Quick Analysis of Viera

Bazzmand Show

Well-Known Member
Joined
17 Jun 2009
Messages
5,048
1st - When the pace was high and at a quick tempo he was next to pathetic. This is the most telling thing for me, absolute liability when the game was in the balance.
2nd - When they lost their player and the pace slowed down to our level and we dictacted he had a lot more room and was probably the one midfielder who kept the ball ticking over.

But the fact he couldn't make his mark in the hurly burly of the first half is the most telling thing for me, at times he appeared so slow it looked like he was running on the spot.
 
i thought the only reason we were bringing him in was to shore up the midfield in the case of us being a goal up or something, to add quality and a level head where we have been guilty of throwing away leads. this is the period of the game from maybe 65-70 mins onwards. can't see why he starts though, with the exception of the ball to ade against bolton he has sounded off the pace and almost a liability.

he's a sub and nothing more i'd say
 
Quick analysis - he was crap.

Glen Whelan could have milked it when Vieira assaulted him - well done Whelan for not doing a Hollywood
 
Bazzmand Show said:
1st - When the pace was high and at a quick tempo he was next to pathetic. This is the most telling thing for me, absolute liability when the game was in the balance.
2nd - When they lost their player and the pace slowed down to our level and we dictacted he had a lot more room and was probably the one midfielder who kept the ball ticking over.

But the fact he couldn't make his mark in the hurly burly of the first half is the most telling thing for me, at times he appeared so slow it looked like he was running on the spot.


Spot on mate. He's well passed his best & in a league that games are played at the highest tempo in Europe he is clearly not up to it. He is definately a last 20 minute player (assuming we're winning of course).
 
I said when we bought him it was strange buy, bought more for manager to have a face in the dressing room than for his contribution on field....he was a great player but time has caught up, we need to build a team using Ireland and Johnson in midfield who are hungry...Viera is a cover player only...not a starter and NOT 90 mins....simple.
 
My quick analysis: He was utter shit in the first half and ok in the second but only because Stoke were a man down and noone was bothering him much anymore.

Clearly past it and an absolute liability. I still don't understand how he stayed on the pitch for 90m and was not taken off by Mancini. When they went down to 10m Mancini should have brought Ireland on immediately.
 
Sheikh Rattle n Roll said:
Can City (maybe Talkshite might) ask The FA to look at Viera's challenge on Whelan again.... hopefully he may then get a 3 match ban!

haha
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.