If you look at other posts I've been making you'll see I'm far from happy with the squad, in particular as soon as Roberts had explained his contract situation on MOTD I said we should look to sign him. I've also said we should have been after Connolly who's also joined Reading because as he can play aywhere along the back line and is good in the air he'd be better cover for Hobbs and Rosenior than Cooper and East are. (Cooper covering Chester is a different matter to him covering Hobbs). The difference in our views is I don't automatically assume we're being lied to, especially when the lie makes no sense. My opinion is that BARMBY THINKS the squad is good enough. It makes no sense for him to lie about it. In the short term the main issue is depth, we don't have enough defenders and we have too many strikers that all do the same thing. In the short term he doesn't need to worry about upsetting the players by saying he wants to bring in a defender or two, or a big man up front (it'll upset Adebola but he must know Barmby's thoughts on him anyway). In the long term, at some point Barmby is going to be looking for a job. He does not want to be on record saying he's happy with this squad if he's not, because if the season falls apart because Rosenior breaks his leg or something the fact he didn't see a problem with the lack of depth will shine through as a huge failing by him. Equally he's not going to say he's got money he doesn't want to spend for the same reason, at least without mentioning the money he could claim in interviews he was working with limited resources. The fact is it makes no sense for their comments to be anything but the truth. The fact they're wrong is a different matter, and it's not even debateable. If Rosenior (as one example) gets injured long term there is no cover for him, therefore we shouldn't be happy with the squad. Being unable to find suitable players is different, but there'd be no negative effects come from saying that so why would they lie?
As you've given me the challenge though: Myhill vs Mannone - If when Mannone settles in he's back to last season's form I'd rather have Mannone. His distribution is far better than Myhill's kick it to Elliott to win the header tactic (why did he carry that on after Elliott had stopped playing for us?) Ricketts vs Rosenior - not much between them Turner vs Hobbs - Turner because he was a better player at both ends. Brown vs Chester - Chester by a long way, Brown's strength was his organising rather than his playing, and we don't seem to be lacking organisation at the back (most games) so I'll have the better player. Dawson vs Dawson - I'll give you that Dawson isn't as good as he was 4 years ago, but at least this year we have a left back to cover for him when we need one. Garcia vs Stewart - Even though Garcia was weighing in with a lot of assists Stewart is still a better player. Lacking match fitness but he is. Ashbee vs McKenna - McKenna is the better player, but I think I'd take Ashbee for his captaincy. Like Brown his strength was what he got other people doing. Marney vs Evans - Evans can hit the target Hughes vs Brady - Brady can play wide, I just wish we'd get him doing what he should be doing in this team instead of crossing to nobody. Okocha vs Koren - I'd rather have Koren than Okocha, Okocha was more skill on the ball but Koren can play more often and has that knack of scoring from nothing where Okocha ran around entertaining but then we didn't score. Windass vs nobody - We do need someone who can play that role, but there's no comparison to be made. Campbell vs Fryatt - yes Campbell was better, but he ended up being a £4M plus player and when we signed him he was a relative nobody (if we'd paid £1M for him people would have complained it was too much) Not a lot in it really. Midfield is better now, strike force was better then, defence is about the same.
Usually agree with you Ricardo. But for all Dean Marney's faults, he weighed in with 6 goals and 6 assists in that campaign. Not a popular view but him and Ash would monster Mckienna and Evans. END OF!!
Okocha started something like 3-4 games. Pederson played wide left until he got injured and was arguably one of the main reasons we got promoted. He is the the best winger we have had in recent times. Your memory of Ash and Marney is certainly better than mine but I dont think they were better than McKenna and Evans. Whatever, what difference does it make. The formation now is different so comparisons are futile. In full flow I have never seen a better current City team that is a pleasure to watch
Yes but billy sharp has scored more in poorer team than us and one that are not making the chances that our strikers are missing
Okocha started 10 games and came off the bench in another 8. - I only included him because he's the one that played the same kind of role Koren does now. Pedersen started 18 (+3 sub), including a few up front and at least 1 at left back. Delaney also played more than 20, but most of those were at LB, and he's never a LB. I'd already said I agreed about our lack of depth though, so I had to take the ones who played the most games, and they happened to fall into the positions they'd played them in nicely. Dawson (24+5) is the only player I originally mentioned who didn't play more than 30 games, and Windass (29+8) and Hughes (26+9) are the only others not to have started 30 league games.
Sorry to dissapoint you , not Humberside occasionally when 'the other station' used to have commentary. And before you state the other accusations that are regularly targeted at posters who' don't toe the party line' I am not a premiership glory hunter, my first game was City V peterborough march 1966 city won 4-2 (goals you see)