Bristol City 1 United 0 - thoughts

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

sitwell said:
Where do you suggest we sign players from then ? Don't think Man citys regulars are available . I take it Washington is your new Ryan Flynn just 15 minutes into his Sheffield Utd career. Tell me which players we should have signed and also the good players in the last 10 years who were deemed good enough for Championship clubs. Where did we get Fleck ,Coutts , OConnell ,Sharp etc etc from ?
Click to expand...

Ryan Flynn! Good one. Nothing like bringing up old stuff..... Where is he now? St Mirren at the peak of his career (30) after failing to be a regular for Oldham.

Be good one day Sitwell if you maybe write a report; I would be interested in your in depth analysis of a match.Yes it is a forum and of course as such its about sharing opinions and not agreeing and I am there to be shot at but not always easy to write long reports. As I say be good if you maybe wrote one or offered some detailed analysis rather than just saying 'poor or negative report.' I love to read others opinions that are thought out and with analysis but a short, sharp 'negative' or 'poor' does not do you any favours I am afraid when trying to have a debate. As I say; what did you think of the 2nd half performance or how we countered the change of shape and formation Bristol employed. What did you think of the changes - timing and personnel etc. Thats the sort of debate that is good on here even if people disagree.

As for your other points - it is not about signing Man City regulars and that retort sums up your level of replies sometimes sadly. My point remains that we need to be going for better quality if we want to go up. Its not a knock on Wilder but the powers that be behind the scenes. We can talk all day about not going silly on wages etc but at some point we have to allow Wilder to get the players he wants whether it is Hogan, Waghorn or whoever he feels we need - if we continue the bargain basement type approach as we saw with those late signings in August when it was obvious we needed more quality up top; then I fear he can only do so much and it will be very tough to make the top 6. The players we should have signed are of course the ones he wanted. Do you think Washington was anywhere near his list of players he wanted or was simply a late punt as he could not get anyone else? Ultimately I worry how long Wilder will wait for the situation behind the scenes to sort it itself out but that is a wider point really.
 

super_pig said:
.. it’s interesting to reflect though that most of the team are still those who were the L1 promotion team.. the only players who look like a ‘real’ improvement came from the premier league (hendo and ollie).. coincidence?
Neither Hendo or Norwood have ever played in the premier league.
Click to expand...
 
Deadbat said:
Ryan Flynn! Good one. Nothing like bringing up old stuff..... Where is he now? St Mirren at the peak of his career (30) after failing to be a regular for Oldham.

Be good one day Sitwell if you maybe write a report; I would be interested in your in depth analysis of a match.Yes it is a forum and of course as such its about sharing opinions and not agreeing and I am there to be shot at but not always easy to write long reports. As I say be good if you maybe wrote one or offered some detailed analysis rather than just saying 'poor or negative report.' I love to read others opinions that are thought out and with analysis but a short, sharp 'negative' or 'poor' does not do you any favours I am afraid when trying to have a debate. As I say; what did you think of the 2nd half performance or how we countered the change of shape and formation Bristol employed. What did you think of the changes - timing and personnel etc. Thats the sort of debate that is good on here even if people disagree.

As for your other points - it is not about signing Man City regulars and that retort sums up your level of replies sometimes sadly. My point remains that we need to be going for better quality if we want to go up. Its not a knock on Wilder but the powers that be behind the scenes. We can talk all day about not going silly on wages etc but at some point we have to allow Wilder to get the players he wants whether it is Hogan, Waghorn or whoever he feels we need - if we continue the bargain basement type approach as we saw with those late signings in August when it was obvious we needed more quality up top; then I fear he can only do so much and it will be very tough to make the top 6. The players we should have signed are of course the ones he wanted. Do you think Washington was anywhere near his list of players he wanted or was simply a late punt as he could not get anyone else? Ultimately I worry how long Wilder will wait for the situation behind the scenes to sort it itself out but that is a wider point really?
Click to expand...
I haven't criticised your match report just your slagging off of the new players who haven't yet been given a chance. Sharp ,Deane ,Fleck ,Coutts ,all the heroes came from lower clubs who didn't want them ,virtually all our side has. Plenty of words in your answer but you haven't answered the question ,of who we should have signed or where we got our best players. Players have to be given a chance and 3 of who you have mentioned haven't accumulated more than 10 minutes before today ,what sort of chance is that ?
I have zero interest of writing long reports, if that stops me having an opinion on other peoples then fair enough but when your 'in depth analysis ' is quite honestly your opinion at the end of the day it is surely there to be questioned ?
 
Got to say, I think Sitwell is right on this one. How can we possibly judge Washington and Johnson on the basis of 25 minutes each? They may or may not be good enough, but at least give them a chance before rushing to judgement.

