Ricardo's report v Fulham

[ricardo 8,034]

Some people doubt the reality of the Bogey team curse, Ricardo, having seen it''s power so many times over the years has never ever had any doubts and it was there in spades for all to see this afternoon.

Hughton kept faith with the side that had plundered a point at the Stadium of Light and after a very low key opening 10 minutes enlivened only by a shot staright at John Ruddy from Kasami and a 25 yarder dragged wide by Bradley Johnson. We were all hoping for an early goal to settle the nerves and our wishes were granted when Gary Hooper picked up the ball 30 yards out and made tracks to goal before unleashing an effort that deflected off a defender before dipping over the keeper and into the net. A Christmas gift we all thought and it could have got so much better when Elmander robbed the keeper out wide but could find nobody in a central position to round things off. Then Hooper wasted an even better chance when a muffed clearance found him in space inside the Fulham area. He had time to settle himself but rushed the shot and it trickled wide of Stockdales far post.

City should have been well in control but the defence looked strangely hesitant as all too often they tried to play themselves out of tight spots. There was a warning on the half hour when there were several opportunities to get the ball away before Ruddy was hurried into a clearance that rebounded into the net off a Fulham player. Thankfully the flag was up for handball. The lesson should have been learned but it wasn''t and minutes later similar hesitancy was punished with a free kick just outside the box. Sidweel dummied a shot over the wall and in the confusion Kasami stroked a low shot into the corner. Oh dear, all so untidy and unneccessary.

The remainder of the half was ragged in the exreme with City unable to construct very much and Fulham looking the neater of the two sides. There was a little flurry in the Fulham box as the clock ticked down but when halftime arrived I could already feel the power of the curse starting to take effect. A small miniture of whiskey was consumed during the break but it did little to dispell a feeling of impending doom.

City tried to wind it up a bit from the off but twice Redmond failed to find a team mate after working his way into good positions. Then City won a corner on the left, Snoddy''s delivery was spot on and I was nearly out of my seat when Leroy Fer met it 8 yards out only to groan with agony as Reither headed it off the line. Mr Moss the ref, had given City precious little all afternoon and when he missed a blatant push on Elmander right on the 6 yard line it was no more than expected.

The game began to get quite stretched and RVW replaced Elmander with no obvious difference in the pattern of play. Fulham were no looking quite lively and the City goal did not look entirely secure during a couple of scrambles. The frustration of the crowd was growing and on 72 minutes Wes came on for Snoddy, again there was no obvious improvement although Chris Hughton had given the subs plenty of time to do their thing. With time running down I was just praying for us to hold onto a point but you can never beat the curse of the bogey team and when on 87 minutes a foul on Ollson went unpunished and the ball worked inside for Parker to despatch a 25 yarder past John Ruddy I was already rsigned to the loss.

All that remained was a bit of huff and puff but City never looked like putting anything together. in my opinion the result had already been ordained long before the kick off. I know some of you don''t believe in the bogey team curse and I can offer no rational explanation for it. All I know is that it exists and it worked its nasty magic once again this afternoon.

[Citizen Journalist Foghorn 0]

Yep, all down to playing a bogey team.Unless of course that is just BS, and we actually played no better than last weekend against Sunderland.  An ok first half followed up by a 2nd half where the opposition took control and we did nothing to change the direction of the game.  The only difference, Fulham had the ability to capitalize on their supremacy.

[City 2nd 193]

Come on Ricardo - bogey team! City were just awful. Football matches are won by what happens on the pitch - and like most of the season it hasn''t happened - nothing to do with bogey teams at all.

[SeattleCanary 0]

I have to agree that the bogey team thing is a state of mind. We gave them the 3 points. None of the best teams in the league invite the opposition to shoot at their goal, or give them the space and time in front of their 18 yard box. So as a bottom 10 team, what makes us think we can afford to?

