Non AMP
Sky Blues Talk
  • Home
  • Forums
  • Coventry City Football Club
  • Coventry City General Chat
This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Match Thread Queens Park Rangers - Coventry City Match Thread - Saturday 31st Jan (16 Viewers)

  • Thread starter Nick
  • Start date Tuesday at 9:00 AM
Forums New posts
Prev
  • 1
  • …
  • 61
  • 62
  • 63
First Prev 63 of 63

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
  • Today at 1:39 PM
  • #2,171
fernandopartridge said:
In his last season here (where for the majority of the season we played a similar system to this, if less attacking) we kept 12 clean sheets. You need to make your mind up whether it's the players or the coaches, you're flailing around with your Kitching obsession.
Click to expand...

Its both. The players are crap and the only coach I’ve seen who can overcome that with a system is Lawrence. I think most Championship defences are pretty poor but our CBs are spectacularly poor at defending one on one or defending their box which means they don’t compensate at all.
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
  • Today at 1:41 PM
  • #2,172
Earlsdon_Skyblue1 said:
I am not 'stanning' for any of them.

I've mentioned repeatedly that there's an argument for all of them to be dropped. For me, in the last month or so, JDS and Kitching have been the stand out poor performers in the back line. It's multiple times, every single game. Even if we don't get punished, they are making so many errors.

They both need to be taken out of the team.
Click to expand...

For who? We’ve spunked our CB slot on Woolfenden who looks even worse and have three LBs where Dasilva is still the standout by a mile. Maybe KKH there.
 

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
  • Today at 1:43 PM
  • #2,173
shmmeee said:
Its both. The players are crap and the only coach I’ve seen who can overcome that with a system is Lawrence. I think most Championship defences are pretty poor but our CBs are spectacularly poor at defending one on one or defending their box which means they don’t compensate at all.
Click to expand...

They are not, they can defend their box. If we sat 20 yards deeper and their job was to defend the box, it'd be fine. The problem we've got is that we are more often that not defending on the 'transition' where we're completely out of shape. QPR's goal is a perfect example.

I am not sure why Kitching decided to go and challenge for that second ball in the run up, Grimes was nearby and should have taken that. I do think though Thomas has looked very lackadaisical since returning to the side, seems to have switched off.
 

alexccfc99

Well-Known Member
  • Today at 1:48 PM
  • #2,174
fernandopartridge said:
They are not, they can defend their box. If we sat 20 yards deeper and their job was to defend the box, it'd be fine. The problem we've got is that we are more often that not defending on the 'transition' where we're completely out of shape. QPR's goal is a perfect example.

I am not sure why Kitching decided to go and challenge for that second ball in the run up, Grimes was nearby and should have taken that. I do think though Thomas has looked very lackadaisical since returning to the side, seems to have switched off.
Click to expand...
Thomas is one of the biggest bluffers this club has ever had - I would have drove him to Sheffield United for the fee that was being banded around in the summer, he really is no better than an okayish Championship centre half yet the fanbase has hyped him into some sort of EFL Van Dijk

Any other player would have been made to earn their place back into the side after what he did against Birmingham yet my biggest bug bare with Lampard is that he thinks the sun shines out of his crack

If Woolfenden is genuinely not a safer pair of hands than him then we might as well pay his contract up
 

Earlsdon_Skyblue1

Well-Known Member
  • Today at 1:51 PM
  • #2,175
shmmeee said:
For who? We’ve spunked our CB slot on Woolfenden who looks even worse and have three LBs where Dasilva is still the standout by a mile. Maybe KKH there.
Click to expand...

Woolfenden has barely played. I cannot see why he wouldn't be worth a shot at this point. He didn't look great against Wrexham, but who did? I don't see how we can play players who are making mistakes to this level every game, which Kitching and JDS are. KKH then needs to come in for JDS.

We have two players on the books who are, on paper, top players at this level. The fact they are sitting on the bench seems bizarre to me given what has been happening on the pitch.
 
Reactions: Skyblueabo1111

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
  • Today at 2:07 PM
  • #2,176
fernandopartridge said:
They are not, they can defend their box. If we sat 20 yards deeper and their job was to defend the box, it'd be fine. The problem we've got is that we are more often that not defending on the 'transition' where we're completely out of shape. QPR's goal is a perfect example.

