In a pretty dreadful game, Blues had led through a Gary McSheffrey strike on the hour mark, but Blues were unable to kill the game off (as usual) and were made to pay when Elvis Hammond equalised from close range with a couple of minutes remaining.
Right, as the game was pretty dull, and as it's now October and we've now reached the '10 game mark' - both of which were generally considered to be the time when people would start to reflect on how the season's going - I'm going to write a fairly brief report of the game, and then spend more time considering how things are going generally - is that ok? No? Tough, I'm writing it.
So, the Leicester game. Well, Steve Bruce made a number of changes to the team that lost 3-2 at Leeds last week. Stephen Kelly and Matt Sadler were back in the full-back slots, replacing the suspended Damien Johnson and the shown-up-at-Leeds Marcos Painter. There was another change in defence as Olivier Tebily, fresh off the back of his glorious winner (for Leeds) at Elland Road replaced the injured Martin Taylor alongside Radhi Jaidi. In the heart of the midfield, the injured David Dunn was replaced by Fabrice Muamba - obviously an attempt to tighten things up a little bit by putting him in alongside Mehdi Nafti - whilst Seb Larsson came in on the right-hand side for the token 'easy-bloke-to-drop-as-he-should-just-be-thrilled-to-be-at-a-big-club-like-us-as-we-signed-him-from-Colchester' Neil Danns. With Dunn out, and with Danns having done alright lately, quite what he did to deserve to be dropped I don't know, but there we go. I'm not paid several hundred thousand pounds a year to make such decisions.
So, the match - pretty rubbish to be honest. Leicester were possibly the poorest opponents Blues have faced all season. Their ability to string passes together made Blues look the the Brazil side of 1970, simply because Blues were able to put more than two passes together (on some occasions). Blues really struggled creatively, which was probably to be expected given the shift in midfield emphasis that Bruce had gone for. Having conceded 5 goals in the previous couple of games, you can't necessarily blame him for bringing Muamba in alongside Nafti, but at the same time, that meant that Blues' creativity from midfield = Gary McSheffrey. Larsson particularly struggled on the right. I'm a fan of him as a player generally - I like his attitude - but he's no right winger. If you had a bit more creativity in the middle, then he'd do a job wide right in a less offensive role - tucking inside and the like - but when you've got Muamba and Nafti in the middle, you need the wide players to be creative, and whilst McSheffrey was (as the game progressed), Larsson just isn't as suited to that side of things, and frankly some of the positions he took up when Kelly drove forward from behind him were abysmal (he didn't offer himself as an option at all - just stood on the touchline). Kelly, on the other hand, possibly had his best game for Blues. He wasn't stunning, but he was a lot more comfortable, and broke well from the back.
Anyway, the main talking point of the first half was an incident involving DJ Campbell and the superbly named Leicester 'keeper Conrad Logan. Campbell was played through and with his pace always looked favourite to get to the ball before the onrushing Logan. Sure enough, Campbell clipped the ball past Logan who was a few yards outside of his area now, and Logan brought Campbell down. Referee Steve Bennett produced a yellow card, whilst the Blues players and fans obviously wanted it to be red. Now, I could see it from both points of view. Bennett did point to the fact that there were several Leicester defenders pretty close by who had made their way back, which there were. However, the pace at which Campbell was approaching the goal probably meant that had Logan not brought him down, it looked as if he'd be knocking the ball into an empty net. Did Logan therefore deny a goalscoring opportunity? Well, I think so, yes. Perhaps Bennett had seen some of Campbell's finishing though, and so felt that even with an empty net it wasn't a goalscoring opportunity? I don't know... I can see why you could give a yellow or a red for it. I'd have thought a red card was probably the right decision, but I don't think it was quite as clearcut as people might think. Anyway, that was that for the first half, apart from Logan saving the resulting free-kick from McSheffrey.
