Play Off Rivals

  • 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!
Attention Drama Queens!
Last seasons league table on 1st March, after 34 games! Of course it means nothing as it's a different season with different teams!

You must log in or register to see images

Interesting but as you say means nothing this season.

Bournemouth where the most entertaining team ive seen in the Championship.
Their football was terrific and they fully deserved to be champions.
They also played without any fear at all.

We don't play with fear. More careful maybe but hardly fear football.


Let the rest fearus now AND THEY DO.!!!!!
 
Or no matter what happens, be unhappy? Who are you, Gary Numan?
Pick it apart if we lose by all means, but please stop picking it apart ffs when we win by less than five.
How many off days do you think a team has in a season? None? 5? 10?
Off days so far were Charlton, Leeds, PNE and Rotherham.
Had a few so-so days, don't get me wrong, but over the course of a season every team has a few **** performances. That's football.

If I was Gary Numan that would be ****ing mint.

What's wrong with wanting a more attacking approach to games? I don't accept that whatever Bruce does, no matter what, is the best possible way. Football doesn't work like that, life doesn't work like that. Setting up to get a clean sheet with this quality of squad is daft. A clean sheet should be a bonus, not an objective.
 
Nowt wrong with wanting an attacking approach to games, as long as it's not at the expense of the result.
This may sound kinda crazy, but I believe Steve Bruce knows the strengths and weaknesses of his squad better than casual observers. I think he believes our attack to be the weakest part of the team but he would never admit it in public for very good reasons.
For that reason he may have come to the conclusion that our attack is relatively weak compared to our competitors, some of whom have far more assets.
Should we play more like Fulham?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Brucebones
You've missed the point a bit, I'm happy to take a 1-0, but setting up to get a clean sheet isn't a strong platform for a win. We should be going for the win, let the defence worry about conceding goals. Or, if we take a 1 or 2 nil lead, shut up shop in the closing stages (note, this isn't the 60th or even 70th minute, I'm talking 85-90 minutes) and catch them on the break.

It's between four teams: us, Brighton, Boro and Burnley. There's only 2 automatic spots and I agree with you it doesn't matter about winning the league as long as we get up there, but we could easily lose those games in hand and we've lost our advantage. Brighton are only a point behind us, Boro on equal points and Burnley a point ahead. That's not enough to think "we're easily going to do this". We have 6 wins in our last 10, Burnley have 7 but they've not lost any of those whereas we've lost 2. Don't forget one of those 'easier games' came against us and we lost it. They also beat Boro and Derby, which easier games are those? Boro can easily turn it around, they have the quality like we do and Brighton are no mugs.

Our acid test will be when we play those so called 'weaker teams', but we need to win them, not celebrate a clean sheet or a good effort.

Failure to get promoted this season would be abysmal and would be akin to Celtic failing to win the SPL, given our quality and our manager's experience (not to mention the cost of our squad).

Our last ten includes only 4 at home and 6 away, Burnley's last 10 games include MK Dons, Bolton and Rotherham and they had 5 home games.
They couldn't beat Ipswich or Reading and like us, drew with Sheff Wed.
All hail Sean Douche and his run all day team.
 
Nowt wrong with wanting an attacking approach to games, as long as it's not at the expense of the result.
This may sound kinda crazy, but I believe Steve Bruce knows the strengths and weaknesses of his squad better than casual observers. I think he believes our attack to be the weakest part of the team but he would never admit it in public for very good reasons.
For that reason he may have come to the conclusion that our attack is relatively weak compared to our competitors, some of whom have far more assets.
Should we play more like Fulham?

When you have attacking players that cost a combined total of £22 million quid, our attack shouldn't be the weakest part of our team at all.
 
Aluko has no future at City, he's underachieved for last couple of years now .
Akpom is a teenager on loan.

We ain't got many goalscorers in the building.
 
When you have attacking players that cost a combined total of £22 million quid, our attack shouldn't be the weakest part of our team at all.

Better strikers are needed in the top tier, but getting them isn't so easy. Our tactical nouse up front has been a problem in the past too though, which is not purely on the players.
 
Our attack cost £22 million?
Abel H £10 million
Diame £3 million
????? £9 million

Snodgrass, Clucas, Elmo, Diomande....

Not all strikers, but all attacking players.

EDIT: I forgot Diame, so even more then.

In a lifetime where I've seen a hull city squad worth less than 500k (maybe less in the early 90s), it's hard to believe one portion of our squad costs so much.
 
Better strikers are needed in the top tier, but getting them isn't so easy. Our tactical nouse up front has been a problem in the past too though, which is not purely on the players.

It depends on the player, Ighalo wasn't up to much in the Championship, now he's one of the Premier Leagues leading scorers. We've seen Abel in the top flight, but not in a team with confidence. I think if we bounce back, he will be much better for this season.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kempton
Nowt wrong with wanting an attacking approach to games, as long as it's not at the expense of the result.
This may sound kinda crazy, but I believe Steve Bruce knows the strengths and weaknesses of his squad better than casual observers. I think he believes our attack to be the weakest part of the team but he would never admit it in public for very good reasons.
For that reason he may have come to the conclusion that our attack is relatively weak compared to our competitors, some of whom have far more assets.
Should we play more like Fulham?

I think most of this is probably right, bit Bruce signed every player in this squad and spent a lot of money doing it. We shouldn't be so weak up front. We shouldn't be having to play Diame there to plug a hole and we shouldn't have to persist with Hernandez when he's not bothering, but Bruce's other forwards have been so poor that he has to stick with those two lazy bastards even if they play like they have the last two games.

When you have attacking players that cost a combined total of £22 million quid, our attack shouldn't be the weakest part of our team at all.

This.

We ain't got many goalscorers in the building.

It's not just goalscorers. The whole team would score more goals if someone up front was making runs into the channels and holding it up. As it is every forward ball comes straight back so all we can do is try to play tippy tappy which we're really not very good at.

It depends on the player, Ighalo wasn't up to much in the Championship, now he's one of the Premier Leagues leading scorers. We've seen Abel in the top flight, but not in a team with confidence. I think if we bounce back, he will be much better for this season.

Ighalo was excellent in the Championship.
 
The reason I dug it up was to show how last season was close at this stage too! Unfortunately the drama queens have seen it as another axe to grind about how the top 2 didn't go up & the next 3 did!<laugh>

A few of those drama queens were @ the game last night. They compared our performance to the one @ Preston.

Other than the scoreline / result the games were worlds apart.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Brucebones
Whilst Hull City are now focussing on the FAC for the next few days or so.......

W/E 5-6th march
Middlesboro v Wolverhampton
Burnley v Blackburn Rovers
Preston v Brighton

Tuesday 12th march
Brighton v Sheffield Wednesday
Fulham v Burnley
Rotherham v Middlesboro

IMO, a few shocks to come in these.
 
I think most of this is probably right, bit Bruce signed every player in this squad and spent a lot of money doing it. We shouldn't be so weak up front. We shouldn't be having to play Diame there to plug a hole and we shouldn't have to persist with Hernandez when he's not bothering, but Bruce's other forwards have been so poor that he has to stick with those two lazy bastards even if they play like they have the last two games.
It's not just goalscorers. The whole team would score more goals if someone up front was making runs into the channels and holding it up. As it is every forward ball comes straight back so all we can do is try to play tippy tappy which we're really not very good at.

I'm sure you're clued up enough to know that the slow sale of N'doye and Jelavic before we could any new attackers in left SB with poor options. That's we ended up Neil Diamande from Norway, a crock unproven in England, Sone Aluko and Chubley Akpom the on loan teenager, It's not all Bruce's fault- blame the men who authorise the sales/ buys. They are the ones who limit his options. Even Steve Walsh signed some dross for us.

If only some of the other midfielders could chip in with the goals that Clucas has......or some of free kicks went in...or some of our corners/ set pieces.