Sunday, 1 March 2009

West Ham 1:0 Manchester City: No London Pride!

Our second trip to London this season has seen City continue the poor form that has dented our 100 million pound season.

Well deserved result for West Ham, Zola has built his foundations on technically good players rather than fitness based, Zolaisation perhaps. They play good football and looked sharper than us today. Individuals like Di Michele, despite his lack of stature and speed is able to play his game with a big strike partner aiding his game.

We flattered at times today with a performance that wasn't necessarily poor like the Portsmouth game, but still lacked the drive and edge needed. Caicedo and Robinho both had two good chances each and should of converted one at least each!
Our midfield didn't function all too well, Kompany perhaps not firing on all cylinders, and Ireland in a below par performance drifting in and out. Bellamy failed to live up to the hype today, his final ball was generally poor! His injury was only a matter of time, He has a long problem with his knees and it's blighted (amongst other things) his career. Scott Parker of course can the game today, gave us endless trouble.

Elano came on helped city go up a gear, although often maligned, his does has great ability and he gave the team chances, which sadly couldn't be converted. But, perhaps if he came on earlier he would be the ideal candidate to blame for the goal.

Again our defending for goal left allot to be desired. Savio slipped through and troubled Given who pushed the ball out poorly. Bridge failed to react and they scored.

It was of course nice to see Bojinov return after completing 60 and 90 mins for the reserves. Although I'm not sure what the merit is of playing for 2 mins if not just to prove your alive to the fans. We were losing after all, i thought a change might of come earlier!

Richards, Robinho, Bellamy all injured? Not good news for the Villa game!


the camels foot said...

disagree west ham deserved to win.we made much better chances than they did and they scored against the run of play.I think Hart wouldve made a better job of the save that led to their goal. we need a bit of luck, thats all

Gary Nolan said...

I noticed before they scored bridge seemed to have gone into a centre midfield role, so maybe tactics were at fault, because had he not been in the midfield he would have been comfortably in defence to defend that West Ham attack properly.

Bridge maybe could have done better on the goal, but saying that if he goes towards him and dives in he gives him a pen or sells himself,so I still havnt made my mind up.

Bridge in general was lots better than he has been, still not quite the attacking threat we know he can be but was better going forward today and apart from the suspect defending on the goal he was good at the back too.

tommytheblue said...

he was much better going forward today, his final ball too was much improved.

WEst ham did deserve it, they dominated with

they had 6 shots on target to our 1, better chances, perhaps, but missing chances to me signals a side that doesnt deserve it. they had the terriotial advantage. And a 95% pass success rate compared to our 65%. no contest!

Hhhammer said...

West ham were far the better team, they had more shots and bossed the midfield. Instead of trying to be purists and think we will rise up the table i think we should be realist and admit relegation is still on the cards if we dont pull our finger out, all these injuries will not help our cause, we are in big trouble.

clevblue said...

We are in big trouble, but weren't at all bad yesterday, unfortunately Rob is off the boil, Bellamy was handled easily, Stevie was out of sorts, so that was that. We raised our game at Anfield, we need to do the same at Stamford Bridge, if we have any players left. I wonder if Boj has a few goals in him yet?

pjdemers said...

I Think some people are being harsh on Caicedo on the 1st chance. Green cut the angle off quickly and Caicedo was correct to shoot hard & high at the near post. look at the replay and his shot is is agonizingly close from a tight angle. Even his 2nd chance he was closed down immediately but at least he tries to impose himself on the game.

I also disagree with your assessment. While like yourself I expected more from City, we created as many if not more chances than the Hammers to at least get a draw. We still had more clear cut chances than West Ham.

tommytheblue said...

pjdemers we only had one shot on target....Im sorry but we may have created chances, but we were not good enough to finish them off, they had 7 shots on target and thats why they do better than us!