The second half wasn't much better, to be honest. Blues took the lead through McSheffrey (who'd previously been denied by Logan again) when Campbell played him through and he hit a rising right-foot drive into the roof of the net. Then it became the Gary McSheffrey show, as he rained in shots which either were off target or Logan saved. Leicester went close through Iain Hume, but really and truly the game started to drift a little bit, and it seemed that it was just going to end up 1-0. Bruce took Campbell and Nicklas Bendtner off with Cameron Jerome and Mikael Forssell replacing them respectively as it looked like Blues were settling for the 1-0.
And what happens when you settle for 1-0, kids? Yes, you've got it! It becomes 1-1! Sure enough, with minutes remaining Leicester broke, and after Bennett again endured the wrath of some 16,500 Blues fans packed into St Andrews for appearing to miss a handball in the build-up, Josh Low of former Northampton Town fame (you see some greats in this division) played the ball across the face of the goal and Elvis Hammond was on hand to tap in the equaliser. Blues - having adopted mediocrity in the previous 10 minutes as they just assumed Leicester would never have the audacity to actually get an equaliser - were unable to shrug off their late-match sluggishness and raise themselves to seek a winner, and the game just petered out.
What to make of it overall? Well, Blues were comfortably the better team, but were unable to kill the game off and were far, far too reliant on McSheffrey. Thinking from the top of my head, but for a first-half save by Logan (again) from Bendtner, and a good clearance from Darren Kenton to deny Bendtner early in the second half, the only player to have attempts on goal for Blues was McSheffrey. As I said earlier, it's perhaps understandable why Bruce opted for the more defensive midfield, given recent results, but this certainly nipped Blues' creativity in the bud. For me, the biggest problem was the last 20 minute or so. For the first 70 minutes, this wasn't vintage Blues (to be fair, when is it ever vintage Blues?), but given Leicester's inadequacies, Blues were doing enough, and a goal always looked like it was coming. A little later than you'd have hoped for, sure enough, a goal did come. Like I say, it was far from impressive stuff, but there'd been all these complaints about the cavalier football leaving Blues too open at the back, and so Blues had defended reasonably well (both Kelly and Sadler looked like the time off had done them some good), got a goal eventually, and you couldn't knock it too much - for the first 70 minutes. It hadn't been brilliant (at times it hadn't even been good) but it looked like it would be more than enough.
Then the last 20 minutes came, and Blues seemed to just settle for the 1-0. It wasn't how they used to settle for 1-0's in the past, with everyone dropping 20 yards deeper, playing one up front, etc - it was just a total shifting down the gears. Jerome came on for Campbell, and fair enough, Jerome looked lively when he came on, so you can't criticise that substitution. When Forssell came on for Bendtner though, what was the point of that? Bendtner didn't look particularly tired, wasn't treading a thin disciplinary line (unlike Nafti who'd been given a final warning by Bennett which was why he came off rather than Muamba for Danns late on) and there seemed little point in taking him off for Forssell. Now, when you're 3-0 up, I'm all for taking a player off to get a standing ovation from the crowd - as Bendtner did. I'm all for bringing on a popular player lacking in confidence to get a huge reception from the crowd and give that player 10 minutes to get a goal off his backside or something - anything - to get some confidence back, as with Forssell in this case. The thing is though, it was only 1-0, Forssell did nothing when he came on, and Leicester scored. Now, it's not fair for a second for me to suggest that that decision and that decision alone cost Blues the three points - it didn't. What it did though was reflect the comfort zone that Blues drifted into late on. Maybe I was as guilty of it as a fan too, given how shocking Leicester were, because with 5 minutes to go I was sat there thinking "maybe a scrappy 1-0 win is what we need - you need to win games when you don't play particularly well", and sure enough, Leicester equalised. As I say, it wasn't necessarily as if Blues invited Leicester onto them by dropping deep, needlessly conceding possession and all the rest of it - it was as if Blues had a 3-0 mindset and thought "they'll never get this back" and just eased off the gas. At 1-0 that is quite honestly a ridiculous thing to think, and it'll be argued that it wasn't the case at all, but that's what it looked like.
