We've got Nat. Don't bring Michael Jackson...Fulham Home

Where fellow sufferers gather to share the pain, longing and unrequited transfer requests that make being a Wanderer what it is...

Moderator: Zulus Thousand of em

Post Reply
User avatar
Dujon
Passionate
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

Post by Dujon » Tue Feb 10, 2015 11:22 pm

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). :smile:

User avatar
Prufrock
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 24004
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 11:51 pm

Re: We've got Nat. Don't bring Michael Jackson...Fulham Home

Post by Prufrock » Tue Feb 10, 2015 11:24 pm

officer_dibble wrote:Janko = bernard mendy?
Well he's already on 2 more than Mendy finished on!
In a world that has decided
That it's going to lose its mind
Be more kind, my friends, try to be more kind.

User avatar
Bruce Rioja
Immortal
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

Post by Bruce Rioja » Tue Feb 10, 2015 11:38 pm

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

LeverEnd
Legend
Legend
Posts: 9969
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2012 11:18 pm
Location: Dirty Leeds

Re: We've got Nat. Don't bring Michael Jackson...Fulham Home

Post by LeverEnd » Wed Feb 11, 2015 12:00 am

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.
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.
...

User avatar
TANGODANCER
Immortal
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

Post by TANGODANCER » Wed Feb 11, 2015 12:24 am

LeverEnd wrote:
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.
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.
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.
Si Deus pro nobis, quis contra nos?

Bruno3
Reliable
Reliable
Posts: 542
Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2008 1:02 pm

Re: We've got Nat. Don't bring Michael Jackson...Fulham Home

Post by Bruno3 » Wed Feb 11, 2015 8:33 am

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.

bobo the clown
Immortal
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

Post by bobo the clown » Wed Feb 11, 2015 9:30 am

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 !!!
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".

User avatar
Bruce Rioja
Immortal
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

Post by Bruce Rioja » Wed Feb 11, 2015 9:33 am

Bruno3 wrote: Bannon was immense
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? :conf:
May the bridges I burn light your way

User avatar
Dave Sutton's barnet
Immortal
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

Post by Dave Sutton's barnet » Wed Feb 11, 2015 9:49 am

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.

User avatar
TANGODANCER
Immortal
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

Post by TANGODANCER » Wed Feb 11, 2015 10:53 am

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/
Si Deus pro nobis, quis contra nos?

Athers
Passionate
Passionate
Posts: 3350
Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 12:19 am
Location: Manchester

Re: We've got Nat. Don't bring Michael Jackson...Fulham Home

Post by Athers » Wed Feb 11, 2015 10:55 am

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!
http://www.twitter.com/dan_athers" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Vertigo
Reliable
Reliable
Posts: 866
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 7:52 am
Location: Australia

Re: We've got Nat. Don't bring Michael Jackson...Fulham Home

Post by Vertigo » Wed Feb 11, 2015 11:16 am

Don't forget, the real reason we won is because Trotter wasn't playing. Also, illuminati confirmed.

jaffka
Legend
Legend
Posts: 8439
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2006 1:36 pm
Location: uk

Re: We've got Nat. Don't bring Michael Jackson...Fulham Home

Post by jaffka » Wed Feb 11, 2015 11:47 am

That league table looks a lot better today than this time yesterday.

User avatar
Bruce Rioja
Immortal
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

Post by Bruce Rioja » Wed Feb 11, 2015 11:56 am

jaffka wrote:That league table looks a lot better today than this time yesterday.
This doesn't though: 12,790 Oof! :shock:
May the bridges I burn light your way

ChrisC
Passionate
Passionate
Posts: 3959
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 12:32 am
Location: Westhoughton

Re: We've got Nat. Don't bring Michael Jackson...Fulham Home

Post by ChrisC » Wed Feb 11, 2015 12:03 pm

Bruce Rioja wrote:
Bruno3 wrote: Bannon was immense
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? :conf:

DF tried for Bannon but it fell through if I remember rightly.

User avatar
Bruce Rioja
Immortal
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

Post by Bruce Rioja » Wed Feb 11, 2015 12:42 pm

ChrisC wrote:
Bruce Rioja wrote:
Bruno3 wrote: Bannon was immense
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? :conf:

DF tried for Bannon but it fell through if I remember rightly.
As such, I repeat exactly what I just said. ;)
May the bridges I burn light your way

Dr Hotdog
Dedicated
Dedicated
Posts: 1718
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2005 5:50 pm
Location: no

Re: We've got Nat. Don't bring Michael Jackson...Fulham Home

Post by Dr Hotdog » Wed Feb 11, 2015 12:42 pm

ChrisC wrote:
Bruce Rioja wrote:
Bruno3 wrote: Bannon was immense
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? :conf:
DF tried for Bannon but it fell through if I remember rightly.
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.

jaffka
Legend
Legend
Posts: 8439
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2006 1:36 pm
Location: uk

Re: We've got Nat. Don't bring Michael Jackson...Fulham Home

Post by jaffka » Wed Feb 11, 2015 12:43 pm

Bruce Rioja wrote:
jaffka wrote:That league table looks a lot better today than this time yesterday.
This doesn't though: 12,790 Oof! :shock:
No it doesn't but there were around 200 away fans, which is understandable for a midweek game and the distance involved.

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.

User avatar
Bruce Rioja
Immortal
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

Post by Bruce Rioja » Wed Feb 11, 2015 1:04 pm

jaffka wrote:
Bruce Rioja wrote:
jaffka wrote:That league table looks a lot better today than this time yesterday.
This doesn't though: 12,790 Oof! :shock:
No it doesn't but there were around 200 away fans, which is understandable for a midweek game and the distance involved.

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.
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!
May the bridges I burn light your way

Sponge
Dedicated
Dedicated
Posts: 1980
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2011 10:17 am

Re: We've got Nat. Don't bring Michael Jackson...Fulham Home

Post by Sponge » Wed Feb 11, 2015 2:11 pm

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