TaiwanGas
Paul Bannon
Tom Ramasuts Left Foot.
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 1,337
|
Post by TaiwanGas on Oct 23, 2018 20:23:09 GMT
2-0 up, well worth the early morning rise!....COYB!...
|
|
|
Post by Gregory Stevens on Oct 23, 2018 20:34:21 GMT
Hang on gas!
|
|
|
Post by Colyton Gas. on Oct 23, 2018 21:04:46 GMT
Macclesfield have the only ground worse than us lost 5-0 at home to-night in front of only 1500 fans.Bliss played but is clearly not up to league football.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 23, 2018 21:10:04 GMT
2 relegation teams. We were awful, they just lumped it and hoped.
Referee was the usual disgraceful standard, ignores one of their players hoofing the ball into the stand after a free kick awarded, then books one of ours for knocking the ball 20 yards back beyond where a free kick was awarded. Where do they find these clowns?
Nichols, the stats will say another game without a goal, but it's ridiculous playing him as a lone striker against a back 4 who are all at least 6 inches taller than him and then hitting nothing but high balls at him.
Edit. If they had anyone who could cross with accuracy, or someone who could head a ball, we would have been hammered tonight. It'll go down as a win, but it papers over huge cracks.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 23, 2018 21:13:06 GMT
That was abject for most of the first half and much of the second. Matthews gave the ball away 10 times in the first half, Upson was awful, yet jokingly was awarded man of the match (should have been Tom Nichols). It looked like we were playing 2-7-1 for the first 35 minutes.
But for the post and Bonham, we could have been 2 down, yet scored after a great corner from Matthews, which Upson knew nothing about.
2md half and second goal were better, but even then their defender beautifully wrong footed their keeper. Odd substitutions meant Danny playing centre midfield at times.
Totally lost at the tactics in that game, but we got away with it because Wimbledon are s***e.
Hey ho, 3 points. UTG.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 23, 2018 21:27:58 GMT
We were dreadful. Bonham,lockyer and craig played very well. Great cross from kelly for the own goal.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 23, 2018 21:43:44 GMT
That was hilarious. I love my club.
|
|
|
Post by emperorsuperbus on Oct 23, 2018 21:53:01 GMT
Surprising amount of south London fans there for Tuesday night. Guess their bit of green chain covered in trash this evening.
Didn’t hear them at all though.
It wasn’t as good a performance as against Walsall and pompey in defeat, but some of the other posts may be a little over the top. I don’t think we gave wombles that many chances over the 90 minutes. It was similar to Coventry game in visitors made much the better start but faded after our first goal.
Tactics? I have a great view on half way, started with a 4 4 1 1 with Ollie in the number 10 role behind nico in the number 9 role. Ollie sercs swapped before half time. The subs gave us 5 3 2 extra outlet up front, full backs and sercs license to break forward, not bad tactics with Wimbledon 2 down chasing.
Officials? The reference from bamber is correct, ref got that one wrong, both hoofed ball away after whistle both book able, apart from that, the linesman were quick and crisp with their flags, and the ref didn’t give needless cards too early, wasn’t too whistlehappy and that was quite good really.
The politics? Throw some height and muscle on the pitch just for the sake of it? Maybe I am reading too much into the comments of Ollie, Lockyer and the manager, but I have formed the impression they are attributing our excellent defensive record down to how hard nico is working up front, and Payne is out of favour because, in their opinion, he wasn’t working hard enough off ball.
There’s no arguing with goals against and clean sheets. But to add more goals we shouldn’t be looking just to the forwards, they are not getting much to miss, tactics and team performance isn’t creating much.
Who knows where it goes from here. But if we add a string of 1.0 2.0 wins in coming weeks it’s an interesting platform to build a season on.
|
|
|
Post by mangogas15 on Oct 23, 2018 22:13:16 GMT
We played 3-5-2 for the last twenty minutes.
AT LAST!!!!!
I've been saying this for ages.
It gave us more support against Hanson Jervis and then Pigott. Allowed us to have 2 up top, 5 at the back when we didn't have the ball and 8 men behind the ball to block and defend.
AFCW started better but we deserved our bit of luck and i missed the OG buying tea.
