We've got Nat. Don't bring Michael Jackson...Fulham Home
Moderator: Zulus Thousand of em
- Dujon
- Passionate
- Posts: 3340
- Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 1:37 am
- Location: Australia, near Sydney, NSW
- Contact:
Re: We've got Nat. Don't bring Michael Jackson...Fulham Home
Well, that brought a morning smile. After the Derby drubbing there was considerable doubt here as to what might happen. What a difference three points make! Still 'n all we've been pretty well performed over the last couple of months. Too many draws but not many losses. If Lenon can produce that sort of performance with a patched up team of new signings and old legs then he has my vote of confidence (until things turn pear shaped of course).
Re: We've got Nat. Don't bring Michael Jackson...Fulham Home
Well he's already on 2 more than Mendy finished on!officer_dibble wrote:Janko = bernard mendy?
In a world that has decided
That it's going to lose its mind
Be more kind, my friends, try to be more kind.
That it's going to lose its mind
Be more kind, my friends, try to be more kind.
- Bruce Rioja
- Immortal
- Posts: 38742
- Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 9:19 pm
- Location: Drifting into the arena of the unwell.
Re: We've got Nat. Don't bring Michael Jackson...Fulham Home
What was Parker's beef with our Polish boy at the end, btw. Refused to shake his hand and looked to be walking behind him whilst giving him some shit, the soft c*nt.
May the bridges I burn light your way
Re: We've got Nat. Don't bring Michael Jackson...Fulham Home
He was bitching at him towards the end of the game after some challenge that looked like nothing. A bit of shoving as well. Probably just sore he's no longer good enough to play in such an average team.Bruce Rioja wrote:What was Parker's beef with our Polish boy at the end, btw. Refused to shake his hand and looked to be walking behind him whilst giving him some shit, the soft c*nt.
...
- TANGODANCER
- Immortal
- Posts: 43220
- Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2005 9:35 pm
- Location: Between the Regency and the Rubaiyat and forever trying to light penny candles from stars.
Re: We've got Nat. Don't bring Michael Jackson...Fulham Home
Always liked Scott Parker as a footballer, but he's been in a few tasty challenges himself, over a year or two.Bit ironic for him to be moaning.LeverEnd wrote:He was bitching at him towards the end of the game after some challenge that looked like nothing. A bit of shoving as well. Probably just sore he's no longer good enough to play in such an average team.Bruce Rioja wrote:What was Parker's beef with our Polish boy at the end, btw. Refused to shake his hand and looked to be walking behind him whilst giving him some shit, the soft c*nt.
Si Deus pro nobis, quis contra nos?
Re: We've got Nat. Don't bring Michael Jackson...Fulham Home
Classic game of two halves. Could have been 3 down at half time - marking empty spaces - no challenges going in - Feeney running his b*llocks off putting crosses in without success and Janko looking lost and getting nowhere against their full back until his pull back to Eidur. No atmosphere at all in the stadium - could hear the players shouting to each other. Second half with Vela at right back we hustled and harried Fulham so they struggled to get out of their own half. Bannon was immense (Archie Gemmell??). Vela and Janko combining well. Danns stil guilty of getting caught in possession at times but looked like he wanted it. All in all a happy ending to what could have been a disaster.
-
- Immortal
- Posts: 19597
- Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 8:49 am
- Location: N Wales, but close enough to Chester I can pretend I'm in England
- Contact:
Re: We've got Nat. Don't bring Michael Jackson...Fulham Home
A nice response after what seems like a very bad day at the office on Saturday. One day we'll put together a consistently good 90 minutes.
Clearly now this is a 'sort yourselves out' season but there are real signs that we have potential. I sensed a little bit of worry whether the wheels were coming off and we'd be dragged back into the mire at the bottom and even some people implying that Lenin doesn't, actually, walk on water.
I'm pleased to see he stopped with the 3 at the back idea at half-time. Who knows, that tactic may work once it's ironed out but right now it seems to confuse more than help.
