Curbishley's Ratings Against Bolton

[John Simkin]

Anyone interested in rating Curbishley’s team selection, tactics and substitutions out of ten against Bolton?

His scores so far, in rank order, are as follows:

Portsmouth (8.7)

Reading (8.4)

Middlesbrough (7.7)

Birmingham (7.1)

Sunderland (6.8)

Arsenal (6.6)

Wigan (6.5)

Aston Villa (6.0)

Newcastle (5.1)

Manchester City (3.7)

[John Simkin]

Given the injuries the team picked itself. However, the tactic of playing the long ball up to Cole was a disaster. (Or was that the decision of the players?) Not that Cole played badly, but surrounded by three defenders, it just meant that we constantly gave the ball away. The only time we looked any good was when we passed it through midfield.

It soon became clear that Boa Morte still has not recovered his confidence. He took ages making decisions and when he did, it was always the wrong one. I would have had him off before half-time and replaced him with Reid. The substitution of Cole was also very strange. True he was tired but it would have been better to have kept him on and brought on Camara for Boa Morte. 6/10.

[Guest Gary Loughran]

This is tough one to rate Curbishley tactically on. The team was literally the only one that could play. It included a couple of not fully fit playeres in Mullins and Bowyer; and it showed. The workrate was high and once again the much maligned Neil and McCartney were stand outs. After a slow start Boa Morte seemed to gain some confidence (given the Coventry performance was the worst individual performance I've ever witnessed by a WHUFC player) and was hurting Bolton late on.

When Pantsil, Spector came on - moves Curbishley would not have made had there not been injuries - the team looked disjointed. Switching Camara for Cole defied logic and this gets a point deducted from my default score of seven. 6/10

[John Simkin]

Curbishley got an average rating of 5.9. The third worst rating of the season. This seems fairly harsh considering the injury problems.

Portsmouth (8.7)

Reading (8.4)

Middlesbrough (7.7)

Birmingham (7.1)

Sunderland (6.8)

Arsenal (6.6)

Wigan (6.5)

Aston Villa (6.0)

Bolton (5.9)

Newcastle (5.1)

Manchester City (3.7)

[Guest Gary Loughran]

Curbishley got an average rating of 5.9. The third worst rating of the season. This seems fairly harsh considering the injury problems.

Portsmouth (8.7)

Reading (8.4)

Middlesbrough (7.7)

Birmingham (7.1)

Sunderland (6.8)

Arsenal (6.6)

Wigan (6.5)

Aston Villa (6.0)

Bolton (5.9)

Newcastle (5.1)

Manchester City (3.7)

It seems with expectancy comes disappointment. Man City first game of season - high expectancy/disappointment ratio; now after a couple of games unbeaten and a match against a struggling team a similar sense of expectancy.

It does indeed seem harsh, for many reasons. Maybe I should deploy .5 more often .

[John Simkin]

It seems with expectancy comes disappointment. Man City first game of season - high expectancy/disappointment ratio; now after a couple of games unbeaten and a match against a struggling team a similar sense of expectancy.

It does indeed seem harsh, for many reasons.

I listened to a radio phone-in after the game. I was amazed by the number of West Ham fans who called for Curbishley to be sacked. The same is true of the KUMB. In reality, with the amount of injuries we have had this season, we have done well not to be in a relegation fight. My only real complaint about Curbishley is that he seems to have bought so many injury prone players. I saw Sam Allardyce being interviewed after the Dyer deal broke down. The interviewer said that Dyer was very disappointed. Sam smiled and said "not half as much as I am". I took that as a reference to his injury record. No wonder he did what he could to get the deal completed. I know Dyer is out because of a broken leg, but if he had not done this, would he out of the team with some other injury?

This is an interesting website that highlights our injury problems:

http://www.physioroom.com/news/english_pre...njury_table.php

[Guest Gary Loughran]

It seems with expectancy comes disappointment. Man City first game of season - high expectancy/disappointment ratio; now after a couple of games unbeaten and a match against a struggling team a similar sense of expectancy.

It does indeed seem harsh, for many reasons.

I listened to a radio phone-in after the game. I was amazed by the number of West Ham fans who called for Curbishley to be sacked. The same is true of the KUMB. In reality, with the amount of injuries we have had this season, we have done well not to be in a relegation fight. My only real complaint about Curbishley is that he seems to have bought so many injury prone players. I saw Sam Allardyce being interviewed after the Dyer deal broke down. The interviewer said that Dyer was very disappointed. Sam smiled and said "not half as much as I am". I took that as a reference to his injury record. No wonder he did what he could to get the deal completed. I know Dyer is out because of a broken leg, but if he had not done this, would he out of the team with some other injury?

This is an interesting website that highlights our injury problems:

http://www.physioroom.com/news/english_pre...njury_table.php

I am in 100% agreement with this. I recall a time when his fitness science was lauded as visionary - the ice bath etc. I must question the conditioning of the players. Overplaying Noble, Bowyer, Mullins when carrying slight muscle problems will undoubtedly have a negative effect later in the season. Not to mention that Bellamy should never have played for Wales.