One other thing you have to remember is that Blues had Matthew Upson, David Dunn, Damien Johnson and Bruno N'Gotty all missing yesterday - that's four internationals and very experienced Premiership players. Granted, Upson hasn't played yet this season, but he will, and you remove such a set of players from any other team in this division, and they would not be able to cope. It does say a lot about the strength of the Blues squad - a squad that will come into play later in the season, as other teams will start to miss their 'big' players.
So, a game with very mixed messages, and that seems to sum up the season so far. Like I say, many people said they'd start to judge Bruce and how the season is going "in October" or "after 10 games", (to be fair, most who said that have judged him and the season already, but there we go), so maybe I should do that now...
Right, teams who get relegated from the Premiership generally struggle at the start of the new season. Blues haven't looked anywhere near like fulfilling their potential, but they're second in the league. The fact is, that if after 46 games, I'm sat here typing that Blues haven't fulfilled their potential all season, but are second in the league, then we'll all be celebrating promotion. It might not be what people want to hear, but it is the case. Now, I understand that people want to be entertained too, but Blues fans shouldn't fall into the Spurs fans mentality of demanding that above all else. The fact is that a lot of Blues games this season have been good entertainment - Colchester, Palace, Hull and Ipswich at home were all good value for money in that they were exciting matches. QPR away was excellent, Leeds away was exciting (not the right result, but a good game) and Sunderland away was a good old-fashioned hanging on for a 1-0 win away from home game which means you leave the ground beaming. Blues may not have blitzed the opposition in any of those games, but they've all been decent enough games of football.
Now, not for one second am I saying everything is alright - there's some big problems to be addressed football-wise - but isn't the expectation a little too high now? There are 23 other clubs in the division that if you'd said to them at the start of the season "look, after 10 games, you'll be second in the league, a point clear of third place", they'd have taken it. I'd like to think that there'd have been 24 clubs saying the same, but in Blues' case it appears not.
The real problem is staying there, because Blues haven't played anywhere near well enough this season, on the whole. There's a lot of work to do. The defensive side of things is poor at the moment - having played five home games and not been able to keep a single clean sheet in those games isn't good enough for promotion. Three clean sheets in five away games, however, suggests that it can be done, so that needs to be addressed.
Another problem appears to be getting the right balance in midfield - there seems to be two extremes. Playing Dunn alongside Nafti everyone thinks that it's too attacking and we concede loads of goals. Playing Muamba with Nafti, and we lack any real creativity there. Surely there's an 'in between' though - I mean, what did we buy Neil Danns for? He seems to strike the right balance between the two. Dunn can still be involved (him and Danns have switched from wide right to the middle of the park during games recently) but there has to be a balance found somehow. Not knowing your best team ten games into the season isn't good enough, to be honest, but then with the suspensions and little niggles that Blues have had, it hasn't been easy. Bruce needs to find that balance soon though, and then work with it, rather than keeping going from 'super attacking' to 'super defensive' - there is an in between.
Blues will put four goals past someone soon - I'm convinced of it - and when they do, I think it'll do the whole situation some good. Until then though, there's too many nerves and Blues are unable to kill teams off - QPR away being the only game they've won by more than the narrowest of margins. This is something else that needs to be addressed. Blues almost need to be told to cut loose against someone, and encouraged to take out their frustrations on them. At the moment, the expectation of the crowd and, I suspect, the expectation amongst the players is actually inhibiting them. Cardiff beat Wolves 4-0 at the same time as Blues were playing Leicester, and without seeing any of the game, you just know that because they're buzzing at being unexpectedly at the top of the league, one goal brings two, two brings three, etc, etc. With Blues though, the fact that everyone is so negative at being second in the league it means that one goal brings the "we have to win, don't commit too much, let's make sure we win now" mentality. Cardiff are a team with confidence because they're flying when no one really expected them to. Until now, Blues have moreorless been with them every step of the way, but there's no real confidence about their game, because it's actually perceived as a failure. If (when?) Blues beat a team emphatically, hopefully it'll lift everyone and may assist them in seeking to really kick on and free themselves from the shackles that seem to be placed on them from all angles at the moment. I've said in previous reports in previous seasons that the best way to defend a 1-0 lead is to make it a 2-0 lead, but Blues just don't seem confident enough to do that at the moment.