It was a cheer that sounded like an own goal. And i was right...
|
|
|
Post by a more piratey game on Oct 23, 2018 23:38:12 GMT
Nichols got told off by the ref for using his arms in a header or something. The last couple of games he has been winning quite a lot more than he has right to given his height - in fact, he's started to look a bit rufty-tufty to me. Can't believe my eyes!
|
|
|
Post by a more piratey game on Oct 23, 2018 23:39:34 GMT
Upson was awful, yet jokingly was awarded man of the match faute de mieux, I suspect and he scored. Sort of
|
|
|
Post by o2o2bo2ba on Oct 23, 2018 23:47:07 GMT
Awful performance, lifesaving result.
Questions must be asked regarding tactical use of starting personnel.
How our defence can get the basics so wrong as in not blocking crosses, non marking, ball watching, standing off attacking players, defending too deep etc.. Coaching must be diabolical as way too often we relied on the man of the season, Bonham to rescue us. Wimbledon should have been 3-0 up before we luckily scored (their keeps had a big part in that). And they missed two more gilt edged chances.
I can't remember testing their keep once in open play.
Going forward, we play one up front, again the only striker in all the league's that can't score. So in essence, no strikers. So many misplaced easy passes. We are claustrophobic in midfield, too narrow. Lityle natural width. No tempo. No forward movement. No imagination. No thought to our play. Side, back, hoof; or side, back and give ball away.
DC says they work hard on training pitch. Is that separately? Rarely, we look dangerous attacking.
If Wimbledon had been ruthless, they would have walked away with this match, make no mistake we were poor.
We are so inconsistent, it's just taking the p!ss playing Nichols up front alone with the physicality and height of Wimbledon and although the result is a breath of fresh air - a very very lucky breath of fresh air - I'm afraid to say I see a manager getting basics wrong however lucky we were.
Apologies to a vociferous AFC Wimbledon crowd tonight, fair play you turned out in numbers and sung your hearts out....I think someone's got your fillings cos you were well and truly robbed..
DC.... Stop taking the p!ss our of our club.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2018 2:58:23 GMT
Awful performance, lifesaving result. Questions must be asked regarding tactical use of starting personnel. How our defence can get the basics so wrong as in not blocking crosses, non marking, ball watching, standing off attacking players, defending too deep etc.. Coaching must be diabolical as way too often we relied on the man of the season, Bonham to rescue us. Wimbledon should have been 3-0 up before we luckily scored (their keeps had a big part in that). And they missed two more gilt edged chances. I can't remember testing their keep once in open play. Going forward, we play one up front, again the only striker in all the league's that can't score. So in essence, no strikers. So many misplaced easy passes. We are claustrophobic in midfield, too narrow. Lityle natural width. No tempo. No forward movement. No imagination. No thought to our play. Side, back, hoof; or side, back and give ball away. DC says they work hard on training pitch. Is that separately? Rarely, we look dangerous attacking. If Wimbledon had been ruthless, they would have walked away with this match, make no mistake we were poor. We are so inconsistent, it's just taking the p!ss playing Nichols up front alone with the physicality and height of Wimbledon and although the result is a breath of fresh air - a very very lucky breath of fresh air - I'm afraid to say I see a manager getting basics wrong however lucky we were. Apologies to a vociferous AFC Wimbledon crowd tonight, fair play you turned out in numbers and sung your hearts out....I think someone's got your fillings cos you were well and truly robbed.. DC.... Stop taking the p!ss our of our club. Meanwhile over on AssHat they are lauding our defence! How many points would we have gained with Smith in goal? We would be bottom of the league, that's how good our defence is! Very strong words there about DC but I have to agree, it does feel like he is taking the piss in some form with his 40 odd changes in 12 or so games, narrow line ups and insistence on playing wingers on the wrong side. He has spectacularly lost the plot and is fast becoming (has already become?) a liability. If we had a few quid and a competant board full of footballing people I would give him his cards tomorrow (due to his stubbornness and inability to go back to basics) and spin the wheel of fortune. As it is we are potless and run by football's answer to the Chuckle Brothers and I dread to think who they and Widdrington would recruit to replace DC. So, for now, it feels 'better the devil we know'.
|
|
harrybuckle
Always look on the bright side
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 5,418
|
Post by harrybuckle on Oct 24, 2018 4:57:36 GMT
DC refusing after match summary on Radio Briz ...Stewart sent along and he sounded dazed and confused as to how the Wombles lost and we won. A bit like those fans who watched this shambles A classic interview.
