club itself? lonniejockstrap

8:15pm Mon 7 Jan 13

Victor Clayton says...

lonniejockstrap wrote:
Dann, you are wanting basically what everyone wants - including PP- which is: a winning, attacking and entertaining team. Unfortunately, its a little more difficult to produce all that, in every game, than some appear to appreciate. We took a 'positive' approach to Rotherham and got stuffed, we started off with a 'positive' approach against Rochdale and got stuffed. We took what you describe as a 'negative/cautious' approach to Morecambe and we were in control of the game, missed chances and drew. We took what you would call a 'negative/cautious' approach to Barnet and -according to media reports- we dominated the game were far more 'positive' than Barnet -who played with a lone striker- but lost.

Gillingham lost at home to Barnet on Boxing day do you think Gillingham set out to be 'positive' or 'negative/cautious'? If we can scientifically prove or at least show overwhelming evidence that one of these approaches is the solution for winning every game -whatever your definition of positive/negative/ca

utious' is -then every team can take this approach and every team will win! Oh hang on a minute, erm, that just is not going to work is it? Not even with what could be classed as a 'decent' league 2 side. Yep, we may win more than we lose. That's if we have all our players free from injury/sickness and can play the same team of first choice players -more or less- each game. But we haven't so we couldn't even if we had wanted to. When we more or less had our strongest team out playing with a 'positive' approach it still doesn't guarantee a win -as in Gillingham and Rotherham as just 2 examples.

I think we need to give PP a bit of credit for understanding how to put out a side that he thinks has the best chance of getting a result. Sometimes it works -as in the majority of our performances this season- and sometimes it doesn't.

PP needed time to get players to play the way he wants them to play. All Managers need time to instil methods, mentality, tactics or -if you like- their culture into the business that they have taken over. If this means replacing staff then that is what they will do. However, not only did you want Taylor out you were also very impatient with PP.

I wanted to stick with the same Manager for a while Dann remember!? Surely you remember that I spent plenty of time on here arguing against you and others who were wanting shut of Managers. The evidence of the previous 11 years or so suggested changing Managers regularly wasn't working.

And Dann, it may just be a coincidence that you now have time to post during a poor spell for the team -whilst still working and having a young child?-, but not when we were doing fantastically well -relatively speaking. I'm glad you understand how it looks. Could be like our shooting technique, just down to bad timing I suppose! Your post was balanced and constructively critical which I have no problem with. Pablo has a similar issues with his time management, he has better things to do with his time than to listen to City dominate Barnet but can find time to write and post out negative criticism of the Manager on here.

As I said to Pablo a couple of weeks ago its a doddle supporting and encouraging a winning team and Manager. It's easy to point out where things are wrong and find fault when we are struggling. The team/Club and Manager need our support most when things are not going well. That doesn't exclude constructive balanced criticism of course. I have disagreed with every managers decisions at some time or other but I have been wary of how my opinions could add to destabilising the Club in some-way during very critical times and chose to support rather than attack. Let the Chairmen decide how long the Manager stays I say, not the fans. Our Chairmen have the best interests of the Club at heart. Now is as important a time as any to get behind PP and the team in my opinion. PP knows what he is doing and the players can't be faulted for effort.

