Sky Commentary

[B4ev6is]

I meant bbc mate helights

[Sith Happens]

1 minute ago, B4ev6is said:

I meant bbc mate helights

Goal shouldn't have stood.

[B4ev6is]

Yes it should I right infront of did not show it again

[Sith Happens]

3 minutes ago, B4ev6is said:

Yes it should I right infront of did not show it again

It didn't, watch it back the whistle goes before Keogh even makes the cross, the united player knowing the whistle went attempts to catch the ball and actually puts it into the net attempting to do so.

[Ellafella]

On 1/20/2018 at 12:35, David said:

 

i'll get his coat, john percy. 

[BobbyD]

On 21/01/2018 at 00:32, Mr Tibbs said:

60-75% of the time tbh. 

Not that anyone’s bothered, its really effective. It works with this squad and management set up and it’s something most have accepted. 

Most of our season has been similar to last nights performance, a bit in and out, very wasteful in possession but normally we’re clinical in front of goal and put teams to the sword with decisive, quick attacks. 

I’m enjoying this season, will be absolutely made up with second place or even a top 6 berth. But let’s be reyt about the football, it’s taken a firm back seat. 

Cant agree I'm afraid

Question : Have you enjoyed going to and watching home games more or less than this time last year and the year before ?

And what do you mean about "the football" ? What is this ? 

I am genuinely mystified ?

What do you mean, back seat ? We score loads more goals than last season, we concede less. To think that our standard away performance is to win 3 : 0 .  What more are you looking for ?

Can you clarify Tibbsy what exactly you would like to see that you currently aren't  ?

 

 

[Mr Tibbs]

10 hours ago, BobbyD said:

Cant agree I'm afraid

Question : Have you enjoyed going to and watching home games more or less than this time last year and the year before ?

And what do you mean about "the football" ? What is this ? 

I am genuinely mystified ?

What do you mean, back seat ? We score loads more goals than last season, we concede less. To think that our standard away performance is to win 3 : 0 .  What more are you looking for ?

Can you clarify Tibbsy what exactly you would like to see that you currently aren't  ?

 

 

Of course, but that's purely down to results isn't it? Are thousands flocking to see good football or a winning team? People love watching a winning team, that's the point. Don't see the point in telling fibs about the football. 

The football, as in the play that fits in-between the 90 minutes. The build up. The control. The finesse. You asked for times it's been poor from another poster, I said 60%-75% of the time. Not the result, the play. I think that because despite our brilliant position we rarely put in a convincing performance that leaves me all warm inside. Does this matter much? Not really.

I don't think we put in a decent performance until about 3 months in.  You only have to look at Friday nights game to see how in and out we were which even the manager acknowledges, it took us 20/25 minutes of each half to get going and it's been the same in the majority of our games. We do the business in the other 30/40 mainly, not far off 60%? Some cracking wins indeed, away at Boro 3-0 being a highlight. 

As I've said already and many a time in other threads, I'm not that bothered about the football. I'm not craving for Rowett to lose to have a pop, I don't even want us to try anything else this season as what we're doing is working but there's no need to beat around the bush about what sort of team we are IMO. We're a very good team at the moment, we just don't play good football being honestly blunt. Workmanlike with a clinical finish and that'll do for me. 

[TigerTedd]

2 hours ago, Mr Tibbs said:

Of course, but that's purely down to results isn't it? Are thousands flocking to see good football or a winning team? People love watching a winning team, that's the point. Don't see the point in telling fibs about the football. 

The football, as in the play that fits in-between the 90 minutes. The build up. The control. The finesse. You asked for times it's been poor from another poster, I said 60%-75% of the time. Not the result, the play. I think that because despite our brilliant position we rarely put in a convincing performance that leaves me all warm inside. Does this matter much? Not really.

I don't think we put in a decent performance until about 3 months in.  You only have to look at Friday nights game to see how in and out we were which even the manager acknowledges, it took us 20/25 minutes of each half to get going and it's been the same in the majority of our games. We do the business in the other 30/40 mainly, not far off 60%? Some cracking wins indeed, away at Boro 3-0 being a highlight. 

As I've said already and many a time in other threads, I'm not that bothered about the football. I'm not craving for Rowett to lose to have a pop, I don't even want us to try anything else this season as what we're doing is working but there's no need to beat around the bush about what sort of team we are IMO. We're a very good team at the moment, we just don't play good football being honestly blunt. Workmanlike with a clinical finish and that'll do for me. 

But surely that is playing football. Otherwise those guys that ply their trade doing keepie uppies for loose change would be world beaters. 

We have some of the best football players in the league. League football is about more than step overs. It’s about game management, stamina, consistency, will. That’s what we’ve not had in past seasons, which has seen us fall away towards the end of the season. 

Your definition of ‘football’ is showing finesse, while dominating a game from start to finish. 

The bristol game is not a good example. Although we should’ve won it, it was a comparatively off day. But generally speaking, what you see as the team not being at the races, I would say is the team doing exactly what they’re setting out to do, soaking up the pressure, and then being clinical on the break. And it’s getting results. And they’re not even unattractive results. 

The proof of the pudding is the amount of pressure we soak up, without ever feeling in danger of letting last minute goal in, and keeping more clean sheets than almost any other team in the league. We’re never in any danger, really it’s incredible game management, and to be applauded.

Leicester won the league by playing this way.

This isn’t some statistically analysed long ball game plan, it’s a tried and tested game plan, where previous plans haven’t worked for us.

My point is, I think it’s unfair to say we don’t play good football, it just depends on your definition of what you think good football is. 

[Mr Tibbs]

3 minutes ago, TigerTedd said:

My point is, I think it’s unfair to say we don’t play good football, it just depends on your definition of what you think good football is. 

I don't disagree with anything you've said Tiger but this sentence is the bottom line really, I think we're good at the game football, really good. Second best out of 24 good. Do I think the football played is good? Not really. I think Arsenal play it well, City, Spurs, Wolves, Brentford are easy on the eye. Does it matter? Probably not. Loads of different ways to play the game. Arsenal are a perfect example of why good football with mixed results doesn't quite cut it sometimes. 

I just can't get on board with people denying it to the hilt when it's pretty clear IMO that it is a bit mixed. We scored more goals than we did. Brilliant. Stoke City have done in recent years compared to their first season in the PL, do they play good football? No chance. Way too simplistic. 

As you say, it's down to the persons definition. Nothing wrong with what we're doing at all, whatever works best for us. Forest fans were on their high horse about the football they played under Warburton compared to what we were playing but they're soon off it now Karanka has got off to a good start with his similar brand to ours.