3 goals without Sargent

[PockthorpePete 331]

o (today at least) we found out can create chances. The first two with no small help from Pukki - welcome back.  The final 20 minutes were worth the wait. Though most would have preferred not have had to wait.  This is NO criticism of Sargent, more a recognition that we need more of this, albeit this was against a lower table Stoke. However, we still need to tighten up in our final third, and not require yellow card fouls to stop the opposition. They will become red. Sargent needs to take his eye off the WC. He is a City player, first and foremost.

Maybe someone could tell me what is happening with the constant injuries. Sargeant off through a calf injury. Omobamidele. It was Gibson the other week. Dowell was out with two illnesses, Larry and Gitis. Whose next ? We have a far, far more advanced fitness/medical set up than the days of the magic sponge, but we never seem able to have a settled side as some player is always out for a couple of games.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,550]

3 minutes ago, PockthorpePete said:

o (today at least) we found out can create chances. The first two with no small help from Pukki - welcome back.  The final 20 minutes were worth the wait. Though most would have preferred not have had to wait.  This is NO criticism of Sargent, more a recognition that we need more of this, albeit this was against a lower table Stoke. However, we still need to tighten up in our final third, and not require yellow card fouls to stop the opposition. They will become red. Sargent needs to take his eye off the WC. He is a City player, first and foremost.

Maybe someone could tell me what is happening with the constant injuries. Sargeant off through a calf injury. Omobamidele. It was Gibson the other week. Dowell was out with two illnesses, Larry and Gitis. Whose next ? We have a far, far more advanced fitness/medical set up than the days of the magic sponge, but we never seem able to have a settled side as some player is always out for a couple of games.

One nice thing about the World Cup is that we should have pretty much the whole squad healthy again by the end of it? 

[cambridgeshire canary 6,721]

Probably due to the fact that Sargent on the wing just does not work most of the time. He's a striker.

[PockthorpePete 331]

5 minutes ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

Probably due to the fact that Sargent on the wing just does not work most of the time. He's a striker.

eh?

[AJ 1,221]

30 minutes ago, PockthorpePete said:

o (today at least) we found out can create chances. The first two with no small help from Pukki - welcome back.  The final 20 minutes were worth the wait. Though most would have preferred not have had to wait.  This is NO criticism of Sargent, more a recognition that we need more of this, albeit this was against a lower table Stoke. However, we still need to tighten up in our final third, and not require yellow card fouls to stop the opposition. They will become red. Sargent needs to take his eye off the WC. He is a City player, first and foremost.

Maybe someone could tell me what is happening with the constant injuries. Sargeant off through a calf injury. Omobamidele. It was Gibson the other week. Dowell was out with two illnesses, Larry and Gitis. Whose next ? We have a far, far more advanced fitness/medical set up than the days of the magic sponge, but we never seem able to have a settled side as some player is always out for a couple of games.

Sargent has done nothing wrong. Unsurprisingly he played better in his natural position, but when shifted back to RM out of position when Pukki returned he is far less effective and disrupts the balance of the team. Nothing on the player, just poor tactics from the management

[PockthorpePete 331]

1 minute ago, AJ said:

Sargent has done nothing wrong. Unsurprisingly he played better in his natural position, but when shifted back to RM out of position when Pukki returned he is far less effective and disrupts the balance of the team. Nothing on the player, just poor tactics from the management

eh ? Are you CC in disguise.The post was NOT about Sargent, as was stated. It was about the others and what they created. Have another read. It might help.

[SwearyCanary 1,179]

5 minutes ago, PockthorpePete said:

eh ? Are you CC in disguise.The post was NOT about Sargent, as was stated. It was about the others and what they created. Have another read. It might help.

Tbh you’d be forgiven for thinking it was by the title, and how much you mention Sargent in your OP. You say Sargent needs to take his eye off the WC and is a city player first and foremost. That founds like criticism, no? 

I think maybe you should read your own original post back and make it a bit more succinct and les like a random stream of consciousness 😂

Edited October 29, 2022 by SwearyCanary

[PockthorpePete 331]

5 minutes ago, SwearyCanary said:

Tbh you’d be forgiven for thinking it was by the title, and how much you mention Sargent in your OP. You say Sargent needs to take his eye off the WC and is a city player first and foremost. That founds like criticism, no? 

I think maybe you should read your own original post back and make it a bit more succinct and les like a random stream of consciousness 😂

That comment was about todays game/events. I appreciate that many do fell the need to stay 'relevant' so the word random has to be inserted in everything. Covering a couple of points in a post is OK. It is my post. You might care to note that the definition of random is "without method or conscious decision". I'm off to bed now, which will no doubt be interpreted as my criticising dreaming.

