Cowardice

[NG32]

Alan Cowardrew

[Wullie]

Both teams seemed to be scrapping it out, especially in the first half yesterday, hence the game being so frantic. Sunderland did a good job of closing us down and we struggled to play football because of it. That played into their hands, as they knew they couldn't live with us in an actual football match.

 

I'm not sure cowardice really comes into it, although I'm not reading back to see the explanation. I think 'not being up for it' is a very lazy line that people trot out when a team loses a passionate fixture.

 

How come Sunderland weren't able to close down Swanseas's team and stop them from passing it? What was the score from that one again? Oh yes...4-0.

 

Good question, a different game, less passionate fixture, less help from the fans, no new manager, less desperation for a win. Swansea are better passers than us as well obviously, if that's what you mean. But that doesn't mean that what I've said about the two sides is wrong.

 

No new manager.

 

I meant the new manager effect making Sunderland want to impress and give everything more than usual.

 

Err righto.

 

So sunderland didn't have a new manager against Swansea, is that what you're saying?

[Ikon]

I surely as hell wouldn't have accepted a point, and even if we had won the game in the end with 2-1 i'd still be fuming over the performance..

 

Well your a man with a rare big-picture perspective then. The pre match thread is full of people saying they would take a draw in an away derby.

 

You make it sound as if we played Bayern M. away. Can't believe how some people are willing to accept these low standards, especially against one of the worst Sunderland sides i've ever seen. A few years ago Pardew would have been given dogs abuse from 99% of our fans (and rightly so) Loser attitude!

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Both teams seemed to be scrapping it out, especially in the first half yesterday, hence the game being so frantic. Sunderland did a good job of closing us down and we struggled to play football because of it. That played into their hands, as they knew they couldn't live with us in an actual football match.

 

I'm not sure cowardice really comes into it, although I'm not reading back to see the explanation. I think 'not being up for it' is a very lazy line that people trot out when a team loses a passionate fixture.

 

How come Sunderland weren't able to close down Swanseas's team and stop them from passing it? What was the score from that one again? Oh yes...4-0.

 

Good question, a different game, less passionate fixture, less help from the fans, no new manager, less desperation for a win. Swansea are better passers than us as well obviously, if that's what you mean. But that doesn't mean that what I've said about the two sides is wrong.

 

No new manager.

 

I meant the new manager effect making Sunderland want to impress and give everything more than usual.

 

Err righto.

 

So sunderland didn't have a new manager against Swansea, is that what you're saying?

 

Jesus. Did I ever say a new manager guarantees winning every game? I was just talking about the various factors at work in the derby. I don't know why people seek to simplify these arguments to such a degree.

[Wullie]

Both teams seemed to be scrapping it out, especially in the first half yesterday, hence the game being so frantic. Sunderland did a good job of closing us down and we struggled to play football because of it. That played into their hands, as they knew they couldn't live with us in an actual football match.

 

I'm not sure cowardice really comes into it, although I'm not reading back to see the explanation. I think 'not being up for it' is a very lazy line that people trot out when a team loses a passionate fixture.

 

How come Sunderland weren't able to close down Swanseas's team and stop them from passing it? What was the score from that one again? Oh yes...4-0.

 

Good question, a different game, less passionate fixture, less help from the fans, no new manager, less desperation for a win. Swansea are better passers than us as well obviously, if that's what you mean. But that doesn't mean that what I've said about the two sides is wrong.

 

No new manager.

 

I meant the new manager effect making Sunderland want to impress and give everything more than usual.

 

Err righto.

 

So sunderland didn't have a new manager against Swansea, is that what you're saying?

 

Jesus. Did I ever say a new manager guarantees winning every game? I was just talking about the various factors at work in the derby. I don't know why people seek to simplify these arguments to such a degree.

 

No, sorry hang on, you're just blatantly making shit up there.

 

You've attempted to give a list of reasons why their game against Swansea was different to their game against us and included "no new manager". I've put it in bold since you seem to have forgotten. They did have a new manager against Swansea but you're now trying to claim that doesn't count because it wasn't the "new manager effect" or something.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Both teams seemed to be scrapping it out, especially in the first half yesterday, hence the game being so frantic. Sunderland did a good job of closing us down and we struggled to play football because of it. That played into their hands, as they knew they couldn't live with us in an actual football match.

 

I'm not sure cowardice really comes into it, although I'm not reading back to see the explanation. I think 'not being up for it' is a very lazy line that people trot out when a team loses a passionate fixture.

 

How come Sunderland weren't able to close down Swanseas's team and stop them from passing it? What was the score from that one again? Oh yes...4-0.

