ncfc90 0 Posted February 21, 2009 Marshall - 5 - Takes for ages to release it, when time is precious, should have done better for the first shot that lad to their goalOtsemobor 5 - 1 good run, doesn''t do it enough, okayish defensively, continously played it back to the keeper.Shackell 7 - Not much wrong, perhaps out of position for goal, won pretty much everything, nearly scored.Doherty 7 - Same as Shackell didn''t do anything wrong really, Won a few good headers, when went up field too.Grounds 6 - Solid aswell, got forward well a few times in the second half.Croft 6 - not as good as usual, looked tired, and final ball was weak most of the time, gave 100% thoughClingan 6.5/7 - Did well defensively, don''t know what else to put, solid performanceFotheringham 4 - Did hardly anything today, when he did have it, gave the ball away, with passes that were simple. never plays the ball infront of the player, always behind himHoolahan - 8 MOTM Everything that Norwich did well today (not that much tbh though) came from him, covered back quite well too, shouldn;t have been brought off, although possibly injured, was hacked several times.Cort 6 - Goodish performance, few good flick ons, held the ball well at time, brought others into play, should have scored when agme was 1-0.Cureton 6 - Good finish, but apart from that did very littleCant be bothered to do subs, but thought Killen was completly useless, wins absolutly nothing in the air and looked lazyCort 6 - Held the line well, won a few headers, brought others into the game with layoffs. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCFC_Shaun 0 Posted February 21, 2009 Marshall 5 - I''m never one to pass blame straight over to a goalkeeper, but 2 very silly mistakes today nearly cost us.Otsemobor 5 - bar one good run in the first half, rather poor againShackell 6 - Despite featuring very rarely, seems to have improved at Wolves.Doherty 6 - OK, but not outstanding in what was a very poor team display.Grounds 6 - Did OK, but not good enough to be first choice left back.Croft 7 - If you looked at him at the end of the match his work rate shined through. He was the only one who had any dirt on them from battling, and the only one completely shattered. Not a great game technically but for the only one to put in 100% he gets MOTM for me.Fotheringham 4 - Useless. One shot didn''t even go out of play.Clingan 6 - Poor game by his standards. Still rate him as our best player though.Hoolahan 7 - Only player to create something. But he annoys me. Not enough strength or pace to be a winger, Far to one footed to cut inside like he does. No way near the quality Hucks was, who had all of these attributes.Cort 6 - I thought he was lazy. OK when the ball comes to him but isn''t one to put himself about.Cureton 5 - Anybody could have scored his goal so doesn''t gain him many extra points. Apart from that he was completely anonymous. Overall. I''m rather depressed looking at our team now and seeing how bad it has fallen compared to only a few years ago. Anybody playing against us cannot possible look at that team sheet, see a strike force of Cort and Cureton, and not think ''we''ve got a great chance of winning this''. It''s gonna be a struggle to stay up. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
medus 0 Posted February 21, 2009 Croft 7 - If you looked at him at the end of the match his work rate shined through. He was the only one who had any dirt on them from battling, and the only one completely shattered. Not a great game technically but for the only one to put in 100% he gets MOTM for me.Croft was very poor today - hardly noticed he was there! I would have only given him 4/5. If he was our MOTM then we are really in trouble. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCFC_Shaun 0 Posted February 21, 2009 [quote user="medus"] Croft 7 - If you looked at him at the end of the match his work rate shined through. He was the only one who had any dirt on them from battling, and the only one completely shattered. Not a great game technically but for the only one to put in 100% he gets MOTM for me.Croft was very poor today - hardly noticed he was there! I would have only given him 4/5. If he was our MOTM then we are really in trouble.[/quote]Yep. Look at the table. We ''really are in trouble''.As I said. He had a poor game technically but his 100% effort was there for us all to see and was the only one with such commitment. Therefore he would get my vote. