Jump to content

Borner


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, torres said:

 

He looked all over the place in the first half 

 

Yet City didn't have a shot on target when Borner was on the pitch. Then when Lees came on they had about 5 in 10 minutes at the start of the second half...

 

After Lees' horrific display on Saturday surely even Monk wouldn't have made a tactical decision to bring him on in place of Borner whilst we were defensively OK, surely it was due to an injury.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, alanharper said:

 

Yet City didn't have a shot on target when Borner was on the pitch. Then when Lees came on they had about 5 in 10 minutes at the start of the second half...

 

After Lees' horrific display on Saturday surely even Monk wouldn't have made a tactical decision to bring him on in place of Borner whilst we were defensively OK, surely it was due to an injury.

 

I wouldn't say Borner was playing well, but i agree in the second half for the first 10 minutes we looked less solid 

 

I'm not sure whether they changed it slightly to a back 3 again in the second half as Palmer was pushed in a lot more and Lees played slightly left of central - almost impossible to tell as we played so deep and was almost a back 9 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, torres said:

 

He looked all over the place in the first half 

Personally I thought he was showboating a bit, given the occasion.

The attempted header back when so easy to head up field, a couple of occasions trying to play out of defence with step overs/swivels  etc.

Wouldn't be surprised if Monk thought he may get caught out BUT I may be wrong (have been before). 

 

Edited by Ray Von shabba
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Ray Von shabba said:

Personally I thought he was showboating a bit, given the occasion.

The attempted header back when so easy to head up field, a couple of occasions trying to play out of defence with step overs/swivels  etc.

Wouldn't be surprised if Monk thought he may get caught out BUT I may be wrong (have been before). 

 

 

A showboating centre back is exactly what are crying out for 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, September65 said:

Borner didn't have his best game but I was staggered, given Lees' recent form, when the change was made.

Mind you I was staggered when FF was dragged off and not Da Cruz.

Monk was probably thinking we have an important league game Saturday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, torres said:

 

A showboating centre back is exactly what are crying out for 

We'll have to agree to disagree on this one.

Personally don't like over confident players like that, looks good when it comes off but horrible and costly when it goes wrong.

Precisely why John Stones only plays a bit part for Man City.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, daleblue said:

 

Not against Man City.

 

1 minute ago, Ray Von shabba said:

We'll have to agree to disagree on this one.

Personally don't like over confident players like that, looks good when it comes off but horrible and costly when it goes wrong.

Precisely why John Stones only plays a bit part for Man City.

 

i was joking!!!!

  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No issues with Borner at centre back, especially considering we don’t have much back up (tom lees). It’s unfortunate because we are crying out for some strength in the middle and I think Iorfa would be suited to the role, given that Hutchinson seems to have been shown the door. Personally don’t think bannan and lee work well. 
 

So many unknowns within the squad, we don’t have the quality to have a consistent starting eleven; no one other than bannan, Iorfa and Fletch warrant a start on a weekly basis

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, torres said:

 

I wouldn't say Borner was playing well, but i agree in the second half for the first 10 minutes we looked less solid 

 

I'm not sure whether they changed it slightly to a back 3 again in the second half as Palmer was pushed in a lot more and Lees played slightly left of central - almost impossible to tell as we played so deep and was almost a back 9 

 

 

Which they also did on Saturday, maybe playing 3 at the back they can now play?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...