At least by our next home match the new owners will be in place and we should have progressed in two cup competitions. Delighted we have Bonham in goal becoming a real match winner and candidate for player of the season. His contract is up next Summer there will be many Clubs after his signature for sure.
|
|
|
Post by CabbagePatchBlues on Oct 24, 2018 6:20:28 GMT
Lines is a must at home with his pacy runs through the middle. We need to get it forward quicker and create more chances for the forwards, or they start going back and wide looking for the ball and crowding up midfield. It's time to stop worrying about the opposition and take the game to them instead. Lines is a must, yes. But not for pacy runs through the middle. He has little pace and drives to the corner flag like a pro golfer. Play him as a holding CDM in a 4-3-3, keep the pace on the flanks to deliver balls to target Payne. Job's a goodun. I guess he looks pacy because he does it head up with a straight back. No direction though like you say. Usually just plays the easy ball when he stops. But runs like that do cut out the tip-tapping about in midfield that's so dire to watch. Last night we were much more direct and it paid off in the end. Olle Clarke actually made a couple of good purposeful runs through the middle last night, I'd like to see him do that more often. I thought Wimbledon deserved more than they got, but that's football. Keep playing on the front foot like this and our forwards might click into action.
|
|
|
Post by o2o2bo2ba on Oct 24, 2018 6:20:44 GMT
Awful performance, lifesaving result. Questions must be asked regarding tactical use of starting personnel. How our defence can get the basics so wrong as in not blocking crosses, non marking, ball watching, standing off attacking players, defending too deep etc.. Coaching must be diabolical as way too often we relied on the man of the season, Bonham to rescue us. Wimbledon should have been 3-0 up before we luckily scored (their keeps had a big part in that). And they missed two more gilt edged chances. I can't remember testing their keep once in open play. Going forward, we play one up front, again the only striker in all the league's that can't score. So in essence, no strikers. So many misplaced easy passes. We are claustrophobic in midfield, too narrow. Lityle natural width. No tempo. No forward movement. No imagination. No thought to our play. Side, back, hoof; or side, back and give ball away. DC says they work hard on training pitch. Is that separately? Rarely, we look dangerous attacking. If Wimbledon had been ruthless, they would have walked away with this match, make no mistake we were poor. We are so inconsistent, it's just taking the p!ss playing Nichols up front alone with the physicality and height of Wimbledon and although the result is a breath of fresh air - a very very lucky breath of fresh air - I'm afraid to say I see a manager getting basics wrong however lucky we were. Apologies to a vociferous AFC Wimbledon crowd tonight, fair play you turned out in numbers and sung your hearts out....I think someone's got your fillings cos you were well and truly robbed.. DC.... Stop taking the p!ss our of our club. Meanwhile over on AssHat they are lauding our defence! How many points would we have gained with Smith in goal? We would be bottom of the league, that's how good our defence is! Very strong words there about DC but I have to agree, it does feel like he is taking the piss in some form with his 40 odd changes in 12 or so games, narrow line ups and insistence on playing wingers on the wrong side. He has spectacularly lost the plot and is fast becoming (has already become?) a liability. If we had a few quid and a competant board full of footballing people I would give him his cards tomorrow (due to his stubbornness and inability to go back to basics) and spin the wheel of fortune. As it is we are potless and run by football's answer to the Chuckle Brothers and I dread to think who they and Widdrington would recruit to replace DC. So, for now, it feels 'better the devil we know'. Better the devil you know might very well take us down and who knows where from there? (Look at Northampton Town).. So many ridiculous changes and decisions push the boundaries of what can only be described as losing or lost the plot. Unfortunately, for all the hard work and great we've celebrated over the past few years, it can be so easily untangled and forgotten in last few months because of managers persistence of playing a truly idiotic formula of players and systems that leave us struggling every match. For instance....DC publicly admitted he got it wrong playing one recognised striker up front alone v Accy, via 20p post match interview. Now continues to do it like it's forgotten versus the land of the giants in Wimbledon, and also play the smallest non striker whom hasn't scored all season....then wonder why it hasn't/doesn't work (?) It's bad enough once or twice, but most the time? That's taking the p!ss. That's gonna get us relegated. And who knows what after..
|
|
|
Post by Gregory Stevens on Oct 24, 2018 7:44:58 GMT
Why is it always down to things like playing too narrow, too many changes. Can players not perform? Can recruitment be at fault.
It seems to me if we lose or are on a bad run, some cognitive dissonance occurs. Basically, fully believe that every game can be won with a tactical change.
Some games won’t be won with putting 3 instead of 4 or 4 instead of 3. There isn’t a secret glitch to winning games you know yet an entire club of professionals are ignorant of.
