| Match thread: AFC Wimbledon 14:06 - Sep 30 with 15877 views | 442Dale |
|  |
| |  |
| Match thread: AFC Wimbledon on 16:54 - Sep 30 with 4303 views | DaveDave |
Yet another clean sheet - but a bit lucky this time by the sound of it.
Up the Dale. |  |
| |
| Match thread: AFC Wimbledon on 16:56 - Sep 30 with 4256 views | D_Alien |
We're not playing at the level we've achieved in the past so far, but we're battling and that's another important point away from home |  |
| |
| Match thread: AFC Wimbledon on 16:57 - Sep 30 with 4233 views | Daley_Lama |
3 clean sheets on the trot. I wont count bury as they are not a proffesional football team.
Unbeaten in 2 games away from home. Again not counting bury away.
Defensive shortcomings disappearing, the way we were leaking early on it looked like we would be sunk. |  |
| |
| Match thread: AFC Wimbledon on 16:58 - Sep 30 with 4219 views | Dale23years |
| Match thread: AFC Wimbledon on 16:54 - Sep 30 by DaveDave |
Yet another clean sheet - but a bit lucky this time by the sound of it.
Up the Dale. |
No luck in it at all, both teams wouldn't of scored if played till next Saturday. Poor match,poor performance but would of took 2 points last week bearing in mind poor defending at MK DONS [Post edited 30 Sep 2017 16:59]
|  |
| |
| Match thread: AFC Wimbledon on 17:04 - Sep 30 with 4131 views | rdaleouis |
| Match thread: AFC Wimbledon on 16:57 - Sep 30 by Daley_Lama |
3 clean sheets on the trot. I wont count bury as they are not a proffesional football team.
Unbeaten in 2 games away from home. Again not counting bury away.
Defensive shortcomings disappearing, the way we were leaking early on it looked like we would be sunk. |
As one issue is resolved though, another appears, we appear to have lost our shooting boots. | | | |
| Match thread: AFC Wimbledon on 17:06 - Sep 30 with 4108 views | Bazzanne |
Very poor game to watch, two very ordinary teams to say the least. Neither team looked like scoring, not impressed with Daniels at fullback, if Raff is fit there is no way this guy should be in front him. A valuable point gained, but not much to inspire the Dale fans. | | | |
| Match thread: AFC Wimbledon on 17:11 - Sep 30 with 4066 views | 442Dale |
| Match thread: AFC Wimbledon on 16:57 - Sep 30 by Daley_Lama |
3 clean sheets on the trot. I wont count bury as they are not a proffesional football team.
Unbeaten in 2 games away from home. Again not counting bury away.
Defensive shortcomings disappearing, the way we were leaking early on it looked like we would be sunk. |
If Daniels is replacing Rafferty to reduce our defensive shortcomings then you have to wonder why all of a sudden a centre half who is limited at right back is better than a right back who has consistently achieved at this level, one who we were all happy to see re-sign.
This isn't Daniels fault at all, he's doing his best but he offers nothing in terms of an outlet.
Today was boring. There's no dressing that up with the clean sheet stats, we didn't threaten one bit. | |
| |
| Match thread: AFC Wimbledon on 17:25 - Sep 30 with 3963 views | Daley_Lama |
Choose to focus on 'Daniels' - from what i saw at Blackpool there are other changes.
MJW12) and Camps were both more focused on defence than attack
Lillis back between the sticks
Wingers both tracking back constantly.
The whole team has been told to tighten up, it's being adhered to (wasnt there today)
I personally wont lambast a full back for us not scoring away from home in two games, i will praise the defence instead. [Post edited 30 Sep 2017 17:26]
| |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Match thread: AFC Wimbledon on 17:58 - Sep 30 with 3823 views | dingdangblue |
| Match thread: AFC Wimbledon on 17:11 - Sep 30 by 442Dale |
If Daniels is replacing Rafferty to reduce our defensive shortcomings then you have to wonder why all of a sudden a centre half who is limited at right back is better than a right back who has consistently achieved at this level, one who we were all happy to see re-sign.
This isn't Daniels fault at all, he's doing his best but he offers nothing in terms of an outlet.
Today was boring. There's no dressing that up with the clean sheet stats, we didn't threaten one bit. |
The only explanation can be Rafferty playing the home games and being ultra offensive. Daniels playing the away games and not bombing forward. Hill is happy keeping it tighter away from home but knows Rafferty's 1st instinct is to get forward. With Bunney always going forward on the left maybe Hill is just happy with one fullback attacking and has gone with Bunney? |  |
| |
| Match thread: AFC Wimbledon on 18:28 - Sep 30 with 3715 views | nordenblue |
| Match thread: AFC Wimbledon on 17:58 - Sep 30 by dingdangblue |
The only explanation can be Rafferty playing the home games and being ultra offensive. Daniels playing the away games and not bombing forward. Hill is happy keeping it tighter away from home but knows Rafferty's 1st instinct is to get forward. With Bunney always going forward on the left maybe Hill is just happy with one fullback attacking and has gone with Bunney? |
I like the idea but I'd argue that Raff is a much better defender too.....wouldnt mind seeing Daniel's at centre half but off current form neither Harrison or big Jim deserve dropping | | | |
| Match thread: AFC Wimbledon on 18:30 - Sep 30 with 3704 views | Bazzanne |
| Match thread: AFC Wimbledon on 17:11 - Sep 30 by 442Dale |
If Daniels is replacing Rafferty to reduce our defensive shortcomings then you have to wonder why all of a sudden a centre half who is limited at right back is better than a right back who has consistently achieved at this level, one who we were all happy to see re-sign.