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GJP 79 Posted February 21, 2009 [quote user="NCFC_Shaun"]Hoolahan 7 - Only player to create something. But he annoys me. Not enough strength or pace to be a winger, Far to one footed to cut inside like he does. No way near the quality Hucks was, who had all of these attributes.[/quote]Hoolahan should be in the same team as Hucks, not a replacement for him. They could rip teams apart in this league with their ability if they had the chance to play together. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gazzathegreat 0 Posted February 21, 2009 Ratings today. Weather 10/10 - the sun in my eyes meant I couldn''t see much of the game. I was lucky!No seriously -Marshall - 5/10 - not sure what his problem was in the final 10 minutes or so. We were in desperate need of a winner and he just didn''t seem to hasten himself into action. In all honestly didn''t have much to do, but still didn''t inspire much confidence in me from where I was watching and the defence didn''t seem to be taking much notice of him either.Semmy 5/10 started okay but faded well before the end of the first half. A major fitness concern with him? Still better than of late.Shacks 5/10 once he had put paid to his hoofs out of defence he settled into a decent game and was up for most of our set pieces. Seems to have a better understanding with Doc since his move.Doc 6/10 did a bit more than Shacks and chased back when needed. Steady as usual.Grounds 5/10 failed to pick up attacking play and looked a bit lost.Croft 6/10 thought Croft looked well off the pace, is he injured, didn''t make many of his usual surging runs and was out of the game for long spells.Fozzy 5/10 made one good forward pass early on and then I rarely noticed him. Don''t think he did too much wrong, but didn''t contribute much in midfield at all.Clingan 7/10 ran the midfield for Norwich. Didn''t control it, but most of our good attacking moves came from his combining with Wes.Wes - 7.5/10 Would love to give an 8 but he was quieter just before going off. Injury? First half he was very good, running all over the pitch and linking well with Cort and Clingan. Very good performance and great effort MOMCort 7/10 thought he got into some good positions and two crosses to him from Wes could have been goals. Is building some good understanding with his team mates and is beginning to look the part.Cureton 6/10 good goal and some good ghosting into position, but not enough of it. Confidence still low? He seemed quite slow today - is he carrying an injury?Subs: Wonderful to see young Daley come on, I think it ws my biggest cheer of the afternoon. He didn''t have time to do much and came on when we seemed to have given up but hopefully this is a signal that we will play some of the academy lads. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
I am a Banana 0 Posted February 21, 2009 [quote user="medus"] Croft 7 - If you looked at him at the end of the match his work rate shined through. He was the only one who had any dirt on them from battling, and the only one completely shattered. Not a great game technically but for the only one to put in 100% he gets MOTM for me.Croft was very poor today - hardly noticed he was there! I would have only given him 4/5. If he was our MOTM then we are really in trouble.[/quote]he dived on the floor to much! thats why he was dirty! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GJP 79 Posted February 21, 2009 [quote user="gazzathegreat"]Cureton 6/10 good goal and some good ghosting into position, but not enough of it. Confidence still low? He seemed quite slow today - is he carrying an injury? [/quote]Ghosting into position? Really??He''s slow and lazy. That''s all. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Graham Humphrey 13 Posted February 21, 2009 Marshall - 5Otesmobor - 4Doherty - 6Shackell - 5Grounds - 4Croft - 5Fotheringham - 6Clingan - 5Hoolahan - 7Cort - 6Cureton - 5 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
whoareyou? 0 Posted February 21, 2009 Why the hell is Pattison not in the team? At least he is busy and puts himself about...and comes up with the odd goal!Instead we have Fotheringham and an unfit Croft. Does Delia pick the f***ing team because it seems to make little difference who the manager is. We still make the same selection mistakes week in week out! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gazzathegreat 0 Posted February 21, 2009 I am trying to be supportive, I thought he did better today than of late. Also I don''t want Wiz to cast a spell on me..... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Puppet Man 0 Posted February 21, 2009 [quote user="Graham Humphrey"]Marshall - 5Otesmobor - 4Doherty - 6Shackell - 5Grounds - 4Croft - 5Fotheringham - 6Clingan - 5Hoolahan - 7Cort - 6Cureton - 5[/quote]were you at the game grounds 4 seriously you must have been looking into the sun most of the time Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Graham Humphrey 13 Posted February 21, 2009 He was terrible. Was largely responsible for their goal, offered no threat at all going forward, shocking distribution, no awareness, generally just hopeless. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GJP 79 Posted February 21, 2009 I agree with a lot you say mate but I think you''re being a touch harsh on young Grounds. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CNS-Canary 0 Posted February 21, 2009 [quote user="ncfc90"]Clingan 6.5/7 - Did well defensively, don''t know what else to put, solid performanceFotheringham 4 - Did hardly anything today, when he did have it, gave the ball away, with passes that were simple. never plays the ball infront of the player, always behind him[/quote] You''ve given Fozzy a four, yet clingan a 7. Im nowhere fozzy''s biggest fan. Probably one of the his smallest. yet even i had to admit that no way was clingan any better today, But i accept peoples opinion. And yes he cant pass even under pressure. But the set up for JC was exceptional. I would have personally given him and clingan both a 6. OTBC.was dire today. Bar hoolahan, and cort there was no commitment. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
First Wizard 0 Posted February 21, 2009 [quote user="gazzathegreat"]I am trying to be supportive, I thought he did better today than of late. Also I don''t want Wiz to cast a spell on me.....[/quote]Lol, seriously Gazza, I''m not going to bite on anti Jami threads anymore, he''s dammed if he does, he''s dammed if he doesn''t.Hopefully, he''ll keep on scoring now, although, if the defence can''t defend...................[:S] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ncfc90 0 Posted February 21, 2009 Well Clingan was certainly alot more involved than fotheringham today, unlike Fotheringham he also didn''t give possession away practically every time he got it! Though i''ll agree it wasn''t Clingans best game for us. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
one 4 the future 0 Posted February 21, 2009 Whats all this Semmi 5/10 crap,he done nothing and i mean nothing exception done the 100m sprint in 10.11secs -5/10 is still being kind. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Empty Mirror 0 Posted February 21, 2009 Marshall - 4 should have done better on the goal, not much to do otherwise. It''s a long time since I''ve gone home thinking "Marshall got us the points today". Or even, "Marshall played better than their keeper".Semmy - 4 One decent run in the first half to remind us what we were missing, but his distribution was terribleDoc- 6 Solid at the back, won some ball at the front tooShacks - 5 SolidGrounds - 6 I thought he had a solid game, and he picked out Cort in the penalty area with a superb ball second half, Cort just couldn''t control itCrofty - 6 As usual. Loads of effort, not much end product. But, involved in the goal, and kept two Burnley players occupied all game which should have meant their was space for someone else, somewhere.Clingan - 5 Not the force he was earlier in the season, but solidFozzy - 6 I''ve been critical of him in the past, but he made tackles, passed forwards as often as sidewards, had a good shot well saved second halfHoolahan - 8 MOTM Arguably his best game for Norwich. When he and Cort went off, so did our threat. He was asking to come off, though.Cort 7 Led the line well, won his share of headers, unlucky not to scoreJamie 5 For the most part looked off the pace. But took his goal well.Killen - 1 Normally I''d say he wasn''t on long enough to assess but by then we were in hoofball mode, and he must have had about 20 balls punted up at him. He didn''t win one. He didn''t jump for one. He fell over a lot. I can''t remember him ever getting the ball to a yellow shirt. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Yellowfuture 71 Posted February 21, 2009 [quote user="GJP"][quote user="NCFC_Shaun"] Hoolahan 7 - Only player to create something. But he annoys me. Not enough strength or pace to be a winger, Far to one footed to cut inside like he does. No way near the quality Hucks was, who had all of these attributes.[/quote]Hoolahan should be in the same team as Hucks, not a replacement for him. They could rip teams apart in this league with their ability if they had the chance to play together.[/quote] Yep, it would have been great to see them in the same team, very very exciting, we wouldn`t be bottom three if that had happened! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ron obvious 1,473 Posted February 21, 2009 Opposition manager''s view:He said: "When Chris playedthat one-two on the edge of the area and found himself in a one-on-onewith their keeper you are thinking ''goal'' because of the quality he hasgot and the fact that he scored twice against Norwich earlier in theseason."Sadly it was not to be, but overall I thought it would have been atravesty if we had won the game because Norwich put in a really goodperformance. Bryan Gunn has got them playing for him and if they carryon like that I am sure they will be moving up the table in no time atall."Norwich scored a good goal and for the next 10 minutes or so theyput us under a lot of pressure, but Brian Jensen made a good save andwe gradually got a foothold in the game."We managed to get a goal back with a good move, but I must admit wewere fortunate to be level at the break on the balance of play."Norwich probably had the biggest share of chances in the secondhalf as well, but I was very pleased with the way we defended. When Ifirst came here we would probably have lost a game like that, but weshowed a lot of character, stood up to be counted, and came away with ahard-earned draw."Overall I think it is a very positive point."Sounds a different game compared to some reports from Norwich supporters.I think quite a few believe Norwich should be consistently producing performances of Man U beating proportions. Realistically, a draw against a promotion chasing team (who have already beaten Prem. sides) is not so bad.Perhaps it would be better to accept the team is no world-beater & support them as they struggle to avoid the drop? Instead of being disappointed that you''re not watching a Premiership quality team every week?It might just help. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ricardo 7,239 Posted February 21, 2009 [quote user="ron obvious"]Opposition manager''s view:Perhaps it would be better to accept the team is no world-beater & support them as they struggle to avoid the drop? Instead of being disappointed that you''re not watching a Premiership quality team every week?It might just help.[/quote]I would be more than happy if I were only watching a team of Championship quality Ron. As we can all see from the league table, this is a far from the case.I''ve given up expecting the moon Ron, but I do expect NCFC to be able to comfortably compete in this league.Is that really expecting too much? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ron obvious 1,473 Posted February 21, 2009 Ricardo, if the league table never lied, then Charlton, Southampton, Watford etc. could never have got the results they did lately. How do you explain the Wolves results? Beating Ipswich? Weren''t Doncaster dead & buried a while ago?The quality is there, the consistency isn''t - & it''s much the same for just about every team in this league. Look at Reading recently.Look at recent league tables. It''s impossible to predict how any one team will perform from one season to the next:04/05Pos Name P W D L F A GD PTS1 Sunderland 46 29 7 10 76 41 35 942 Wigan Athletic 46 25 12 9 79 35 44 873 Ipswich Town 46 24 13 9 85 56 29 854 Derby County 46 22 10 14 71 60 11 765 Preston 46 21 12 13 67 58 9 756 West Ham Utd 46 21 10 15 66 56 10 737 Reading 46 19 13 14 51 44 7 708 Sheffield Utd 46 18 13 15 57 56 1 679 Wolves 46 15 21 10 72 59 13 6610 Millwall 46 18 12 16 51 45 6 6611 QPR 46 17 11 18 54 58 -4 6212 Stoke City 46 17 10 19 36 38 -2 6113 Burnley 46 15 15 16 38 39 -1 6014 Leeds United 46 14 18 14 49 52 -3 6015 Leicester City 46 12 21 13 49 46 3 5716 Cardiff City 46 13 15 18 48 51 -3 5417 Plymouth 46 14 11 21 52 64 -12 5318 Watford 46 12 16 18 52 59 -7 5219 Coventry City 46 13 13 20 61 73 -12 5220 Brighton 46 13 12 21 40 65 -25 5121 Crewe 46 12 14 20 66 86 -20 5022 Gillingham 46 12 14 20 45 66 -21 5023 Nottm Forest 46 9 17 20 42 66 -24 4424 Rotherham 46 5 14 27 35 69 -34 2905/06 1 Reading 46 31 13 2 99 32 67 1062 Sheffield Utd 46 26 12 8 76 46 30 903 Watford 46 22 15 9 77 53 24 814 Preston 46 20 20 6 59 30 29 805 Leeds United 46 21 15 10 57 38 19 786 Crystal Palace 46 21 12 13 67 48 19 757 Wolves 46 16 19 11 50 42 8 678 Coventry City 46 16 15 15 62 65 -3 639 Norwich City 46 18 8 20 56 65 -9 6210 Luton Town 46 17 10 19 66 67 -1 6111 Cardiff City 46 16 12 18 58 59 -1 6012 Southampton 46 13 19 14 49 50 -1 5813 Stoke City 46 17 7 22 54 63 -9 5814 Plymouth 46 13 17 16 39 46 -7 5615 Ipswich Town 46 14 14 18 53 66 -13 5616 Leicester City 46 13 15 18 51 59 -8 5417 Burnley 46 14 12 20 46 54 -8 5418 Hull City 