Printable View
I didn’t watch but the bbc stats are interesting. It looks like far more forward passing and we ditched the meaningless play around the back style. We had as many shots and touches in opposition box despite having 27% possession. I hope that continues.
What was your motivation for potentially undermining the team and the club?Quote:
Originally Posted by Sunnysideup
It was noticeable from the off today that the players were all prepared to run and run (as they should be!) and the goal coming so quickly definitely boosted their confidence.Quote:
Originally Posted by 2b2bdoo
The second goal also came at the right time as heads could have dropped but they ALL did well today, including the subs (Tanner looked very lively)
Good stuff
In your phone box no one can hear you scream.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman
Very good performance
:xmashehe:Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby Dandruff
Whatever just happened, more please.
😂Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby Dandruff
what is this phone box reference, i've seen it a few times on here..Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby Dandruff
Very noticeable that we got the ball forward quicker today and much less passing slowly around the back. We had a lot less possession as a result but defended higher up the pitch and won the ball back on numerous occasions . I think this may be the way forward to get us out of this messQuote:
Originally Posted by Dave Blue
There are another lucky 8 who could have been dropped. Colwill senior doesn't suit being played wide in a front 3. He is either a 10 or nothing. Today was a day for dogs of war. We desperately need more legs, physique and quality in centre midfield.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman
What’s this weird phone box reference all about? Where has that come from? You’ll have to explain that one to me. I don’t get it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby Dandruff
Who provided the legs, physique and quality? I didn’t see the game. Are you saying the team is simply more balanced or better without Colwill in it?Quote:
Originally Posted by AdrianAlston
Great result, long may it continue!
Tan made Riza paint the phone box on leckwith road (red)Quote:
Originally Posted by Splott-light...
Didn't see the game but just saw the highlights.
Watford's equaliser was disappointing to concede allowing the left winger such time but our goals were things of beauty.
The quality of finish for Robinson's first cannot be overstated.
The touch itself took him away from goal, he did well to get it out of his feet, but to swivel and guide a powerful shot into the far corner was just superb.
Ashford's assist for the winner was just as impressive, the vision and quality of pass were top notch.
Great result which even the most optimistic amount fans could not have predicted and one which the players and staff should take great heart from going into the Coventry game (albeit we are at home! :hide:)
Why are you singling Colwill out? As was mentioned on here in the Oxford thread he didn’t have a great game and certainly went missing in the 2nd half but he wasn’t the worst performer on the day.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman
As a result of the Oxford game several players lost their place and to be honest the likes of Rihnomota Goutas and Chambers were lucky to retain theirs
However they all played much better today and Colwill also contributed as a late sub.
There was a definite change of tactics today to get the ball forward more quickly and then win the 2nd balls which we did well and yes perhaps this style of play suits Colwill much less but I don’t know why you single him out instead of , for example, Bagan and Meite who also lost their places
I get the feeling you think he has an “easier ride “ than others because he’s “ one of ours” but that would be true for fans of all clubs with their academy players.
He needs to provide a lot more than shown in the last 10 games but I genuinely hope he succeeds
I rarely get involved in the numerous Colwill discussions on this board, but I’ve found his performances very frustrating of late and he was poor at Oxford - something a number of contributors disputed and gave me some stick for daring to say as much.Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Corleone
In my opinion, a cluster of regular posters are ridiculously protective of Colwill and seem intent on making excuses for him at every turn. The fact is he’s a senior international with well over 100 first team club appearances under his belt, not some green 17 year-old member of the youth team.
I didn’t see the game today, but it’s interesting to me that the team apparently looked better in Colwill’s absence. If that offends anyone, so be it.
After roundly criticising the display against Oxford it is right to equally praising them for the victory at Watford. When you put a shift in and have pace in the side it's surprising what can be achieved.
Well done, City.
StT.
<><
what a rediculous reply.Quote:
Originally Posted by ToTaL ITK
highlights look good and despite them having a massive % of possession, the highlights look like we had a few decent chances, Siopis on another day would have hit the target and made it 3
In all fairness credit to the entire team and Riza for lifting them to this win after the debacle at Oxford. I'd like to see Ashford, Tanner and Robinson as nailed on starters. There's optimistic signs we can build on this performance.
Very happy. 2 well worked goals. Hopefully we can push on from here.
Shame that we may have 2 more out, ODowda and Willock, but at least we have Tannerback.
Sorry but Colwill is a one trick pony and as such is waste of space
Neither.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman
We'd be a better team with Colwill at 10, but he's a luxury that requires two other midfielders with more of the qualities that I list than our current options and wide players who work their socks off (Willock and El Ghazi have barely broken sweat all season). This is how teams can accommodate an attacking 10.
