Post Match Charlton 2 :1 Leicester City

[spionfox]

As an additional treat to a pretty crap day, we went for a pint at London Bridge to witness the Baby Squad being general morons.

Crikey. Aren't they all pensioners now?

 

[H T B]

Analysed all the recorded games I have with us under sven and pearson.

We have slowly lost ability to keep possession since losing sven, in the early pearson games it wasnt so evident but its clear its something not worked on well in training as over time its gone away, that leaves direct football, and for whatever reason thats not very good under pearson either so in short our ability to do much with the ball is bad, this ties in with that creative midfielders and strikers at this club underperform which I keep putting down to bad coaching and I will keep putting it down to bad coaching. Defensive we should be a rock but since pearson's first spell at our club he cant get it right the 2nd time round. If he did get it right then maybe the other problems we could get away with and sneaking 1-0 wins.

Flipping heck, talk about over reaction.
We lose 1 game, 1 fecking game, 1 fecking game. Just stay away from anything sharp for a while, for your own safety if nothing else.
In fact, if anybody knows this person, just take his PC off him, NOW

 

[Billyjof]

A winnable game, wasted opportunity to join the early league leading pack. I'm not in the doom and gloom camp but we really need to be getting something from these types of games.

 

[DesertFox]

A winnable game, wasted opportunity to join the early league leading pack. I'm not in the doom and gloom camp but we really need to be getting something from these types of games.

I agree, but two points per game = automatic promotion form, for anyone feeling suicidal about it.

 

[camberwell fox]

I can't see a single trace of 'suicidal' on here. It's a football forum and people are trying to understand why we lost a game which had we have set up correctly we would have won.

What's wrong with constructive analysis?

 

[Billyjof]

I felt a little bit suicidal when I woke up and saw this result. Could have been more the realisation of having to spend the day at the zoo with my brother in law.

 

[Matt_B]

I can't see a single trace of 'suicidal' on here. It's a football forum and people are trying to understand why we lost a game which had we have set up correctly we would have won.

What's wrong with constructive analysis?

Is that not true of every game?

 

[camberwell fox]

Hopefully yes and balanced.

 

[Blaarev]

I think you know what I meant...

I think you know that I knew what you meant...

 

[camberwell fox]

I also should have said in my previous post:

I have seen us play twice this season, once on the box and once live. Both times we have played badly and scraped a point. From other posts it is fair to say that we haven't played well in the first half of any games this far and overall we are perhaps fortunate to be sitting on ten points.

If we continue to play badly we wi turn a corner and lose more than we win. Pearson needs to change tactics sooner rather than later as a run of similar proportions to the one witnessed at the back end of last season would result in him losing his job and the inevitable merry go round that follows.

As far as I can see no one wants this.

 

[camberwell fox]

I think you know that I knew what you meant...

Yes...I think.

 

[pork pie fox]

I also should have said in my previous post:

I have seen us play twice this season, once on the box and once live. Both times we have played badly and scraped a point. From other posts it is fair to say that we haven't played well in the first half of any games this far and overall we are perhaps fortunate to be sitting on ten points.

If we continue to play badly we wi turn a corner and lose more than we win. Pearson needs to change tactics sooner rather than later as a run of similar proportions to the one witnessed at the back end of last season would result in him losing his job and the inevitable merry go round that follows.

As far as I can see no one wants this.

IIRC last year we were playing fairly well at the start of the season and the general consensus was that we had been unlucky with some results and yet after 5 matches we had lost 3 and only had 6 points. Genuine question - which way round would people prefer it to be?

 

[camberwell fox]

I would prefer us to be playing reasonably well and getting points.

I really don't want to go through the whole 'entertainment' argument again, but is it a coincidence that our home support is in decline?

 

[pork pie fox]

I would prefer us to be playing reasonably well and getting points.

I really don't want to go through the whole 'entertainment' argument again, but is it a coincidence that our home support is in decline?

I don't think we're unique on the declining attendance front.

I'm not necessarily disputing your point, I was just using it as a lead in to a discussion (although I think to say you'd like us to play well and win points is a fairly safe answer :icon_wink)

 

[camberwell fox]

You're right - attendances are on the decline in general. The reason for this at least partly will come down to individual choice as to how to spend free time and at what cost.

For a family if three to go to a game at City is probably close to a £90 afternoon out (this is based on no travel).

£90 is a lot of money for 2 hours and perhaps people can spend a fraction of that kind of outlay for far greater entertainment?

 

[spionfox]

£90 is a lot of money for 2 hours and perhaps people can spend a fraction of that kind of outlay for far greater entertainment?

It would be hard not to to be honest.

 

[pork pie fox]

You're right - attendances are on the decline in general. The reason for this at least partly will come down to individual choice as to how to spend free time and at what cost.

For a family if three to go to a game at City is probably close to a £90 afternoon out (this is based on no travel).

£90 is a lot of money for 2 hours and perhaps people can spend a fraction of that kind of outlay for far greater entertainment?

Absolutely. I would suggest that cost is a much more important figure in declining attendances than the fact that we may play a perceived less entertaining brand of football.

Rightly or wrongly, the only thing that will significantly affect our attendances is promotion to the Premier League.

 

[bocadillo]

You're right - attendances are on the decline in general. The reason for this at least partly will come down to individual choice as to how to spend free time and at what cost.

For a family if three to go to a game at City is probably close to a £90 afternoon out (this is based on no travel).

£90 is a lot of money for 2 hours and perhaps people can spend a fraction of that kind of outlay for far greater entertainment?

My layout used to include travel so was relatively more costly. But it wasn't the expense that stopped me going week after week; nor was it lack of success or entertainment. It's where the money goes to that has caused my increasing dissatisfaction.

 

[Brown Nose]

IIRC last year we were playing fairly well at the start of the season and the general consensus was that we had been unlucky with some results and yet after 5 matches we had lost 3 and only had 6 points. Genuine question - which way round would people prefer it to be?

The problem is that we all tend to use whatever evidence exists to support our personal view.

So last season, at this point, many were arguing that our start was false because we were playing well and the results would come. This season, the corresponding argument is opposite but some of the same people are espousing it. The performances have been poor but we've started with 'promotion' results so what's the problem?

If, like me, your glass is pretty much always half empty when it comes to City under NP, you can look at performances and/or results and draw quite different conclusions, equally reasonably (or unreasonably).

There is no right or wrong answer because nobody knows for sure whether we'd be better or worse with a different manager. It's all opinion. What gets me sometimes is the assertion that we should simply support because that's what our role is. Criticism is seen as inherently wrong or somehow a depiction of being a less legitimate City fan.

For example, in our last game at home, the team were partially applauded and partially booed off at half time. The first half performance was interpreted completely differently by many at the game. There is simply no consensus amongst fans right now. There are good reasons why NP is still in his job but also good reasons why he's one the favourites to be sacked.

Answering your question directly, I'm a results over performance person in all circumstances and I've never really understood anyone that isn't. But to expect consistency in results and performances with our current set up is likely to leave you disappointed.

 

[camberwell fox]

The problem is that we all tend to use whatever evidence exists to support our personal view.

So last season, at this point, many were arguing that our start was false because we were playing well and the results would come. This season, the corresponding argument is opposite but some of the same people are espousing it. The performances have been poor but we've started with 'promotion' results so what's the problem?

If, like me, your glass is pretty much always half empty when it comes to City under NP, you can look at performances and/or results and draw quite different conclusions, equally reasonably (or unreasonably).

There is no right or wrong answer because nobody knows for sure whether we'd be better or worse with a different manager. It's all opinion. What gets me sometimes is the assertion that we should simply support because that's what our role is. Criticism is seen as inherently wrong or somehow a depiction of being a less legitimate City fan.

For example, in our last game at home, the team were partially applauded and partially booed off at half time. The first half performance was interpreted completely differently by many at the game. There is simply no consensus amongst fans right now. There are good reasons why NP is still in his job but also good reasons why he's one the favourites to be sacked.

Answering your question directly, I'm a results over performance person in all circumstances and I've never really understood anyone that isn't. But to expect consistency in results and performances with our current set up is likely to leave you disappointed.

But we are consistent. We have played poorly for the whole of two games and half (first half) of the other three. We have played badly with 3-5-2 and better with 4-4-2, why are we then persevering with a system that with the current players doesn't work?

We should have tried to steamroller Charlton yesterday, their confidence was frail. If we had scored first we would have won the game easily.

We set up with the system that invites us to be attacked and therein we were always on the back foot. A very poor selection and system to play against a team that were there for the taking.