Sky Highlights

[Scot-e-dog 34]

Just watched the Sky highlights to savour Madison''s goal again....and again...and again.

If I hadn''t seen the game earlier, I would barely have known it was the same one. The only City possession shown was the goal and a weak Jerome chance. Yet they showed chance after chance after chance from Town....and that included the early part of the second half, which we dominated. Made it very much look like a lucky win.

Never mind, I did get to see Madison''s goal again...and again....and again 😀

[FenwayFrank 2,456]

I hope they showed McGoldricks volley 😂😂😂😂

[Scot-e-dog 34]

They showed a cracking Waghorn volley that went for a throw in

[lake district canary 4,531]

Their highlights may have painted one picture, but their player ratings show a different story! Ipswich: Bialkowski (6), Spence (6), Chambers (6), Webster (6),

Knudsen (6), Nydam (6), Adeyemi (5), Skuse (5), Waghorn (6), Garner (5),

McGoldrick (5)Norwich: Gunn

(6), Pinto (7), Zimmermann (6), Klose (7), Stiepermann (7), Trybull

(7), Reed (7), Wildschut (7), Maddison (8), Hoolahan (6), Jerome (7)Man of the match: James Maddison

[Branston Pickle 3,633]

I saw some highlights on YouTube that seemed to show every single binner ''effort'' on goal, however lame - and most of them were just that - but next to nothing from us. Still, the result is all that matters.

[Lessingham Canary 99]

I saw one interesting stat, 0-1 !!

[vos 155]

Ipswich did have a few half chances and could have nicked a point. However the stats give a fair reflection which are even confirmed by my "Ipswich Mate" who said we gave a polished performance. Once we went ahead we displayed a lot of fight and determination to hold on. For me Trybull is a great asset in these situations and just what we need for the Championship. I am a fan of Cam. Still gives 100% but the lone striker responsibility is taking its toll. Not winning much in the air and his first touch and hold up play is well below what he normally delivers. Probably needs a rest.

[SwindonCanary 455]

To be fair, if that shot that hit the post had gone in, it could have been a whole different story.

[Guest]

Don''t think we should take it too personal regarding the highlights.

I do notice that many times, the editors, given a finite time to produce, show as much as they can and then run out of time.

Consequently, too many times we see twice as much 1st half as 2nd, even though the 2nd may be better.

[Jim Smith 2,314]

Ridiculously unbalanced highlights and whilst i don''t really care too much they do feed the myth that the sc*m seem to have latched onto that they were the "better team in the first half."

They weren''t. Yes McGoldricks chance was the best chance but the free kick it came from was an absolute joke (amongst many dreadful decisions by the ref first half). yes they hit the post but Pinto was clearly fouled leading up to it and shouldn''t have been p**sing around with it anyway. They created nothing from open play at all and it was clear throughout that we had more about us.

they shaded the first 10 minutes when Stiepermann went walkabout and they exploited the space on their right wing. We then completely dominated for about 20 minutes where Wildshutt and Maddison carved them open time and time again but our shooting was poor. they then ended the half quite strongly and we got a bit sloppy. All in all i''d say the first half was even and then we took control second half, it reminded me a lot of the Reading win.

The great thing i we can play a lot better. Stiepermann looked rusty, Tettey improves us a lot in that holding role and will hopefully be back soonish and Jerome, whilst he was a nuisance and put in a great shift, actually had quite a poor and ineffective game up front and I think would have come off early in the second half if we had any fit options to replace him.