I am not sure why Kitching decided to go and challenge for that second ball in the run up, Grimes was nearby and should have taken that. I do think though Thomas has looked very lackadaisical since returning to the side, seems to have switched off.
Click to expand...

Were we out of shape? The screenshots show a flat back four with CBs well in reach of their forward. Look at the difference in defending the long throws on Saturday as well. They’re just shit rash defenders. Kitching can pass and drive well, Thomas was before his injury/suspension a threat in the oppositions box, but both are poor defenders and always have been.
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
  • Today at 2:09 PM
  • #2,177
Earlsdon_Skyblue1 said:
Woolfenden has barely played. I cannot see why he wouldn't be worth a shot at this point. He didn't look great against Wrexham, but who did? I don't see how we can play players who are making mistakes to this level every game, which Kitching and JDS are. KKH then needs to come in for JDS.

We have two players on the books who are, on paper, top players at this level. The fact they are sitting on the bench seems bizarre to me given what has been happening on the pitch.
Click to expand...

Woolf isn’t a top player at this level really. He was an academy kid who was at Ipswich during their rise like a Josh Eccles type. He was a stupid panic buy who hasn’t shown any ability whatsoever in his cameos and can’t get on the pitch ahead of Latubeaudiere when there’s a suspension.
 
S

Skyblueabo1111

Well-Known Member
  • Today at 2:26 PM
  • #2,178
Tommo1993 said:
I’ve been very vocal about my like and dislike for Kitching/Thomas and Latibeaudiere respectively, haven’t said that much about Woolfenden. But with the way things have been, I really wouldn’t double down on the current two. But the two wingbacks will still be guilty of the same shit anyway.
Click to expand...
I'd change the whole back 4,send a
shmmeee said:
For who? We’ve spunked our CB slot on Woolfenden who looks even worse and have three LBs where Dasilva is still the standout by a mile. Maybe KKH there.
Click to expand...
How are you judging Woolf? He has hardly played? KKH at left back, even Bidwell, on current form.
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
  • Today at 2:28 PM
  • #2,179
Skyblueabo1111 said:
How are you judging Woolf?
Click to expand...

Skyblueabo1111 said:
He has hardly played
Click to expand...
…
Skyblueabo1111 said:
even Bidwell
Click to expand...
 
S

Skyblueabo1111

Well-Known Member
  • Today at 2:32 PM
  • #2,180
shmmeee said:


…

Click to expand...
Typical response. Pathetic.
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
  • Today at 2:41 PM
  • #2,181
Skyblueabo1111 said:
Typical response. Pathetic.
Click to expand...

Thought it was quite original for me tbh.

I’ll go back to words. Woolf has barely played which suggests the coaches don’t rate him. The few minutes he has played (more than KKH or Latibeaduere) he’s looked rubbish. So that’s how I can say he’s rubbish is because a) his history suggests he’s rubbish and b) all evidence we have since he signed suggests he’s rubbish.

So while yes you have hopes and dreams on the other side. I tend to go with real stuff I can see.

Calling for Bidwell when he’s been embarrassingly bad every time he’s been on the pitch for over a year now is lol worthy. Hence the lol.
 

mark82

Super Moderator
  • Today at 2:43 PM
  • #2,182
DT-R said:
Imagine being so far out in front, then losing out on autos to a team full of freebies.

Sent from my SM-S711B using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Be even worse for Ipswich. They should be walking this division. Throw Southampton in that too.
 
C

Cally Fedora

Well-Known Member
  • Today at 2:48 PM
  • #2,183
Our central defenders are fine at this level. The problem is we play with no midfield or full backs. That is always going to cost you a few results.,
 
S

Skyblueabo1111

Well-Known Member
  • Today at 2:53 PM
  • #2,184
shmmeee said:
Thought it was quite original for me tbh.

I’ll go back to words. Woolf has barely played which suggests the coaches don’t rate him. The few minutes he has played (more than KKH or Latibeaduere) he’s looked rubbish. So that’s how I can say he’s rubbish is because a) his history suggests he’s rubbish and b) all evidence we have since he signed suggests he’s rubbish.

So while yes you have hopes and dreams on the other side. I tend to go with real stuff I can see.