And finally, there was a very odd thing you seemed to suggest in your last paragraph Dann. Are you really questioning that I was content with my team loosing on a regular basis and being so close to relegation from the football league that it threatened our future at VP and possibly even the existence of the Club itself?
how can going out with a negative set up against a team that is not as good a we are be right? even Tim & sticks were pulling their hair out. and to top it all we lost!
[quote][p][bold]lonniejockstrap[/bold] wrote: Dann, you are wanting basically what everyone wants - including PP- which is: a winning, attacking and entertaining team. Unfortunately, its a little more difficult to produce all that, in every game, than some appear to appreciate. We took a 'positive' approach to Rotherham and got stuffed, we started off with a 'positive' approach against Rochdale and got stuffed. We took what you describe as a 'negative/cautious' approach to Morecambe and we were in control of the game, missed chances and drew. We took what you would call a 'negative/cautious' approach to Barnet and -according to media reports- we dominated the game were far more 'positive' than Barnet -who played with a lone striker- but lost. Gillingham lost at home to Barnet on Boxing day do you think Gillingham set out to be 'positive' or 'negative/cautious'? If we can scientifically prove or at least show overwhelming evidence that one of these approaches is the solution for winning every game -whatever your definition of positive/negative/ca utious' is -then every team can take this approach and every team will win! Oh hang on a minute, erm, that just is not going to work is it? Not even with what could be classed as a 'decent' league 2 side. Yep, we may win more than we lose. That's if we have all our players free from injury/sickness and can play the same team of first choice players -more or less- each game. But we haven't so we couldn't even if we had wanted to. When we more or less had our strongest team out playing with a 'positive' approach it still doesn't guarantee a win -as in Gillingham and Rotherham as just 2 examples. I think we need to give PP a bit of credit for understanding how to put out a side that he thinks has the best chance of getting a result. Sometimes it works -as in the majority of our performances this season- and sometimes it doesn't. PP needed time to get players to play the way he wants them to play. All Managers need time to instil methods, mentality, tactics or -if you like- their culture into the business that they have taken over. If this means replacing staff then that is what they will do. However, not only did you want Taylor out you were also very impatient with PP. I wanted to stick with the same Manager for a while Dann remember!? Surely you remember that I spent plenty of time on here arguing against you and others who were wanting shut of Managers. The evidence of the previous 11 years or so suggested changing Managers regularly wasn't working. And Dann, it may just be a coincidence that you now have time to post during a poor spell for the team -whilst still working and having a young child?-, but not when we were doing fantastically well -relatively speaking. I'm glad you understand how it looks. Could be like our shooting technique, just down to bad timing I suppose! Your post was balanced and constructively critical which I have no problem with. Pablo has a similar issues with his time management, he has better things to do with his time than to listen to City dominate Barnet but can find time to write and post out negative criticism of the Manager on here. As I said to Pablo a couple of weeks ago its a doddle supporting and encouraging a winning team and Manager. It's easy to point out where things are wrong and find fault when we are struggling. The team/Club and Manager need our support most when things are not going well. That doesn't exclude constructive balanced criticism of course. I have disagreed with every managers decisions at some time or other but I have been wary of how my opinions could add to destabilising the Club in some-way during very critical times and chose to support rather than attack. Let the Chairmen decide how long the Manager stays I say, not the fans. Our Chairmen have the best interests of the Club at heart. Now is as important a time as any to get behind PP and the team in my opinion. PP knows what he is doing and the players can't be faulted for effort. And finally, there was a very odd thing you seemed to suggest in your last paragraph Dann. Are you really questioning that I was content with my team loosing on a regular basis and being so close to relegation from the football league that it threatened our future at VP and possibly even the existence of the Club itself?[/p][/quote]how can going out with a negative set up against a team that is not as good a we are be right? even Tim & sticks were pulling their hair out. and to top it all we lost! Victor Clayton

12:14am Tue 8 Jan 13

lonniejockstrap says...

Victor Clayton wrote:
lonniejockstrap wrote:
Dann, you are wanting basically what everyone wants - including PP- which is: a winning, attacking and entertaining team. Unfortunately, its a little more difficult to produce all that, in every game, than some appear to appreciate. We took a 'positive' approach to Rotherham and got stuffed, we started off with a 'positive' approach against Rochdale and got stuffed. We took what you describe as a 'negative/cautious' approach to Morecambe and we were in control of the game, missed chances and drew. We took what you would call a 'negative/cautious' approach to Barnet and -according to media reports- we dominated the game were far more 'positive' than Barnet -who played with a lone striker- but lost.

Gillingham lost at home to Barnet on Boxing day do you think Gillingham set out to be 'positive' or 'negative/cautious'? If we can scientifically prove or at least show overwhelming evidence that one of these approaches is the solution for winning every game -whatever your definition of positive/negative/ca


utious' is -then every team can take this approach and every team will win! Oh hang on a minute, erm, that just is not going to work is it? Not even with what could be classed as a 'decent' league 2 side. Yep, we may win more than we lose. That's if we have all our players free from injury/sickness and can play the same team of first choice players -more or less- each game. But we haven't so we couldn't even if we had wanted to. When we more or less had our strongest team out playing with a 'positive' approach it still doesn't guarantee a win -as in Gillingham and Rotherham as just 2 examples.

