ono wrote:
Leading up to the game i was worried that we'd shit on our chips just like we did against Lokeren and Groclin a few years ago.
So i wasn't surprised when we went a goal down.
We didn't look fit or sharp early on and they did. They had a 20 minute spell where they looked good and they made us pay with a goal. We had a 70 minute spell where we were the better team and we didn't score.*
Same old problems really - no outlet on the right, which makes us far too reliant on Petrov. Other teams know this. No tenacity or experience in central midfield. Surely Richards deserves a shot to add a little bit of bite. Maybe play Hamman alongside him for a while until Richards makes defensive midfield his own. That'd mean we could only play with one upfront but seen as though all our decent strikers are either injured or inexperienced, it wouldn't be a bad thing.
And finally, can somebody please explain to me what the fuss is about Michael Johnson? Other than a handful of decent games at the start of last season and a slight resemblence to Colin Bell, i don't see what the fuss is about. He doesn't seem capable of passing, he's not that quick, he isn't strong, he very rarely beats a man. His link up with Elano isn't effective because we don't have an outlet on the right to stretch their defence or
midfield. Everything is so congested and we continually get squeezed out.
Positves are that we are a very young team and Sturridge looked bright for about 60 minutes, Etuhu looked quite lively and his crossing was decent-ish for a change. Richards looked good, as did Charlie.
I'm sure a few of you will think i'm being harsh and a i know a lot rate Johnson. I know he does a lot of good things that aren't particularly obvious. Just at the minute, his decision making, final ball and shooting are all pretty bad.
Agree on pretty much all of this.
* easy to forget this when you get so frustrated watching us work the ball forward and have no invention around the box.