It’s hugely arrogant to rock up on a Saturday, and claim if he had done the opposite of what we attempted we surely would have won. That isn’t true, but crucially, it’s impossible to prove otherwise.
We got promoted twice on Clarke’s tactics. We don’t have the money or the squad to win every single week.
Sometimes we play the long ball - do we always set out to do that? Probably not. Are the opposition midfield dominating and hence pressuring our defence into long balls - probably. Yet the usual “why does Clarke persist lumping long balls to Nichols” gets aired. Other usual suspects are “kick it forwards”. “Press high” etc etc.
Sometimes there are valid concerns and I think DC knows what they are.
As far as I can see, a load of people said that line up would lose because of the changes and formation, and we won, and those egos need protecting.
In DC I trust, a far more qualified man to make decisions than me.
|
|
|
Post by laughinggas on Oct 24, 2018 8:49:26 GMT
Upson was awful, yet jokingly was awarded man of the match faute de mieux, I suspect and he scored. Sort of Was involved in both goals. Scored first Got a touch on the cross causing the own goal. Those two events enough given how long since we scored. He's and oddball Always looking for ball but makes mistakes and gives it away. Probably looses more tackles than he wins. Appears to have no pace. Another player, can se what he is about but in DC words, is he top ten (of league) player?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2018 8:53:19 GMT
Why is it always down to things like playing too narrow, too many changes. Can players not perform? Can recruitment be at fault. It seems to me if we lose or are on a bad run, some cognitive dissonance occurs. Basically, fully believe that every game can be won with a tactical change. Some games won’t be won with putting 3 instead of 4 or 4 instead of 3. There isn’t a secret glitch to winning games you know yet an entire club of professionals are ignorant of. It’s hugely arrogant to rock up on a Saturday, and claim if he had done the opposite of what we attempted we surely would have won. That isn’t true, but crucially, it’s impossible to prove otherwise. We got promoted twice on Clarke’s tactics. We don’t have the money or the squad to win every single week. Sometimes we play the long ball - do we always set out to do that? Probably not. Are the opposition midfield dominating and hence pressuring our defence into long balls - probably. Yet the usual “why does Clarke persist lumping long balls to Nichols” gets aired. Other usual suspects are “kick it forwards”. “Press high” etc etc. Sometimes there are valid concerns and I think DC knows what they are. As far as I can see, a load of people said that line up would lose because of the changes and formation, and we won, and those egos need protecting. In DC I trust, a far more qualified man to make decisions than me. Fair enough. But then you have to look at the consistency of performance of the whole team. I was at Burton, DC played the same tactic as last night and we lost in the last minute, our luck running out. Last night, against a very poor team, at home, he did it again, this time with Nicholls alone up front. Did their goalie have one save to make all game from open play? None, not one. In a game we had to win. Go figure.
|
|
|
Post by laughinggas on Oct 24, 2018 9:05:59 GMT
Why is it always down to things like playing too narrow, too many changes. Can players not perform? Can recruitment be at fault. It seems to me if we lose or are on a bad run, some cognitive dissonance occurs. Basically, fully believe that every game can be won with a tactical change. Some games won’t be won with putting 3 instead of 4 or 4 instead of 3. There isn’t a secret glitch to winning games you know yet an entire club of professionals are ignorant of. It’s hugely arrogant to rock up on a Saturday, and claim if he had done the opposite of what we attempted we surely would have won. That isn’t true, but crucially, it’s impossible to prove otherwise. We got promoted twice on Clarke’s tactics. We don’t have the money or the squad to win every single week. Sometimes we play the long ball - do we always set out to do that? Probably not. Are the opposition midfield dominating and hence pressuring our defence into long balls - probably. Yet the usual “why does Clarke persist lumping long balls to Nichols” gets aired. Other usual suspects are “kick it forwards”. “Press high” etc etc. Sometimes there are valid concerns and I think DC knows what they are. As far as I can see, a load of people said that line up would lose because of the changes and formation, and we won, and those egos need protecting. In DC I trust, a far more qualified man to make decisions than me. Fair enough. But then you have to look at the consistency of performance of the whole team. I was at Burton, DC played the same tactic as last night and we lost in the last minute, our luck running out. Last night, against a very poor team, at home, he did it again, this time with Nicholls alone up front. Did their goalie have one save to make all game from open play? None, not one. In a game we had to win. Go figure. Was he just trying anything to grab a win so we can build on it Or Is he our Jose Stuck in what used to work Not moving with the times Stubborn?
|
|