This isn't Daniels fault at all, he's doing his best but he offers nothing in terms of an outlet.
Today was boring. There's no dressing that up with the clean sheet stats, we didn't threaten one bit. |
The problem with Daniels today was his slowness. Their winger had him beaten for pace and also he was caught out of position on numerous occasions. He did actually go forward many times so the theory of him playing away games because he's more defensive than Raff doesn't hold up. We may have kept a clean sheet and gained a point but we were very poor overall. I know some on this board will say I only post about the negatives but in all honesty there wasn't much to be positive about. Here's hoping for better displays soon. | | | |
| Match thread: AFC Wimbledon on 18:51 - Sep 30 with 3634 views | D_Alien |
| Match thread: AFC Wimbledon on 18:30 - Sep 30 by Bazzanne |
The problem with Daniels today was his slowness. Their winger had him beaten for pace and also he was caught out of position on numerous occasions. He did actually go forward many times so the theory of him playing away games because he's more defensive than Raff doesn't hold up. We may have kept a clean sheet and gained a point but we were very poor overall. I know some on this board will say I only post about the negatives but in all honesty there wasn't much to be positive about. Here's hoping for better displays soon. |
That's a pretty reasonable analysis, tbf
I thought we had the better of the game last Tuesday, and not being there today can't comment on that aspect but in both games it looks like we've consolidated to start with before launching an attempt to take all three points with fresh legs up front
The selection of Daniels is a bit of an head-scratcher, and it'll be interesting to see if Raff takes over again at home next week | |
| |
| Match thread: AFC Wimbledon on 19:50 - Sep 30 with 3467 views | dingdangblue |
| Match thread: AFC Wimbledon on 18:28 - Sep 30 by nordenblue |
I like the idea but I'd argue that Raff is a much better defender too.....wouldnt mind seeing Daniel's at centre half but off current form neither Harrison or big Jim deserve dropping |
Yes I agree Raff is just as good defensively - but he is more likely to be caught out of position having gone on an attack than Daniels who isn't going forward. I can only think that is Hilly's reason? We all know who's the better player. It's a bit harsh on Raff as he's been trusted before by Hilly to play defensive midfielder. I'm sure he'd rather play than be on the bench - maybe once we've got a few more points and we've moved up the league Hill will be a bit more adventurous away from home again - but at the minute we need to be tight and it seems to have worked. | |
| |
| Match thread: AFC Wimbledon on 21:40 - Sep 30 with 3257 views | Swissdale |
Raff and Bunney have played as full backs in the same team this season 3 times, we have won two of those games, scoring 7 goals.
Having decent attacking options down both flanks changes the way we play, without it we seem toothless. For me they should be the first two names on the teamsheet. |  | | |
| Match thread: AFC Wimbledon on 21:52 - Sep 30 with 3222 views | macro |
That’s 90 minutes I won’t get back. First half there was some attacking intent, Daniels came close from a corner, some reasonable movement, as for the second half! It was dreadful, Dale were dreadful attack wise just lumping it up front to the forwards all of whom had a poor game. Solid at the back though |  | | |
| Match thread: AFC Wimbledon on 10:26 - Oct 1 with 2861 views | dingdangblue |
| Match thread: AFC Wimbledon on 21:40 - Sep 30 by Swissdale |
Raff and Bunney have played as full backs in the same team this season 3 times, we have won two of those games, scoring 7 goals.
Having decent attacking options down both flanks changes the way we play, without it we seem toothless. For me they should be the first two names on the teamsheet. |
At home - I guess they will both start at fullback this Saturday too. | |
| |
| Match thread: AFC Wimbledon on 12:01 - Oct 1 with 2763 views | ColDale |
I'm assuming that the inclusion of Brown and now Daniels is an attempt to add height to the side, and add some attacking threat in both boxes that we've been lacking since the days of Dawson. Don't agree with it myself as Raff adds so much to our side.
Yesterday was perhaps the most nil nil nil nil I've seen in years. |  | | |
| Match thread: AFC Wimbledon on 13:07 - Oct 1 with 2697 views | dingdangblue |
| Match thread: AFC Wimbledon on 12:01 - Oct 1 by ColDale |
I'm assuming that the inclusion of Brown and now Daniels is an attempt to add height to the side, and add some attacking threat in both boxes that we've been lacking since the days of Dawson. Don't agree with it myself as Raff adds so much to our side.
