Match Day Thread West Ham Away

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Bodanki' said:
Also, as bad as some people say we have looked, City have been far worse.
Did you see their game against Leicester?
My word did they look disinterested and jaded. Silva seems to be dragging the rest of the team by the collar.
It's almost like they don't want to retain the title.

Whilst we were away to a local rival who is competing for a European spot, they were up against a team , at HOME, with no geographical or historical rivalry, who are propping up the league with 18 points and they were lucky to win.
I mean it, Leciester could have won it, especially in the first half, City were so lucky to score right at the death. If it had gone in 0-0 at half time, I think Leicester would have gotten something from that game.
Click to expand...

Exactly. I Don't know why people were so worried after Burnley, it is highly unlikely that City will go on a 11 game winning streak. But if they can win six in a row (say), which you would not expect given their current form, it could put some pressure on us, especially if we make the quarters of CL, and make it interesting.

Even though city are poor, there may be some twists and turns yet. Just not too many hopefully
 
Bodanki' said:
Also, as bad as some people say we have looked, City have been far worse.
Did you see their game against Leicester?
My word did they look disinterested and jaded. Silva seems to be dragging the rest of the team by the collar.
It's almost like they don't want to retain the title.

Whilst we were away to a local rival who is competing for a European spot, they were up against a team , at HOME, with no geographical or historical rivalry, who are propping up the league with 18 points and they were lucky to win.
I mean it, Leciester could have won it, especially in the first half, City were so lucky to score right at the death. If it had gone in 0-0 at half time, I think Leicester would have gotten something from that game.
Click to expand...

I didn't see it but it did sound like they were hanging on a bit at 1-0 until the late 2nd.

City have been a bit like United, poor in lots of games but do tend to win most of them. There are plenty of dropped points for them if they carry on as they are at the moment though. They don't seem to give much respect to some of the lesser teams and perhaps that's the manager's failing.
 
If Everything Was Awesome, there'd be no point to a forum. Same if everything was a moan or everything was 'banter'. You have to nitpick or there'd be no conflict. All writers know this. Conflict = Drama. It is why so many people have died in Albert Square. Car insurance and life policy premiums in Walford must be through the roof.
 
Like you all agree, pretty bad City won comfortably. We were better compared to City but still only scraped through to 0-1. I understand difference between Lester & Spammers, Home & Away etc etc.

But still, Every possible factor points to City. So we cannot play like every other team. We need to give more than 100% every single game.
Where as City can even play at 50% to walk their remainder of the games.
 
StanDMan said:
Like you all agree, pretty bad City won comfortably. We were better compared to City but still only scraped through to 0-1. I understand difference between Lester & Spammers, Home & Away etc etc.

But still, Every possible factor points to City. So we cannot play like every other team. We need to give more than 100% every single game.
Where as City can even play at 50% to walk their remainder of the games.
Click to expand...

I can't see how every possible factor points to City? Fact is they could go and win every single one of their last 10 games and still not win the title. They don't play us and have no say whatsoever therefore in our result (save for keeping the pressure up with wins).

They have a couple of very tricky away games at United and Spurs at the very least and the way they've been playing, there are likely to be other opportunities to drop points.

They have a easier run in and are likely to be out of Europe. These factors will help them. But we have points on the board and a game in hand, are in better form and have Jose. I'd know which position I'd rather be in.
 
StanDMan said:
Like you all agree, pretty bad City won comfortably. We were better compared to City but still only scraped through to 0-1. I understand difference between Lester & Spammers, Home & Away etc etc.

But still, Every possible factor points to City. So we cannot play like every other team. We need to give more than 100% every single game.
Where as City can even play at 50% to walk their remainder of the games.
Click to expand...

You contradict yourself here a bit Stan, you've already said you understand there are differences between US playing West Ham and City playing Leicester. Firstly, West Ham are miles better than Leicester, add that to the fact we were away from home and City weren't, and that West Ham vs Chelsea is a London derby.

How you feel that every possible factor points towards City (unless you mean something different to what I think you mean) is beyond me when we're 5 points clear of them with a game in hand.
 
Drogs said:
You contradict yourself here a bit Stan, you've already said you understand there are differences between US playing West Ham and City playing Leicester. Firstly, West Ham are miles better than Leicester, add that to the fact we were away from home and City weren't, and that West Ham vs Chelsea is a London derby.

How you feel that every possible factor points towards City (unless you mean something different to what I think you mean) is beyond me when we're 5 points clear of them with a game in hand.
Click to expand...

I am a little puzzled by this too.
And saying that City could give 50% and still walk their matches.
Well City HAVE been giving 50% or arguably less, and had looked worse than us in recent games.
We may have a slightly harder run in (and I would say only slightly), but you are forgetting one simple thing.....
We are better than them.
 
Bodanki' said:
I am a little puzzled by this too.
And saying that City could give 50% and still walk their matches.
Well City HAVE been giving 50% or arguably less, and had looked worse than us in recent games.
We may have a slightly harder run in (and I would say only slightly), but you are forgetting one simple thing.....
We are better than them.
Click to expand...

Last 10 games:

Chelsea - 6W 3D 1L
City - 4W 4D 2L

We're in better form, have a better first XI and a better more experienced manager.
 
I think Stans going for the classic reverse psychology!!

We're undoubtedly the favourites at the moment but it needs to be reviewed after every 2-3 games at this stage of the season. A couple of back to back losses say for either team could change things dramatically.
 
  • Like
Reactions: StanDMan
If we're still 5 points clear by the time our game in hand comes along (Leicester, 29th april) and we then win that game in hand, the league is all but ours. Got to keep up what we're doing and grinding out results at the business end of the season, which is what Jose is best at.

City have also looked like they could drop points at any time, we haven't.
 
Agree with you all. But I am stating my current predos based on Factors supporting City, History and Hunch , LOL!
Possibly reverse psyching our team to go on and win it!!
Perhaps our team & Jose are reading my comments and focusing on task at hand, without getting complacent. <whistle>
 
I don't think we'll get complacent as Jose won't allow it, simple as that. Every team in the country would love to be in our position. I think some tend to over analyse things and see problems that aren't really there instead of just sitting back and enjoying the ride. We'll be fine, I'm sure.
 
george the blue said:
Were we watxhing the same game?

Ramieres had a brilliant match as far as I could see. Yeah he had a poor passing accuracy, but his drive and pace consyructed or played a part in all of pur swift counters.

he was always on hand to break up play.

he hit the post in the second.

he had a hand in the goal too.

its like mikel, and to some extent cahill, it doesn't matter how he plays people don't rate him.

I think in games like these and any must win cup knockout game, he'd be the first name om the wall
Click to expand...
You are saying exactly what we are thinking. Ramires is great attacking , but hopeless directing play. So don't play him in midfield except as an attacker.
 
Chelsea Pensioner said:
You are saying exactly what we are thinking. Ramires is great attacking , but hopeless directing play. So don't play him in midfield except as an attacker.
Click to expand...

And in attack his conversion rate is not very good, especially with the positions he easily gets into.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back