46 12 16 18 49 55 -6 5219 Sheffield Wed 46 13 13 20 39 52 -13 5220 Derby County 46 10 20 16 53 67 -14 5021 QPR 46 12 14 20 50 65 -15 5022 Crewe 46 9 15 22 57 86 -29 4223 Millwall 46 8 16 22 35 62 -27 4024 Brighton 46 7 17 22 39 71 -32 3806//071 Sunderland 46 27 7 12 76 47 29 882 Birmingham 46 26 8 12 67 42 25 863 Derby County 46 25 9 12 62 46 16 844 WBA 46 22 10 14 81 55 26 765 Wolves 46 22 10 14 59 56 3 766 Southampton 46 21 12 13 77 53 24 757 Preston 46 22 8 16 64 53 11 748 Stoke City 46 19 16 11 62 41 21 739 Sheffield Wed 46 20 11 15 70 66 4 7110 Colchester 46 20 9 17 70 56 14 6911 Plymouth 46 17 16 13 63 62 1 6712 Crystal Palace 46 18 11 17 59 51 8 6513 Cardiff City 46 17 13 16 57 53 4 6414 Ipswich Town 46 18 8 20 64 59 5 6215 Burnley 46 15 12 19 52 49 3 5716 Norwich City 46 16 9 21 56 71 -15 5717 Coventry City 46 16 8 22 47 62 -15 5618 QPR 46 14 11 21 54 68 -14 5319 Leicester City 46 13 14 19 49 64 -15 5320 Barnsley 46 15 5 26 53 85 -32 5021 Hull City 46 13 10 23 51 67 -16 4922 Southend 46 10 12 24 47 80 -33 4223 Luton Town 46 10 10 26 53 81 -28 4024 Leeds United 46 13 7 26 46 72 -26 3607/081 WBA 46 23 12 11 88 55 33 812 Stoke City 46 21 16 9 69 55 14 793 Hull City 46 21 12 13 65 47 18 754 Bristol City 46 20 14 12 54 53 1 745 Crystal Palace 46 18 17 11 58 42 16 716 Watford 46 18 16 12 62 56 6 707 Wolves 46 18 16 12 53 48 5 708 Ipswich Town 46 18 15 13 65 56 9 699 Sheffield Utd 46 17 15 14 56 51 5 6610 Plymouth 46 17 13 16 60 50 10 6411 Charlton 46 17 13 16 63 58 5 6412 Cardiff City 46 16 16 14 59 55 4 6413 Burnley 46 16 14 16 60 67 -7 6214 QPR 46 14 16 16 60 66 -6 5815 Preston 46 15 11 20 50 56 -6 5616 Sheffield Wed 46 14 13 19 54 55 -1 5517 Norwich City 46 15 10 21 49 59 -10 5518 Barnsley 46 14 13 19 52 65 -13 5519 Blackpool 46 12 18 16 59 64 -5 5420 Southampton 46 13 15 18 56 72 -16 5421 Coventry City 46 14 11 21 52 64 -12 5322 Leicester City 46 12 16 18 42 45 -3 5223 Scunthorpe 46 11 13 22 46 69 -23 4624 Colchester 46 7 17 22 62 86 -24 38 Nobody wants to believe it, but a bad run of luck can & does happen, & if a team AND ITS SUPPORTERS react badly to that it will be a downward spiral.Coyle was saying that, had City got the extra goal THAT THEY DESERVED then Burnley would have been lucky to have drawn.Supporters can do nothing to help except support. Getting behind each & every player will not make them worse players - & may make them just that crucial little bit better.I don''t believe this is a club full of arrogant players. Running out in a magnificent stadium in front of 25,000 peoplethey know, deep down, that a lot is expected of them. And they also know they''re not a team of Ronaldos.They really, really need your help. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ZLF 261 Posted February 21, 2009 A quality goal with movement from and passing from city that they could not reproduce. Poor defending again lost us two points. Poor coaching and decision making in centrak midfield really killed us off, together with limited options from bench and lack of guidance from the management team on how to exploit the changes we did eventually make. Why did NONE of the players twig that this was a must win game for us? If anyone ever questions the committment of loan v permanent staff remember this game,, just one loanee started and the least committed player was our right back.No - I cant see where a win is coming from with effort and performances like this.Marshall 6 Knows his kicking is poor and his confidence is ruined as a result. Given that he, we our players AND our opponents also know thi swhy o why do clingand fozzy and the back four continue to pass back to him so often, why dont they hoof it as it at least has a chance of heading in the direction of a city shirt?Ots 4. I good attacking run was the sum of his performance today. More uncommitted than any loan player, is leijer really than bad he cant shift ots from the team????#Doc 7 SOlid - best of the defendersShax 5 cant forgive him forgetting to track back after blake for their goal. Instant reminder of why we let him go. Poor effort in teh second half which would have sealed three crucial points.Grounds 5 Worse than drury or betrand. Needs to be droppedCroft 6 NOt great today, less effort than in recent games and back to his worst possible crossing. Fozzy 6 See Clingan - gains an extra mark for being the first central midfielder in weeks to run beyond the strikers in open play to create our goal.Clingan 5 WOeful. Ran around but Sammy Sideways and Fozzy both failed to produce a single tackle in the second half (and combined with fozzy tackled less during the game than either croft or hoolahan