|
|
Post by dutchstokie on Nov 29, 2010 9:03:53 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Will_75 on Nov 29, 2010 9:38:40 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by jaybee on Nov 29, 2010 10:08:30 GMT
Interesting bit in The Times Whether a time will come when Stoke City are acknowledged to offer a great deal more than the direct and physical brand of football with which they tend to be lazily associated is arguable, if only because it is such a convenient stick for the ill-informed or simply prejudiced to beat them with. Less arguable, however, is that a point was the very least the Potters deserved against a Manchester City side who were fortunate to still be in the game at half-time. For 45 minutes Stoke absolutely battered Roberto Mancini’s expensively assembled team, and if the second period was a more even affair, it would still have been grossly unfair if Micah Richards’ 81st-minute shot had resulted in City stealing a win. That Matthew Etherington’s stoppage-time equaliser resulted from a clever back-heel on the part of Tuncay Sanli was an appropriately skilful response on the part of Tony Pulis’s unfairly pigeon-holed outfit. That did not stop Mancini having a dig, of course. “It’s not easy to come here, on a difficult pitch and against a team that plays long ball, long ball, and play as well as we did in the second half,” said the Italian, without blushing. “I’m disappointed with the result, but I’m happy because my team played football very well.” No, they didn’t. To start with, if City had practised dealing with one of the most effective — and notorious — of Stoke’s attacking weapons, the Rory Delap long throw, it wasn’t obvious. The first two times the midfielder launched the ball into the penalty area, the visitors were fortunate not to concede. The first was headed on by Ryan Shawcross and Jermaine Pennant shot wide; the second was flicked on by Robert Huth only for Ricardo Fuller’s goal-bound volley to be deflected off target. <snip> See www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/sport/football/Premiership/article462583.ecefor details |
|
