Sang

[Bobby Dandruff]

It has only been a handful of games but Sang looks quite comfortable at RB.

So why did a Harris play Bacuna there instead of giving Sang a go?

🤷

[LeningradCowboy]

Re: Sang

It has only been a handful of games but Sang looks quite comfortable at RB.

So why did a Harris play Bacuna there instead of giving Sang a go?

��

Because Sang was on loan at Cheltenham.

[valleys caveman]

Re: Sang

Sang was quality tonight I thought. In fact I don't think one City player had a poor game.

[2b2bdoo]

Re: Sang

Thought he was excellent today, couldn't have done more.

We have gone from having real issues at right back to two good options in Ng and Sang.

To be honest I think Bacuna would also be suited to wingback now rather than RB which didn't suit him.

I think it comes down to Harris being to rigid in terms of selection and his pool of players.

[Bobby Dandruff]

Re: Sang

Because Sang was on loan at Cheltenham.

And we couldn’t recall him?

[Eric the Half a Bee]

Re: Sang

Sang was quality tonight I thought. In fact I don't think one City player had a poor game.

I thought his touch and passing was streets ahead of most of the other City players on the pitch tonight.

[Bobby Dandruff]

Re: Sang

I thought his touch and passing was streets ahead of most of the other City players on the pitch tonight.

Yes I have liked what I have seen of him so far.

Yet further evidence of Harris’ absolutely abysmal management when the potential answer to one of our biggest problems (no RB) was sitting under his nose. Pitiful.

[Eric the Half a Bee]

Re: Sang

Yes I have liked what I have seen of him so far.

Yet further evidence of Harris’ absolutely abysmal management when the potential answer to one of our biggest problems (no RB) was sitting under his nose. Pitiful.

Agreed.

[stevebrickman]

Re: Sang

Yes I have liked what I have seen of him so far.

Yet further evidence of Harris’ absolutely abysmal management when the potential answer to one of our biggest problems (no RB) was sitting under his nose. Pitiful.

Its staggering, really. Sang has taken to league football like a duck to water. Why wasnt he ever given a chance before Mick came in (and was desperate!)? I genuinely think he's looked one of our stronger players lately.

[olderblue]

Re: Sang

He wasn't given a chance because we had David Brent in charge who was ****ing clueless

[Des Parrot]

Re: Sang

He looks composed an unusual trait in this team!

[B. Oddie]

Re: Sang

And we couldn’t recall him?

Sometimes it's because there's a fee involved.

[2b2bdoo]

Re: Sang

Sometimes it's because there's a fee involved.

It asks the question if he should have been sent out. Let be honest tho he would never have played him anyway.

[surge]

Re: Sang

He played well defensively in largely nullifying Norrington-Davies against Stoke but I didn't feel he was on top defensively against his full-back today. Both our wing backs have the advantage that even if they don't stop the cross our CB's are going to win 9/10 anyway so it never appears that they're giving away good chances.

Offensively, has he put in any good crosses yet?

It's very early on in his career and there is plenty to like including having the first touch of more similar to Pack and energy more similar to Vaulks, but let's not go too overboard yet. He hasn't looked out of place at all.

[Eric the Half a Bee]

Re: Sang

He looks composed an unusual trait in this team!

:hehe: Absolutely right.