I didn’t go to Fulham last night, so was reliant on an amalgam of Chris Goreham, Paul McVeigh, Sky Sports and Twitter for my Craven Cottage news. So if anything that follows is inaccurate feel free to blame them.
Unsurprisingly, it was the usual 90 plus minutes of roller-coastering that contained the now obligatory mix of ecstasy, despair and over-reaction; the agony doubled by being solely reliant on said sources for news and views.
That City came up a little short on the banks of the Thames came as no surprise whatsoever; what was surprising was that they came so close to busting the hoodoo.
The coin a phrase – one that was trotted out endlessly at full-time – yes, we undoubtedly would have taken a point if it were offered to us prior to kick-off, but having been leading 2-0 – and according to Macca, ‘cruising’ – it seems perfectly reasonable to question why we were again so susceptible when taking a two goal lead.
City are still second, have won six of the last eight, have a points per game ratio that will do very nicely thank-you in the final reckoning, but still there is clearly an Achilles heel that needs to be addressed.
Fulham, by the sound of it, played very well in the second-half and had Tony Gale, Sky Sports pundit extraordinaire, positively salivating, yet were given a sniff when a sniff was not even on the table.
That Chris Martin was able to bully and torment Timm Klose and Russell Martin was a disappointment – albeit an inevitable one – but it was the way City’s midfield appeared to get overrun and dominated by Scott Parker and co that ultimately paved the way for the Fulham comeback.
It was a City midfield that, despite Graham Dorrans’ brace of penalties, failed to function as it has done of late and in Wes, Jacob Murphy and Robbie Brady, reportedly had personnel whose form dipped below the required and expected level. On that score it’s unsurprising that the second-half was not for the faint-hearted.
On the face of it, Brady for Alex Pritchard made sense – to play with Wes and the latter on any given day represents a risk if it turns into a physical battle; especially so when playing away from home – but offered the benefit of hindsight it was tough on Pritchard. Brady, in a yellow shirt, is struggling.
Wes too failed to hit the heights of Saturday and Jacob M, not for the first time, is looking in desperate need of a refresh or a rest. Perhaps a simple Josh for Jacob is the answer.
Question marks still remain over our back-four, no question, and it’s something that will hopefully be addressed in January – part of which may entail hanging on to Klose – because a defence that doesn’t look remotely close to earning itself a clean sheet, despite being second in the table, represents just a little bit of a problem.
It’s fine to organise, shout, cajole and point, but we just need ‘defenders’ to do exactly what it says on the tin.
Sometimes it can be done by the aforementioned organisation by and ensuring there is a shape without any obvious gaps but sometimes it just needs good old fashioned one-on-one defending with no messing – the latter of which I’m not convinced City are good enough at.
But it was a point… at Craven Cottage… and, in truth, I’d prepared myself for not witnessing another City point there for the remainder of my days. So, on that basis, whatever happened between minutes one and 94, it was one that deserved a very modest celebration.
And, despite Sky Sports celebrating Newcastle’s rightful place at the top of the Championship like it was April 30, I’m not sure being tucked in second, third or even fourth at this stage of the season is such a bad thing.
Now, bring on Preston.
“Never mind the danger…”
We got bullied. Fulham overran us second half. We looked uncomfortable on the ball and everyone seemed to be looking to ‘get rid’ asap, meaning the ball was given away far too often, most obviously for their second goal.
Like Palace away last season, too much of the game was played above head height and we are, frankly, useless at that type of football, so why to we let ourselves get dragged into it? Out jumped, out muscled, out played – that’s how I saw our second half.
That said, quite how we didn’t get a third penalty at the end for that double-handed diving save by their left back, is beyond me.
Murph didn’t have a good game but the manager should see that and do something about it. He is allowed an off game, he has been excellent this season but Neil could have done something earlier in the game, for sure. I suppose he felt he was a good potential outlet as the game wore on but, in hindsight, it didn’t work out that way. That said, I am disappointed in some of the comments I heard in the crowd last night. Bordering on prejudice, which is despicable.
Brady and Wes faded very quickly. that was obvious to the crowd so, again, I would have expected earlier changes, especially as we were clearly getting overrun.
Opportunity missed but we were lucky not to lose it after that second half.
I was there and, afterwards, it felt horrible. Just like a defeat.
For all the inquests afterwards about the starting XI, the defence being poor, the midfield being overrun, the wrong use of substitutes, I can’t help but feel that the second half failings came down primarily to poor game management by the players.
Fulham clearly upped their game at the start of the second half and City desperately needed someone to put their foot on the ball and start some controlled possession in order to take the sting out of the opposition.
That didn’t happen. We became frantic in possession, often with poor decision making by our players. When we got the ball, more often than not, we gave it away cheaply.
Maybe our “top four” are too offensively minded for situations like this when the whole team comes under pressure?
The holding two midfield players were being out flanked, which, in turn meant more pressure on the back four. It became predictable and the conclusion, goals conceded, inevitably.
Being too open may generally work against weaker opposition, but we’re going to struggle unless we can be flexible in our approach – something which was sadly lacking last night.
Fine summary of events Gary.
This inability to not keep control once 2 goals in front is a perplexing problem and one that 99% of other clubs would probably be envious of having.
Fulham’s first was a lucky deflected effort that I don’t think any City player was really responsible for. Martin was left too much time & space for the second.
Whatever went wrong on the pitch, some of Alex’s decisions seem hard to fathom. No problems with the starting 11 – Wes and Alex P. together away is a luxury hard to justify.
However, Naismith for Wes thereby removing a creative midfield spark was curious. Leaving a clearly flagging Jerome and Ja. Murphy on for the full match was equally strange with Alex P and Jo. Murphy’s fresh legs waiting to come on.
Finishing the game with Jerome, Olivera and Naismith on the pitch was very curious. Alex himself said nothing tactical had changed in the 2nd half to cause the decline so why not make like-for-like swaps?
Ryan Bennett is not to everyone’s taste but our only clean sheets have come with him together with Klose but Alex seems determined to stick with the skipper.
Preston are a tricky side who’ve had good results against the bigger sides of late – feeling nervous (although I would have been if we’d won at Fulham).