- This topic has 24 replies, 18 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 1 month ago by
.
-
Posts
-
First 15 minutes then after that the same old story. Lost our shape once we lost kvist & best. But personally, i think our days are numbered now.
I seriously considered leaving at half time. Been going since 73 and never felt like that. Utter dog shite once again.
First 15 minutes then after that the same old story. Lost our shape once we lost kvist & best. But personally, i think our days are numbered now.Best? I presume you mean Clarke.
But there was no need to lose our shape at all, as we had like for like swaps, and either of the subs could have started instead of the ones who did.
It’s not as though we had to suddenly play a teenager goalkeeper in then centre of midfield. The injuries were unfortunate, but they shouldn’t really have made a difference at that point – possibly just later as we ran out of sub options.
McClean at fault for their first, needlessly giving the ball away when we had most of the team pushing right upfield! Ali didn’t exactly cover himself in glory mind getting beat like that! I was queuing at the bar when they got their second but was left wondering how a guy of about 4’6″ got up to head it in? Their 3rd, I was well away and over the bridge! If I was to sum up tonight’s performance in one word it would be ‘Gutless’ !
When u have the away side who go 2 nil up and not far from us in the league but they still go forward and don’t try to defend their lead it just says a lot for our goal threat which is zero
First 15 minutes then after that the same old story. Lost our shape once we lost kvist & best. But personally, i think our days are numbered now.
Best? I presume you mean Clarke.
But there was no need to lose our shape at all, as we had like for like swaps, and either of the subs could have started instead of the ones who did.
It’s not as though we had to suddenly play a teenager goalkeeper in then centre of midfield. The injuries were unfortunate, but they shouldn’t really have made a difference at that point – possibly just later as we ran out of sub options.[/quote]
I don’t agree that the forced changes didn’t change the course of tonight’s game. Fortune and Clarke were clearly winning the battle with the Charlton central defensive pairing and that allowed us to win more second balls. Replacing Clarke with an “on your shoulder” striker meant that we lost the vital hold up play and gave them more of the ball.
The other problem we had was that Kvist was replaced by a player who’s confidence is rock bottom. Having gifted a goal in his last home game he was lucky not to give them a gift within minutes of coming on and eventually did gift um one just before half time, although to be fair it still wanted finishing.Personally I think that but for the injuries, we may have seen a different score line. Those forced changes did affect the shape of our team although I totally agree, they shouldn’t have. :(
From Matlock to ManU
What a journey!First 15 minutes then after that the same old story. Lost our shape once we lost kvist & best. But personally, i think our days are numbered now.
Best? I presume you mean Clarke.
But there was no need to lose our shape at all, as we had like for like swaps, and either of the subs could have started instead of the ones who did.
It’s not as though we had to suddenly play a teenager goalkeeper in then centre of midfield. The injuries were unfortunate, but they shouldn’t really have made a difference at that point – possibly just later as we ran out of sub options.[/quote]
I don’t agree that the forced changes didn’t change the course of tonight’s game. Fortune and Clarke were clearly winning the battle with the Charlton central defensive pairing and that allowed us to win more second balls. Replacing Clarke with an “on your shoulder” striker meant that we lost the vital hold up play and gave them more of the ball.
The other problem we had was that Kvist was replaced by a player who’s confidence is rock bottom. Having gifted a goal in his last home game he was lucky not to give them a gift within minutes of coming on and eventually did gift um one just before half time, although to be fair it still wanted finishing.Personally I think that but for the injuries, we may have seen a different score line. Those forced changes did affect the shape of our team although I totally agree, they shouldn’t have. :([/quote]
Your positivity knows no bounds! Are you trying to balance the books? ;)
I’m just saying it as I see it Fil.The buzz around the ground for the first 20 mins was great and balls whizzed into the box from both wings.
The Kvist injury and more so the Clarke injury, resulted in the atmosphere going flat and with it our strangle hold on the game. Anyone with half a football brain could see that. :huh:
From Matlock to ManU
What a journey!John, how many times this season have you witnessed a gutsy albeit no clear chance of a goal in the first 10- 15 mins display only to see us get overrun and eventually capitulate! We get lulled into a false sense of security in practically every single home game with that initial burst! A football match is played over 90 mins !
For the first 15 minutes we managed to build pressure, didn’t really create a killer opportunity, but we worked hard, and looked like a team with fight. If that had continued who knows how the game would have progressed. But we suddenly collapse, a single attack, and a thumping strike, and then the game is over, we just return to tripe (couldn’t resist)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