I think we need to give PP a bit of credit for understanding how to put out a side that he thinks has the best chance of getting a result. Sometimes it works -as in the majority of our performances this season- and sometimes it doesn't.

PP needed time to get players to play the way he wants them to play. All Managers need time to instil methods, mentality, tactics or -if you like- their culture into the business that they have taken over. If this means replacing staff then that is what they will do. However, not only did you want Taylor out you were also very impatient with PP.

I wanted to stick with the same Manager for a while Dann remember!? Surely you remember that I spent plenty of time on here arguing against you and others who were wanting shut of Managers. The evidence of the previous 11 years or so suggested changing Managers regularly wasn't working.

And Dann, it may just be a coincidence that you now have time to post during a poor spell for the team -whilst still working and having a young child?-, but not when we were doing fantastically well -relatively speaking. I'm glad you understand how it looks. Could be like our shooting technique, just down to bad timing I suppose! Your post was balanced and constructively critical which I have no problem with. Pablo has a similar issues with his time management, he has better things to do with his time than to listen to City dominate Barnet but can find time to write and post out negative criticism of the Manager on here.

As I said to Pablo a couple of weeks ago its a doddle supporting and encouraging a winning team and Manager. It's easy to point out where things are wrong and find fault when we are struggling. The team/Club and Manager need our support most when things are not going well. That doesn't exclude constructive balanced criticism of course. I have disagreed with every managers decisions at some time or other but I have been wary of how my opinions could add to destabilising the Club in some-way during very critical times and chose to support rather than attack. Let the Chairmen decide how long the Manager stays I say, not the fans. Our Chairmen have the best interests of the Club at heart. Now is as important a time as any to get behind PP and the team in my opinion. PP knows what he is doing and the players can't be faulted for effort.

And finally, there was a very odd thing you seemed to suggest in your last paragraph Dann. Are you really questioning that I was content with my team loosing on a regular basis and being so close to relegation from the football league that it threatened our future at VP and possibly even the existence of the Club itself?
how can going out with a negative set up against a team that is not as good a we are be right? even Tim & sticks were pulling their hair out. and to top it all we lost!
I don't accept that to play two attackers with an attacking midfielder playing just behind the front two is a negative approach to a game.

If you can explain why Gillingham lost at home to Barnet on Boxing day then we might be able to understand, to some extent, why PP chose the line up he did.

Barnet have been in better form than their lowly position suggests no matter how many posters on here chose to ignore that fact. PP may have had someone watch Barnet as well as also being aware of their recent good results against teams that are 'better' or at least as good as us -if we are judging by Gillingham's, Exeter's and Burton's league position. All of those teams -on paper- were much better than Barnet. How would 'Tim & sticks' explain that do you think?

And don't ignore the fact that City were the far more dominant team in the game regardless of the opinion that it was a negative approach. Barnet played a more 'negative ' line up than us with one man up front. If we believe the result is purely down to who plays the more positive line-up will win then Barnet appear to have been proving that is a myth.

I fully understand where posters are coming from, but I don't think they are taking into consideration Barnet's recent form or City's for that matter. The form table for the last 6 games show Barnet in 6th place and City in 16th. That suggests to me that Barnet are actually a better team than us -at the moment. I have already mentioned 3 teams that they have got wins and a draw against. Only 9 games ago they drew with Oxford who are at the top of the form table. Barnet's defeats in recent games have been by the odd goal.