As for Lundstram: he is not as good as Fleck. He is not as dynamic going forward and does not have the same understanding with our other left-sided players. This is not a major revelation. Very few midfielders in this division are as good as Fleck. Today he was fine. He did basically nothing wrong that I saw barring one missed tackle where he was a bit weak--an area of his game that needs to be more consistent. He is a scapegoat because certain of our fans have made a decision about him and then their evaluation of his performances are made to fit the preconception.
 
sitwell said:
I haven't criticised your match report just your slagging off of the new players who haven't yet been given a chance. Sharp ,Deane ,Fleck ,Coutts ,all the heroes came from lower clubs who didn't want them ,virtually all our side has. Plenty of words in your answer but you haven't answered the question ,of who we should have signed or where we got our best players. Players have to be given a chance and 3 of who you have mentioned haven't accumulated more than 10 minutes before today ,what sort of chance is that ?
I have zero interest of writing long reports, if that stops me having an opinion on other peoples then fair enough but when your 'in depth analysis ' is quite honestly your opinion at the end of the day it is surely there to be questioned ?
Click to expand...

I have answered the question - we should have allowed Wilder to get the players he wanted - which may have been Hogan but certainly was Waghorn. ultimately the players he signed at the end of the month I do not feel were the ones top of his list. I believe they were a long way down. I am not sure when Wilder started to look for serious competiion in the summer he identified McGoldrick and Washington. They have ended up being the best we could get type players.

Players do have to be given a chance but you have kind of answered the question by effectively saying they are not ready to hit the ground running - it is the cut and thrust of the championship; we cannot be waiting for players and giving them 6 or 7 games to get up to speed.

It is not about stopping you having your opinion - that is what the reports want to stimulate - I just feel your 'negative, poor report' is not really offering much of a debate really. If you had said I was being negative about the new players then fair enough but you stated it was a poor report so I just asked if you had any more analysis over what other parts of the report you felt poor or negative.
 
dc_blade said:
Got to say, I think Sitwell is right on this one. How can we possibly judge Washington and Johnson on the basis of 25 minutes each? They may or may not be good enough, but at least give them a chance before rushing to judgement.

As for Lundstram: he is not as good as Fleck. He is not as dynamic going forward and does not have the same understanding with our other left-sided players. This is not a major revelation. Very few midfielders in this division are as good as Fleck. Today he was fine. He did basically nothing wrong that I saw barring one missed tackle where he was a bit weak--an area of his game that needs to be more consistent. He is a scapegoat because certain of our fans have made a decision about him and then their evaluation of his performances are made to fit the preconception.
Click to expand...

That is the point though - the report is that a report of one game and an evaluation of their performances. I stand by I am not sure they are good enough overall as signings but today the impact was minimal. In no way did they affect us losing. Sadly I cannot agree about Lundstram today. He did very little of note in a positive note. He played safe most of the time but meant it slowed play down and when he went forward he just punted it to noone. Its not about him being a scapegoat; regardless of the defeat; I have not seen him having very many influential games for United. Its not about a preconception really - I want him to do well and want him to affect games but he is not really doing that and there is a big drop off when he plays. The peformances and results he starts are not particularly positive.
 
Lundstrum and Lafferty have no place in a squad with any serious intentions of gaining promotion to the top flight. Couldn't care less who that upsets
It's obvious to anyone who actually knows anything about the game.
 
Deadbat said:
That is the point though - the report is that a report of one game and an evaluation of their performances. I stand by I am not sure they are good enough overall as signings but today the impact was minimal. In no way did they affect us losing. Sadly I cannot agree about Lundstram today. He did very little of note in a positive note. He played safe most of the time but meant it slowed play down and when he went forward he just punted it to noone. Its not about him being a scapegoat; regardless of the defeat; I have not seen him having very many influential games for United. Its not about a preconception really - I want him to do well and want him to affect games but he is not really doing that and there is a big drop off when he plays. The peformances and results he starts are not particularly positive.
Click to expand...

I agree with your analysis of their impact today--minimal. If that's all you're saying, fine. But you generalised from that to say they're clearly not good enough. What's the evidence for that? It just sounds to me like an unwarranted conclusion based on frustration from a disappointing result.

I didn't think Lundstram pulled up any trees today, but I do think you're being unfair in your rating of his performance.
 
dc_blade said:
I agree with your analysis of their impact today--minimal. If that's all you're saying, fine. But you generalised from that to say they're clearly not good enough. What's the evidence for that? It just sounds to me like an unwarranted conclusion based on frustration from a disappointing result.

I didn't think Lundstram pulled up any trees today, but I do think you're being unfair in your rating of his performance.
Click to expand...
take a step back
people have noticed a trend
when lundstram plays we have a tendency to lose .. being the cynical bunch we are, we find that worrying ;)
he could play brilliant but we’d still lose imo
 
dc_blade said:
I agree with your analysis of their impact today--minimal. If that's all you're saying, fine. But you generalised from that to say they're clearly not good enough. What's the evidence for that? It just sounds to me like an unwarranted conclusion based on frustration from a disappointing result.