Overall, Blues haven't sparkled - though the football has improved considerably from last season. People denying that are not being fair - when Blues knock the ball about now, it makes the team of last season look like a team of statues. The only problem is that Blues are not doing it over the course of 90 minutes (or even 45 minutes) this season, and in those periods that they're not, teams are getting themselves back into the game. Steve Bruce has an awful lot of work to do this season, because there are problems - mainly getting the balance of the side right, and that should have been done by now, quite frankly. Over the first ten games, Blues have looked poor on occasions, but they are still second. I know it's boring and I know people think we should be beating everyone 5-0 every week, but it was never going to happen like that. Regardless of the football being played, Blues are averaging 1.8 points per game, and if you spread that over the course of the season, you'll be close to automatic promotion. If Blues can find another gear (which, given the players they've got, they should be able to do), then they should be ok - whether that will be because of Bruce or in spite of Bruce, well, I have my doubts.
There are people calling for Steve Bruce to go now, but they have to realise that there is no way on God's earth that a club is going to get rid of a manager this early in a season, purely for footballing reasons, whilst they're second in the league. No way at all. Steve Bruce proved himself inadequate in the past few seasons in the Premiership, and he's endured a difficult start to this season, but his team is second - like it or not. I think he makes some ridiculous decisions (as above, taking Bendtner off for Forssell in this match, plus many others this season) but whether you want him to be sacked or not, it's never, ever, ever going to happen whilst Blues are second, or probably even in the top six. It's just not. One other thing that people don't seem to think about is who you'd get in to replace him? What would any potential new manager think if the fans of the club that are pursuing him hounded out the previous manager for 'only being second in the league'?
My actual thoughts on Bruce are that he's a top bloke, but that he's struggling now with his management of Birmingham City Football Club - I think that the expectation being heaped on the club is taking it's toll on him, as it's not like he was a new manager who came in with expectation - the pressure was on from the start. You cannot get to second in the league after ten games being rubbish though - you just can't - so whilst everyone criticises this thing that he does and that thing that he does (myself included), perhaps you do have to give him some credit for the fact that Blues are second. Relegation hit this club hard - harder than it does most clubs. The atmosphere amongst fans over the summer was dreadful, and you had the thought from speaking to people that this was just the start of a real big decline. Kenny Cunningham referred to the club as having no soul, and you could almost sense that. As I said above too, teams relegated from the Premiership invariably struggle initially in their new surroundings. Given all of this, Blues aren't actually doing too horrifically being second in the league. Some of that is due to the poor standard of some other teams (how can you pick up two points out of the last nine available this early on in the season when teams are close to one another and remain second?!) but you can only really reflect on what the league table says at any one point to judge how things are going.
Once the decision to let Bruce continue was taken over the summer - whether you feel it was the right decision or not - people had to accept that he'd be starting this season as Blues manager, and he did. Given that, you have to really reflect on this season. I know people are still angry about previous seasons - and quite rightly - but once Bruce was given another crack at the job, he had to be given a chance to show that he had learned the lessons that he claimed he had because of last season. I'm afraid, after all this, the jury's still out, but there's no way that he can be dismissed at this point. You can't categorically say that he's learned nothing. One thing people may want to reflect on is this - IF Bruce had been sacked and IF a new manager had come in, how would people be feeling this morning reflecting on the Leicester game and the season so far, sitting in second place in the league? I think people would be fairly positive, in general, if a new manager had taken us into this position. People aren't though, because it's Steve Bruce.
There's still an awful lot of work to do, and the golden lights of the Premiership look a long way off, but who thought any differently? It's a long, hard season in this division, and at present there are 22 other teams who would swap their position for the one that Blues occupy. If we're still saying that in May, then we'll all be happy. Well, I'd like to think we would anyway.