The information is provided to bring context to what some posters seem to think should have been a walk in the park for City. It appears to me we actually did well to dominate Barnet, away from home, who are doing well on present form, even if we didn't win, when all the facts are considered.
[quote][p][bold]Victor Clayton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lonniejockstrap[/bold] wrote: Dann, you are wanting basically what everyone wants - including PP- which is: a winning, attacking and entertaining team. Unfortunately, its a little more difficult to produce all that, in every game, than some appear to appreciate. We took a 'positive' approach to Rotherham and got stuffed, we started off with a 'positive' approach against Rochdale and got stuffed. We took what you describe as a 'negative/cautious' approach to Morecambe and we were in control of the game, missed chances and drew. We took what you would call a 'negative/cautious' approach to Barnet and -according to media reports- we dominated the game were far more 'positive' than Barnet -who played with a lone striker- but lost. Gillingham lost at home to Barnet on Boxing day do you think Gillingham set out to be 'positive' or 'negative/cautious'? If we can scientifically prove or at least show overwhelming evidence that one of these approaches is the solution for winning every game -whatever your definition of positive/negative/ca utious' is -then every team can take this approach and every team will win! Oh hang on a minute, erm, that just is not going to work is it? Not even with what could be classed as a 'decent' league 2 side. Yep, we may win more than we lose. That's if we have all our players free from injury/sickness and can play the same team of first choice players -more or less- each game. But we haven't so we couldn't even if we had wanted to. When we more or less had our strongest team out playing with a 'positive' approach it still doesn't guarantee a win -as in Gillingham and Rotherham as just 2 examples. I think we need to give PP a bit of credit for understanding how to put out a side that he thinks has the best chance of getting a result. Sometimes it works -as in the majority of our performances this season- and sometimes it doesn't. PP needed time to get players to play the way he wants them to play. All Managers need time to instil methods, mentality, tactics or -if you like- their culture into the business that they have taken over. If this means replacing staff then that is what they will do. However, not only did you want Taylor out you were also very impatient with PP. I wanted to stick with the same Manager for a while Dann remember!? Surely you remember that I spent plenty of time on here arguing against you and others who were wanting shut of Managers. The evidence of the previous 11 years or so suggested changing Managers regularly wasn't working. And Dann, it may just be a coincidence that you now have time to post during a poor spell for the team -whilst still working and having a young child?-, but not when we were doing fantastically well -relatively speaking. I'm glad you understand how it looks. Could be like our shooting technique, just down to bad timing I suppose! Your post was balanced and constructively critical which I have no problem with. Pablo has a similar issues with his time management, he has better things to do with his time than to listen to City dominate Barnet but can find time to write and post out negative criticism of the Manager on here. As I said to Pablo a couple of weeks ago its a doddle supporting and encouraging a winning team and Manager. It's easy to point out where things are wrong and find fault when we are struggling. The team/Club and Manager need our support most when things are not going well. That doesn't exclude constructive balanced criticism of course. I have disagreed with every managers decisions at some time or other but I have been wary of how my opinions could add to destabilising the Club in some-way during very critical times and chose to support rather than attack. Let the Chairmen decide how long the Manager stays I say, not the fans. Our Chairmen have the best interests of the Club at heart. Now is as important a time as any to get behind PP and the team in my opinion. PP knows what he is doing and the players can't be faulted for effort. And finally, there was a very odd thing you seemed to suggest in your last paragraph Dann. Are you really questioning that I was content with my team loosing on a regular basis and being so close to relegation from the football league that it threatened our future at VP and possibly even the existence of the Club itself?[/p][/quote]how can going out with a negative set up against a team that is not as good a we are be right? even Tim & sticks were pulling their hair out. and to top it all we lost![/p][/quote]I don't accept that to play two attackers with an attacking midfielder playing just behind the front two is a negative approach to a game. If you can explain why Gillingham lost at home to Barnet on Boxing day then we might be able to understand, to some extent, why PP chose the line up he did. Barnet have been in better form than their lowly position suggests no matter how many posters on here chose to ignore that fact. PP may have had someone watch Barnet as well as also being aware of their recent good results against teams that are 'better' or at least as good as us -if we are judging by Gillingham's, Exeter's and Burton's league position. All of those teams -on paper- were much better than Barnet. How would 'Tim & sticks' explain that do you think? And don't ignore the fact that City were the far more dominant team in the game regardless of the opinion that it was a negative approach. Barnet played a more 'negative ' line up than us with one man up front. If we believe the result is purely down to who plays the more positive line-up will win then Barnet appear to have been proving that is a myth. I fully understand where posters are coming from, but I don't think they are taking into consideration Barnet's recent form or City's for that matter. The form table for the last 6 games show Barnet in 6th place and City in 16th. That suggests to me that Barnet are actually a better team than us -at the moment. I have already mentioned 3 teams that they have got wins and a draw against. Only 9 games ago they drew with Oxford who are at the top of the form table. Barnet's defeats in recent games have been by the odd goal. The information is provided to bring context to what some posters seem to think should have been a walk in the park for City. It appears to me we actually did well to dominate Barnet, away from home, who are doing well on present form, even if we didn't win, when all the facts are considered. lonniejockstrap

