|
Post by Bacon on Dec 9, 2017 20:35:17 GMT
Everyone knows that if you're going for a winner and/or holding on for a win, you need three right backs on. Pretty basic stuff really.
|
|
|
Post by ricksanchez on Dec 10, 2017 10:04:29 GMT
I'd give Robinson a 7 but Trains ratings are pretty much spot on... Dominated first half with law playing well going forward. I think going in 3-1 would have been fair, but 2nd half we were dog shit and Vince & McMahon were the worst culprits. People will point to his assist but in my eyes as a defender he was shocking. There was a lot of debate about what vinces best position is during pre season but right now it's left back...in the changing rooms. Yes he rises like a salmon and scores the odd goal and he took a yellow to stop a 1 on 1 today but he is offering nothing to us at the moment. NKP had another of them games he's prone to and I can't have been the only one perplexed by the subs and tactics for the last 15. And finally I'm going all Hopwood.... Robinson is a #baller at left wing, best crosser of a ball at the club Yeah, Vince was a passanger in the game yesterday. After law faded away in the second half our midfield was basically non-existent. Hapless and hopeless. It's a worry that Vince is our captain because you get the impression that Stuart won't drop his skipper. He's a pretty limited midfielder and has to be replaced for next season, at the latest, in my view. What started out as an attacking side - that was tearing into Rochdale at times - was gradually dismantled by McCall during the second half with Poleon being withdrawn after about 15 mins of the 2nd. After that we gave away the initiative and conceded the 3rd goal around 10 mins after we replaced an attacker with a defender. After that it was pretty ugly and Rochdale were swarming all over us seemingly winning every second ball and always having a man in space. When we did manage to pick up a loose ball it had got to the stage of lumping balls up to Wyke or into space for anyone(?) to run on to. It was the pace and composure of Robinson that got us out of jail here. He's got to be a nailed on starter from now on. I thought he did well as a defender at times and was a genuine threat (more than everyone's favourite Aussie) going forward. He looks better than Chicksen to me.
|
|
|
Post by Neshead on Dec 10, 2017 11:09:55 GMT
I'd give Robinson a 7 but Trains ratings are pretty much spot on... Dominated first half with law playing well going forward. I think going in 3-1 would have been fair, but 2nd half we were dog shit and Vince & McMahon were the worst culprits. People will point to his assist but in my eyes as a defender he was shocking. There was a lot of debate about what vinces best position is during pre season but right now it's left back...in the changing rooms. Yes he rises like a salmon and scores the odd goal and he took a yellow to stop a 1 on 1 today but he is offering nothing to us at the moment. NKP had another of them games he's prone to and I can't have been the only one perplexed by the subs and tactics for the last 15. And finally I'm going all Hopwood.... Robinson is a #baller at left wing, best crosser of a ball at the club Yeah, Vince was a passanger in the game yesterday. After law faded away in the second half our midfield was basically non-existent. Hapless and hopeless. It's a worry that Vince is our captain because you get the impression that Stuart won't drop his skipper. He's a pretty limited midfielder and has to be replaced for next season, at the latest, in my view. What started out as an attacking side - that was tearing into Rochdale at times - was gradually dismantled by McCall during the second half with Poleon being withdrawn after about 15 mins of the 2nd. After that we gave away the initiative and conceded the 3rd goal around 10 mins after we replaced an attacker with a defender. After that it was pretty ugly and Rochdale were swarming all over us seemingly winning every second ball and always having a man in space. When we did manage to pick up a loose ball it had got to the stage of lumping balls up to Wyke or into space for anyone(?) to run on to. It was the pace and composure of Robinson that got us out of jail here. He's got to be a nailed on starter from now on. I thought he did well as a defender at times and was a genuine threat (more than everyone's favourite Aussie) going forward. He looks better than Chicksen to me. There's a reason why McCall doesn't like going without a three man midfield and yesterday showed why. Law played well but had to fade eventually because with only Vince at the side of him he was very exposed. One thing the formation did help with was getting the ball forward quicker, instead of Law and Reeves constantly coming too deep to receive the ball, the ball was played down the flanks quicker and led to a lot more entertaining game than usual. Second half we lost our shape quite quickly, something we have done before at home. A lot down to Vince having no positional sense. Robinson again was impressive, i don't think anyone else in the team would have scored that winner, as quick and composed as you will see. Would still like to see him played more advanced, having to run 80 metres to get involved in attacks is asking a lot. No wonder his hamstring was tightening up. In all it was fantastic entertainment, this has to be tempered somewhat in that we were playing the worst away team in the division who at times caused us no end of problems. I don't think you will see McCall go with that formation again if Reeves and Dieng are fit, it's not his cautious style.