[SwearyCanary 1,179]

7 minutes ago, PockthorpePete said:

That comment was about todays game/events. I appreciate that many do fell the need to stay 'relevant' so the word random has to be inserted in everything. Covering a couple of points in a post is OK. It is my post. You might care to note that the definition of random is "without method or conscious decision". I'm off to bed now, which will no doubt be interpreted as my criticising dreaming.

Yep. Random was definitely the right word 😂. Enjoy your lie down and sleep off whatever frog you’ve licked 

[daly 503]

2 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

One nice thing about the World Cup is that we should have pretty much the whole squad healthy again by the end of it? 

Like most clubs especially those with much smaller squads

[Nexus_Canary 1,016]

We have scored over 500 without Holty and Wes in the team...

Sorry just thought I would go along with the OP's dumb logic and post an irrelevant point as well. 

[AJ 1,221]

42 minutes ago, Nexus_Canary said:

We have scored over 500 without Holty and Wes in the team...

Sorry just thought I would go along with the OP's dumb logic and post an irrelevant point as well. 

Don’t forget getting rid of Hucks as well, despite unpopular opinion, was actually business genius! Look how many goals we’ve scored since then!

[Nexus_Canary 1,016]

2 minutes ago, AJ said:

Don’t forget getting rid of Hucks as well, despite unpopular opinion, was actually business genius! Look how many goals we’ve scored since then!

Yeh that's a really good point actually. We have gone from strength to strength 

[Dr Greenthumb 749]

12 hours ago, PockthorpePete said:

eh ? Are you CC in disguise.The post was NOT about Sargent, as was stated. It was about the others and what they created. Have another read. It might help.

Putting Sargent in the post title meant the post wasn’t about him, what the heck? 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,550]

 

12 hours ago, AJ said:

Sargent has done nothing wrong. Unsurprisingly he played better in his natural position, but when shifted back to RM out of position when Pukki returned he is far less effective and disrupts the balance of the team. Nothing on the player, just poor tactics from the management

Less effective than himself in his preferred position, absolutely. Are Pukki in position and Sargeant out of position less collectively effective than Sargeant in position and Pukki out of position, or playing Sargeant in position and dropping Pukki entirely? There's no data to draw any conclusions there. 

[AJ 1,221]

1 hour ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

 

Less effective than himself in his preferred position, absolutely. Are Pukki in position and Sargeant out of position less collectively effective than Sargeant in position and Pukki out of position, or playing Sargeant in position and dropping Pukki entirely? There's no data to draw any conclusions there. 

Sargent scored more without Pukki in the squad is the only conclusion you can draw 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,550]

30 minutes ago, AJ said:

Sargent scored more without Pukki in the squad is the only conclusion you can draw 

This is true, and goals are a huge part of both players games, which is why it's understandable to want to try and have both players on the pitch somehow, even if you can't play both of them in their ideal position at the same time. It was noticeable when we played the diamond (false diamond?) with Pukki and Sargeant up front that both finished up drifting so narrow that they were practically standing on each other's heads. 

Also, Pukki's a leader in the squad, and if he becomes disaffected from not playing there's a danger that will affect squad morale. 

[Surfer 1,547]

17 hours ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

Probably due to the fact that Sargent on the wing just does not work most of the time. He's a striker.

Maybe we should put Sargent in the middle and Pukki outside him? That was what he was originally brought in for. 

It would make very little difference to running onto a defense splitting ball... 

[canarybubbles 1,915]

They are two completely different players. Sometimes that works wonderfully when the two players complement each other, but somehow Pukki and Sargent don't. When they are both in the box, they often seem to get in each other's way.

I've got no idea how we can go about fixing this, and I suspect the management team don't either.

EDIT: That wasn't my usual poke at Smith. Maybe it's a problem that can't be solved.

Edited October 30, 2022 by canarybubbles

[Mr Angry 1,562]

23 hours ago, PockthorpePete said:

o (today at least) we found out can create chances. The first two with no small help from Pukki - welcome back.  The final 20 minutes were worth the wait. Though most would have preferred not have had to wait.  This is NO criticism of Sargent, more a recognition that we need more of this, albeit this was against a lower table Stoke. However, we still need to tighten up in our final third, and not require yellow card fouls to stop the opposition. They will become red. Sargent needs to take his eye off the WC. He is a City player, first and foremost.

Maybe someone could tell me what is happening with the constant injuries. Sargeant off through a calf injury. Omobamidele. It was Gibson the other week. Dowell was out with two illnesses, Larry and Gitis. Whose next ? We have a far, far more advanced fitness/medical set up than the days of the magic sponge, but we never seem able to have a settled side as some player is always out for a couple of games.

The World Cup is the most important football competition in the world. The clue is in the name.