1:10am Tue 8 Jan 13

tyker2 says...

goodness me:we lost 2-0.END OF
goodness me:we lost 2-0.END OF tyker2

10:14am Tue 8 Jan 13

lonniejockstrap says...

tyker2 wrote:
goodness me:we lost 2-0.END OF
“All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them.”
(Galileo Galilei)

I can't help mesen tyker. It's the ex player/manager/coach in me. Plus being a devil's advocate/competitive
/argumentative git is a personality trait of mine.

“The search for truth is more precious than its possession.”
(Albert Einstein)
[quote][p][bold]tyker2[/bold] wrote: goodness me:we lost 2-0.END OF[/p][/quote]“All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them.” (Galileo Galilei) I can't help mesen tyker. It's the ex player/manager/coach in me. Plus being a devil's advocate/competitive /argumentative git is a personality trait of mine. “The search for truth is more precious than its possession.” (Albert Einstein) lonniejockstrap

12:46pm Tue 8 Jan 13

Victor Clayton says...

lonniejockstrap wrote:
Victor Clayton wrote:
lonniejockstrap wrote: Dann, you are wanting basically what everyone wants - including PP- which is: a winning, attacking and entertaining team. Unfortunately, its a little more difficult to produce all that, in every game, than some appear to appreciate. We took a 'positive' approach to Rotherham and got stuffed, we started off with a 'positive' approach against Rochdale and got stuffed. We took what you describe as a 'negative/cautious' approach to Morecambe and we were in control of the game, missed chances and drew. We took what you would call a 'negative/cautious' approach to Barnet and -according to media reports- we dominated the game were far more 'positive' than Barnet -who played with a lone striker- but lost. Gillingham lost at home to Barnet on Boxing day do you think Gillingham set out to be 'positive' or 'negative/cautious'? If we can scientifically prove or at least show overwhelming evidence that one of these approaches is the solution for winning every game -whatever your definition of positive/negative/ca utious' is -then every team can take this approach and every team will win! Oh hang on a minute, erm, that just is not going to work is it? Not even with what could be classed as a 'decent' league 2 side. Yep, we may win more than we lose. That's if we have all our players free from injury/sickness and can play the same team of first choice players -more or less- each game. But we haven't so we couldn't even if we had wanted to. When we more or less had our strongest team out playing with a 'positive' approach it still doesn't guarantee a win -as in Gillingham and Rotherham as just 2 examples. I think we need to give PP a bit of credit for understanding how to put out a side that he thinks has the best chance of getting a result. Sometimes it works -as in the majority of our performances this season- and sometimes it doesn't. PP needed time to get players to play the way he wants them to play. All Managers need time to instil methods, mentality, tactics or -if you like- their culture into the business that they have taken over. If this means replacing staff then that is what they will do. However, not only did you want Taylor out you were also very impatient with PP. I wanted to stick with the same Manager for a while Dann remember!? Surely you remember that I spent plenty of time on here arguing against you and others who were wanting shut of Managers. The evidence of the previous 11 years or so suggested changing Managers regularly wasn't working. And Dann, it may just be a coincidence that you now have time to post during a poor spell for the team -whilst still working and having a young child?-, but not when we were doing fantastically well -relatively speaking. I'm glad you understand how it looks. Could be like our shooting technique, just down to bad timing I suppose! Your post was balanced and constructively critical which I have no problem with. Pablo has a similar issues with his time management, he has better things to do with his time than to listen to City dominate Barnet but can find time to write and post out negative criticism of the Manager on here. As I said to Pablo a couple of weeks ago its a doddle supporting and encouraging a winning team and Manager. It's easy to point out where things are wrong and find fault when we are struggling. The team/Club and Manager need our support most when things are not going well. That doesn't exclude constructive balanced criticism of course. I have disagreed with every managers decisions at some time or other but I have been wary of how my opinions could add to destabilising the Club in some-way during very critical times and chose to support rather than attack. Let the Chairmen decide how long the Manager stays I say, not the fans. Our Chairmen have the best interests of the Club at heart. Now is as important a time as any to get behind PP and the team in my opinion. PP knows what he is doing and the players can't be faulted for effort. And finally, there was a very odd thing you seemed to suggest in your last paragraph Dann. Are you really questioning that I was content with my team loosing on a regular basis and being so close to relegation from the football league that it threatened our future at VP and possibly even the existence of the Club itself?