But that is a good result against a team we apparently haven't beaten in any competition since 1893.
Oh ... & Vela. Did I mention I rate him ? Yay !!!
Clearly now this is a 'sort yourselves out' season but there are real signs that we have potential. I sensed a little bit of worry whether the wheels were coming off and we'd be dragged back into the mire at the bottom and even some people implying that Lenin doesn't, actually, walk on water.
I'm pleased to see he stopped with the 3 at the back idea at half-time. Who knows, that tactic may work once it's ironed out but right now it seems to confuse more than help.
But that is a good result against a team we apparently haven't beaten in any competition since 1893.
Oh ... & Vela. Did I mention I rate him ? Yay !!!
Not advocating mass-murder as an entirely positive experience, of course, but it had its moments.
"I understand you are a very good footballer" ... "I try".
"I understand you are a very good footballer" ... "I try".
- Bruce Rioja
- Immortal
- Posts: 38742
- Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 9:19 pm
- Location: Drifting into the arena of the unwell.
Re: We've got Nat. Don't bring Michael Jackson...Fulham Home
Indeed he was, and as I pointed out last night - Finally we get a good player out of Palace. How come it took Lennon to spot one?Bruno3 wrote: Bannon was immense
May the bridges I burn light your way
- Dave Sutton's barnet
- Immortal
- Posts: 28594
- Joined: Sun May 14, 2006 4:00 pm
- Location: Hanging on in quiet desperation
- Contact:
Re: We've got Nat. Don't bring Michael Jackson...Fulham Home
So to be clear: second half we switched to a midfield four of (L to R): Feeney, Bannan, Danns, Janko. Is that the case?
Whatever happened, we improved immensely - the second half shot stats were 12-0 in our favour – so all hail the changes that brought us back into the game. However, I think we'll need a much stiffer mid-section on Saturday against Watford, who tend to have a lot of bodies in midfield. With two wingers and Bannan in there, that midfield four's got a touch of the Coyles (although Lennon has them working commendably harder). Vela's versatility saved the day but surely his future is in midfield, while Janko's emergence gives us another wing option.
Whatever happened, we improved immensely - the second half shot stats were 12-0 in our favour – so all hail the changes that brought us back into the game. However, I think we'll need a much stiffer mid-section on Saturday against Watford, who tend to have a lot of bodies in midfield. With two wingers and Bannan in there, that midfield four's got a touch of the Coyles (although Lennon has them working commendably harder). Vela's versatility saved the day but surely his future is in midfield, while Janko's emergence gives us another wing option.
- TANGODANCER
- Immortal
- Posts: 43220
- Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2005 9:35 pm
- Location: Between the Regency and the Rubaiyat and forever trying to light penny candles from stars.
Re: We've got Nat. Don't bring Michael Jackson...Fulham Home
If you can live with the X-Box ad, the goals are here...briefly. No doubt there'll be better later:
Our first two are good, the second a real cracker.
http://www.goalsaim.com/bolton-vs-fulha ... mpionship/
Our first two are good, the second a real cracker.
http://www.goalsaim.com/bolton-vs-fulha ... mpionship/
Si Deus pro nobis, quis contra nos?
Re: We've got Nat. Don't bring Michael Jackson...Fulham Home
Yeah we looked 100x better with a 4-4-1-1 as in the 3-5-2 Janko and Feeney weren't getting back to help out a beleaguered back three, with gaps down the sides and then through the middle as they shuffled across.
Fulham tore us up a few times for half an hour and should have been 2 or 3 up but once the formation was corrected they weren't in the game whatsoever. Our wide men and full backs had a free run of the pitch all the way to their box and it was a matter of time really.
Janko, well he really really likes trying to put a low cross in doesn't he! This tactic works best when on the run/break as for the goal, rest of the time it won us a few corners. Reminded me of Valencia at United who does that all the time too. Hell of a shot on him obviously!