|
|
|
Post by Lethal Jizzle on Dec 10, 2017 13:40:15 GMT
Yeah, Vince was a passanger in the game yesterday. After law faded away in the second half our midfield was basically non-existent. Hapless and hopeless. It's a worry that Vince is our captain because you get the impression that Stuart won't drop his skipper. He's a pretty limited midfielder and has to be replaced for next season, at the latest, in my view. What started out as an attacking side - that was tearing into Rochdale at times - was gradually dismantled by McCall during the second half with Poleon being withdrawn after about 15 mins of the 2nd. After that we gave away the initiative and conceded the 3rd goal around 10 mins after we replaced an attacker with a defender. After that it was pretty ugly and Rochdale were swarming all over us seemingly winning every second ball and always having a man in space. When we did manage to pick up a loose ball it had got to the stage of lumping balls up to Wyke or into space for anyone(?) to run on to. It was the pace and composure of Robinson that got us out of jail here. He's got to be a nailed on starter from now on. I thought he did well as a defender at times and was a genuine threat (more than everyone's favourite Aussie) going forward. He looks better than Chicksen to me. There's a reason why McCall doesn't like going without a three man midfield and yesterday showed why. Law played well but had to fade eventually because with only Vince at the side of him he was very exposed. One thing the formation did help with was getting the ball forward quicker, instead of Law and Reeves constantly coming too deep to receive the ball, the ball was played down the flanks quicker and led to a lot more entertaining game than usual. Second half we lost our shape quite quickly, something we have done before at home. A lot down to Vince having no positional sense. Robinson again was impressive, i don't think anyone else in the team would have scored that winner, as quick and composed as you will see. Would still like to see him played more advanced, having to run 80 metres to get involved in attacks is asking a lot. No wonder his hamstring was tightening up. In all it was fantastic entertainment, this has to be tempered somewhat in that we were playing the worst away team in the division who at times caused us no end of problems. I don't think you will see McCall go with that formation again if Reeves and Dieng are fit, it's not his cautious style. to me that says Vincelot isn't good enough not that the formation was wrong. Had that been Dieng yesterday I don't think they would have got through so easily. Apart from heading at set pieces Vince offers nothing in midfield and is much better at cb. A horrible cunt of a cm is top priority in January for me
|
|
|
Post by Neshead on Dec 10, 2017 13:54:20 GMT
There's a reason why McCall doesn't like going without a three man midfield and yesterday showed why. Law played well but had to fade eventually because with only Vince at the side of him he was very exposed. One thing the formation did help with was getting the ball forward quicker, instead of Law and Reeves constantly coming too deep to receive the ball, the ball was played down the flanks quicker and led to a lot more entertaining game than usual. Second half we lost our shape quite quickly, something we have done before at home. A lot down to Vince having no positional sense. Robinson again was impressive, i don't think anyone else in the team would have scored that winner, as quick and composed as you will see. Would still like to see him played more advanced, having to run 80 metres to get involved in attacks is asking a lot. No wonder his hamstring was tightening up. In all it was fantastic entertainment, this has to be tempered somewhat in that we were playing the worst away team in the division who at times caused us no end of problems. I don't think you will see McCall go with that formation again if Reeves and Dieng are fit, it's not his cautious style. to me that says Vincelot isn't good enough not that the formation was wrong. Had that been Dieng yesterday I don't think they would have got through so easily. Apart from heading at set pieces Vince offers nothing in midfield and is much better at cb. A horrible cunt of a cm is top priority in January for me Fair point, Vince was ball chasing a lot yesterday, not so good when you ain't that quick. Nobody plays 4-4-2 with two wingers anymore though, it just leaves you far too open. It did make the game a very good watch yesterday because of it, nowt worse than watching a game stifled by a packed midfield. But against good sides they will tear you apart down the middle.