how can going out with a negative set up against a team that is not as good a we are be right? even Tim & sticks were pulling their hair out. and to top it all we lost!
I don't accept that to play two attackers with an attacking midfielder playing just behind the front two is a negative approach to a game. If you can explain why Gillingham lost at home to Barnet on Boxing day then we might be able to understand, to some extent, why PP chose the line up he did. Barnet have been in better form than their lowly position suggests no matter how many posters on here chose to ignore that fact. PP may have had someone watch Barnet as well as also being aware of their recent good results against teams that are 'better' or at least as good as us -if we are judging by Gillingham's, Exeter's and Burton's league position. All of those teams -on paper- were much better than Barnet. How would 'Tim & sticks' explain that do you think? And don't ignore the fact that City were the far more dominant team in the game regardless of the opinion that it was a negative approach. Barnet played a more 'negative ' line up than us with one man up front. If we believe the result is purely down to who plays the more positive line-up will win then Barnet appear to have been proving that is a myth. I fully understand where posters are coming from, but I don't think they are taking into consideration Barnet's recent form or City's for that matter. The form table for the last 6 games show Barnet in 6th place and City in 16th. That suggests to me that Barnet are actually a better team than us -at the moment. I have already mentioned 3 teams that they have got wins and a draw against. Only 9 games ago they drew with Oxford who are at the top of the form table. Barnet's defeats in recent games have been by the odd goal. The information is provided to bring context to what some posters seem to think should have been a walk in the park for City. It appears to me we actually did well to dominate Barnet, away from home, who are doing well on present form, even if we didn't win, when all the facts are considered.
IMO, We are very literal and one attacking midfield player means just that. so 2 attackers and 1 midfield player would mean 3 of our players against 6 of theirs (keeper, 4 defenders and one tracking back midfielder). Against Villa this is attacking, but against Barnet (even if they have been better of late) I dont agree. and them playing a lone striker makes it even worse! all the rest about
My concern is that we are dominating midfield but leaving the strikers isolated. when Hanson and Wells were popping them in this was a great way to play. but of late they haven't been. we haven't adapted and it could cost us. all the rest about Gillingham and what Tim and sticker think i don't know.
[quote][p][bold]lonniejockstrap[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Victor Clayton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lonniejockstrap[/bold] wrote: Dann, you are wanting basically what everyone wants - including PP- which is: a winning, attacking and entertaining team. Unfortunately, its a little more difficult to produce all that, in every game, than some appear to appreciate. We took a 'positive' approach to Rotherham and got stuffed, we started off with a 'positive' approach against Rochdale and got stuffed. We took what you describe as a 'negative/cautious' approach to Morecambe and we were in control of the game, missed chances and drew. We took what you would call a 'negative/cautious' approach to Barnet and -according to media reports- we dominated the game were far more 'positive' than Barnet -who played with a lone striker- but lost. Gillingham lost at home to Barnet on Boxing day do you think Gillingham set out to be 'positive' or 'negative/cautious'? If we can scientifically prove or at least show overwhelming evidence that one of these approaches is the solution for winning every game -whatever your definition of positive/negative/ca utious' is -then every team can take this approach and every team will win! Oh hang on a minute, erm, that just is not going to work is it? Not even with what could be classed as a 'decent' league 2 side. Yep, we may win more than we lose. That's if we have all our players free from injury/sickness and can play the same team of first choice players -more or less- each game. But we haven't so we couldn't even if we had wanted to. When we more or less had our strongest team out playing with a 'positive' approach it still doesn't guarantee a win -as in Gillingham and Rotherham as just 2 examples. I think we need to give PP a bit of credit for understanding how to put out a side that he thinks has the best chance of getting a result. Sometimes it works -as in the majority of our performances this season- and sometimes it doesn't. PP needed time to get players to play the way he wants them to play. All Managers need time to instil methods, mentality, tactics or -if you like- their culture into the business that they have taken over. If this means replacing staff then that is what they will do. However, not only did you want Taylor out you were also very impatient with PP. I wanted to stick with the same Manager for a while Dann remember!? Surely you remember that I spent plenty of time on here arguing against you and others who were wanting shut of Managers. The evidence of the previous 11 years or so suggested changing Managers regularly wasn't working. And Dann, it may just be a coincidence that you now have time to post during a poor spell for the team -whilst still working and having a young child?