 

Good question, a different game, less passionate fixture, less help from the fans, no new manager, less desperation for a win. Swansea are better passers than us as well obviously, if that's what you mean. But that doesn't mean that what I've said about the two sides is wrong.

 

No new manager.

 

I meant the new manager effect making Sunderland want to impress and give everything more than usual.

 

Err righto.

 

So sunderland didn't have a new manager against Swansea, is that what you're saying?

 

Jesus. Did I ever say a new manager guarantees winning every game? I was just talking about the various factors at work in the derby. I don't know why people seek to simplify these arguments to such a degree.

 

No, sorry hang on, you're just blatantly making shit up there.

 

You've attempted to give a list of reasons why their game against Swansea was different to their game against us and included "no new manager". I've put it in bold since you seem to have forgotten. They did have a new manager against Swansea but you're now trying to claim that doesn't count because it wasn't the "new manager effect" or something.

 

Sorry , I got confused! They did have a new manager against Seansea. What I was saying was that one of the factors at work in the derby was that they have a new manager to impress.  That's true regardless of  what happened against Swamsea.

[Spudil]

Both teams seemed to be scrapping it out, especially in the first half yesterday, hence the game being so frantic. Sunderland did a good job of closing us down and we struggled to play football because of it. That played into their hands, as they knew they couldn't live with us in an actual football match.

 

I'm not sure cowardice really comes into it, although I'm not reading back to see the explanation. I think 'not being up for it' is a very lazy line that people trot out when a team loses a passionate fixture.

 

How come Sunderland weren't able to close down Swanseas's team and stop them from passing it? What was the score from that one again? Oh yes...4-0.

 

Good question, a different game, less passionate fixture, less help from the fans, no new manager, less desperation for a win. Swansea are better passers than us as well obviously, if that's what you mean. But that doesn't mean that what I've said about the two sides is wrong.

 

No new manager.

 

I meant the new manager effect making Sunderland want to impress and give everything more than usual.

 

Err righto.

 

So sunderland didn't have a new manager against Swansea, is that what you're saying?

 

Jesus. Did I ever say a new manager guarantees winning every game? I was just talking about the various factors at work in the derby. I don't know why people seek to simplify these arguments to such a degree.

 

No, sorry hang on, you're just blatantly making s*** up there.

 

You've attempted to give a list of reasons why their game against Swansea was different to their game against us and included "no new manager". I've put it in bold since you seem to have forgotten. They did have a new manager against Swansea but you're now trying to claim that doesn't count because it wasn't the "new manager effect" or something.

 

Sorry , I got confused! They did have a new manager against Seansea. What I was saying was that one of the factors at work in the derby was that they have a new manager to impress.  That's true regardless of  what happened against Swamsea.

 

Now go back to your post at "reply 130" and look at the knot you are in.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Both teams seemed to be scrapping it out, especially in the first half yesterday, hence the game being so frantic. Sunderland did a good job of closing us down and we struggled to play football because of it. That played into their hands, as they knew they couldn't live with us in an actual football match.

 

I'm not sure cowardice really comes into it, although I'm not reading back to see the explanation. I think 'not being up for it' is a very lazy line that people trot out when a team loses a passionate fixture.

 

How come Sunderland weren't able to close down Swanseas's team and stop them from passing it? What was the score from that one again? Oh yes...4-0.

 

Good question, a different game, less passionate fixture, less help from the fans, no new manager, less desperation for a win. Swansea are better passers than us as well obviously, if that's what you mean. But that doesn't mean that what I've said about the two sides is wrong.

 

No new manager.

 

I meant the new manager effect making Sunderland want to impress and give everything more than usual.

 

Err righto.

 

So sunderland didn't have a new manager against Swansea, is that what you're saying?

 

Jesus. Did I ever say a new manager guarantees winning every game? I was just talking about the various factors at work in the derby. I don't know why people seek to simplify these arguments to such a degree.

 

No, sorry hang on, you're just blatantly making s*** up there.

 

You've attempted to give a list of reasons why their game against Swansea was different to their game against us and included "no new manager". I've put it in bold since you seem to have forgotten. They did have a new manager against Swansea but you're now trying to claim that doesn't count because it wasn't the "new manager effect" or something.

 

Sorry , I got confused! They did have a new manager against Seansea. What I was saying was that one of the factors at work in the derby was that they have a new manager to impress.  That's true regardless of  what happened against Swamsea.

 

Now go back to your post at "reply 130" and look at the knot you are in.

 

All that means is 'no new manager' wasn't a difference between the Swansea game and the derby. All the other factors still stand. They didn't manage to impress him against Swansea, that doesn't mean they weren't trying to do so against us.