|
|
|
Post by Hobhead on Dec 10, 2017 14:10:51 GMT
to me that says Vincelot isn't good enough not that the formation was wrong. Had that been Dieng yesterday I don't think they would have got through so easily. Apart from heading at set pieces Vince offers nothing in midfield and is much better at cb. A horrible cunt of a cm is top priority in January for me Fair point, Vince was ball chasing a lot yesterday, not so good when you ain't that quick. Nobody plays 4-4-2 with two wingers anymore though, it just leaves you far too open. It did make the game a very good watch yesterday because of it, nowt worse than watching a game stifled by a packed midfield. But against good sides they will tear you apart down the middle. I don't agree with this and I'm not sure where this idea comes from. Plenty of teams play with two wingers and have more often than not in recent history. Whether you get overrun in midfield or not depends on the opposition and your personnel more than it does the execution of the formation. We have pretty much entirely defensive central midfielders in Vincelot, Dieng, Reeves etc. so it makes it imperative that we have outlets on the wings. In my opinion, we have the personnel to make the classic, two genuine wingers version of 4-4-2 work. Not only would it give us much needed attacking impetus but it would allow our centre mids to play their more natural game by having them sit in more. As it is we're stuck in some weird limbo where we're afraid of being overrun but playing with only one attacking outlet while others are trying to go against their instincts by doing too much as a result of us being so flat in midfield. With two genuine wingers and one attacking centre midfielder I could see the concern at being overrun but with our central options I actually think we need to do it. I'd have Reeves/Vincelot/Dieng concern themselves more with the defensive side of their role and play it short and easy to two wingers whose job it is to feed Wyke. Nice and simple lower league stuff. Sorted. I'm a genius.
|
|
|
Post by Lofty on Dec 10, 2017 14:26:01 GMT
Fair point, Vince was ball chasing a lot yesterday, not so good when you ain't that quick. Nobody plays 4-4-2 with two wingers anymore though, it just leaves you far too open. It did make the game a very good watch yesterday because of it, nowt worse than watching a game stifled by a packed midfield. But against good sides they will tear you apart down the middle. I don't agree with this and I'm not sure where this idea comes from. Plenty of teams play with two wingers and have more often than not in recent history. Whether you get overrun in midfield or not depends on the opposition and your personnel more than it does the execution of the formation. We have pretty much entirely defensive central midfielders in Vincelot, Dieng, Reeves etc. so it makes it imperative that we have outlets on the wings. In my opinion, we have the personnel to make the classic, two genuine wingers version of 4-4-2 work. Not only would it give us much needed attacking impetus but it would allow our centre mids to play their more natural game by having them sit in more. As it is we're stuck in some weird limbo where we're afraid of being overrun but playing with only one attacking outlet while others are trying to go against their instincts by doing too much as a result of us being so flat in midfield. With two genuine wingers and one attacking centre midfielder I could see the concern at being overrun but with our central options I actually think we need to do it. I'd have Reeves/Vincelot/Dieng concern themselves more with the defensive side of their role and play it short and easy to two wingers whose job it is to feed Wyke. Nice and simple lower league stuff. Sorted. I'm a genius. The most exciting team to watch years gone by were Man Utd. Beckham - Keane - Scholes - Giggs Yorke - Cole 4 4 fucking 2 is the answer.
|
|
|
Post by bantam147 on Dec 10, 2017 14:44:45 GMT
I've seen the goals on TV and hereby drop my earlier rating for sattelmaeir even further. Shite for the third goal and I think he should've stopped their second too. It's right down the middle of the goal. We've fannied about with shite keepers for way too long.
