chedylan 2 12:22 Thu Feb 2
players ratings city
|
|
randolph - 5 err he went the right way for the penalty? couldnt do a thing about the other goals
Byram - 4 got done a few times, poor control at times, looked out of depth
fonte - 5 looks like a 35 yr old james tomkins. why did we sell the younger one again?
reid - 6 best of the back, looks better on the right to me.
cresswell - 3 stupid pass cost a goal, fluffs a one on one to redeem. don't remember any crosses
obiang 3 - worst performance ive seen from him. another stupid pass resulting in a goal. was second to everything.
noble 5 - the usual base level noble performance against a mobile midfield
lanzini 4 - i actually had to check he was in the lineup after 15mins into the game. not involved enough, too many tricks instead of pass t a player in space. not good deadballs.
Antonio - 6 our only attacking outlet for most the game,
ferghouli - 4 . 2 steps forward 3 back. from the first minute got knocked off the ball, a few hopeful crosses. his control of the ball from a byram throw in could feature in the nect 'message to the board' youtube video
carroll - 6 actually did alright with little support. Was also our best defender.
the rest...sorry i fucked off to bed 5 mins after the 4th goal. perhaps you can fill me in, and if the others got better :)
bilic - 3. is this an improvement on the 5 -0 drubbing? can we expect a goaless draw in 3 or 4 seasons?
OK let down by yet more individual errors, but how many times have we given the ball away in stupid places and conceded as a result so far this season? bilic needs to stop this complacency.
that aside the team was set up exactly as before, sitting back and trying to catch them on the break. Didn't work last time did it? We just let them play their game again and they punished us...again.
|
|
|
Replies - In Chronological Order ( Show Newest Messages First)
1964
12:25 Thu Feb 2
Re: players ratings city
|
Only players that came out with any credit were Reid and Carroll both 6.
Antonio in fits and starts but even he was dissappointing - 5
The rest? I'd score them a FAT 0
|
stewie griffin
12:27 Thu Feb 2
Re: players ratings city
|
LONDON STADIUM - 0
|
clarky
1:39 Thu Feb 2
Re: players ratings city
|
A collective 3
|
jimbo2.
1:44 Thu Feb 2
Re: players ratings city
|
Stewie we were beaten by a much better team, who were on fire, not the stadium!
|
El Scorchio
1:47 Thu Feb 2
Re: players ratings city
|
Snodders looked decent when he came on.
If he was fit to start he'd have offered a lot more protection down our right hand side. Feghouli isn't that interested in tracking back and working hard without the ball.
|
clarky
1:59 Thu Feb 2
Re: players ratings city
|
Yeah they would've tonked us at Upton Park as well
Blaming the stadium every time we lose is getting a bit dull!
|
1964
2:00 Thu Feb 2
Re: players ratings city
|
The stadium is currently shit but it's not the reason we lost to City 4-0..
|
Robson
2:01 Thu Feb 2
Re: players ratings city
|
If Randolph is blameless for the goals why only 5?
|
jimbo2.
2:18 Thu Feb 2
Re: players ratings city
|
Reid, Antonio & Carroll can be satisfied with their individual contributions & Randolph had very little chance with any of their goals. Snodgrass looked decent when he came on & that coincided with our only "decent" period of the game, outside the first 10-15 mins. The other players all fell between poor & woeful! Thank God we don't have to play MC again this season, as we are miles behind them! Other comments are right, it's becoming very boring for some posters total obsession that all our problems are down to the stadium & pitch size, they aren't, so please try to grow up. Also the London stadium is not a cesspit, that is a dumb & ludicrous claim, often from people who have never even been there!
|
Rivs
2:21 Thu Feb 2
Re: players ratings city
|
clarky 1:59 Thu Feb 2
|
Northern Sold
2:21 Thu Feb 2
Re: players ratings city
|
They may well have beaten us at the Boleyn... but I know one thing the stats say they would not have smashed 4 and 5 past us... because they never did in the 100 odd years we was there same re Arsenal... they never put 5 past us at UP... and Watford scoring 4?? Yeah alright... nothing to do with the cess pit... keep reading that Martin Samuels article and keep nodding...
|
jimbo2.
2:24 Thu Feb 2
Re: players ratings city
|
It's not a cesspit Northern! How many times have you been there?
|
Northern Sold
2:27 Thu Feb 2
Re: players ratings city
|
Jimbo... it's built on radio active sludge... where the fuck you been for the past 4 or 5 years... you could not get anymore Cesspit'y than being built on radioactive sludge...
|
stewie griffin
2:27 Thu Feb 2
Re: players ratings city
|
clarky 1:59 Thu Feb 2
Re: players ratings city
Yeah they would've tonked us at Upton Park as well
*ponders*
23rd January 2016 - West Ham United 2-2 Manchester City
West Ham United have conceded 4 or more goals on four occasions at the London Stadium in 17 games.
West Ham United conceded 4 or more goals on four occasions in the last 95 games at Upton Park
Or if you prefer...
West Ham United have conceded 4 or more goals in three of 12 premier league games at London Stadium - the same as in the last 106 at Upton Park
The only thing that's dull is the 'oh it used to happen at UP' brigade. That, I'm afraid, is demonstrably, and very obviously, complete bollocks. The facts are there.
To put a bit of perspective around the above - we have conceded 4 goals in league games as many times in the cesspit as we did in the last FIVE AND A HALF YEARS of premier league football at UP.
People can stick their fingers in their ears as much as they wish - but it's blindingly obvious its a fucking huge problem.
|
sand iron
2:34 Thu Feb 2
Re: players ratings city
|
The stadium is awful for football, worst stadium in the premier league for atmosphere by far. Dont get me wrong theirs numerous factors for the team going backwards this year, but the stadium is the biggest one.
As Sold said those teams very rarely stuck 4-5 by us in donkeys years at Upton Park, even when we were at our worst, but the goals we've leaked this season at home (if you can call it home) are ridiculous. Those of you that can't see the stadium being a factor are kidding yourself's.
There will never ever be an intimidating atmosphere in that shit hole, just can't happen. It's a gut wrenching shame that we will never experience that famous West Ham atmosphere ever again.
|
Poplar Iron
2:36 Thu Feb 2
Re: players ratings city
|
Watched Lanzini come face to face with Toure in the midfield...stopped, looked up at his towering presence and literally shit a brick and fumbled the ball out of play...it was like Anthony Joshua coming face to face with Tom Daley...!
|
clarky
2:38 Thu Feb 2
Re: players ratings city
|
If you think where we play will magically make our players better and their players worse there's no helping you Stewie me old fruit!
|
1964
2:39 Thu Feb 2
Re: players ratings city
|
We've moved to a new ground with different surroundings, different atmosphere etc. Of course it's going to affect the team and probably some results.
They will grow into it, they have to!
It's the first season FFS - give it 2 or 3 seasons before we blame the stadium entirely.
|
Northern Sold
2:40 Thu Feb 2
Re: players ratings city
|
So Toure has grown since last season then?? Don't remember Lanzini being that bothered LAST season??
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/34191909
|
jimbo2.
2:43 Thu Feb 2
Re: players ratings city
|
Northern, your constant slating if the stadium is very tedious, could you not change the record for once? You also didn't answer my question re how many times you have been there. What happened to the far more interesting poster that you used to be?
|
| 
