Page 1 of 1
MotM v Tottenham

Posted:
Sun Feb 14, 2016 6:37 pm
by Beefymcfc
The fucking cheating cunts!
Not the MotM, just the officials and the Spud cunts.
Re: MotM v Tottenham

Posted:
Sun Feb 14, 2016 7:04 pm
by iwasthere2012
I'll give it to Vinny. Welcome back. Stay fit you bastard.
Re: MotM v Tottenham

Posted:
Sun Feb 14, 2016 7:16 pm
by Beefymcfc
iwasthere2012 wrote:I'll give it to Vinny. Welcome back. Stay fit you bastard.
Well, at least someone bothered ;-)
Vinny was given plenty of protection today, Pellers played the tactics that he played against the Rags, giving plenty of cover. Just wish he's done it more this season, and last.
Re: MotM v Tottenham

Posted:
Sun Feb 14, 2016 7:48 pm
by mr_nool
It's funny. I thought we played quite well today, but I have a very hard time picking one player who stood out.
It was nice to have Komps back, but in all honesty, with this much protection Martin would probably have done alright as well.
Silva was poor in the first period, but grew into the game.
Sterling was very hit and miss, but his directness was our best threat in the first half.
Yaya let himself and the team down losing possession before the 2-1, but he offers so much more than the two Ferns...
Aguero was very poor today. The fullbacks OK, but not great.
Re: MotM v Tottenham

Posted:
Sun Feb 14, 2016 7:50 pm
by PrezIke
Kaptain K is back. We need him to stay top 4 or have a chance to turn things around and make history (would be the most losses ever for the prem title apparently).
I thought Raheem offered a lot as well on both ends. He's a real defender which I can't say the same for some of our other attacking players. Some brilliant crosses that our other attackers were not there for and big time harrassment of Spurs when they threatened near him. However, I think his teammates expect him to cut inside or deliver shorter crosses than some of what he delivered towards the middle or far post. We miss kdb so much now it kills me. I think Sterling getting a run of games may be good for his development despite some inconsistencies in his play at times.
Clichy did well too and fern1 wasn't his best but still fairly good. Nacho super sub is great but it may be time Pellegrini starts him more.
Re: MotM v Tottenham

Posted:
Sun Feb 14, 2016 8:18 pm
by Blue Since 76
Fernando for me, really good game and not sure why he was the one sacrificed.
Re: MotM v Tottenham

Posted:
Sun Feb 14, 2016 10:52 pm
by Dameerto
Blue Since 76 wrote:Fernando for me, really good game and not sure why he was the one sacrificed.
It was just a case of one from three off when we brought a second striker on - I went for Fernandinho, I thought he was one of our better players today doing the unglamorous stuff.
Re: MotM v Tottenham

Posted:
Mon Feb 15, 2016 2:46 am
by Socrates
No contest, Clattenberg easily made the difference so has to be MOTM, Sterling next best.
Re: MotM v Tottenham

Posted:
Wed Feb 17, 2016 2:06 am
by Trautmann
Adding Kompany back in the mix made a big difference. Saw flashes of the great City team of old. If the injury list stays small we are capable of a long run of wins, including MAN U... Pundits who think we are finished are guilty of premature speculation.
Re: MotM v Tottenham

Posted:
Wed Feb 17, 2016 10:07 pm
by Beefymcfc
Socrates wrote:No contest, Clattenberg easily made the difference so has to be MOTM.
Good point, just not for us.
Wanker!
Re: MotM v Tottenham

Posted:
Fri Feb 19, 2016 2:38 pm
by Tokyo Blue
Beefymcfc wrote:Socrates wrote:No contest, Clattenberg easily made the difference so has to be MOTM.
Good point, just not for us.
Wanker!
Bit harsh on Socrates that, mate.
Re: MotM v Tottenham

Posted:
Fri Feb 19, 2016 11:41 pm
by Socrates
Tokyo Blue wrote:Beefymcfc wrote:Socrates wrote:No contest, Clattenberg easily made the difference so has to be MOTM.
Good point, just not for us.
Wanker!
Bit harsh on Socrates that, mate.
Aren't we all?
Re: MotM v Tottenham

Posted:
Sat Feb 20, 2016 6:16 am
by Beefymcfc
Socrates wrote:Tokyo Blue wrote:Beefymcfc wrote:Socrates wrote:No contest, Clattenberg easily made the difference so has to be MOTM.
Good point, just not for us.
Wanker!
Bit harsh on Socrates that, mate.
Aren't we all?
There's always two ;-)