-, but not when we were doing fantastically well -relatively speaking. I'm glad you understand how it looks. Could be like our shooting technique, just down to bad timing I suppose! Your post was balanced and constructively critical which I have no problem with. Pablo has a similar issues with his time management, he has better things to do with his time than to listen to City dominate Barnet but can find time to write and post out negative criticism of the Manager on here. As I said to Pablo a couple of weeks ago its a doddle supporting and encouraging a winning team and Manager. It's easy to point out where things are wrong and find fault when we are struggling. The team/Club and Manager need our support most when things are not going well. That doesn't exclude constructive balanced criticism of course. I have disagreed with every managers decisions at some time or other but I have been wary of how my opinions could add to destabilising the Club in some-way during very critical times and chose to support rather than attack. Let the Chairmen decide how long the Manager stays I say, not the fans. Our Chairmen have the best interests of the Club at heart. Now is as important a time as any to get behind PP and the team in my opinion. PP knows what he is doing and the players can't be faulted for effort. And finally, there was a very odd thing you seemed to suggest in your last paragraph Dann. Are you really questioning that I was content with my team loosing on a regular basis and being so close to relegation from the football league that it threatened our future at VP and possibly even the existence of the Club itself?[/p][/quote]how can going out with a negative set up against a team that is not as good a we are be right? even Tim & sticks were pulling their hair out. and to top it all we lost![/p][/quote]I don't accept that to play two attackers with an attacking midfielder playing just behind the front two is a negative approach to a game. If you can explain why Gillingham lost at home to Barnet on Boxing day then we might be able to understand, to some extent, why PP chose the line up he did. Barnet have been in better form than their lowly position suggests no matter how many posters on here chose to ignore that fact. PP may have had someone watch Barnet as well as also being aware of their recent good results against teams that are 'better' or at least as good as us -if we are judging by Gillingham's, Exeter's and Burton's league position. All of those teams -on paper- were much better than Barnet. How would 'Tim & sticks' explain that do you think? And don't ignore the fact that City were the far more dominant team in the game regardless of the opinion that it was a negative approach. Barnet played a more 'negative ' line up than us with one man up front. If we believe the result is purely down to who plays the more positive line-up will win then Barnet appear to have been proving that is a myth. I fully understand where posters are coming from, but I don't think they are taking into consideration Barnet's recent form or City's for that matter. The form table for the last 6 games show Barnet in 6th place and City in 16th. That suggests to me that Barnet are actually a better team than us -at the moment. I have already mentioned 3 teams that they have got wins and a draw against. Only 9 games ago they drew with Oxford who are at the top of the form table. Barnet's defeats in recent games have been by the odd goal. The information is provided to bring context to what some posters seem to think should have been a walk in the park for City. It appears to me we actually did well to dominate Barnet, away from home, who are doing well on present form, even if we didn't win, when all the facts are considered.[/p][/quote]IMO, We are very literal and one attacking midfield player means just that. so 2 attackers and 1 midfield player would mean 3 of our players against 6 of theirs (keeper, 4 defenders and one tracking back midfielder). Against Villa this is attacking, but against Barnet (even if they have been better of late) I dont agree. and them playing a lone striker makes it even worse! all the rest about My concern is that we are dominating midfield but leaving the strikers isolated. when Hanson and Wells were popping them in this was a great way to play. but of late they haven't been. we haven't adapted and it could cost us. all the rest about Gillingham and what Tim and sticker think i don't know. Victor Clayton

