|
Post by manchestergas on Jan 30, 2016 20:44:51 GMT
Horizontal hail. Vertical is not special. The variety of winter weather in Accrington is truly spellbinding.
Won't be too downbeat. Just an off day.
|
|
|
Post by laughinggas on Jan 30, 2016 22:22:33 GMT
|
|
|
Post by matealotblue on Jan 30, 2016 22:44:09 GMT
Strewth! That was an awful goal to concede.
|
|
Bridgeman
Alfie Biggs
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 3,549
|
Post by Bridgeman on Jan 30, 2016 23:20:23 GMT
Their goal was a fluke, Stanley's manager conceded that on the radio and I agree. The ball was crossed into that uncertain area between defence and goal keeper, it went past three of our defenders any of whom could have attempted to clear but might also have put it in their own net. I think Mildenhall was trying to anticipate if either of them would touch it and get ready to collect it unfortunately none of them did by which time it was too late and ball went past him into the corner of the net. Did we deserve anything from the game, I think we did, we certainly weren't at our best today but neither were we outplayed and we also created a number of chances against a well drilled Accrington defence. No need to panic, we'll come back from this. Of course I'm disappointed we didn't come back with anything but that's just the way it goes sometimes but puts a little more pressure on us to get something from the Wimbledon game.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2016 23:29:48 GMT
I agree it was a fluke, but it was entirely stoppable which is why I think it has to go down as an error rather than simply bad luck.
I don't agree we deserved anything, we started brightly but I genuinely think we were outplayed for large periods in both halves.
|
|
|
Post by alloutofgas on Jan 30, 2016 23:53:33 GMT
I wonder if there ever has been a scientific analysis of 'bogey teams'?
|
|
|
Post by matealotblue on Jan 31, 2016 7:34:03 GMT
I wonder if there ever has been a scientific analysis of 'bogey teams'? Only the ones that play in green.
|
|
|
Post by The Concept on Jan 31, 2016 9:36:36 GMT
As Geoffrey Boycott might put it : the cross was played in "... down the corridor of uncertainty."
Then again, maybe he would have said "My gran-muther coo-da caught that in 'er apron ... and she's been dead forty year."
|
|
|
Post by laughinggas on Jan 31, 2016 10:33:26 GMT
For the last keeper it would have been discussed as a bad mistake, as would last week's goal. Not discussing the keepers more the analysis etc post match.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2016 10:36:55 GMT
For the last keeper it would have been discussed as a bad mistake, as would last week's goal. Not discussing the keepers more the analysis etc post match. Maybe, maybe not. The last keeper wouldn't have made the saves that kept us in the game/score down in either match though.
|
|
|
Post by lostinspace on Jan 31, 2016 11:08:33 GMT
I agree it was a fluke, but it was entirely stoppable which is why I think it has to go down as an error rather than simply bad luck. I don't agree we deserved anything, we started brightly but I genuinely think we were outplayed for large periods in both halves. so 3 defenders had the chance to clear the ball in... neither did, so therefore left to the goalkeeper to make an attempt to keep a mis hit cross into the area fro going into the goal... sounds to me a bash mildy time again FFS ,, have a go at the first line of defence first, berate, them and ask for their excuse!!! rather than blame the last man standing
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2016 11:13:51 GMT
I agree it was a fluke, but it was entirely stoppable which is why I think it has to go down as an error rather than simply bad luck. I don't agree we deserved anything, we started brightly but I genuinely think we were outplayed for large periods in both halves. so 3 defenders had the chance to clear the ball in... neither did, so therefore left to the goalkeeper to make an attempt to keep a mis hit cross into the area fro going into the goal... sounds to me a bash mildy time again FFS ,, have a go at the first line of defence first, berate, them and ask for their excuse!!! rather than blame the last man standing Hahaha. I've consistently supported Mildenhall all season, still do and have him as my Man of the Match yesterday. But he made an error for the goal, not least because he called for Parkes to leave the ball. I put the blame, such as it is, squarely 50/50 between Parkes and Mildenhall for the goal. No bashing here.
|
|
Igitur
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 2,293
|
Post by Igitur on Jan 31, 2016 14:12:32 GMT
The game is an example of what I've been thinking about for ages. As in other games, so many shots and action only produced a 1-0 result. I'm not looking for cricket scores, but it seems to me the laws of the game must be spot on.
Perhaps some strikers really can't hit a cow's ar$e with a banjo (it is rather amusing when you hear in January from a commentator, "...and that's the striker's fourth goal of the season...") or the penalty area is too crowded with often 14 or more players or the goals are too small (yet 200 times the area of a ball) or too many fouls are made by the attackers or keepers are protected by refs... Whatever it is, games are so often very close in score despite 90 minutes of play. I'm not a great believer that managers set up teams to fit the opponents particularly this time of year when some teams often play two games a week.
|
|
irishrover
Global Moderator
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 3,372
|
Post by irishrover on Jan 31, 2016 14:38:29 GMT
The game is an example of what I've been thinking about for ages. As in other games, so many shots and action only produced a 1-0 result. I'm not looking for cricket scores, but it seems to me the laws of the game must be spot on. Perhaps some strikers really can't hit a cow's ar$e with a banjo (it is rather amusing when you hear in January from a commentator, "...and that's the striker's fourth goal of the season...") or the penalty area is too crowded with often 14 or more players or the goals are too small (yet 200 times the area of a ball) or too many fouls are made by the attackers or keepers are protected by refs... Whatever it is, games are so often very close in score despite 90 minutes of play. I'm not a great believer that managers set up teams to fit the opponents particularly this time of year when some teams often play two games a week. This is interesting. I'm not sure whether the overall stats on number of goals over time back you up or not. But my feeling is that 1)there is quite a lot of parity in League 2 so not much to choose between sides 2)coaching and tactics have become more and more refined over the years which means mistakes happen less often leading to fewer goals and 3)the evolution of the game to prioritise possession means there are less gaps for players to exploit.
It's part of my general rant about possession based football not creating a particularly good game to watch because it's too organised. I don't doubt it produces more successful teams but I'm not convinced it produces a better game. Football is better when it is a little bit unstructured. The definition of an exciting goal filled game is 'end to end' and that is the complete opposite to the way players are being trained to play now.
|
|