And their first; I thought he was offside at the time and he looks it on the TV clip too
|
|
|
Post by bantam147 on Dec 10, 2017 14:48:46 GMT
I don't agree with this and I'm not sure where this idea comes from. Plenty of teams play with two wingers and have more often than not in recent history. Whether you get overrun in midfield or not depends on the opposition and your personnel more than it does the execution of the formation. We have pretty much entirely defensive central midfielders in Vincelot, Dieng, Reeves etc. so it makes it imperative that we have outlets on the wings. In my opinion, we have the personnel to make the classic, two genuine wingers version of 4-4-2 work. Not only would it give us much needed attacking impetus but it would allow our centre mids to play their more natural game by having them sit in more. As it is we're stuck in some weird limbo where we're afraid of being overrun but playing with only one attacking outlet while others are trying to go against their instincts by doing too much as a result of us being so flat in midfield. With two genuine wingers and one attacking centre midfielder I could see the concern at being overrun but with our central options I actually think we need to do it. I'd have Reeves/Vincelot/Dieng concern themselves more with the defensive side of their role and play it short and easy to two wingers whose job it is to feed Wyke. Nice and simple lower league stuff. Sorted. I'm a genius. The most exciting team to watch years gone by were Man Utd. Beckham - Keane - Scholes - Giggs Yorke - Cole 4 4 fucking 2 is the answer. Best midfield 4 I've ever seen. For the vast majority f our home games we should have Law centrally with Vincelot. Gillead as an orthodox winger and Taylor playing with a more free role from the left. Then sign a proper forward to partner Wyke. A proper keeper. And a right sided centre back who can compete with opposition target men. Our issues yesterday were much more down to individual mistakes, switching off defensively and having a shite keeper than being 'overrun in midfield'
|
|
|
Post by Hoochy on Dec 10, 2017 15:48:43 GMT
Should play 3-5-2.
Vince, NKP and Killa back 3.
Robinson and set piece man wing backs.
Reeves and Law centre mid.
Cokehead/McCarten/Gillied as number 10 or a free role.
Wyke plus a partner up top.
|
|
|
Post by Neshead on Dec 10, 2017 16:21:20 GMT
Fair point, Vince was ball chasing a lot yesterday, not so good when you ain't that quick. Nobody plays 4-4-2 with two wingers anymore though, it just leaves you far too open. It did make the game a very good watch yesterday because of it, nowt worse than watching a game stifled by a packed midfield. But against good sides they will tear you apart down the middle. I don't agree with this and I'm not sure where this idea comes from. Plenty of teams play with two wingers and have more often than not in recent history. Whether you get overrun in midfield or not depends on the opposition and your personnel more than it does the execution of the formation. We have pretty much entirely defensive central midfielders in Vincelot, Dieng, Reeves etc. so it makes it imperative that we have outlets on the wings. In my opinion, we have the personnel to make the classic, two genuine wingers version of 4-4-2 work. Not only would it give us much needed attacking impetus but it would allow our centre mids to play their more natural game by having them sit in more. As it is we're stuck in some weird limbo where we're afraid of being overrun but playing with only one attacking outlet while others are trying to go against their instincts by doing too much as a result of us being so flat in midfield. With two genuine wingers and one attacking centre midfielder I could see the concern at being overrun but with our central options I actually think we need to do it. I'd have Reeves/Vincelot/Dieng concern themselves more with the defensive side of their role and play it short and easy to two wingers whose job it is to feed Wyke. Nice and simple lower league stuff. Sorted. I'm a genius. I'm right and you're all a bunch of cunts.
|
|
|
Post by Ricc on Dec 11, 2017 9:41:01 GMT
Jesus wept. what a game.
