http://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/chris-wathan-no-signs-europa-6077946 There are plenty of positives in there - but as I read through I couldn't help but feel like the tone they wanted to get across was disappointment and their aim was to generate concern. For all the positives that were mentioned (although I'm sure they shaved a few prem goals off of michu's record), it was all about us easing off and being sloppy with our finishing. Even a touch of 'it was all down to Michu' about it. I don't know why I click on a newspaper that professionally trolls the Swans... I ask for it really.
Goodland we have all learnt that it should be called kerdaftonline pal , it won't change so don't sweat it ! However I haven't read the article as I've found past reviews to be so underwhelming , I don't waste my time. I also consider, that it's quite bad that your insulted for your post and called paranoid.
A well written and accurate article yet again by chris wathan who says it as its written on the tin. His honesty makes him one of the best reporters in the business....
Sometimes I think I'm paranoid, but then what tone would it have if it was Cardiff having won 2-0? It can be: Swans won playing well within themselves, doing a professional job and controlling the game whilst playing in a lower gear or it can be that we missed a number of opportunities and weren't as decisive or penetrating as we should have been. Both are saying the same thing, but they create a different tone. Ah, bollox, you're probably right. I'm a real glass-half-fuller finding something to grumble about when we won 2-0.
Is that the Walesonline who are still using the centenary badge from last year on their Swans page!!! Maybe they'll read this and update it!!!
Dont forget, the Wales on line relies on things going a little viral to earn its cash...a little controversy gies a long way to achieve that. In this case, it seems a pretty honest appraisal ....they never blow smoke up our arse though
Thought the article was excellent to be honest. We did control the game but were sloppy at times, both offensively and defensively. We started the game on fire and could have been 3 up in as many minutes and Palace looked like they were ****ting themselves. We seemed to step down a gear after the first ten minutes and got bullied off the ball at times but never looked like getting anything other than three points - the only thing in question was how many we would score. A very good away win - I saw this as a potential banana skin before hand, but Palace were pretty crap!
We all know the bias that is usually in evidence on that site,Goodland,and I do understand why you griped. It's a historical thing,but I really think the article was above average considering the source.No right or wrong here,just saw it slightly differently to you.