[ricardo 8,034]

[quote user="City 2nd"]Come on Ricardo - bogey team! City were just awful. Football matches are won by what happens on the pitch - and like most of the season it hasn''t happened - nothing to do with bogey teams at all.[/quote]

Just ask yourself why it always happens against Fulham and give me a convincing reason why we have never beaten them in 30 years.

[City 2nd 193]

Ricardo wrote

Just ask yourself why it always happens against Fulham and give me a convincing reason why we have never beaten them in 30 years.

Old wives tales! Do you really really believe in such utter rubbish. There is no such thing as a bogey side - it''s in your head man. Norwich were poor, lacklustre, did not turn up, did not play, did not show desire, intent or panache. They were quite simply sh**e, and have consistently been poor through the whole of 2013! So is that down to bogey sides?

[ricardo 8,034]

you can''t argue with history. You might not like what it says but there is no denying the results.

[Dubai Mark 0]

Thanks for going to the effort of writing your report Ricardo, I get the bogey team thing, plus I understand that we hadnt won a Premier league match ever on Boxing Day before, or was it a home Premier league match, regardless of that we played a Fulham team who have certainly been playing worse than they are now this season.

I actually thought we didnt play so badly, sure I am gutted about the loss, but really thought the match was between two pretty even teams, and had we had that little bit more luck and some better finish a result would have come our way, the difference again today was very narrow between getting zero and getting soemthing. Fulham I thought had a lot of ability in their side and certainly didnt look like candidates for relegation, and the unusually early subs, something many have been calling for didnt make much difference at all, in fact I would rather have seen Elmander stay on to be honest as he was working their defence well from what I could see.

I thought our team''s attitude was good, plenty of effort and was impressed with Hooper, Fer and Turner in particular....and Johnson also put in a good shift against a very decent opposition midfield.

With the way other results went again today, its very clear that this season is going to be a fight between something like ten clubs to keep out of the dreaded drop zone, we are one of them and its going to be a real roller coaster to the end of the season.......I will try and enjoy it to be honest! 

 

[City 2nd 193]

ricardo wrote the following post at 2013-12-26 11:00 PM:

you can''t argue with history. You might not like what it says but there is no denying the results.

What relevance does history have over the result of today''s game! History is something that has happened in the past, not what is happening in the present. History does not determine a football result - the players on the pitch do that, and today Norwich city did not do enough to determine a positive result for themselves, just as they have for most of 2013.

[Highland Canary 78]

It''s nothing to do with bogey teams; it''s simply that our team is playing as less that the sum of its parts - that is the responsibility of our management team.

[Mason 47 1,925]

For me, a bright start but started to become apparent that our 4-man midfield was finding the going tough against their 5. This was further confounded by the lacklustre Fer who seemed a yard behind for most of the game. Johnson very good today but that alone wasn''t going to hold the centre for us.

I had noted when the teams were announced that we had no real backup for midfield aside from Hoolahan and young Murphy, and whilst the former has his appeals I wouldn''t rely on him in central midfield all that much, nor as a winger. Injuries really becoming a bind in the middle.

[morty 0]

[quote user="Mason 47"]For me, a bright start but started to become apparent that our 4-man midfield was finding the going tough against their 5. This was further confounded by the lacklustre Fer who seemed a yard behind for most of the game. Johnson very good today but that alone wasn''t going to hold the centre for us.

I had noted when the teams were announced that we had no real backup for midfield aside from Hoolahan and young Murphy, and whilst the former has his appeals I wouldn''t rely on him in central midfield all that much, nor as a winger. Injuries really becoming a bind in the middle.[/quote]Common sense assessment[Y]

[ricardo 8,034]

[quote user="City 2nd"]ricardo wrote the following post at 2013-12-26 11:00 PM:

you can''t argue with history. You might not like what it says but there is no denying the results.

What relevance does history have over the result of today''s game! History is something that has happened in the past, not what is happening in the present. History does not determine a football result - the players on the pitch do that, and today Norwich city did not do enough to determine a positive result for themselves, just as they have for most of 2013.[/quote]

You still haven''t explained why we are so poor and can never get a result against Fulham. The fact that we haven''t played well is indisputable but doesn''t explain continual failure against this team over a span of 30 years.

