› Forums › Latics Crazy Forum › Coyles view
- This topic has 23 replies, 15 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 1 month ago by Chris Griffin.
-
AuthorPosts
-
30 November 2013 at 2:52 am #124088I’ll argue with it. Gomez’s dead balls were atrocious. How many corners went straight to the keeper or failed to beat the first defender? I’m not blaming Gomez for everything that went wrong last night but surely we should have made all those corners count for something.
There defenders couldnt deal with the high ball and the set plays,now here goes, gomez corners would have been ideal for one man the same man coyle ony decided to bring on in the 90th min HOLT. And powell must be wondering what the fuck coyles playing at,he ripped up trees last night for 90mins, like it or not we have gone backwads four years and when we get knocked out of europe the proof will be in the pudding with our league form which isnt the best, NOT IMPRESSED BY COYLE ONE BIT
30 November 2013 at 2:52 am #124089You don’t have to be a striker to attack the ball at set pieces hence why defenders score from them.
30 November 2013 at 6:07 am #124095got to be honest and i’m no expert but apart from the first fifteen or so mins, i thought powell was pretty shit, every time the ball came to him he tried the same
trick ( a flick with some part of his body to try and flick it over his marker), and i can’t remember it working once. IMO he was actually more aggravating than Franco D S. Went down far to easily and then spent far to long arguing with the officials instead of bustin a gut to get the ball back. At one point he was 20 yards behind their last defender walking back .again IMO he is obviosley class, but the phrase “Peys above sticks”
springs to mind.That was one hell of a chance to make even more history lost
But then again what do I know
And yes I knom thers a few spelling and punktuation mark mistakes.
but please don’t hold that against me30 November 2013 at 12:58 pm #124100That’s all very good if he his played as a striker, but the poor lad was in virtually every position but keeper on Thursday.Another reason why he’s not as good as everybody thinks he is – can’t be trusted to hold his position :ohmy:
30 November 2013 at 3:46 pm #124113On the odd occasion Fortune and Holt have been on the pitch at the same time they have caused problems for opposing defenders !
30 November 2013 at 4:26 pm #124114Maybe Fortune and Holt or Holt and Powell or Pwell and Fortune and play one winger. We need two up front and we need two up front who play together consistently.y
30 November 2013 at 7:30 pm #124116Maybe Fortune and Holt or Holt and Powell or Pwell and Fortune and play one winger. We need two up front and we need two up front who play together consistently.yAgreed you cant beat a good partnership it becomes natural to work for one another.
30 November 2013 at 9:13 pm #124118That’s all very good if he his played as a striker, but the poor lad was in virtually every position but keeper on Thursday.
Another reason why he’s not as good as everybody thinks he is – can’t be trusted to hold his position :ohmy:[/quote]
He’s not the finished article yet, but looks like he has the potential to go all the way, especially when compared to Tom Cleverley.
30 November 2013 at 11:10 pm #124122That’s all very good if he his played as a striker, but the poor lad was in virtually every position but keeper on Thursday.
Another reason why he’s not as good as everybody thinks he is – can’t be trusted to hold his position :ohmy:[/quote]
He’s not the finished article yet, but looks like he has the potential to go all the way, especially when compared to Tom Cleverley.[/quote]
Couldn’t agree more. But he ain’t that good yet! There’s just something about his demeanour I don’t quite like, but I’m not sure what it is. He is a very good player though, no doubt about that.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
› Forums › Latics Crazy Forum › Coyles view