Search results

Wondering that although it seems harsh, Paterson for Tats. I agree the criticism of EMC is over the top but he does need to improve his final delivery. It's useless beating your man and then hitting a ball to the man in the third row of the stand opposite

It was going short but Ogilvy, probably knackered, completely mistimed his jump. However how Rudoni had the energy in his legs to do that little jink before his cross, God only knows.

Final ball in was shite

Sadly I think we have to right off Simms. Got it wrong. There is a good league 1 striker in there. Hasn't got the smarts

Pretty much my view. They have sussed EMC in particular, although he worked hard. He may be a 'flat track bully'. Rudoni, Van Ewik and Kitching all played well. Kitching's passing is well above standard for a central defender. Pleased for Collins after Burnley. But Grimes, Sheaf, wright...

From the off you could see what a good player he was. The nearest thing to Ian Gibson I have seen in a City shirt. Had to do a lot of work last night because Grimes and Sheaf offered so little

he had a good game.....by his standards

I loved Fellani

Neither sub came on with time to get into the pace of the game. Ridiculously late. Torp and Simms should have been on the pitch on or shortly after the hour. It was obvious where the weaknesses were. This is Frank's big flaw according to my neighbour in Block 19 who has met Derby supporters...

...and Grimes (who was hobbling near the end) has to really get hold of the game by the scruff of the neck. He went awol for periods on Saturday. Only Rudoni really bothered them. Incidentally did you notice how few corners Burnley conceded. Very telling

Even tho I don't think he was wholly at fault, Kitching was equally culpable, Collins has to make way for Wilson Back four: I would always have Bidwell, but suspect Frank will stick with JDS Midfield: Allen was ineffectual against a strong Burnley set up, Torp offers more. Attack: Simms...

Trouble with that is that it treats equally a pass to the wing that is passed back and a genuinely penetrative attack. It came out to there left and then went straight back quite a lot, can you remember Burnley getting past MVE, or even trying

Teams have spotted our weakness. Such a high proportion of their attacks were down their right. Bit harsh on EMC but I think sides have researched him as well - often up against three men

Ref was the worst of the season (and as a rule I am usually sympathetic to them) You almost needed a rule like they have in rugby - keep fouling and the next one is in the sin bin whoever he is

I agree - his brain tends to go to sleep when he is not on the ball. Nor is he alert for a rapid throw out by the keeper - he tends to just trot back to the halfway line

I regularly think of Mick Coop. Every time one of our fullbacks makes a hurried cross into the penalty area I am reminded how often he did it, but never under the pressure that modern day payers are. He would have an age to cross, these days its milli-seconds

Sadly I think they will be just too good for us. Not in the way Leeds or Ipswich were, but in clinical professionalism. I usually like 5 at the back but as Burnley are not a particularly offensive side, and their defence notoriously difficult to beat, we might as well give it a go and risk...

It's pretty much what Forest did. Loans and new signings iirc. I think Brentford funded it by selling Watkins. At the most optimistic we have barely 4 players (four!) of Premiership standard.

This is the right sort of length of list and rightly focused on defence. We already have four players, if you include Haji, who play on the wing so it implies that Frank does not trust one of them (Tats?). Spending money on cover for Tats makes little commercial sense, might just as well keep...

If we were to rely on the current team then it's 0-4 every home game. Premiership strikers will make mincemeat of our back 4 - even MVE. It will be a week in week out thrashing. See Soton this year and Burnley last. Forest spent big and survived. Luton spent on the ground, because they were...