Calling for Bidwell when he’s been embarrassingly bad every time he’s been on the pitch for over a year now is lol worthy. Hence the lol.
Click to expand...
Original for you, yes.
So, for 8 weeks we have been poor, even the games we have won. Defensively we are shot to pieces. Kitching and Da Silva are a liability, at the moment. Earlier in the season, they were not. Frank continues to pick out of form players. Yet you are relying on "coaches don't rate him". I don't rate the coaches, based on current form.Woolf has done okay, when played, which is rare.. Difficult to show what you have, when not getting game time. Thought Bidwell did okay when he played recently, definitely a step up defensively from Da Silva, on current form.

But hey, let's keep doing the same thing, same formation, same players, same shite
 

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
  • Today at 3:03 PM
  • #2,185
shmmeee said:
I’ll go back to words. Woolf has barely played which suggests the coaches don’t rate him. The few minutes he has played (more than KKH or Latibeaduere) he’s looked rubbish. So that’s how I can say he’s rubbish is because a) his history suggests he’s rubbish and b) all evidence we have since he signed suggests he’s rubbish.

So while yes you have hopes and dreams on the other side. I tend to go with real stuff I can see.

Calling for Bidwell when he’s been embarrassingly bad every time he’s been on the pitch for over a year now is lol worthy. Hence the lol.
Click to expand...

TBF to Wolf our best defensive display of the season was probably (mostly) holding off Southampton with ten men, he played well that day, but that's one of the rare occasions where we sat deep to literally defend the box albeit I think we played with a back 3 in the second half. He also started in the last game in which we kept a clean sheet.
 
Reactions: shmmeee and Skyblueabo1111

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
  • Today at 3:10 PM
  • #2,186
Skyblueabo1111 said:
Original for you, yes.
So, for 8 weeks we have been poor, even the games we have won. Defensively we are shot to pieces. Kitching and Da Silva are a liability, at the moment. Earlier in the season, they were not. Frank continues to pick out of form players. Yet you are relying on "coaches don't rate him". I don't rate the coaches, based on current form.Woolf has done okay, when played, which is rare.. Difficult to show what you have, when not getting game time. Thought Bidwell did okay when he played recently, definitely a step up defensively from Da Silva, on current form.

But hey, let's keep doing the same thing, same formation, same players, same shite
Click to expand...

Originality is typical for me?

Woolf did OK alongside Lats and another playing in a back 5 when all they had to do was defend their box but for me Lats did most of the work there. When Woolf has played otherwise he’s looked dreadful.

I can’t even on Bidwell. If you think he’s been good then there’s not much we’ll agree on regarding defenders.
 
S

Skyblueabo1111

Well-Known Member
  • Today at 3:29 PM
  • #2,187
shmmeee said:
Originality is typical for me?

Woolf did OK alongside Lats and another playing in a back 5 when all they had to do was defend their box but for me Lats did most of the work there. When Woolf has played otherwise he’s looked dreadful.

I can’t even on Bidwell. If you think he’s been good then there’s not much we’ll agree on regarding defenders.
Click to expand...
Last game Bidwell played, recently, he played well defensively. Love to know when these games where "Woolf was dreadful". Both have hardly played. My favourite bit of your post is " the coaches don't rate him". Whilst the "coaches" have gone missing, for the last 8 weeks.
 
Reactions: wingy

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
  • Today at 3:49 PM
  • #2,188
Skyblueabo1111 said:
Last game Bidwell played, recently, he played well defensively. Love to know when these games where "Woolf was dreadful". Both have hardly played. My favourite bit of your post is " the coaches don't rate him". Whilst the "coaches" have gone missing, for the last 8 weeks.
Click to expand...

Once again going from limited data is better than hopes and dreams. I thought he was particularly poor against Wrexham for example. And I strongly disagree that Bidwell played well against Swansea.
 

TomRad85

Well-Known Member
  • Today at 3:54 PM
  • #2,189
shmmeee said:
Once again going from limited data is better than hopes and dreams. I thought he was particularly poor against Wrexham for example. And I strongly disagree that Bidwell played well against Swansea.
Click to expand...
I actually agree on Bidwell which is a rarity atm
If anything i would be keen to see if KKH can do well there. He looked good at Charlton but its a small sample.
 
