Or they were poor because we was good. Cole showed his class. And he played 90 minutes which hopefully he will keep up. Our defence looked much stronger. This helped our midfield.
No, they were poor too. Some of the defending was just awful and that had little to do with us.
Great corner from Cole, but Stokes was unmarked. For Cargill's goal their defender inexplicably allowed Cargill to get in front of him in the 6 yard box and the keeper should really have done so much better for Fleck's effort.
If we had let in those three goals we would have been debating them on here for a week as to how terrible our defending was.
You can only beat what is put in front of you though and the fact is, I believe we would have won anyway.
Don't think it's a case of we were good OR they were rubbish, it was a bit of both and like I say, I think we would have won anyway, the only difference probably being the margin of victory.
It was 6 I believe, because of their poor defence. It would have probably been 2 or 3 had their defence been better.
I do think it's wrong to deflect from City's efforts. It was a very good performance from us for sure.