1:23pm Tue 8 Jan 13

tyker2 says...

lonniejockstrap wrote:
tyker2 wrote:
goodness me:we lost 2-0.END OF
“All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them.”
(Galileo Galilei)

I can't help mesen tyker. It's the ex player/manager/coach in me. Plus being a devil's advocate/competitive

/argumentative git is a personality trait of mine.

“The search for truth is more precious than its possession.”
(Albert Einstein)
but what is the truth: intellectual argument does not necessarily result in the truth being achieved. We all know football is about opinion and we should ,therefore, respect any opinion which does not fit our own perception and we must all accept that there is no true answer.
[quote][p][bold]lonniejockstrap[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tyker2[/bold] wrote: goodness me:we lost 2-0.END OF[/p][/quote]“All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them.” (Galileo Galilei) I can't help mesen tyker. It's the ex player/manager/coach in me. Plus being a devil's advocate/competitive /argumentative git is a personality trait of mine. “The search for truth is more precious than its possession.” (Albert Einstein)[/p][/quote]but what is the truth: intellectual argument does not necessarily result in the truth being achieved. We all know football is about opinion and we should ,therefore, respect any opinion which does not fit our own perception and we must all accept that there is no true answer. tyker2

1:44am Wed 9 Jan 13

lonniejockstrap says...

tyker2 wrote:
lonniejockstrap wrote:
tyker2 wrote:
goodness me:we lost 2-0.END OF
“All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them.”
(Galileo Galilei)

I can't help mesen tyker. It's the ex player/manager/coach in me. Plus being a devil's advocate/competitive


/argumentative git is a personality trait of mine.

“The search for truth is more precious than its possession.”
(Albert Einstein)
but what is the truth: intellectual argument does not necessarily result in the truth being achieved. We all know football is about opinion and we should ,therefore, respect any opinion which does not fit our own perception and we must all accept that there is no true answer.
Maybe there is no 'truth' tyker. But we must search for the truth simply because we become wiser by doing so. The more difficulty in getting to the truth -if we ever get to it- the more we learn. I certainly agree that people should be allowed to express an opinion but not sure I agree we should 'respect' an opinion just because it's an opinion. I think it would have to depend on how that opinion was arrived at.

City 3, Villa 1. Can yer believe it!
[quote][p][bold]tyker2[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lonniejockstrap[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tyker2[/bold] wrote: goodness me:we lost 2-0.END OF[/p][/quote]“All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them.” (Galileo Galilei) I can't help mesen tyker. It's the ex player/manager/coach in me. Plus being a devil's advocate/competitive /argumentative git is a personality trait of mine. “The search for truth is more precious than its possession.” (Albert Einstein)[/p][/quote]but what is the truth: intellectual argument does not necessarily result in the truth being achieved. We all know football is about opinion and we should ,therefore, respect any opinion which does not fit our own perception and we must all accept that there is no true answer.[/p][/quote]Maybe there is no 'truth' tyker. But we must search for the truth simply because we become wiser by doing so. The more difficulty in getting to the truth -if we ever get to it- the more we learn. I certainly agree that people should be allowed to express an opinion but not sure I agree we should 'respect' an opinion just because it's an opinion. I think it would have to depend on how that opinion was arrived at. City 3, Villa 1. Can yer believe it! lonniejockstrap

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

Get Adobe Flash player
About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree