Viking Warrior Posted 6 October, 2009 Posted 6 October, 2009 My second home game in a couple of days, and 100% record. We started well but suddenly we went to sleep. lost our shape and direction Playing with 5 midfielders is not the way to play. we become to stagnant playing defensively and we are easy to be picked off with the big hoof over the midfiled set up. We need to boss the whole game from the first minute. be first to the ball first to pass and above all else keep the ball on the ground and possession this tactic of keeping the ball up in the air is not helping our smaller lads get control of it. Still a wins a win and for that reason I am pleased. I thought the referee was awful seem to blow for the most lightest of touches on a torquay play but gave very little to lambert wo was constantly being held or pushed by his various markers.
stevegrant Posted 6 October, 2009 Posted 6 October, 2009 Christ, that was painful viewing. I think the main thing that Pardew will probably have learned from tonight is that some of the fringe players aren't good enough. Also, lumping the ball to Lambert is a ridiculous tactic that just doesn't work. Surely we've learned that by now? ("apparently not" is the obvious answer) While we were terrible from about the 10th minute onwards, the ref was equally appalling. Some of the decisions he gave were just bizarre in the extreme, and then showed complete inconsistency by not giving us a free-kick for identical "fouls". Made a change to see five clinical penalty takers, though - why couldn't that have been the case at Pride Park?
krissyboy31 Posted 6 October, 2009 Posted 6 October, 2009 Has made some bad decisions, not sure it is a form issue tbf Don't think he's played anywhere near as well this season. Maybe it's because he was our best player by such a distance last season that mediocre performances stick out.
saint_stevo Posted 6 October, 2009 Posted 6 October, 2009 I agree the ref was a bit of a pedantic idiot and gave some odd decisions. Quality penalties. Officially, does this count as a draw or win?
Saint_Mabes Posted 6 October, 2009 Posted 6 October, 2009 Very weird game - one of those ones where at 2-0 I prayed that we'd get a draw, and have a replay. Had no idea it would go to penalties! I don't like being negative and have been on a high since and including Bristol Rovers, but that was a shocking performance. The only positive in my eyes was a very accomplished run of penalties - was pleasantly suprised by that. For large parts of the game we abandoned our neat on the floor passing and just played head/chest tennis. I think it highlighted the massive importance of lallana, mellis and possibly schniederlin - as someone said the 'tidy' players. Perry and Thomas had a knigtmare against their massive No. 41 - I would have liked to have seen Pardew bring Jaidi on simply to nulify him, as the amount of headers from their long throw he won was scary, he needed a battering to shake him up. Also for some reason I thought Wotton scored one of the close tap ins, dunno how I got that wrong - well done Papa tho. Was hoping Gillet would rekindle my faith in him - he didn't. The trialist had a couple of good flashes but looked poor more often. At least we made it through and can look on and forget about it! COYR
Saint_Mabes Posted 6 October, 2009 Posted 6 October, 2009 Just realised Jaidi wasn't on the bench, got to the stand late! Maybe he could have subbed Lancashire on?????!!
Wes Tender Posted 6 October, 2009 Posted 6 October, 2009 In reality, we were lucky to have won. The game was us back to our usual dreadful play of last season and the season before. Misplaced passing, lack of commitment, poor defending and I was half expecting the loss of the penalty shoot-out to complete the set. Although Pardew had stated that it was possible to win this trophy, we won't if we play like that again. Pardew also said that we would put out a strong team too, but in reality, the defence was weak without Jaidi and Trotman, the midfield was lacking in creativity and accuracy without Lallana, Schneiderlin or Mellis and the attack lacked bite with Lambert playing up front alone. It seemed to be the wrong formation for such a match against a team like Torquay at home. We lacked balls. To give Pardew credit, at least having got it wrong for the first half, he took the bull by the horns, probably having stripped the paint of the walls at half time and changed things around. We looked much more lively in the second half, playing a much more familiar 4-4-2 and brought things back level, but should have had the ability to have won it without the lottery of the penalties. I'm hoping that having scraped through by our fingertips, the fact that we had the spirit to win at the end, will still have the power to increase our confidence and help us on Friday. At least we have the knowledge that we had several key players absent. I think that the new boy didn't do too badly when you consider that he hadn't had the time to get to know his team mates and their style of play. He's very raw, but I think that there is some potential with growing understanding and coaching. Our other newish recruit Waigo, is fast becoming a talisman for the team. He's off to a flying start in the scoring stakes, even though sometimes it beggars belief how he manages it, but the results speak for themselves. Despite the narrowness in the margin for victory, nevertheless a very entertaining evening's football.
niceandfriendly Posted 6 October, 2009 Posted 6 October, 2009 Officially, does this count as a draw or win? You must know? We didn't draw did we, we're through. We won. Not sure about this question. As for the game, pretty dire overall. Not a good performance but it turned out an entertaining evening. First half we were playing two very wide men yet still lofting the ball up to Lambert. Rubbish tactics. Why haven't we learnt that the long ball to Lambert does not work? Really worrying. Perry and Thomas at the back looked very weak and every time Torquay got near our box they looked like they could score, I'm surprised Pardew changed both our centre backs. Our distribution from the defence was the worst aspect of their performance though - it was non existant. With Trotman and Jaidi you know their passes and clearances will reach a red and white shirt, but with Thomas and Perry it was a case of "close your eyes, hoof, and hope for the best". Better in the second half, unfortunately Gillett wasn't good tonight - and I'm a big fan of his. Shame because tonight was a good chance for him to shine. Waigo was up for it, Lambert held the ball well but we still played it long too often. The good thing was that wasn't our first team. If it was we'd have reason to be concerned, but even so, you'd still expect that team to easily beat Torquay really. Oh well, a win is a win. Oh and how good were our penalties? I absolutely expected us to lose the shoot out, but our pens were fantastic. Bevan didn't stand a chance! Have we been practicing?
saint_stevo Posted 6 October, 2009 Posted 6 October, 2009 You must know? We didn't draw did we, we're through. We won. Not sure about this question. As for the game, pretty dire overall. Not a good performance but it turned out an entertaining evening. First half we were playing two very wide men yet still lofting the ball up to Lambert. Rubbish tactics. Why haven't we learnt that the long ball to Lambert does not work? Really worrying. Perry and Thomas at the back looked very weak and every time Torquay got near our box they looked like they could score, I'm surprised Pardew changed both our centre backs. Our distribution from the defence was the worst aspect of their performance though - it was non existant. With Trotman and Jaidi you know their passes and clearances will reach a red and white shirt, but with Thomas and Perry it was a case of "close your eyes, hoof, and hope for the best". Better in the second half, unfortunately Gillett wasn't good tonight - and I'm a big fan of his. Shame because tonight was a good chance for him to shine. Waigo was up for it, Lambert held the ball well but we still played it long too often. The good thing was that wasn't our first team. If it was we'd have reason to be concerned, but even so, you'd still expect that team to easily beat Torquay really. Oh well, a win is a win. Oh and how good were our penalties? I absolutely expected us to lose the shoot out, but our pens were fantastic. Bevan didn't stand a chance! Have we been practicing? Well we drew after 90mins. So for the prediction league it goes down as a?
niceandfriendly Posted 6 October, 2009 Posted 6 October, 2009 Well we drew after 90mins. So for the prediction league it goes down as a? Win. Surely?
Roger Posted 6 October, 2009 Posted 6 October, 2009 Whatever anyone says about waigo he has scored goals so far and even if they are tap ins they all count. Its no coincidence that we have looked a lot better going forward since bristol rovers, which was the first game waigo started. The opposition dont know what he is going to do which helps us a lot and he seems to find space in the box. He isnt a english fans type of player so he will always be the guy the fans pick on a bit more, cos he can look awkward but if you look deeper into it, it gives us a vital dimension that we really needed. I think he can be a hero here. Also, his workrate and passion cannot be questioned.
niceandfriendly Posted 6 October, 2009 Posted 6 October, 2009 (edited) a 2-2 win? Yep, because we won the shoot out. The rules of the competition state that if the scores are level after 90 minutes then the result will be decided by penalty shoot out, which we won. We won the game. I don't even know what you're talking about really as I've no idea we have a prediction league here, but I do know that tonights result was not a draw. We won the game so be happy if that's what you predicted. Edited 6 October, 2009 by niceandfriendly
SaintDonkey Posted 6 October, 2009 Posted 6 October, 2009 Having seen Saga's contribution after he came on I can understand why Pardew started with just Lambert up front. Apart from him we don't have another striker worth the name (Papa shows the instinct as 3 bundled goals in 2 games has shown but I can see why Pards likes him down the wing). I thought Antonio looked good once he got his feet and it's a shame being 2 -0 down meant he had to be subbed. Much wringing of hands but we were desparately unlucky with the first goal (a rare Kelvin mistake? will have to wait to see the highlights before apportioning blame) we were totally in control until then and I think it would have been a totally different game if that had not gone in.
bungle Posted 6 October, 2009 Posted 6 October, 2009 Saw the whole game, but had to leave before penalties. It showed that we were missing our three best footballers: Mellis, Lallana and Schneiderlin. The midfield trio in the first half were all far too similar, and I think Gillett got caught out in the numbers game, asked to play an unfamiliar role ahead of other midfielders. Deeply concerned by Chris Perry, who looked awful all night. Thomas not great, but first game back after injury so will let him off a bit. I like 4-5-1, it is clearly the superior formation in football, and it is only thicko Brits that hark on about 4-4-2 all the time, but the balance needs to be right in the middle of the park, and that was what was lacking tonight. Pardew will have learnt a bit more about some fringe players, however, which can only help in the long run.
Saint Bones Posted 6 October, 2009 Posted 6 October, 2009 agree with the sentiments - "phew, but we are through" Can anyone explain the first goal. reading the match report makes it sound like a long throw over KD's head and straight into the net ( Which I thought needed a touch ??? ) Regardless - Bring on the weekend and hopfeully some more points on the table.
JibMcdo Posted 7 October, 2009 Posted 7 October, 2009 Southampton are my 2nd team but I've got Yellow blood, went to tonight's game and thought you lot were very, very poor. This "one way traffic" stuff just isn't true and we matched you throughout the game and finished stronger, missing two glorious chances from a corner and a one-on-one. We played 4-3-3 in the first half to counter-act your 3 in the centre but also give us a chance to take the game to you. It turned out that we couldn't quite be as attacking as we wanted but kept it very solid and deserved to go in at half-time level. It turns out we went in 2-0 up. Our number 23 (Charnock) attempted to mark Lambert out of the game (and did very well) and then when you played 3 holding midfielders in the centre, you had no outlet except Waigo, who was ineffective. Second half from 45 to 70 minutes, our manager got scared, went 5-4-1 and invited way too many crosses and long balls into our box where 2 scrappy, scrappy goals came from. We then brought on two wingers and got back into the game when we had the two chances to win it. We'll take great heart from the team's performance and Tyrone Thompson's performance (the small, black guy in the middle who won the penalty) who isn't normally a regular and was the best player on the pitch. Tim Sills (number 8, then 41) had the beating of both centre halves in the air and it was good to see Nicky Wroe try his attempted goal from the halfway line which he tries once every game Now putting my Saints hat back on for a minute, Waigo definitely didn't deserve a 10 for his second half performance - he was ok that was it. Joseph Mills was on par with Simon Gillett and Thomas and Perry certainly didn't help the cause by losing arial battles against Sills constantly. Davis was dodgy and at fault for both goals and Hammond and Wotton did nothing. James was the only player who looked like he could deliver a ball and that wasn't a consistent delivery by all means. I haven't seen Saints before today but I can imagine Lallana being a hugely influential player in the team and whoever posted for Lallana to be dropped because he causes a problem on where to play, shame on you! Seeing the team without him must worry you?
SaintBobby Posted 7 October, 2009 Posted 7 October, 2009 Just got back to London after the game. Truly abysmal performance, but am obviously lifted by having got through to the next round (I actually really care about this competition and think we can win it). My missus will testify that I was considerably more foul-mouthed at this match than I have ever been before, this was because: (a) we were playing worse than a pub team from minute 20 to minute 45 and (b) the Kingsland North was so populated with unaccompanied chavvy 13-15 year olds, at the very bottom of the food chain, that I lost all sense of social responsibility. I thought Waigo was better than okay - but am surprised that he has won MotM so decisively. I voted for Lambert who I thought was 100% committed, very brave and utterly tireless. But I'm worried we're giving him too much of a thankless task. The problem is that lumping the ball up to Rickie DOES work (sort of). He challenges for everything and gets the ball down from his chest to his feet well - although inevitably with his back to goal. But we aren't getting the best out of him if we expect too much of him. I'm leaning towards Lallana being our second centre forward. Particular low points for me today were the central defence and central midfield - both appalling. And our (complete lack of) movement off the ball was pathetic. The penalties were quite superb though.
SFKA South Woodford Posted 7 October, 2009 Posted 7 October, 2009 Saw the whole game, but had to leave before penalties. It showed that we were missing our three best footballers: Mellis, Lallana and Schneiderlin. The midfield trio in the first half were all far too similar, and I think Gillett got caught out in the numbers game, asked to play an unfamiliar role ahead of other midfielders. Deeply concerned by Chris Perry, who looked awful all night. Thomas not great, but first game back after injury so will let him off a bit. I like 4-5-1, it is clearly the superior formation in football, and it is only thicko Brits that hark on about 4-4-2 all the time, but the balance needs to be right in the middle of the park, and that was what was lacking tonight. Pardew will have learnt a bit more about some fringe players, however, which can only help in the long run. Why is 4-5-1 such a superior formation Bungle? In our case it means that our deadliest striker is constantly playing with two defenders on him and his back to goal, which are both hardly conducive to him finding the net as much as we need him to.
chrisobee Posted 7 October, 2009 Posted 7 October, 2009 Win. Surely? Unfortunately I'd say definitely a 2-2 draw even though I predicted a win. I doubt anyone predicted 7-5 TBH !
shurlock Posted 7 October, 2009 Posted 7 October, 2009 Why is 4-5-1 such a superior formation Bungle? In our case it means that our deadliest striker is constantly playing with two defenders on him and his back to goal, which are both hardly conducive to him finding the net as much as we need him to. Two reasons -one negative, one positive - perhaps we don't have the personnel to play straight-forward 4-4-2. In particular, we don't have a decent striker to play alongside Lambert. Saga's faded and Patterson's not ready. On the other hand, 4-5-1 gives us an element of unpredictability that 4-4-2 cannot. With players floating in the hole and others breaking from midfield, picking up players is a nightmare for defenders which in fact creates more rather than less space for our centre-forward. Of course it requires the right personnel - a holding player, a fulclum around which play can be developed (which we lacked last year under JP) and willing and able runners. In Lambert we have a football league Mark Hughes - a physical presence with superb control, increasingly agile (hence all the references to work on his fitness) and a scorer of great volleys. In Lallana, Papa, Mellis and to an extent Hammond we have the runners. Many of these players would not thrive under a more rigid system - after all is Lallana a LM or RM or centre-forward; is Papa better on the right wing or down the middle? With 4-5-1, we don't have to answer these questions in any final way. It's flexible enough to let us sample the best of all worlds. That's the theory at least. The problem yesterday is that while we had the fulclum, we had too many holding players and not enough runners. To all his detractors, yesterday also showed how increasingly indispensible Lallana is to the team.
alpine_saint Posted 7 October, 2009 Posted 7 October, 2009 Made a change to see five clinical penalty takers, though - why couldn't that have been the case at Pride Park? Two words : George Burley Did we really play 4-5-1 against Torquay United ? FFS. At least a win continues the momentum. The team could have gotten really unstuck confidence-wise if they had lost this. But Torquay United, FFS, hardly what I'd call a banana-skin team..... Pardew will realise from this that : 1. His tactics utterly ming at times 2. He might have a good first 11, but he has zero depth to cover for injury or suspension.
NickG Posted 7 October, 2009 Posted 7 October, 2009 strange game. It was so easy to start with it was untrue, constant possession and corners - then let in two very soft goals. The issue about formation is more about personnel in my mind. Gillett I like, but he is not the right type of player to partner Hammond - too similar and not as good. We were without Schneiderlin, Lallana and Mellis - our creative midfielders and it showed when we were trying to break down a team who were rarely leaving their own half.
JustMike Posted 7 October, 2009 Posted 7 October, 2009 Two words : George Burley Did we really play 4-5-1 against Torquay United ? FFS. At least a win continues the momentum. The team could have gotten really unstuck confidence-wise if they had lost this. But Torquay United, FFS, hardly what I'd call a banana-skin team..... Pardew will realise from this that : 1. His tactics utterly ming at times 2. He might have a good first 11, but he has zero depth to cover for injury or suspension. think he knows point 2. as for point 1, the team he put out should have won, they just didnt appear up to it.
St.Thomas7 Posted 7 October, 2009 Posted 7 October, 2009 In case anyone is wondering I just woke up to see the highlights on SSN. All the goals plus their missed pen and Wotton's winner. I'd imagine this means they'll be up on the sky sports website by tomoro. HTH
saint_bert Posted 7 October, 2009 Posted 7 October, 2009 As bad as the performance sounded lets remember it was a cup match. The essence being the only important thing is the result. We won and we move on to the next game!
Fitzhugh Fella Posted 7 October, 2009 Posted 7 October, 2009 Southampton are my 2nd team but I've got Yellow blood, went to tonight's game and thought you lot were very, very poor. This "one way traffic" stuff just isn't true and we matched you throughout the game and finished stronger, missing two glorious chances from a corner and a one-on-one. We played 4-3-3 in the first half to counter-act your 3 in the centre but also give us a chance to take the game to you. It turned out that we couldn't quite be as attacking as we wanted but kept it very solid and deserved to go in at half-time level. It turns out we went in 2-0 up. Our number 23 (Charnock) attempted to mark Lambert out of the game (and did very well) and then when you played 3 holding midfielders in the centre, you had no outlet except Waigo, who was ineffective. Second half from 45 to 70 minutes, our manager got scared, went 5-4-1 and invited way too many crosses and long balls into our box where 2 scrappy, scrappy goals came from. We then brought on two wingers and got back into the game when we had the two chances to win it. We'll take great heart from the team's performance and Tyrone Thompson's performance (the small, black guy in the middle who won the penalty) who isn't normally a regular and was the best player on the pitch. Tim Sills (number 8, then 41) had the beating of both centre halves in the air and it was good to see Nicky Wroe try his attempted goal from the halfway line which he tries once every game Now putting my Saints hat back on for a minute, Waigo definitely didn't deserve a 10 for his second half performance - he was ok that was it. Joseph Mills was on par with Simon Gillett and Thomas and Perry certainly didn't help the cause by losing arial battles against Sills constantly. Davis was dodgy and at fault for both goals and Hammond and Wotton did nothing. James was the only player who looked like he could deliver a ball and that wasn't a consistent delivery by all means. I haven't seen Saints before today but I can imagine Lallana being a hugely influential player in the team and whoever posted for Lallana to be dropped because he causes a problem on where to play, shame on you! Seeing the team without him must worry you? It is refreshing to get an "outsider's" view. Thanks. Your report back is of concern as it seems we struggle to throw off old habits which means AP has much to do.
dubai_phil Posted 7 October, 2009 Posted 7 October, 2009 So, what does this all tell us. Think that for many of us who have read watched and listened it should be pretty obvious, hopefully now this result and performance will focus the minds of the budget holders as well... KD played and nearly got badly hurt - because the covering goal-keeping reserves aren't good enough... If Bart?Forecast can't get a game in the JPT v Torquay time for a shake up Thomas may be a cover for one of Jaidi OR Trottman, but if we lose both, Thomas & Perry don't sound the answer and Lancashire couldn't get on t he pitch - tells us again we need CB cover in Jan Wotton AND Gillett are both DM's - we all sort of knew that. Hammond is a DM with some creativity, passing skills and an engine, so ONE of Gillett/Wotton are cover for him not both - good-bye to one of them Antonio - sounds like a low risk cover for Papa who is even more raw than the Dancing "Queen". We have to assume that AP has now settled on a style of play - which MOST of the top teams in the PL play so this looks to be the first move forwards in the 2nd level of rebuild Holmes is nowhere to be seen - either he was worn out after his 5 mins on Saturday OR there must be an attitude issue OR he is playing Friday and didn't want to risk him. He should be cover for Mellis I would guess as is Mills (who also covers Harding). If Holmes doesn't appear Friday then we have to assume he's surplus as well 4-4-2 great idea but you need to have two forwards. IMHO Saga is not the answer, he was a Brett Omerod all energy type, with Lambert he needs a player with a brain and pace to pick up the flicks and touches. Sort of a L1 Jermaine Defoe would be my pick, maybe Waigo if he has a season or more with us will move from being a Thierry Henry on the wing (awful in his first year) to being the L1 man through the middle BUT we have NO cover for Lambert, we lose him to suspension or injury, our style will go out the window with Saga or Patto or a Defoe type in the middle alone.. needs work AP said he is looking so good James - good cover for Murty and also as DM. His crossing is getting better, he isn't ever going to be the worlds' best but a useful squad player who would likely be first choice cover at RB or DM, amking Wotton/Gillett. So... Lesson 1 you cannot play Wotton & Gillett and Hammond in the same midfield in the 4-2-3-1 formation. We have to play 4-4-2. But as others have said, Lallana & Mellis give the movement and legs to play the floating way. Can understand why he started that way, but if we have those creative players out, cannot see it being done again And a lot of money still needs to be spent to pay off contracts from players we don't need who won't leave/aren't wanted and we need 3 or 4 squad players in. In summary, the first team is looking good, but we don't have the strength in depth to cover for injury/suspensions (maybe soome of the youngsters out on loan will come back and step up to that role but think they are still too inexperienced). So while we will be safe this season we won't be able to string enough long term results together before Jan to give us a platform to hit the playoffs. It also shows what rubbish we had in last year's squad
bungle Posted 7 October, 2009 Posted 7 October, 2009 I like 4-5-1, it is clearly the superior formation in football, and it is only thicko Brits that hark on about 4-4-2 all the time Did we really play 4-5-1 against Torquay United ? FFS. QED
bungle Posted 7 October, 2009 Posted 7 October, 2009 Why is 4-5-1 such a superior formation Bungle? In our case it means that our deadliest striker is constantly playing with two defenders on him and his back to goal, which are both hardly conducive to him finding the net as much as we need him to. 4-5-1 is superior at every level because of the number of options it offers you. Three in the centre of the park can dominate the midfield, and over-run the 'British two'. Even more importantly, you can get at least 4 going forward every time, with both wide players and a runner from midfield. You instantly bring width with a 5 man midfield, but there are enough runners to get forward and support the striker in the middle when a cross comes in. All the best teams around the world play 4-5-1. The reason our top clubs started getting better in Europe is because the ditched the simpletons 4-4-2 and went for a more sophiscated 4-5-1, which allows more options. The problem the British have with 4-5-1 is because of the way it is traditionally used in this country. It was employed as a defensive formation, leaving the lone striker totally isolated. That's now how it should be played (although you could argue it has some purpose in football), but backward footballing Britain could only do it that way.
saints_is_the_south Posted 7 October, 2009 Posted 7 October, 2009 First 10 mins we came out & looked like we'd pummel em, after that we just didn't look interested & they just wanted it more. We were lucky to get through last night. Not overally concerned tho, we had Jaidi, Trottman, Mellis & Lallana all missing but still, the team we put out should have won comfortably in 90 mins.
SFC Forever Posted 7 October, 2009 Posted 7 October, 2009 We played some fringe players and found them lacking. We are through so I am happy enough with that. Would have given Bart a game though as he must have been buzzing having been a winner twice in the last week.
david in sweden Posted 7 October, 2009 Posted 7 October, 2009 Waigo scored 2 of the worst goals i have ever seen as well! Made me laugh well they all count when they cross the goal line..... (of course that depends on whether the lino is up with the play).
John B Posted 7 October, 2009 Posted 7 October, 2009 (edited) When is the next round draw ? Saturday on SKYSPORTS http://www.football-league.co.uk/page/JohnstonesPaintTrophy/0,,10794,00.html Edited 7 October, 2009 by John B
John B Posted 7 October, 2009 Posted 7 October, 2009 We played some fringe players and found them lacking. We are through so I am happy enough with that. Would have given Bart a game though as he must have been buzzing having been a winner twice in the last week. We played squad players who will play if there are injuries and suspensions something we have been fairly lucky with this season
Wes Tender Posted 7 October, 2009 Posted 7 October, 2009 In summary, the first team is looking good, but we don't have the strength in depth to cover for injury/suspensions (maybe soome of the youngsters out on loan will come back and step up to that role but think they are still too inexperienced). The impression that the first team is looking good is gained mainly on the basis of a decent game against Bristol Rovers that we lost and a capable win against a depleted Gillingham. I'd need to see many more good results to feel comfortable that the first team is looking good and as you rightly say, a lot depends on that squad remaining injury free and without suspensions.
david in sweden Posted 7 October, 2009 Posted 7 October, 2009 But the important thing is that he did change it. You've become too negative of late stevo... well we get lucky in the end.´..was the last time we won a shoot-out? Critics of AP should realise that we need to rest some of our " better " players whenever we can.....it's a very long season. Seems most people had a bad night, but playing the reserves like Perry, Thomas and Wotton gives others a breather. (by most accounts) it seems that Gillett may have reached the " last chance saloon" without success. Pity, as he was outstanding in our very poor sides last season, but typical of the many promising young players who can't make it when the chips are down. Until we get a " someone beefy " up front alongside Lambert the better, then Lallana should have a field day every week.
fareham saint phil Posted 7 October, 2009 Posted 7 October, 2009 From my crap position of itchen row ****ing D i thought we were ordinary at best, first goal Davis mistake, 2nd reaction was that it wasn't a penalty (refer to earlier comment about crap seat) expected us to come out second half and show abit of passion, not sure if passion was shown but 2 scrappy goals lateri thought we would go on but in fact they should have won it the 1-0n-1 chance and the header, penalties a lottery but 5 well taken ones and abit of excitement at the end, so paper over the cracks, a wins a win, bring back 4 players and win on friday. Also FFS stop Lloyd James stupid corner signals, the gnome stance makes you look gayyyyyy
Iowsaintsfan Posted 7 October, 2009 Posted 7 October, 2009 anyone got a video of the penalty shoot out?
Toomer Posted 7 October, 2009 Posted 7 October, 2009 We were lucky last night IMO most of them could not pass water or cross the road.
Gingeletiss Posted 7 October, 2009 Posted 7 October, 2009 curtesy of .com................caption comp???? 'It's my ferking goal, now who's wants to take that one away from me???'
The9 Posted 7 October, 2009 Posted 7 October, 2009 Well blimey, that was hard work. Kelvin's worst performance since the dark days of 2006, from 120 yards away he looked totally at fault for their first goal which more or less went directly in from a throw-in (obviously there was a touch first), and he should have walked for the penalty too, the "covering defender" was about 5 yards behind play when Kelvin got rounded, but cleverly went and retrieved the ball to put himself in the ref's mind. Changing both centre backs is always risky, though it's fair enough to rest a few in a week when we're playing Saturday/Tuesday/Friday and the wet conditions never help defenders anyway. 4-5-1 with those three holding midfielders was too defensive, but after the last few minutes of Saturday I can't see any reason for wanting to play Gillett as the attacking midfielder unless he's being set up to fail, because it's just not his game (nor Wotton or Hammond's) and with those three in there we were NEVER going to get a through ball or enough support for Lambert. But again, that's not the first choice centre midfield and in the last few games Lallana's workrate has matched some high-tempo creativity, which we were singularly lacking yesterday. Waigo was an outlet first half and kept the ball well, but his poor finishing and utter lack of heading was mildly embarrassing. I actually thought Antonio did pretty well to get in decent positions on the right, but he was overhitting crosses slightly - though I'd rather that than scuffing them to the first defender, which James did practically all night, usually after faffing about with it long enough for Torquay to get 10 men back. Wasn't the first team, we switched a few out, rode the storm and showed character to come back and then score all our penalties. Not much to say about it after that, other than I got wet from the rain in Row Y.
ericofarabia Posted 7 October, 2009 Posted 7 October, 2009 After several totally embarassing capitulations to lower league outfits in Cup matches over the years, a fightback was a pleasing change. Papa's goals may not be classics, but are the sort we were not converting earlier in the season. Hopefully a reminder for us not to under estimate Southend on Friday. Another game unbeaten and goals going in at both ends at SMS, 14 in the last 3 games ... that's nearly as any as the whole of last season
Clifford Nelson Posted 7 October, 2009 Posted 7 October, 2009 So, what does this all tell us. Think that for many of us who have read watched and listened it should be pretty obvious, hopefully now this result and performance will focus the minds of the budget holders as well... KD played and nearly got badly hurt - because the covering goal-keeping reserves aren't good enough... If Bart?Forecast can't get a game in the JPT v Torquay time for a shake up Thomas may be a cover for one of Jaidi OR Trottman, but if we lose both, Thomas & Perry don't sound the answer and Lancashire couldn't get on t he pitch - tells us again we need CB cover in Jan Wotton AND Gillett are both DM's - we all sort of knew that. Hammond is a DM with some creativity, passing skills and an engine, so ONE of Gillett/Wotton are cover for him not both - good-bye to one of them Antonio - sounds like a low risk cover for Papa who is even more raw than the Dancing "Queen". We have to assume that AP has now settled on a style of play - which MOST of the top teams in the PL play so this looks to be the first move forwards in the 2nd level of rebuild Holmes is nowhere to be seen - either he was worn out after his 5 mins on Saturday OR there must be an attitude issue OR he is playing Friday and didn't want to risk him. He should be cover for Mellis I would guess as is Mills (who also covers Harding). If Holmes doesn't appear Friday then we have to assume he's surplus as well 4-4-2 great idea but you need to have two forwards. IMHO Saga is not the answer, he was a Brett Omerod all energy type, with Lambert he needs a player with a brain and pace to pick up the flicks and touches. Sort of a