Quote Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman View Post
That's not what I said at all, Fangirl. What I said was:

"Huddersfield are a truly poor side. Lightweight, over-elaborate on the ball, no cutting edge up front, weak and disorganised in defence. I haven't seen Luton or Barnsley play this season, but I've watched Huddersfield on several occasions and they look comfortably the worst side I've seen. For a team as physically strong and organised as City usually are, they are the perfect opponents."

If you and the genius that is Hilts genuinely thought that Hull's performance last night (during which they scored four goals and earned a point) was worse than Huddersfield's performance on Wednesday, that's your prerogative.

That's an interesting form table, though. After all, Hilts was using the fact that Huddersfield have somehow managed to beat Hull and QPR recently as an indication of their strength. Those two sides are in a free-fall, which is not surprising given their tarnsfers in January and their injury lists.
I pointed out victories over Forest and Brentford as well.

They also kept a clean sheet against Brentford recently. The same Brentford who smashed a currently shocking Hull side.

Its your prerogative to believe a side in freefall decimated by injuries, losing their best players are currently better than Huddersfield and it was a great game last night.

Those who havent seen the game may think your right.

Fact is Hull were shocking. Swansea simply were awful defensively with a couple of their young players completely out of their depth.

I agree because of boths sides lack of ability to defend it was entertaining particularly the Hull equaliser.

But I saw very little in great football and virtually all the decent stuff was from Swansea.