[Citizen Journalist Foghorn 0]

------------Dubai Mark---------I thought our team''s attitude was good, plenty of effort and was impressed with Hooper, Fer and Turner in particular....and Johnson also put in a good shift against a very decent opposition midfield.------------------------------------Fulham who were deservedly sitting in 18th position.   Just like ''improving'' Sunderland, and champions elect Tottenham eh...If you thought Fer had a good game, I refuse to believe you watched the match today.

[ricardo 8,034]

One thing is becoming painfully obvious. There is very little difference between the bottom dozen teams in this league.

[chicken 0]

You''re right there Ricardo.

It''s not a justification but Prem Footy definitely seems to have gone down in quality over the last few years despite the influx of money and supposedly better players.

I would say, on performances man city, arsenal and Liverpool stand apart for their attacking play but almost all of the other teams are inconsistent, hit and miss or just poor.

Of the many teams we have played so very few have players that even catch the eye.

[nutty nigel 7,902]

That is true. And Foggy highlighting games we didn''t win doesn''t explain games we''ve won. Bogey teams? This was probably our worst home performance of the season. It doesn''t surprise me it was Fulham though...

 

 

[ricardo 8,034]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

That is true. And Foggy highlighting games we didn''t win doesn''t explain games we''ve won. Bogey teams? This was probably our worst home performance of the season. It doesn''t surprise me it was Fulham though...

 

 

[/quote]Nailed on it was going to be, at halftime I already knew we wouldn''t get anything from the game having seen this happen oh so many times before.. I could see from all the predictions that people were expecting to win so was I the only one who would have been happy with a draw?Personally I always thought we had more chance getting something from United than from Fulham.

[nutty nigel 7,902]

[quote user="ricardo"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

That is true. And Foggy highlighting games we didn''t win doesn''t explain games we''ve won. Bogey teams? This was probably our worst home performance of the season. It doesn''t surprise me it was Fulham though...

 

 

[/quote]Nailed on it was going to be, at halftime I already knew we wouldn''t get anything from the game having seen this happen oh so many times before.. I could see from all the predictions that people were expecting to win so was I the only one who would have been happy with a draw?Personally I always thought we had more chance getting something from United than from Fulham.[/quote]

 

Ha!

 

I think we''ve beat United seven times since we last beat Fulham...

 

 

[Gingerpele 0]

No MOTM Ricardo?

[nutty nigel 7,902]

Yer man Bradley got it from the match sponsors GPele. We were pretty poor but he would be a contender for me. As would Turner and Elmander.

 

 

[ricardo 8,034]

[quote user="Gingerpele"]No MOTM Ricardo?[/quote]Sorry Ginger I was feeling a bit depressed. I thought Johno had a very good first half and his passing was spot on but spoiled it a couple of times in the second. Elmander also had a decent game but I suppose I have to give it to Hooper again for the goal and a generally good all round game. Pity he missed the easier chance though.I also thought both fullbacks were poor and Redmond for all his trickery was just not in synch with the rest of the team. Also Snoddy was very below par. It was a very poor team performance all round.

[Citizen Journalist Foghorn 0]

----------nutty nigel------

And Foggy highlighting games we didn''t win doesn''t explain games we''ve won. 

------------------------------

Same First XI, same performance... And in both games NOTHING done by the management to change the flow of the game.

I mean damn, he could have switched to a 4-2-3-1 or indeed anything. Wes on the right and Redmond on the left Give me strength! Is Hoot the only one in the stadium not to see it??

Two games where Redmond was instrumental in our good results playing on the right and he has been there for about 15 minutes since.

[nutty nigel 7,902]

[quote user="Citizen Journalist Foghorn"]----------nutty nigel------

And Foggy highlighting games we didn''t win doesn''t explain games we''ve won. 

------------------------------

Same First XI, same performance... And in both games NOTHING done by the management to change the flow of the game.