S

Skyblueabo1111

Well-Known Member
  • Today at 3:55 PM
  • #2,190
shmmeee said:
Once again going from limited data is better than hopes and dreams. I thought he was particularly poor against Wrexham for example. And I strongly disagree that Bidwell played well against Swansea.
Click to expand...
Everyone was poor against Wrexham, thanks to Frank's team selection/ players not available. Defensively Bidwell was solid, last game. , his crossing of the ball, not so good. Limited data you say, but you use that limited data, to judge Woolf and Bidwell. Hilarious.
 
Last edited: 45 minutes ago

Nick

Administrator
  • Today at 3:58 PM
  • #2,191
Skyblueabo1111 said:
Everyone was poor against Wrexham, thanks to Frank's team selection/ players not available. Defensively Bidwell was soli, last game. , his crossing of the ball, not so good. Limited data you say, but you use that limited data, to judge Woolf and Bidwell. Hilarious.
Click to expand...
If he's being judged on crossing then I'm not sure jds has done very well with that.
 
Reactions: TomRad85 and Skyblueabo1111

TomRad85

Well-Known Member
  • Today at 4:07 PM
  • #2,192
Nick said:
If he's being judged on crossing then I'm not sure jds has done very well with that.
Click to expand...
No he hasn't, his crosses are too looped up in the air and he barely ever assists anything. If you are to push your fullbacks that far forward you want better output than he offers.
 

Offhegoes

Well-Known Member
  • 41 minutes ago
  • #2,193
We’ve been unconvincing since Boro away. Even in that game, we really should of been 3-2 down before scoring those 2 late goals.
The flowing attacking football from Aug-Late November became sporadic, and only at home games. But those home games which we won, we gave up big, big chances.
Watford, Charlton and Swansea could have all scored 3-4 goals on another day.
Rudoni’s return and the brief comeback for BTA hasn’t changed anything in regards to our performances.

The QPR game was the worst performance of the season. At least at Norwich, Birmingham and Wrexham we looked like scoring every time we went forward. At Loftus Road we looked blunt. Probably needed that to be honest. A jolt to the system. The players slowly belieiving their own / or the team's hype, but now realising the job is far from done.

Still, our home record is excellent. Beat Oxford and don't lose to Boro. We are still top.
 
Reactions: bulko and Skyblueabo1111

Earlsdon_Skyblue1

Well-Known Member
  • 31 minutes ago
  • #2,194
TomRad85 said:
No he hasn't, his crosses are too looped up in the air and he barely ever assists anything. If you are to push your fullbacks that far forward you want better output than he offers.
Click to expand...

1 assist and 0 goals in a team that have scored 63 goals this season. The notion that he is in the team for his forward play is a pretty thin argument for me.
 
Reactions: TomRad85

Brighton Sky Blue

Well-Known Member
  • 30 minutes ago
  • #2,195
Earlsdon_Skyblue1 said:
1 assist and 0 goals in a team that have scored 63 goals this season. The notion that he is in the team for his forward play is a pretty thin argument for me.
Click to expand...
I can't remember when we last paid a fee for a recognised left back, which is odd given that we have otherwise paid fees for every other position.
 
Reactions: Skyblueabo1111
Prev
  • 1
  • …
  • 61
  • 62
  • 63
First Prev 63 of 63
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

  • zuniA moment ago
  • Skyblueabo11112 minutes ago
  • Matt smith3 minutes ago
  • Dirk Turpin6 minutes ago
  • old_wheat11 minutes ago
  • ... and 3 more.
  • Total: 16 (members: 8, guests: 8)
    Share:
    Facebook Twitter Reddit Pinterest Tumblr WhatsApp Email
    • Home
    • Forums
    • Coventry City Football Club
    • Coventry City General Chat
    • Default Style
    • Contact us
    • Terms and rules
    • Privacy policy
    • Help
    • Home
    Community platform by XenForo® © 2010-2021 XenForo Ltd.
    Menu
    Log in

    Register

    • Home
    • Forums
      • New posts
      • Search forums
    • What's new
      • New posts
      • Latest activity
    • Members
      • Current visitors
    • Donate to the Season Ticket Fund
    X

    Privacy & Transparency

    We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

    • Personalized ads and content
    • Content measurement and audience insights

    Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

    X

    Privacy & Transparency

    We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

    • Personalized ads and content
    • Content measurement and audience insights

    Do you accept cookies and these technologies?