L1 Jermaine Defoe would be my pick, maybe Waigo if he has a season or more with us will move from being a Thierry Henry on the wing (awful in his first year) to being the L1 man through the middle BUT we have NO cover for Lambert, we lose him to suspension or injury, our style will go out the window with Saga or Patto or a Defoe type in the middle alone.. needs work AP said he is looking so good James - good cover for Murty and also as DM. His crossing is getting better, he isn't ever going to be the worlds' best but a useful squad player who would likely be first choice cover at RB or DM, amking Wotton/Gillett. So... Lesson 1 you cannot play Wotton & Gillett and Hammond in the same midfield in the 4-2-3-1 formation. We have to play 4-4-2. But as others have said, Lallana & Mellis give the movement and legs to play the floating way. Can understand why he started that way, but if we have those creative players out, cannot see it being done again And a lot of money still needs to be spent to pay off contracts from players we don't need who won't leave/aren't wanted and we need 3 or 4 squad players in. In summary, the first team is looking good, but we don't have the strength in depth to cover for injury/suspensions (maybe soome of the youngsters out on loan will come back and step up to that role but think they are still too inexperienced). So while we will be safe this season we won't be able to string enough long term results together before Jan to give us a platform to hit the playoffs. It also shows what rubbish we had in last year's squad I'm delighted that there are more people than me who realises that a large number of surplus players can't be "shipped out", "sold" or "lent" because nobody wants them. Who would want a player who can't even get on to the fringes of a L1 team? It is a large expense to look at, but I can't see any other option but to pay off their contracts. Having them on the training ground daily doesn't contribute towards the kind of attitudes needed for a properly competitive team. And, indeed, now we can see that last year's squad was shocking. Some of our best players were sold, but do we really think that we would improve if we could bring back McGoldrick?
Clifford Nelson Posted 7 October, 2009 Posted 7 October, 2009 (edited) The obsession about formation continues to haunt us. I didn't see us play 4-5-1 last night, but 4-3-3. Problem being that Papa is a right sided player who probably has never played on the left, and Antonio has probably never played anywhere else but wide right in a rigid 4-4-2. With the additional lack of creative midfield spark it became a shambles. In the second half Saga mostly ended up playing in the middle. Poor Gillett has lost his confidence, but maybe AP has spotted something as well, which is why he hasn't played him. It was much easier to shine last year by just being industrious. I would be surprised if we have seen the last of him, but some team will pick him up and I wish him luck. Antonio might have choked at the experience, but he didn't look good. What the whole team missed was a spark, something to drive them on. Hammond tried to provide it, Papa scored goals, Lambert fought wholeheartedly, Harding did his bit again and James had one of his better games, but none of them provide that bit of something which brings the team up another level. How we missed Lallana! I never thought I'd say that. He becomes a problem when we try to think a rigid 4-4-2, because his skills don't fit any of the roles. On the left of a more flexible 4-3-3 he can provide everything he has got in his locker, including providing cover for Harding, who clearly enjoy working with him. A genius move by AP. It has solved a perennial problem for the team who couldn't score from open play. Now we've scored 7 in 3 games, including yesterday when we played badly. Finally we found a way for round pegs to fit round holes. We get so many attacking options so that the opposition doesn't know how to defend against it. As soon as we "get another striker to join Lambert" we are back to square one. We haven't got any wingers to play 4-4-2, and we have excluded our primary creative player. Lambert didn't look isolated against Bristol or Gillingham, on the contrary, he was surrounded at all times and seemed to love it. 4-3-3 suits the players we have got at the moment, which is rather an incentive for AP to acquire more players who are adept at playing it. It is also flexible enough to turn into 4-5-1 in tough away games and when we're defending a lead. I think we'd better get used to it. If we develop a couple of pacy wingers with good crossing ability, because I don't know where you can buy them from anymore, then it's time to look again. But more important than the system is the pegs and holes scenario. Edited 7 October, 2009 by Clifford Nelson
joffystevens Posted 7 October, 2009 Posted 7 October, 2009 2 good things about tonight 1) We're through 2) Simon Gillett will probably leave the club couldn't agree more
Cheesegrater999 Posted 7 October, 2009 Posted 7 October, 2009 Anyone know if there will be online highlights of the goals anywhere?
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now