I didn't think Lundstram pulled up any trees today, but I do think you're being unfair in your rating of his performance.
Click to expand...
doesn’t 5.5 equate to ‘didn’t pull up any trees’?
 
super_pig said:
take a step back
people have noticed a trend
when lundstram plays we have a tendency to lose .. being the cynical bunch we are, we find that worrying ;)
he could play brilliant but we’d still lose imo
Click to expand...

Don't get me wrong, I'd rather have Fleck! Or Coutts, for that matter. Any team would miss them and it's not surprising our results drop off when they're not in the team.

Still think Lunny gets some undeserved flack.
 

dc_blade said:
Don't get me wrong, I'd rather have Fleck! Or Coutts, for that matter. Any team would miss them and it's not surprising our results drop off when they're not in the team.

Still think Lunny gets some undeserved flack.
Click to expand...
probably .. some poor bastard is going to get it and after enda’s sudden improvement the sights inevitably move to the next underperforming player
t’was ever thus :)
 
There's nothing more disappointing than a 1-0 defeat when you know you should have got something from the game. I think it's easy to say this player, that player, blah blah blah.... but it's all fine margins.

We take one of those chances in the first half and we'd be discussing the game very differently. We beat Birmingham and normal service will be resumed. I still think from a playing quality perspective, we are heading in the right direction.
 
sitwell said:
Great criticism of the new players who only mcgoldrick has played a full game yet, nowt like giving players a chance is there. Totally negative poor report
Click to expand...
To be fair, neither of the subs impacted on the game as I hoped they would, but early days.
 
coaxingstar71 said:
There's nothing more disappointing than a 1-0 defeat when you know you should have got something from the game. I think it's easy to say this player, that player, blah blah blah.... but it's all fine margins.

We take one of those chances in the first half and we'd be discussing the game very differently. We beat Birmingham and normal service will be resumed. I still think from a playing quality perspective, we are heading in the right direction.
Click to expand...
indeed .. can some of you stop being so bloody sensible? some of us are really disappointed.. we’ve got to blame ‘somebody’ :)
after the next two home games we’ll be world beaters again .. t’was ever thus :D
 
Deadbat said:
I think it is fair criticism - not of the but of the type of signing the club made at the end of the window. Washington, Johnson and Craine is sadly so United in bargain basement type signings - we are relying on Wilder's excellent skills to get the best out of them but we should have been looking for better. My opinion.

Do you think Washington and Johnson are good enough for a side going for the top 6? Maybe they will prove me wrong but they players not deemed good enough for other Champ clubs. We should be aiming for higher.

We got worse when they came on and they made little impact. It was not their fault we lost; but the type of signing and the inability to bring in real quality at the top of the field means we will see us have results like this sadly in between some great performances like Villa.

The report calls it what it was - we played ok but second half offered little to nothing. Did you think we played well 2nd half or did anything of note? Bristol changed their formation and adjused their tactics and we never reacted. It's not a negative report -we played well for spells and had cotnrol of the game but missed chances but they scored and had the other best chance of the game. They also finished much stronger.
Click to expand...

DB some excellent points and well put. It seems to be the modern way to sugar-coat everything and wrap it up in nice sentiments. At the end of the day Lundstrum aint good enough, he's started in the three defeats this season and many of last season's defeats. And the transfer window was a typical Sheff United window, shopping at f***ing Aldi again.
 
dc_blade said:
Don't get me wrong, I'd rather have Fleck! Or Coutts, for that matter. Any team would miss them and it's not surprising our results drop off when they're not in the team.

Still think Lunny gets some undeserved flack.
Click to expand...

Agree that Lundstram has usually been expected/required to come in and perform in place of Fleck or Coutts, and it's a tough ask. I think we were ok today for most of the game, but BC gradually looked the more dangerous side. Wilder tried to make tweaks to counteract the pattern of the game, including putting on our two quickest players and also pushing Basham forward, but they didn't alter the look of a side that would probably take a point in the end. Our forwards became more and more isolated, while they seemed to get more people forward and into the box. The winnning goal had an element of luck/not too much you could do to prevent it, but at the time BC looked the more likely to score. With hindsight, maybe it would have been better to include Clarke in the starting line up, as missing both him and Fleck from our "preferred" first eleven may have been one change too many?
 
The problem last season was that we dominated games and didn't score goals when on top.

We seemed to do the same today and should have been winning at half time. Punished in the 2nd half because we hadn't done enough previous.

Their goal was a lucky back header - but that sort of cross should be stopped from coming in.

As for the comments about Lundstram, some of our fans use the backstop statement of him being a scapegoat - we DON'T have scapegoats, we just have players not good enough to finish in the top six - that's all. Our A team can beat anyone in this league - but if we take out a centre midfield player, it devalues the team more than any other part of the team.

