Having not been to the game, but based on the highlights

I'm really not sure why McNulty has been singled out for blame. Or did his name come out today on the 'random blame a Keith Hill signing generator'?

 

I'm not a McNulty hater,but certainly early on at least he didn't play well,he looks like a lad whose confidence is at a very low ebb.

 

General poor defending/ bad luck / blind ref to me on the evidence of biased highlights.

 

I watched the game live on an internet feed. I don't think McNulty was at fault for any of the goals, but that doesn't mean he had a good game.

I understand why Flitcroft took Foster off, although I'm not sure I agree with the decision. He thought Foster would get sent off and he didn't want to go down to ten men. Foster had been fouling a lot and he had been booked, but I think Foster is experienced enough now, what with having 500 games under his belt, to modify his behaviour once he received the booking. With Foster gone we had nothing standing between Bristol City and our goal. He'd basically been the only player that stopped Bristol getting a bagful in the first half. We had no protection from the midfield, while Cranie and McNulty simply weren't up to it. Our only form of defence was Foster kicking people up in the air. Once Foster was subbed the result looked inevitable. I don't necessarily agree with some of the abuse that McNulty has received, but I don't think they were picking on a player at random. They watched the game and saw how weak he looked. They saw a defence in disarray. They probably watched the last game he played and saw it there too. And the one before that.

 

Thanks Sadbrewer and Jay. You're both always very considered and I appreciate the views of people who've seen more of the game than me. It was just after some earlier posts (some from people who hadn't seen the game) I watched the highlights assuming he'd had a shocker.

For what its worth he's had a horribly disrupted season, chucked in to often make shift teams, and hasn't had any run of games. When I've seen him this year he's not played particularly well (although the above factors have IMHO been a large cause of this). But last year I thought he did well for us, and I just can't understand the view that he is one of the worst defenders to wear a Barnsley shirt.

 

If your referring to me then I have to disappoint you as I watched it all on the net and obviously paid particular attention to mcnulty as he was the major change/addition to our team for the last 10 games. He wasn't the only player to have a bad game however having watched him he failed to pick players up regularly when required and was totally outfought by Jon stead on every occasion, hence foster having to come across and help out..a lot. He looked like a fish out of water and shouldn't have started for me. It's flickers misguided loyalty unfortunately by playing him and it was his predecessors downfall also. I hope he doesn't blindly persevere with mcnulty for all our sakes. I don't think he will by hinting that he may have a wing back loanee coming in. I don't blame either ultimately so long as this doesn't happen again and flicker can see that the lad isn't good enough on today and Tuesdays last 15 mins. I'm sure his mate at Rochdale will have mcnulty back with open arms as that is his level
I'm afraid..

 

He didn't have a shocker. For me that implies giving the ball away in key areas that costs us goals. That wasn't McNulty today. But he just looked so unsure. You need your central defenders to dominate and he came nowhere near to doing that. It was almost like he wasn't there. From a personal point of view I haven't seen him dominate since the first few months of last season. I really don't rate him, but I don't think he was any worse than our other defenders today. Or our midfielders come to that, who gave the defence no help at all.

 

All that is far too negative. Going forward today we were great. Could have easily scored half a dozen. But the whole team just forgot how to defend.

 

I never said shocker but foster came across and covered a lot for him as he seemed to be caught daydreaming far too often and not picking a man up far too regularly although he did give the ball away quite a few times also but so did most of the team. We can't afford passengers in our situation I'm afraid and that's just what mcnulty looked like today, a passenger.

 

I was at the game. Jim Mac looked shakey all through and the major damage came down our left. I always call games true as I see it and fozzie was blatantly fouled for the first goal, he was angry and later got booked - Flicker chose to sub him but he'll admit now that was a mistake. We tried a formation minus key parts, - Goldy, Stones and Kel/Dawson. Not quite the Jan 12 loss, but still an upheaval.

It's not fair to expect the same intensity which brought about the great run, that much is evident from the last two games. We've bedded in and racked up some points, as much again will see us safe.

Fck the cup, I'm going to league games.

 

I was there and thats a fair analysis. I would not single anyone out. We were just shocking in defense.
Also thought the booking was harsh. While Foster was holding, he was not holsing around the neck as the play-acting suggested.

 

McNulty had an awful start at left-back, improved in his normal position after Foster went off.

 

how can you comment having only seen 5 to 10 mins

 

Because the highlights showed all the goals, and the chances, and from those I certainly didn't think McNulty was anymore culpable than anyone else. I also make it clear in this thread that I haven't seen all the game and therefore can't judge the whole performance.

 

sorry mate but i dint see how anyone not just you can comment about 90 mins after seeing only short highlights

 

But I'm not commenting on 90 minutes, or claiming to be able to. I was just making the point that from the highlights I'm not sure why McNulty was being singled out.

 

I think it is a well established opinion of supporters that McNulty and Wiseman do not perform to a consistently high enough level for this league. Of course they have the odd good game when they are suited to a particular opponent, or the overall team performance has been high. They don't have nightmares every game as some suggest, but league positions reflect the consistency of performances and we are still down the bottom.

Foster, Hassle and Cranie for me, consistently perform to a sufficient standard to keep a foothold in this league and of course are guilty of mistakes and the odd below par performance but the difference is clear. Fozzie is no better or worse than he was two years ago, but on occasion he did look a weaker player at the side of Jason Shackell. Now for me he's our top defender, which demonstrates how weak we are at the back. particularly now we've lost Stones and Golbourne.

If ever a game suited Bobby Hassell, that was it. In the absense of adequate wing-backs, for me we have to go we a solid back 4. Hassell, Foster, Cranie and Kennedy, with maybe Rory Delap sitting deep as required. If we do sign this left back that will be another option.

We were knackered yesterday, as we were v Wolves. That is why Jim O'B was lacking the usual drive. It's clear to me that we will have problems sustaining that level of intensity that carried us through the great run. Hopefully the return of Dawson and Etuhu will refresh that impetus, but we do need to address these defensive issues. As much as I would like to see all the players do well, McNulty and Wiseman have had their chance now and we need to replace them with a bit more quality. Theoretically, The John Stones money would buy us three Jason Shackells, we need to go shopping in the summer.