|
|
Post by MrMagic on Dec 27, 2007 16:44:45 GMT
Ian - whilst clearly we are far removed from being the press darlings of the Chamionship, I have to disagree with your view on Beagrie. I thought the only negative thing he said yesterday was that we were hitting it too long and were devoid of ideas.
Immediately after that he had egg on his face as we levelled to 2-2.
I don't know if his comments hold any water as i didn't go, and decided to take the family out rather than listen to the first half. Caught second half on mix of radio and TV.
Beyond that comment tho, I don't beleive he said much wrong
|
|
|
|
Post by mikeyb99 on Dec 27, 2007 16:45:42 GMT
What a truly amazing match report, an obvious case of a journo seeing the game in the terms that he wanted to see it and not even closely in terms of the reality.
Isn't it funny how I don't remember most of the controversies that the reporter rants about. And how the numerous cynical fouls on Fuller are airbrushed out of the game or, when mentioned at all, vaguely referred to as diving.
It was a terrible game by all accouts though and a Stoke victory would have been as unfair as a Barnsley one (despite Simonsen's best efforts to hand them the win). There was far too much ball in the air compared to recent outings and we looked in danger of living up to our 'Wimledon' tag at times. We also lacked direction in our play for the most part, with Delap and Eustace dissapointingly returning to the norm from a superb West Brom outing.
All things considered a good point IMO.
|
|