Look how average Man City look now that Silva, Gundogen and De Bruyne's legs have gone and they are missing Rodri's physicality.
So, I'm going to say it; Colwill is one of the few players we have who has the ability to rise above our current malaise but the imbalance (a kind word for crapness) of the midfield and the wide players makes it, on times, right to leave him out.
Jesus.......Quote:
Originally Posted by AdrianAlston
:xmashehe:Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby Dandruff
What does it mean? And do phone boxes exist anymore?Quote:
Originally Posted by MacAdder
Omer Riza was seen screaming crying in a phone box near his home in Tonyrefail when his contract issue was dragging on.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman
Huge effort from the team today which allowed Robinson and Willock to show their quality, with an excellent showing from Ashford who contributed both in attack and defence. Feels like we did a bit of a number on Watford, perhaps using Riza's knowledge of their setup, as they rarely threatened despite having so much possession- Alnwick barely had to make a save.
And, once again, the discussion gravitates towards a player who was on the pitch for about ten minutes. We were in front for all but five minutes yesterday and this played a part in Colwill having so little game time. I’d like to think everyone is agreed that Colwill is a player more suited to trying to gain a lead, rather than preserve one and we were far more happy than normal to let our opponents have the ball.
As has been mentioned, there was less passing for passing’s sake and I think Chambers’ move into midfield had something to do with this. Im guessing here, but I think he’s been regarded as essential to our play out from the back policy, but he’s sometimes been lacking in the thing I’ll always believe is the main purpose of a defender (defending!) - we went back to basics to an extent yesterday, but im not sure Chambers, Siopis and Robertson is a midfield to get us enough wins in the second half of the season.
However, it’s really more about the squad in general than systems - we’ve won just five matches in half a season and how many of them have there been where we’ve been worth the three points? I’d say no more than five or six. - we’ve lost seven home games all of which have been deserved) and only Hull of the others have lost more than four. Credit to the players for yesterday, but the frustration is that on the rare occasions we play well, we show we have more potential than last season’s team.
Its not often that you see such a reasoned post on the subject of Colwill, Id agree 100%.Quote:
Originally Posted by AdrianAlston
Just to clear things up, it gravitated towards Colwill the other day because you omitted him from criticism as a reply in a thread. That was you, nobody else, up until then he hadn't been mentioned, so less of the sanctimonious stuff please.Quote:
Originally Posted by the other bob wilson
As pleasing for a very irregular away supporter to see how City showed commitment, fought for every ball, resilience and the odd flash of technique and passing through lines to get a result, that style of play, those players and the coach isn't going to get them out of the shiite.
Sorry to piiss on everyone's chips.
I enjoyed the game though which is the first time I can say that for an age.
Hang on a sec, Colwill became a subject in another thread because I didn't mention him in it? How does that one work out? What happened is that you jumped to what was a wrong conclusion about my opinion of Colwill - I made it clear on my blog and in a later post in the thread you refer to what I thought of Colwill's recent performances.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuerto
As for this thread, sorry for being "sanctimonious", but I struggle to see why Colwill should be a discussion point in a match thread on a game where he came on for just the dying minutes and had little effect, good or bad, on proceedings.
I can answer that. It's because he was dropped.Quote:
Originally Posted by the other bob wilson
It's happened to him a few times recently though and, although I may have missed the discussion, I can't remember much being said about it on here at the time (think he may have been left out for the first time under Riza for the game at Sheffield Wednesday).Quote:
Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman
You didn't see the game yesterday did you? As has been hinted at in this thread, we placed less emphasis on possession and, although I wouldn't say we played long ball, we were more direct than we have been this season with more emphasis on getting it forward quicker..
For me, more relevant than what Colwill did for a few minutes when we were trying to wind down the clock is whether we look to play the same way on Wednesday and whether Colwill will be in the starting eleven. There may have been a degree of squad rotation involved yesterday when you consider that we have another league game on the weekend as opposed to the Third round of the FA Cup which is traditionally played on the first weekend in a new year.
I started a thread about Ashford, complimenting him on his goal, his all round play in the move, I was really impressed with his composure and awareness. Then I said that we need to go easy on him, not to big him up to early (He may not be the Messiah) and that he may need protecting and used properly in order to benefit his development. You came along and said that the only players that needed protection were those over the age of 25, so I think you know what or who you were referring to. You didn't think that by coming out with that, that nobody was going to mention Colwill considering he's been an ever present in the terrible run we have seen over the past 2 monitor so? C'mon, you're way to intelligent to think that.Quote:
Originally Posted by the other bob wilson
Christ you are boring.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuerto
Slag Colwill off because some fans rate him, slag him off because someone didn't mention him in their match report, slag him off when he's only played 10 minutes in a win.
There's no point having a genuine discussion over him because you act like a scorned lover.