Yesterday was perhaps the most nil nil nil nil I've seen in years. |
Aye the 'highlights' aren't up to much! Who was that team last season or the season before who showed kick off and the end of the game as the highlights - and that was it? | |
| |
| Match thread: AFC Wimbledon on 15:48 - Oct 1 with 2604 views | Shun |
| Match thread: AFC Wimbledon on 17:11 - Sep 30 by 442Dale |
If Daniels is replacing Rafferty to reduce our defensive shortcomings then you have to wonder why all of a sudden a centre half who is limited at right back is better than a right back who has consistently achieved at this level, one who we were all happy to see re-sign.
This isn't Daniels fault at all, he's doing his best but he offers nothing in terms of an outlet.
Today was boring. There's no dressing that up with the clean sheet stats, we didn't threaten one bit. |
I agree fully with that, but Daniels played all season at right back in their title-winning season 2 years ago. |  | | |
| Match thread: AFC Wimbledon on 17:09 - Oct 1 with 2536 views | Daleaholic |
I can't help but feel as though Daniels playing is part of a contractual obligation. Everyone knows we're better going forward with Rafferty in the team and I'm sure Keith Hill does too.
For Rafferty to go from 2 clean sheets and a goal, to the bench... Strikes me as suspicious to say the least.
Dour game yesterday with very little to talk about. 194 Dale fans is a decent following.
Can see this being Henderson's last season. He had little to no impact yesterday and if truth be told, he didn't look very interested. [Post edited 1 Oct 2017 18:35]
|  |
| |
| Match thread: AFC Wimbledon on 17:09 - Oct 1 with 2536 views | Daley_Lama |
| Match thread: AFC Wimbledon on 21:40 - Sep 30 by Swissdale |
Raff and Bunney have played as full backs in the same team this season 3 times, we have won two of those games, scoring 7 goals.
Having decent attacking options down both flanks changes the way we play, without it we seem toothless. For me they should be the first two names on the teamsheet. |
With our flying full-backs we were 1-0 down to Doncaster after 90 minutes and out-played and out-attacked by ten man Gillingham in the second half.
It's hardly been stupendous attacking football at home against fellow strugglers in the bottom third, never mind away at a team with 100% record. | |
| |
| Match thread: AFC Wimbledon on 17:50 - Oct 1 with 2478 views | NorthernDale |
The game was a waste of £17 getting in, plus the cost of getting there, we created nothing and I am baffled by Daniels at full back, he is more of a centre half, yet he is selected before Rafferty, it is baffling to say the least. What is worse was the selection of Andrews, Calvin can win headers, but the direction of the ball is a lottery and many teams to stand off him and pick up the second ball, yet at the same time we had far better strikers on the bench in Davies and Done, who could make a good three man attacking force with Henderson given time. I would even consider Slew before Andrews, in that Slew seems to have pace and could run at defences, which would unsettle some defences.
What as happened to Andy Cannon? | | | |
| Match thread: AFC Wimbledon on 18:26 - Oct 1 with 2437 views | VivaDonaldo |
| Match thread: AFC Wimbledon on 17:09 - Oct 1 by Daleaholic |
I can't help but feel as though Daniels playing is part of a contractual obligation. Everyone knows we're better going forward with Rafferty in the team and I'm sure Keith Hill does too.
For Rafferty to go from 2 clean sheets and a goal, to the bench... Strikes me as suspicious to say the least.
Dour game yesterday with very little to talk about. 194 Dale fans is a decent following.
Can see this being Henderson's last season. He had little to no impact yesterday and if truth be told, he didn't look very interested. [Post edited 1 Oct 2017 18:35]
|
Brooklands. Not Goodwood. Only about 30 mins away. | | | |
| Match thread: AFC Wimbledon on 18:58 - Oct 1 with 2396 views | TVOS1907 |
| Match thread: AFC Wimbledon on 17:50 - Oct 1 by NorthernDale |
The game was a waste of £17 getting in, plus the cost of getting there, we created nothing and I am baffled by Daniels at full back, he is more of a centre half, yet he is selected before Rafferty, it is baffling to say the least. What is worse was the selection of Andrews, Calvin can win headers, but the direction of the ball is a lottery and many teams to stand off him and pick up the second ball, yet at the same time we had far better strikers on the bench in Davies and Done, who could make a good three man attacking force with Henderson given time. I would even consider Slew before Andrews, in that Slew seems to have pace and could run at defences, which would unsettle some defences.
What as happened to Andy Cannon? |
Must admit I would have started with Done ahead of Inman, but not Davies ahead of Andrew, who greatly assisted us in defence against a big Dons' team. |  |
| When I was your age, I used to enjoy the odd game of tennis. Or was it golf? |
| |
| Match thread: AFC Wimbledon on 16:38 - Oct 2 with 2172 views | Shun |
It's worth noting that we currently have the 7th best defence in the league, going off goals conceded. Having said that, only the bottom 4 have scored less than us. Very unlike a Hill side. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
