Current version

Posted October 19, 2014 18:24 · last edited October 19, 2014 18:25

I'm pretty sure that was tongue-in-cheek.

I find the debate over Brockie's performance almost a litmus test for one's philosophy on the role of a striker. For some of us, missing a penalty and a couple of decent chances can be forgiven through winning a penalty and putting on the assist for a goal. For others, no goal = shit performance.

I think Brockie misses too many chances in general, and I would prefer it if we had a more clinical number 9. But the only thing that kept him from being man of match in this game and having a lot of you who slag him off talk about how impressive he was was his penalty being a couple of inches too high. His finishing was poor (again), but he made a great run and shielded the ball well to win the penalty, and his headed cross was perfect. Brockie basically won us that game.

Isn't there a middle ground - ie Brockie had an adequate performance, it wasn't shit but it wasn't great?

Previous versions

1 version
ConanTroutman edited October 19, 2014 18:25

Isn't there a middle ground - ie Brockie had an adequate performance, it wasn't shit but it wasn't great?