Fulham tore us up a few times for half an hour and should have been 2 or 3 up but once the formation was corrected they weren't in the game whatsoever. Our wide men and full backs had a free run of the pitch all the way to their box and it was a matter of time really.
Janko, well he really really likes trying to put a low cross in doesn't he! This tactic works best when on the run/break as for the goal, rest of the time it won us a few corners. Reminded me of Valencia at United who does that all the time too. Hell of a shot on him obviously!
http://www.twitter.com/dan_athers" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Re: We've got Nat. Don't bring Michael Jackson...Fulham Home
Don't forget, the real reason we won is because Trotter wasn't playing. Also, illuminati confirmed.
Re: We've got Nat. Don't bring Michael Jackson...Fulham Home
That league table looks a lot better today than this time yesterday.
- Bruce Rioja
- Immortal
- Posts: 38742
- Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 9:19 pm
- Location: Drifting into the arena of the unwell.
Re: We've got Nat. Don't bring Michael Jackson...Fulham Home
This doesn't though: 12,790 Oof!jaffka wrote:That league table looks a lot better today than this time yesterday.
May the bridges I burn light your way
Re: We've got Nat. Don't bring Michael Jackson...Fulham Home
Bruce Rioja wrote:Indeed he was, and as I pointed out last night - Finally we get a good player out of Palace. How come it took Lennon to spot one?Bruno3 wrote: Bannon was immense
DF tried for Bannon but it fell through if I remember rightly.
- Bruce Rioja
- Immortal
- Posts: 38742
- Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 9:19 pm
- Location: Drifting into the arena of the unwell.
Re: We've got Nat. Don't bring Michael Jackson...Fulham Home
As such, I repeat exactly what I just said.ChrisC wrote:Bruce Rioja wrote:Indeed he was, and as I pointed out last night - Finally we get a good player out of Palace. How come it took Lennon to spot one?Bruno3 wrote: Bannon was immense
DF tried for Bannon but it fell through if I remember rightly.
May the bridges I burn light your way
Re: We've got Nat. Don't bring Michael Jackson...Fulham Home
Aye, Bannon said in a radio interview last night there was an inquiry the pre-season but Palace weren't willing to let him go.ChrisC wrote:DF tried for Bannon but it fell through if I remember rightly.Bruce Rioja wrote:Indeed he was, and as I pointed out last night - Finally we get a good player out of Palace. How come it took Lennon to spot one?Bruno3 wrote: Bannon was immense
Re: We've got Nat. Don't bring Michael Jackson...Fulham Home
No it doesn't but there were around 200 away fans, which is understandable for a midweek game and the distance involved.Bruce Rioja wrote:This doesn't though: 12,790 Oof!jaffka wrote:That league table looks a lot better today than this time yesterday.
For us the games have been coming thick and fast, two a week. I don't think that the bus service replacing the train line helps either.
Hopefully we will have more on against Watford.
- Bruce Rioja
- Immortal
- Posts: 38742
- Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 9:19 pm
- Location: Drifting into the arena of the unwell.
Re: We've got Nat. Don't bring Michael Jackson...Fulham Home
I know all that, thanks. It just took me back to us having a dismal crowd on after the last time we'd played Liverpool in the cup. Think it was against Plymouth. Rioch was gutted. I thought one or two of the big-gamers might have stuck around but hey-ho!jaffka wrote:No it doesn't but there were around 200 away fans, which is understandable for a midweek game and the distance involved.Bruce Rioja wrote:This doesn't though: 12,790 Oof!jaffka wrote:That league table looks a lot better today than this time yesterday.
For us the games have been coming thick and fast, two a week. I don't think that the bus service replacing the train line helps either.
Hopefully we will have more on against Watford.
May the bridges I burn light your way
Re: We've got Nat. Don't bring Michael Jackson...Fulham Home
Proper highlights: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n4BR5Fz ... e=youtu.be" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], LHwhite and 186 guests