The last time we played Luton...

LaPennaBianca said:
I largely agree with what you've said bar this.

We got more points than them in our disastrous season than they did last year.

They were abject last season. But because their ground is a dump and they play like a Dave Bassett team people thought they were 'plucky'
Click to expand...
They had a go, we were surrender monkeys under Karanka, it was a disgraceful season.
 
If we match their effort we should be far too good for them.

No excuses about them “cheating” or being ghastly brutes we just need to get stuck in and play around them.
 
What with our Anarchist Forward and that smooth stylish Geordie Midfielder with the silky goal-scoring touch, we'll beat them 2-1 (y)
 
Corcaigh_the_Cat said:
We did indeed, but they were decent to watch. We weren't.
Click to expand...

Were they decent to watch or were the games?

I'll accept the games were entertaining, but I don't think any Boro fan would think we were decent to watch if we were conceding an average of 3 goals every game from January to May.
 
Last edited:
I think we will struggle to get a win tomorrow. We just do not cope well against teams like Luton, hope to be proved wrong.
 
Famous last words I know (sorry) but it should suit Edmondson and Clarke.

In theory 2 centre backs who should relish that sort of match. I don't think they'll be bullied put it that way.
 
festa5 said:
Famous last words I know (sorry) but it should suit Edmondson and Clarke.

In theory 2 centre backs who should relish that sort of match. I don't think they'll be bullied put it that way.
Click to expand...
I was a little concerned that QPR got a number of free headers in the box from dead ball situations last Wednesday.
 
TeaCider said:
Were they decent to watch or were the games?

I'll accept the game were entertaining, but I don't think anyone Boro fan would think we were decent to watch if we were conceding an average of 3 goals every game from January to May.
Click to expand...
I thought Robbo's relegation side were good to watch, similar to Luton's. And like Luton we were praised by reporters and commentators, and rightly so.
 
If AK hadn't got sacked after the WHU game its likely we would have picked up more points up than we did after Stevie A was made manager, but it would have been difficult for AK to stay after criticising the crowd.
I'm going for a home win tomorrow, it be a dirty niggling match where neither team wants to loose but both believe they can win, both will trying to impose themselves on the other.
On a thread after the Norwich match , I said we would loose at home to Coventry but win the next 3 after that I'm sticking to it but tomorrow will be hard.
On the topic of do we owe Luton one for the result at Kenilworth last time around I would, say no but I still have my tennis balls at hand for the next time we play Charlton at the Riverside , let's see how they like it!
 
I thought Luton’s style changed after maybe a dozen or so games. Everything went through a midfield playmaker in Ross Barkley, who was exceptional and earned a move to Villa on the back of his form. I don’t think they were solely a direct, long-ball team. I thought they had variety but just not enough quality.
 
LaPennaBianca said:
I largely agree with what you've said bar this.

We got more points than them in our disastrous season than they did last year.

They were abject last season. But because their ground is a dump and they play like a Dave Bassett team people thought they were 'plucky'
Click to expand...
And because they fared the best of the promoted sides (whereas we did the worst) and were made to look better because they were in a league where several other teams had a crap season/were deducted points.
 
Corcaigh_the_Cat said:
We did indeed, but they were decent to watch.
Click to expand...
They were decent to watch because the opposition ripped them to shreds on many occasions, resulting in many goals created and scored.

We weren't watching their games because of Luton's ability to play football...it was due to their inability to defend.
 
Marvanelli said:
They were decent to watch because the opposition ripped them to shreds on many occasions, resulting in many goals created and scored.

We weren't watching their games because of Luton's ability to play football...it was due to their inability to defend.
Click to expand...
That made for entertaining matches, it's why many people watch football.

Most neutrals don't watch the game to see a defence hold on to a 1-0 defeat, they watch to see goalmouth action, goals and a bit of excitement. Most people watching live games on Sky or TNT don't follow the teams that are playing.

Luton were praised for being part of those games. It makes some of our fans bitter.
 
Corcaigh_the_Cat said:
That made for entertaining matches, it's why many people watch football.

Most neutrals don't watch the game to see a defence hold on to a 1-0 defeat, they watch to see goalmouth action, goals and a bit of excitement. Most people watching live games on Sky or TNT don't follow the teams that are playing.

Luton were praised for being part of those games. It makes some of our fans bitter.
Click to expand...
But you said they were decent to watch.

They weren't. They were terrible from their own POV.

The reason many watched their games is because they were laughable at defending at times, resulting in plenty of chances and conceding goals.

Luton weren't praised for being good. Their games were praised because they were terrible, which resulted in their games being high scoring.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top