|
|
Post by stokiejack on Aug 17, 2013 13:43:27 GMT
Plenty of positives to take from the overall performance. Yes we had the chance to nick a draw and if it wasn't for that fuckin useless twat Walters we would of.
Pace needed and creativity needed.
Begovic 10
Pieters 6
Huth 7
Shawcross 7
Cameron 6
Wilson 6
Whelan 4
N'Zonzi 7
Etherington 6
Walters 5
Crouch 5
Played some good stuff at times, sloppy passing let us down and lack of pace killed the attack. But it's a long season and the windows still open!
|
|
|
|
Post by samdamule on Aug 17, 2013 13:48:40 GMT
I'd swap Whelan and Crouch's ratings. Crouch did nothing Whelan made a few contributions, might knock rob down one or ryan up one too.
|
|
|
|
Post by stokeymad on Aug 17, 2013 13:51:05 GMT
I thought Whelan did better than a four. And Pieter's did better as well.
Crouch deserves a 1. What an absolute useless git he was today. If he wasn't on the floor he was giving it away. And you can say he was playing the lone striker role all you want, he should be able to hold it up better than he did.
I have no idea why Walters takes penalties when Adam would be better.
|
|
|
|
Post by stokemanusa on Aug 17, 2013 13:51:54 GMT
Plenty of positives to take from the overall performance. Yes we had the chance to nick a draw and if it wasn't for that fuckin useless twat Walters we would of. Pace needed and creativity needed. Begovic 10 Pieters 6 Huth 7 Shawcross 7 Cameron 6 Wilson 6 Whelan 4 N'Zonzi 7 Etherington 6 Walters 5 Crouch 5 Played some good stuff at times, sloppy passing let us down and lack of pace killed the attack. But it's a long season and the windows still open! You gave whelan a 4 but Walters and crouch a 5? Did you watch that bobbled peno and did crouch even take a shot... We're looked far more dangerous with KJ IMO. |
|
|
|
Post by kingstokie on Aug 17, 2013 13:52:29 GMT
Why only 6 for Pieters? Didn't put a foot wrong for me. Some good interceptions too.
|
|
|
|
Post by march4 on Aug 17, 2013 13:53:05 GMT
What positives?
Had it not been for Bego we would have lost by 7 or 8 goals.
Defensively, that is the worst performance since we were promoted.
|
|
|
|
Post by stokeoptimist on Aug 17, 2013 13:59:42 GMT
What positives? Had it not been for Bego we would have lost by 7 or 8 goals. Defensively, that is the worst performance since we were promoted. Absolute bollocks! |
|
|
|
Post by stokiejack on Aug 17, 2013 14:06:37 GMT
Plenty of positives to take from the overall performance. Yes we had the chance to nick a draw and if it wasn't for that fuckin useless twat Walters we would of. Pace needed and creativity needed. Begovic 10 Pieters 6 Huth 7 Shawcross 7 Cameron 6 Wilson 6 Whelan 4 N'Zonzi 7 Etherington 6 Walters 5 Crouch 5 Played some good stuff at times, sloppy passing let us down and lack of pace killed the attack. But it's a long season and the windows still open! You gave whelan a 4 but Walters and crouch a 5? Did you watch that bobbled peno and did crouch even take a shot... We're looked far more dangerous with KJ IMO. Whelan gave away the ball continuously and cannot play quick one touch football. He was awful, and rightly subbed. |
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Aug 17, 2013 14:09:24 GMT
I thought Cameron was awful but not many seem to agree. His positioning was shit, they got past him and inside him too often and he can't pass wind. Pieters was equally as bad.
|
|
|
|
Post by stokemark on Aug 17, 2013 14:10:50 GMT
What positives? Had it not been for Bego we would have lost by 7 or 8 goals. Defensively, that is the worst performance since we were promoted. Sensationalist bollocks |
|
|
|
Post by Kjones9 on Aug 17, 2013 14:11:27 GMT
What positives? Had it not been for Bego we would have lost by 7 or 8 goals. Defensively, that is the worst performance since we were promoted. Even the 7-0 Chelsea away? True colours begging to show. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 17, 2013 14:13:14 GMT
Loads of positives.
A good performance away at Anfield possibly one of the toughest fixtures on the fixture list, a few more competitive games & 2 new attacking signings and we'll be up & running. we MUST back MH.
|
|
|
|
Post by blooter on Aug 17, 2013 14:17:05 GMT
I thought Cameron was awful but not many seem to agree. His positioning was shit, they got past him and inside him too often and he can't pass wind. Pieters was equally as bad. The full backs are allowed to go and support the attack so its only natural they will get caught out a few times. Its down to the other players to fill in when it happens. |
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Aug 17, 2013 14:20:50 GMT
I thought Cameron was awful but not many seem to agree. His positioning was shit, they got past him and inside him too often and he can't pass wind. Pieters was equally as bad. The full backs are allowed to go and support the attack so its only natural they will get caught out a few times. Its down to the other players to fill in when it happens. I agree but both were wank in the final third too, so needed to sharpen up at the back. And covering from the midfield was an issue, a massive issue. The centre backs had no covering in front or the side. We need one dedicated DM to fill in gaps, we didn't have one. Our defence were left one on one far too many times. |
|
