Father Fred wrote:
Obviously the criticism is in part valid, but FFS. Pre-season game. 0 goals conceded in two games bar a 5 minute spell where we conceded two, at least one of which was a bit unlucky. Young players in the side. Esp. defence when we conceded two (two new signings and a kid is hardly our fist choice back 4 as it will be a few games in).

To my mind we need to try other players in the hole, incl Zarate (but not necessarily away at the big boys). We need to get men forward better both wide and from CM. But, again, our three best strikers are a new guy, a new guy who hasn't even trained with us yet as far as a I know and a guy injured... you'd like to think that we'd look better going forward in a week / two / three.

Allardyce should not have been told to play more attacking football. He should have been told to progress (which means maintaining a decent defence whilst improving going forward.) We all know it. He knows it. I'm not ready to give up on him yet.


So, the criticism (which didn't come from me - I simply asked a perfectly reasonable, non-critical, entirely rhetorical question) is at least 'in part valid', and we don't let any goals in.  Except when we do.

You agree we need to change the way we play, attempting to outline how we should do so.

And conclude by saying our manager 'should not have been told to play more attacking football' but should actually have been told to 'progress' which you equate to maintaining a decent defence but 'improve going forward'.  The degree of semantics being deployed is remarkable...

We've shared 4 recent warm-up opponents with Newcastle; we've lost three and had one nil-nil, scoring twice and conceding eight.  Newcastle have won three out of those four, scoring nine and conceding four.

Looking forward to your response that we draw games, except when we lose them and that Newcastle can't score for fucking toffee, except when they do...

 


  


Last Edited By: smashdad Aug 3 14 6:52 PM. Edited 1 times.