I said at 3-2, that if we don't win this questions would have to be asked - and they would have been. the defence was a shambles, Killa aside. you can't defend like that if you expect to get promoted. midfield was too exposed going 442 with 2 out and out wide men, as McCall has continually said all season - but with Reeves and Dieng out I don't suppose we had much choice. it made for an entertaining, if not infuriating game though.
even I wondered what the fuck he was playing at bringing Thompson on for a midfielder when we'd just conceded an equaliser but then when Robinson scored I realised it was a genius move, tactically brilliant you could say. ;-)
Wyke was absolutely superb. he got battered and bruised by their defenders all game and still bossed them. brilliant. Law was excellent first half, faded, but it's a tough gig playing as one of two central midfielders in a side as open as we set up. Taylor good again, although the amount of times he dribbled across the face of the penalty box looking for room to shoot I guess and then lost the ball was a bit annoying.
|
|
|
Post by Train (F-2547) on Dec 11, 2017 10:40:28 GMT
We did not play with two out and out wide men did we? we had vince and law in CM with taylor ahead of them and gillead on the right.
|
|
|
Post by Lethal Jizzle on Dec 11, 2017 11:17:56 GMT
We did not play with two out and out wide men did we? we had vince and law in CM with taylor ahead of them and gillead on the right. at 2-1 he did push Poleon to the left wing but that didn't work. Apart from last 15 mins and what I've just said I saw no change in formation from any game so far. It was just the entire defence and Vince playing shite
|
|
|
Post by bantam147 on Dec 11, 2017 16:20:43 GMT
By the way, is there a worse fucking song from any set of fans than
Daaaaaaaaaaaale Daaaaaaaaaale Daaaaaaaaale Daaaaaale Daale
|
|
|
Post by ricksanchez on Dec 11, 2017 17:12:50 GMT
I've seen the goals on TV and hereby drop my earlier rating for sattelmaeir even further. Shite for the third goal and I think he should've stopped their second too. It's right down the middle of the goal. We've fannied about with shite keepers for way too long. And their first; I thought he was offside at the time and he looks it on the TV clip too Yeah, Rouven's had a bit of a 'mare in the end when you watch it back.
|
|
|
Post by Dick on Dec 11, 2017 17:49:51 GMT
By the way, is there a worse fucking song from any set of fans than Daaaaaaaaaaaale Daaaaaaaaaale Daaaaaaaaale Daaaaaale Daale Miiiiiiiilllllllllll... It sounds like a bunch of mentally ill just making a made up sound in unison.
|
|
|
Post by Hoochy on Dec 11, 2017 18:06:31 GMT
By the way, is there a worse fucking song from any set of fans than Daaaaaaaaaaaale Daaaaaaaaaale Daaaaaaaaale Daaaaaale Daale Miiiiiiiilllllllllll... It sounds like a bunch of mentally ill just making a made up sound in unison. I like that Millwall one. I like Millwall fans in general. Cracking trolls. Behave like animals then apply for fans of the year and win it! Then invade the hallowed Wembley turf and incite hatred and violence. A cracking bunch of lads.
|
|
|
Post by Lofty on Dec 11, 2017 18:40:50 GMT
Miiiiiiiilllllllllll... It sounds like a bunch of mentally ill just making a made up sound in unison. I like that Millwall one. I like Millwall fans in general. Cracking trolls. Behave like animals then apply for fans of the year and win it! Then invade the hallowed Wembley turf and incite hatred and violence. A cracking bunch of lads. They're so unique in today's happy clappy family football climate I can't help but like em. Pitch invading at Wembley FFS 😁 And getting called a bunch of cunts by their teams captain just sums em up. Weird, but loveable, set of mongs.
|
|
|
Post by Dick on Dec 11, 2017 18:49:05 GMT
Miiiiiiiilllllllllll... It sounds like a bunch of mentally ill just making a made up sound in unison. I like that Millwall one. I like Millwall fans in general. Cracking trolls. Behave like animals then apply for fans of the year and win it! Then invade the hallowed Wembley turf and incite hatred and violence. A cracking bunch of lads. Indeed. They sound like a bunch of mongs but I've always loved they way they just don't give a shit. No matter how bad they are, no matter what they do they always get away with it. Opposing fans whine and moan and cry about them, they're pandered to by all the governing bodies and they always end up having the last laugh right in their faces. And you can bet they don't have any shite like the #lionsfamily; I'd love other fans and teams to dread coming to VP like they do the Den. Still sound like they lick windows though.
|
|