did individually) Poor passing, unable to suppport the strikers and continued failure to close down opponents midfielders means they neither create or provide cover as a central midfielder should. Now becoming the weakest part of the team. Sideways movement of the ball will not win us three points. Did neither midfielder really have the nouce to try and lift a ball over the top to see whether we could exploit Daleys pace???????????Hoolahan 8 MOTM Not everything he tried came off but he was our only hope for a goal. Sorely missed when withdrawn for injury reasons - after the ref offered him no protectionsCureton 6 Nice finish for the goal but failed to give the movement needed or support that COrts efforts deserved.Cort 7 Boy have we missed him all season. A real handful for Burnley, and forced the only real save from Jensen.SUbsKIllen 5 SHowed just what an impact COrt had on the game.but proving completely ineffecticeDaley 5 Did he touch the ball? Given no service at all. Why was he left 5 mins waiting to come on? Be decisive GUnn, once you have made that decision get him on, dont leave him so long he needs to warm up again!!Bertrand 5 Why no carney?? Not comfortable in midfield. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Alex Harvey-Jones 0 Posted February 22, 2009 Marshall - 5: Not a huge amount to do really. Could he have held on to the shot that led to their goal? Probably should have at least pushed the shot away from goal. Distribution wasn''t great and kicking was poor. Not a great game. Grounds - 6: Solid and some neat touches. However no pace going forward and refused to cross the ball. Not a bad game though overall.Shackell - 7: For me impressive. Made some good tackles, got his head to a lot and stood out from where I was watching. Looks like he has improved from his time at Wolves. Probably should have scored.Doherty - 6: Solid but nothing spectacular. No glaring errors but nothing caught the eye. Didn''t notice him for most of the game and overshadowed by Shackell.Otsemobor - 5: Frustrating as usual. Good when he did get forward with pace by why won''t he do it more often??? All too often refused to cross and half way line and passed the ball backwards way too much.Hoolahan - 7: Generally a good game. Linked play quite well, good movement, some neat touches and signs of skill. Still has the annoying habit of giving the ball away too much. Man of the match though for me!!Clingan - 6: Not his best game. Solid but nothing more - few wayward passes.Fozzy - 5: Not happy with his commitment really. Pasisng was ok but just doesn''t get stuck in enough for me!!! Would prefer Russell or Pattison!Croft - 6: Tried hard but didn''t get much joy. Where he did there was little end product. Hi energy levels weren''t up to normal standard.Cort - 6: Not as impressive as against Brisol City but still won a lot in the air and his hold up play was good. Our key striker and when he went off we looked a worse side and won nothing in the air. Should have scored to make it 2-0 and wrap up the game.Cureton - 5: Good finish but apart from that was poor. Doesn''t win anything in the air, gives the ball away and some of the stuff he does is quite frankly embarrassing at this level. Lets play Gow or McDonald instead!Subs:Killen - 4: Awful. Won nothing in the air, didn''t hold the ball up and was no threat on goal. Looks lacking in fitness and quality. Daley - 4: Didn''t really get a touch hence the low score. Good to see a youngster given a chance and he looks quick. Definitely one for the future.Betrand - 5: Nothing really of note. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Robert N. LiM 4,002 Posted February 23, 2009 ZLF was at the same game as me. Although I''m not sure what Killen did to deserve a 5. About four points too generous, Zipper. Burnley were pretty poor on Saturday and while I might have taken a point at the start of the game, it was apparent early on that this was a winnable game. I don''t think we played that badly, and, as the Burnley manager said, we might easily have won the game. But the lack of desire to go and take the game by the scruff of the neck is really worrying from a team in our position.Anyone remember last season''s fixture vs Burnley, which was another must-win game? We really took it to them right from the off, with Fotheringham at the heart of everything, and won the game largely on desire. I don''t believe last year''s team, man-for-man, was better. We need more passion, and soon, or we''re going down. Surely passion should be the one thing that Gunny can inspire? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites