Jump to content

v Swansea (A) - Matchday Thread


OohMartWright

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 699
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Just now, IslandExile said:

Thanks - as always - @SaintRam and everyone for their contributions.

COYR ? Come on Cocu ?

I have to apologise forgetting distracted during the 2nd half in what was probably our best spell of the game ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Ramarena said:

Excellent to break this away hoodoo. 

Cocu's not had the best of times, but things are slowly turning around. Maybe time to give him the benefit of the doubt when he makes decisions..............Just a thought!

It won't happen for some....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Andicis said:

Not really, the subs were objectively negative. They worked out, fair play, but it doesn't change the fact that it was a negative change. Hindsight is 20/20.

Sometimes it's easier to hold up your hands and admit you are wrong, even I've been known to get it wrong, and I'm perfect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, EranioIsGod said:

Cocu haters currently retreating in droves... 

Great win. Always a tough place to go and get a result! 

I’m not going anywhere - yes this is better but it shows that this squad had more in it than Cocu was getting. I have consistently said this !

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, ossieram said:

Sometimes it's easier to hold up your hands and admit you are wrong, even I've been known to get it wrong, and I'm perfect.

Not in this case. I gave an opinion that the subs were negative, and as soon as you give a negative opinion you get people jump down your throat for it. Next time I just won't give an opinion and agree with every single decision made by the manager. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Andicis said:

Not really, the subs were objectively negative. They worked out, fair play, but it doesn't change the fact that it was a negative change. Hindsight is 20/20.

Were they, though?

A defender came on for a defender who was not contributing in the 2nd half and was likely going to get sent off. So I'd say even.

Shinnie came on for another midfielder who was struggling to contribute; which allowed Rooney to play a more advanced role; increasing our quality in attack. So I'd say positive. 

 

So.... are they objectively negative? I don't think so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Andicis said:

Not really, the subs were objectively negative. They worked out, fair play, but it doesn't change the fact that it was a negative change. Hindsight is 20/20.

It wasn't negative in the least if you change your system.  Negativity isn't merely a product of the players but also the formation, and more importantly, the tactics.

Not sure if you were watching or listening and therefore couldn't see that.

It's okay to admit when you get stuff wrong, you're not Donald Trump.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...