Ratings (1 Viewer)

Nick said:

Bakayoko did charge the goalkeeper down, so he was running to the keeper. What were they meant to do?


It baffled me when he said it against Walsall as well.

Click to expand...

Ya and he pit burge down to a bad decision lol

Stop bullying baka!!!

For me that burge wallsall mistake fucked this team up mentally

Nick said:

Robins is saying it's also Bakayoko, Thomas and Bright to blame a bit for not getting back.

Am I missing something again? He said the same against Walsall when they scored long a massive kick and a cockup with a defender / Burge.

What the hell would any of those 3 done there? I can understand if they played through us but it was another long ball.

Click to expand...

It didn't read to me as blaming them for the goal, just bemoaning how at a key part in the game our general discipline and shape has gone out the window.

'we were all over the place for the goal and it’s a major disappointment'...........

“But then Willis who hadn’t really put a foot wrong all game then decided to listen to a shout back to the goalkeeper that wasn’t on.


“It wasn’t just him, Dom [Hyam] has gone in for a header when he didn’t need to.


“We also had three players out of position in Thomas, Enobakahre and Bakayoko that have stayed up field when we need to make sure we are in position and solid."

Nick said:

Bakayoko closed the keeper down to kick it.

Where does he want them to be in that situation from a long kick?

Click to expand...

Except he didn't really close the keeper down did he? He got to about 10 yards away from him and the keeper launched it unchallenged, leaving Baka miles offside on the edge of their box if the ball came straight back, and Gillingham with a man extra somewhere.
In the 88th minute and as a bunch of short-arses, I guess Robins would have been happier with a tighter defensive shape and the keeper eating up time by rolling it out to their left back (like he had originally wanted to do) rather than being hurried into launching it at Tom Eaves.

Like I say, don't think he's blaming them directly for the goal, just recognising that the small things that are needed to see games out 1-0 start in attack.

covcity4life said:

Burge 6 somw good catches. 1 save which i thibk was easier thab he made it look. Maybe a bad call to willis for pen. Csnt be sure

Mcallum 6 had a good gsme and startinf to see what robins sees in him

Willis 6 v good performance till idiotic pen

Hyam 6 didnt rly get bette rof number 9 but did ok

Sterling 6 would have liked him to best his msn more bit did alright

Meyler 6 looked good. Some bad touches prpb down to mstch fitness. Wins fouls by pjtting himself in bravely

Westbrookr 5 ststyed well but poor passing

Thomas 6 a real danger. Should hsve been put trough more


Shipley 4. He sshit and now everyonr sees it



Bright 7 class above. But messed up a few times at end

Hiwulla 6 did ok imo. Csnt habe a go at blocked shots etc

Baka 5 poor misses
Bsyliss 6 needs to start
New lad n/a

Click to expand...

Thank Fuck for That! I thought I was the only that thinks Shipley should change the 'P' in his surname to a 'T'. He is awful!

Malaka said:

Thank Fuck for That! I thought I was the only that thinks Shipley should change the 'P' in his surname to a 'T'. He is awful!

Click to expand...

Motm according to gregg lol

Littlewood CCFC said:

Wow, no words for the amount of people saying ' we have no shape' or 'I can't figure out the formation'

Quite obviously it's 4 2 3 1, Robins has only used it for most his career.... back 4, meyler and westbrooke holding, shipley on the left, Bright as the 10 and Thomas on the right with Hiwula up top. The attacking 3 behind the striker have freedom to swap positions for those who can't work out why bright sometimes ends up on the left...

Click to expand...

You can say “wow” and be lost for words as to how badly everyone got it wrong, but it doesn’t necessarily make you right.

Out of interest, here’s how it was described in the Telegraph report: “City look to be playing a 4-5-1/4-3-3 formation with a midfield three anchored by new man David Meyler, with Jordan Shipley to his left and Zain Westbrooke to his right. Bright Enobakhare and Luke Thomas are deployed wide on the left and right respectively but are pushing forward to support lone striker Hiwula on the attack.”

Bright & Thomas played so deep that 4-3-3 seems optimistic, hence 4-5-1 but to my eyes only one holding mid not two, hence 4-1-4-1. If you say Westbrooke was sitting, fair enough but it didn’t look like that to me, and likewise Bayliss when he replaced him.

Much swopping around during play of course, and it depends on which team has the ball. I’ve just seen on another website that we played 4-4-1-1, so take your pick from at least 5 interpretations! Patterns in the mind that barely exist on the field. Whatever they were all supposed to be doing, Hiwula often needed a telescope to see his teammates.

I think I was watching a different game to some;

Burge - 6.5 - not to blame for the goal, took a few corners well in the second half. Wayward kicking is definitely creeping back in.

Sterling - 7 - constantly an outlet in the first half, but rarely used. Offered a thread going forward and was solid enough in defence. I would like him to do more offensively as when he takes people on it often worlds.

Willis - 5.5 - was bullied for the majority of the first half by Eaves, his distribution was poor and the idiotic error.

Hyam - 6 - solid enough, but nothing special.

McCallum - 6 - grew in confidence as the game progressed and began to offer mkfe offensively. He definitely looks to have a bright future. Positioning isn’t as poor as being made out.

Westbrooke - 6.5 - good player, retains the ball well and is always an option. Impressed by his confidence considering his relative inexperience. I’d like to see him create more. He’ll eventually become a victim of the boo boys for his lack of forward passes.

Meyler - 5 - off the pace. One good progressive pass, a few speculative ones and a lot of poor touches. Looked slow too. However, he’s savvy in winning free kicks and will come good when his sharpness improves.

Shipley - 6 - looked a lot more confident and reassured when he moved to the middle. He was even organising others at times. A few good touches mixed with a few misplaced ones, however, like Westbrooke, he doesn’t hide. Never going to be a creative game changer at this level, but he’s definitely capable.

Thomas - 6 - offered an outlet as always, albeit on a lesser scale to a few weeks ago. He’s either being more tightly marked or has lost his ability to find space.

Hiwula - 5 - didn’t offer much, and always looks as though he’s falling over. However very isolated up front and showed a few good touches to link play and interchange with others.

Bright - 7 - brilliant skill that scares defenders and a definite asset at this level. However he needs to pick the ball up ten yards further forward so he can do more damage.

Subs
Bakayoko - 5 - I’d like to see him up front with another striker. Should have scored, but seemed keen to impress overall.

Bayliss - 6 - offered direct running, but decision making neeefs to improve.

Formation wise it was definitely 4-3-3 with Shipley left of the midfield three and Bright supppossedly left wing. Second half he reverted to 4-2-3-1.

I said it in the other thread - we aren’t going down.

Littlewood CCFC said:

Wow, no words for the amount of people saying ' we have no shape' or 'I can't figure out the formation'
Quite obviously it's 4 2 3 1, Robins has only used it for most his career.... back 4, meyler and westbrooke holding, shipley on the left, Bright as the 10 and Thomas on the right with Hiwula up top. The attacking 3 behind the striker have freedom to swap positions for those who can't work out why bright sometimes ends up on the left...

Click to expand...

Doesn't tally at all with what Robins himself has said about Saturday’s formation. For sure Shipley didn’t play wide left (and IMO he looked a better player further infield).

“With David Meyler coming in and not having played much I needed that extra insurance policy with Jordan Shipley in there in the midfield because I needed his legs at this moment in time.”

“When Liam Kelly is fit that will be slightly different again and I’ll be able to do something different.”

The second comment seems like a hint about Kelly playing alongside Meyler when he’s fit again. Sounds like a promising pairing to me, at least for home matches, and maybe suggests it actually will be 4-2-3-1 in future games?

Calista said:

Doesn't tally at all with what Robins himself has said about Saturday’s formation. For sure Shipley didn’t play wide left (and IMO he looked a better player further infield).

“With David Meyler coming in and not having played much I needed that extra insurance policy with Jordan Shipley in there in the midfield because I needed his legs at this moment in time.”

“When Liam Kelly is fit that will be slightly different again and I’ll be able to do something different.”

The second comment seems like a hint about Kelly playing alongside Meyler when he’s fit again. Sounds like a promising pairing to me, at least for home matches, and maybe suggests it actually will be 4-2-3-1 in future games?

Click to expand...

Agreed First half Westwood, Mehler and Shipley played as a central 3, with thomas right and bright was supposed to be wide left with hiwula up top on his own.


Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

So it was 433 as I said. Sit down shut up.

But just one up front.