I mean damn, he could have switched to a 4-2-3-1 or indeed anything. Wes on the right and Redmond on the left Give me strength! Is Hoot the only one in the stadium not to see it??

Two games where Redmond was instrumental in our good results playing on the right and he has been there for about 15 minutes since.[/quote]

 

And Foggy highlighting games we didn''t win doesn''t explain the games we won..

 

 

[City 2nd 193]

Ricardo wrote:

You still haven''t explained why we are so poor and can never get a result against Fulham. The fact that we haven''t played well is indisputable but doesn''t explain continual failure against this team over a span of 30 years.

Ricardo if you believe we have been poor just against Fulham in one game which you but down to a bogey team, you are more deluded than I thought. Look through ALL the results for 2013, and my explanation for being so poor is we have been CONSISTENTLY poor under the guidance of Mr Hughton and his coaching team. He picks the team, coaches, and selects the game plan to go with his picked team. Result - consistent poor results against many of the premiership sides and they are not all bogey teams! Sorry but your argument is a joke IMO.

[Citizen Journalist Foghorn 0]

------------nutty nigel---------

And Foggy highlighting games we didn''t win doesn''t explain the games we won..

-----------------------------------

The two recent games we looked dangerous in, WBA and Swansea, involved breaking quickly. Something we have not done since Snodgrass is back in the team. We have not scored a single goal on the counter attack with him in the side.

Being mainly right footed, Redmond looks a lot weaker on the left than the right. Unless watching him cut inside repeatedly and blasting the ball at goal indicates good play.... hence 41 shots 1 goal from Redmond this season.

Hooper has 5 goals in 20 shots, perhaps Redmond on the right putting the ball in the box from a dangerous angle with his preferred foot could create more opportunities for our clinical finisher.

[nutty nigel 7,902]

Why is Ricardo deluded[:^)]

 

 

[Citizen Journalist Foghorn 0]

-------------"City 2nd"------------

Ricardo if you believe we have been poor just against Fulham in one game which you but down to a bogey team, you are more deluded than I thought.

---------------------------------------

For the vast majority of these few games, Fulham have been the superior side in the league and monetarily. Historically I think it is 11 wins to us, 18 to them.

[nutty nigel 7,902]

[quote user="Citizen Journalist Foghorn"]------------nutty nigel---------

And Foggy highlighting games we didn''t win doesn''t explain the games we won..

-----------------------------------

The two recent games we looked dangerous in, WBA and Swansea, involved breaking quickly. Something we have not done since Snodgrass is back in the team. We have not scored a single goal on the counter attack with him in the side.

Being mainly right footed, Redmond looks a lot weaker on the left than the right. Unless watching him cut inside repeatedly and blasting the ball at goal indicates good play.... hence 41 shots 1 goal from Redmond this season.

Hooper has 5 goals in 20 shots, perhaps Redmond on the right putting the ball in the box from a dangerous angle with his preferred foot could create more opportunities for our clinical finisher.[/quote]

 

I thought they switched wings a fair bit in the last couple of games. I don''t get this downer about Snoddy on here. He''s had a difficult season with injuries but he''s played well and has been involved in games we won. He was far better than Redmond today whatever side they were on. That''s not a critcism of Redmond it''s just an acceptance that his form will fluctuate a lot and if we had cover he wouldn''t be expected to pull up trees every week. Our biggest problem today was that Fulham were too cute for many of our players. They are a much older and more experienced team. Two players that were strong enough for us were Elmander and Snoddy and i thought we were worse when they were replaced.

 

 

[Citizen Journalist Foghorn 0]

-----------nutty nigel---------

And Foggy highlighting games we didn''t win doesn''t explain the games we won..

---------------------------------

Also interestingly, Redmond was clearly trying to cross the ball in the box today. He put in 10 crosses. Any byline style dangerous ones would be on his left (weaker) boot, on his right would tend to be crossed in in front of the defence which are easier for the defenders to deal with and require a great deal more accuracy.

Today we also had more play down the left than the right, which is a big change from the norm. probably due to Snodgrass being very quiet today.