Wednesday can't come soon enough - FFS we are still 5th !

UTB
 
Bergen Blade said:
Agree that Lundstram has usually been expected/required to come in and perform in place of Fleck or Coutts, and it's a tough ask. I think we were ok today for most of the game, but BC gradually looked the more dangerous side. Wilder tried to make tweaks to counteract the pattern of the game, including putting on our two quickest players and also pushing Basham forward, but they didn't alter the look of a side that would probably take a point in the end. Our forwards became more and more isolated, while they seemed to get more people forward and into the box. The winnning goal had an element of luck/not too much you could do to prevent it, but at the time BC looked the more likely to score. With hindsight, maybe it would have been better to include Clarke in the starting line up, as missing both him and Fleck from our "preferred" first eleven may have been one change too many?
Click to expand...

Agree with that. I thought Bash was unusually quiet by recent standards and Billy wasted a couple of good positions--but he also got kicked all game and had several very soft fouls called against him. Wilder tried something by bringing on Washington and Johnson. I might've tried Woodburn for Duffy, and his gamble didn't pay off. But it was well worth a try.

Up until half time we were excellent--if we'd got a goal, you'd have said it was as good as Bolton or Villa. We never gave them a sniff. Then we were okay for 15 minutes, then we lost the plot toward the end. We've seen it happen many times in the last year or so: we boss a team for an hour and then look a bit lost when we're not well in front. What's the answer to that? Better player in several key positions, obviously, but we have what we have.
 
jt64 said:
Sharp is scoring for fun and McGoldrick was our best player last time out in what was our best performance in years. 90 minutes later throw the whole front line under the bus
Click to expand...
He’s not saying that, he’s just saying what he saw and I was there and agee with him entirely. I thought McGoldrick had a very good game and worked tirelessly both upfront and later in midfield. But man! He had two gilt edged chances in the first half that he should have buried.

One player who has impressed me no end in the last couple of games is Billy Sharp. I thought he was fantastic v Bolton and Villa. But today he was poor. Invisible tbh.

Washington ran about like crazy when he came on. He’s filling the gap left by Done in that respect. But he never looks a goal threat so far.

I thought Marvin Johnson did ok tbh. Some good first time crosses with the left and good pace.

But I agree 100% that a quality striker would have had that game won by half time today.

This Sheffield “peasant” mentality can only get you so far. At some point we need s new Deane, Agana, Fjortoft, to really make certain in games like this. But they cost money and we aren’t ready to spend it....

Yet.
 
If new players come on and are crap, I have no issue with them being described as such. Lundstram gets defended to the hilt by some on the basis he needs time etc. It makes no sense, if he was poor, he was poor. It was the same with George Long for baout 2 years. "He's young" does not mean he was not crap.
 
dc_blade said:
Got to say, I think Sitwell is right on this one. How can we possibly judge Washington and Johnson on the basis of 25 minutes each? They may or may not be good enough, but at least give them a chance before rushing to judgement.

As for Lundstram: he is not as good as Fleck. He is not as dynamic going forward and does not have the same understanding with our other left-sided players. This is not a major revelation. Very few midfielders in this division are as good as Fleck. Today he was fine. He did basically nothing wrong that I saw barring one missed tackle where he was a bit weak--an area of his game that needs to be more consistent. He is a scapegoat because certain of our fans have made a decision about him and then their evaluation of his performances are made to fit the preconception.
Click to expand...

Went today and was nervous every time Lunny was on the ball, he did have the only shot on goal, but was sign posted and easy for the keeper, he also did one good headed clearance from a dangous corner, otherwise he was as average / poor as most of our midfielders since brown and McCall, hence why some defend him as he is on a par with Doyle who some liked, but clearly was not good enough and compared to Norward and Coutts is not fit to lace their boots unfortunatly, I was wishing him to do well but feel he is only here because no one came in for him and we would have been better keeping Evans or Leonard until Coutts is fit to do the cover role.

As for the new guys, I can see why some are critical of Deadbat, but I actually was feeling the same, Washington did not do anything wrong and could have been a hero with his late header, Marv's contributions were poor apart from one good cross, though no one was near it. At least the got on the ball as Clarke in his 10 mins or so never touched it.

Still time for the new guys, but unless the owners sort their shit out this month, we will end up with another underfunded Jan window and fall short as last year.
 
Bill Johnson said:
Lundstrum and Lafferty have no place in a squad with any serious intentions of gaining promotion to the top flight. Couldn't care less who that upsets
It's obvious to anyone who actually knows anything about the game.
Click to expand...
Who is Lundstrum?
Does he play for that team in a Derby County kit with red and white "straaaps"?
With Sharpe, Clark, etc....oh good.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom