modern matron Posted 23 January, 2012 Posted 23 January, 2012 Watching this forget promotion - no Rickie no chance - why? If we don't have a replacement we are not the same team forget promotion on this performance. Sometimes forget the endless passing, line up 442 and hit it long. Very depressed....
Wiggles31 Posted 23 January, 2012 Posted 23 January, 2012 Agreed without Lambert we are not half as good. We desperately need a replacement for him.
brightspark Posted 23 January, 2012 Posted 23 January, 2012 Yep. Important week ahead to find someone. Anyone.
Jez Posted 23 January, 2012 Posted 23 January, 2012 What endless passing? I didn't see any evidence of endless passing in that game!! Agree though, we missed Lambert. But then we also missed Lallana, Chaplow and Fonte.
Dr Who? Posted 23 January, 2012 Posted 23 January, 2012 We need are star players. Lambert, Lallana, chappers and fonte!
modern matron Posted 23 January, 2012 Author Posted 23 January, 2012 What endless passing? I didn't see any evidence of endless passing in that game!! Agree though, we missed Lambert. But then we also missed Lallana, Chaplow and Fonte. Agree, bit we still kept trying. Sometimes you have to hit it long or behind defenders pressure to turn them round. Trouble is we have no pace......all in all we were well beaten....
MOSaint Posted 23 January, 2012 Posted 23 January, 2012 When Lambert doesn't play the one dimensional nature of our play is truly exposed since most of our best moves happen when he gets the ball, holds it up and brings the others into play. Guly and Connolly are not able to do this so our gameplan goes to sh*t
Wiggles31 Posted 23 January, 2012 Posted 23 January, 2012 We have no other CF in our team and it is defintely a position we are short in. We are also short in defence and need to be able to keep a clean sheet if we want to warrant top 2. And lastly Oakley is gash as as a pundit.
benjii Posted 23 January, 2012 Posted 23 January, 2012 When Lambert doesn't play the one dimensional nature of our play is truly exposed since most of our best moves happen when he gets the ball, holds it up and brings the others into play. Guly and Connolly are not able to do this so our gameplan goes to sh*t But that completely ignores the fact we played excellent football against Forest and have won the last two matches. We lost today because players played badly. Individuals made errors. Not because of some tactical failing or because we're "found out" or "one dimensional". It does my nut when people try to inductively reason on the back of one match. It is ****ing massively simple-minded. Yes, we're better with Lambert. We're also better with Fonte, Chaplow, Lallana a fully fit Richardson, Barnard... etc...
corky morris Posted 23 January, 2012 Posted 23 January, 2012 But that completely ignores the fact we played excellent football against Forest and have won the last two matches. We lost today because players played badly. Individuals made errors. Not because of some tactical failing or because we're "found out" or "one dimensional". It does my nut when people try to inductively reason on the back of one match. It is ****ing massively simple-minded. Yes, we're better with Lambert. We're also better with Fonte, Chaplow, Lallana a fully fit Richardson, Barnard... etc... We were far from excellent at Forest - They were just completely **** & only had 10 men for half the game!!!
um pahars Posted 23 January, 2012 Posted 23 January, 2012 But that completely ignores the fact we played excellent football against Forest and have won the last two matches. We lost today because players played badly. Individuals made errors. Not because of some tactical failing or because we're "found out" or "one dimensional". It does my nut when people try to inductively reason on the back of one match. It is ****ing massively simple-minded. Yes, we're better with Lambert. We're also better with Fonte, Chaplow, Lallana a fully fit Richardson, Barnard... etc... We comprehensively beat a sheite 10 man Forest, and people's reactions have not been based on the back of one match, we have been relatively poor for quite a while now.
MOSaint Posted 23 January, 2012 Posted 23 January, 2012 But that completely ignores the fact we played excellent football against Forest and have won the last two matches. We lost today because players played badly. Individuals made errors. Not because of some tactical failing or because we're "found out" or "one dimensional". It does my nut when people try to inductively reason on the back of one match. It is ****ing massively simple-minded. Yes, we're better with Lambert. We're also better with Fonte, Chaplow, Lallana a fully fit Richardson, Barnard... etc... Beating the two worst sides in the league, one which played half the game with 10 and another who rested key players doesn't prove anything.
Wiggles31 Posted 23 January, 2012 Posted 23 January, 2012 We need another CF for cover for Lambert simple. Guly is not a CF and never will be. A huge weakness in this team as well as defensive cover. The whole game the ball would not stick up front. We need another forward as well as Lee.
S-Clarke Posted 23 January, 2012 Posted 23 January, 2012 We have no game plan without Lambert and will always struggle against the better teams. We kept hitting it long today to Guly and Connolly which was half our bloody problem.
aintforever Posted 23 January, 2012 Posted 23 January, 2012 We should have brought backup in for Rickie and Lallana, a classic case of resting on our laurels. Too busy noshing ourselves off for being top of the league instead of planning for the inevitable injury crisis.
Rebel Posted 23 January, 2012 Posted 23 January, 2012 we don't have a centre forward - Lambert is a second striker who plays in the hole, Do Prado an attacking midfielder better when running at players from deep, Connolly is too small and probably too old to lead the line, and Barnard is not that different in style - both drop deep and go wide for the ball I hope that Tandanari can give us what we need upfront - power and pace to lead the line - but I have my doubts over a player from the JLeague. I fear he will be more like a replacement for Barnard.
sandwichsaint Posted 23 January, 2012 Posted 23 January, 2012 We were far from excellent at Forest - They were just completely **** & only had 10 men for half the game!!! I like your posts but now you are just re-writing history! First 20 mins was level, we scored and got on the front foot, second half we were excellent (albeit against 10 players). At Forest v 10 men we saw Lallana, Hammond, Morgo and Cork all on top of their games; add in Connoly (Guly was average) and we had 5 of our front 6 really firing. We would have taken apart any team in this league on that second 45 mins - difference today is not just Forest v Leic, it is much more the diff in performance levels from our players. Why were so nervous etc today? Cork over 20 games has ranged from Prem Lge to Ryman South ..... how can one player be so inconsistent?
Ashby Saint Posted 24 January, 2012 Posted 24 January, 2012 I was at Forest and in the first 20 minutes Forest had several corners from which they should have scored. If they had, it might have been a different game. Fair play we did dominate after halftime.
shurlock Posted 24 January, 2012 Posted 24 January, 2012 Said it from day one we are quite direct at times and rely on a target man with good strength and awareness. Lambert is the closest we have to one, even if he's had to change his game a bit. Even when Lambert's been playing, we've struggled when opposing CBs have won the aerial/physical duels. We don't have a plan B; but people are confused about what our plan A is which is clever, direct football.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now