| We got it wrong 17:10 - Nov 29 with 8914 views | 442Dale |
They were there to be got at first half, a defence that looked unsteady with the ball at their feet and susceptible to teams passing it in a around them. Except we didn't do it enough. Midfield was a bit of a mystery, it looked like a diamond, but one which players were unsure of their roles in - RNL especially. Did he play there v MK Dons too?
Without wanting to start yet another debate, the stats and games like illustrate why we need Hery from the start at home. Got to make the opposition think and neither Lund or Dawson did that, and their unsteady defence wouldn't have grown in confidence like they did if those questions would have been asked more often with the Frenchman in the side.
Oldham deserved the win because they produced a good away display, nothing special but effective winners. |  |
| |  |
| We got it wrong on 23:57 - Dec 1 with 1530 views | Swissdale |
In a similar vein to Col's post, I too thought the difference between the sides was marginal on Saturday. They didn't create any fantastic opportunities, and all three goals can be attributed to (bad) individual mistakes.
The worst thing about Saturday for me was that as soon as we conceded, I knew we were going to lose (I even logged into my SkyBet account from the main stand and put a bet on Oldham to win to nil).
We showed again that as soon as a team sits back, we do not have it in us to break them down. Hilly needs to sit down and work out and effective 'Plan B', as I'm afraid long balls to Calvin Andrew is nowhere near good enough. He may have changed the game and won a few headers against a 4th choice league 2 centre half in the FA Cup, but he hasn't had a sniff against anyone at this level. The 19 goals he's scored in 251 career appearances are a testament to that.
Not saying Hery is the answer to all of our problems, but he is certainly our most creative player. His ability to turn and create a space in tight areas might be the answer when we are playing against a team who are 'parking the bus'. Would certainly prefer that option than lumping balls up to a static centre forward who jumps around 2 seconds too early for every header. [Post edited 1 Dec 2014 23:59]
|  | | |
| We got it wrong on 01:43 - Dec 2 with 1475 views | dingdangblue |
| We got it wrong on 23:57 - Dec 1 by Swissdale |
In a similar vein to Col's post, I too thought the difference between the sides was marginal on Saturday. They didn't create any fantastic opportunities, and all three goals can be attributed to (bad) individual mistakes.
The worst thing about Saturday for me was that as soon as we conceded, I knew we were going to lose (I even logged into my SkyBet account from the main stand and put a bet on Oldham to win to nil).
We showed again that as soon as a team sits back, we do not have it in us to break them down. Hilly needs to sit down and work out and effective 'Plan B', as I'm afraid long balls to Calvin Andrew is nowhere near good enough. He may have changed the game and won a few headers against a 4th choice league 2 centre half in the FA Cup, but he hasn't had a sniff against anyone at this level. The 19 goals he's scored in 251 career appearances are a testament to that.
Not saying Hery is the answer to all of our problems, but he is certainly our most creative player. His ability to turn and create a space in tight areas might be the answer when we are playing against a team who are 'parking the bus'. Would certainly prefer that option than lumping balls up to a static centre forward who jumps around 2 seconds too early for every header. [Post edited 1 Dec 2014 23:59]
|
Its just baffling, Hery's omission from the starting X1. The last league game we won was the last league game he started - 5 games ago v Preston. Yet Hilly persists in ignoring him even to the point last Saturday playing 2 injured players from the start. Its as bizarre as last season Hery coming from nowhere to star in the Bristol Rovers away win - then our subsequent games to get us promoted! Where had this talent been all season and why had he been ignored up until then? Is it the same reason he is being ignored now? Only this time we've all seen how good he is for us and the positive effect he has on our results. Hill needs to explain what the problem is - and no one say its because he's a liability or he takes too many risks because I'm sorry - I'd rather see that than the stuff I've seen in the last 2 Saturday home defeats. |  |
| |
| We got it wrong on 06:40 - Dec 2 with 1437 views | BigDaveMyCock |
I can understand his inclusion from a purely pragmatic viewpoint. That, whilst certainly not pretty, his inclusion nevertheless causes, on anything like a consistent level, ensuing panic in the opposition half to the benefit of his teammates. However, the opposite is the case. There is absolutely no chaos whatsoever caused by his play. On the contrary, we become even more easier to defend against. Even if he manages to stay onside and win a flick on, teams just focus on winning the second ball.
It's odd because after the Donny game Hill congratulated them for not "going long".
Anyway, that aside, is it even possible, in today's game, to be so immobile and have an impact? Teams, even league one centre backs, are technically better these days. Oldham's centre backs were not just physically strong they were also athletic and could shift. No panic from them necessary. His attempted rugby tackle on one from behind as they ghosted past him highlighted the gulf and my early exit to the pub.
Still, what do I know. Hilly usually gets it right. [Post edited 2 Dec 2014 6:49]
|  |
| |
| We got it wrong on 11:01 - Dec 2 with 1348 views | D_Alien |
| We got it wrong on 06:40 - Dec 2 by BigDaveMyCock |
I can understand his inclusion from a purely pragmatic viewpoint. That, whilst certainly not pretty, his inclusion nevertheless causes, on anything like a consistent level, ensuing panic in the opposition half to the benefit of his teammates. However, the opposite is the case. There is absolutely no chaos whatsoever caused by his play. On the contrary, we become even more easier to defend against. Even if he manages to stay onside and win a flick on, teams just focus on winning the second ball.
It's odd because after the Donny game Hill congratulated them for not "going long".
Anyway, that aside, is it even possible, in today's game, to be so immobile and have an impact? Teams, even league one centre backs, are technically better these days. Oldham's centre backs were not just physically strong they were also athletic and could shift. No panic from them necessary. His attempted rugby tackle on one from behind as they ghosted past him highlighted the gulf and my early exit to the pub.
Still, what do I know. Hilly usually gets it right. [Post edited 2 Dec 2014 6:49]
|
It's also a question of the midfield knowing their roles and being comfortable in them, thus ensuring some degree of attacking strategy, rather than play it back to Logan and hoof
With Hery in the team in a clearly defined attacking midfield role (and the ability to beat a man and find a man with well-weighted passing), one or other of the other midfielders can play a more defensive role with the other(s) supporting in attack or defence. Head of a diamond, as it were.
On Saturday, none of the midfield seemed to know whether to stick or twist (we're back to that again) hence the almost complete lack of penetration (oooer missus).
It's the combination of all the above that creates uncertainty in the opposition. |  |
| |
| We got it wrong on 21:04 - Dec 3 with 1221 views | wimborne_dale |
| We got it wrong on 01:43 - Dec 2 by dingdangblue |
Its just baffling, Hery's omission from the starting X1. The last league game we won was the last league game he started - 5 games ago v Preston. Yet Hilly persists in ignoring him even to the point last Saturday playing 2 injured players from the start. Its as bizarre as last season Hery coming from nowhere to star in the Bristol Rovers away win - then our subsequent games to get us promoted! Where had this talent been all season and why had he been ignored up until then? Is it the same reason he is being ignored now? Only this time we've all seen how good he is for us and the positive effect he has on our results. Hill needs to explain what the problem is - and no one say its because he's a liability or he takes too many risks because I'm sorry - I'd rather see that than the stuff I've seen in the last 2 Saturday home defeats. |
He also played the last three quarters of MK Dons away: our only point from the last 12. |  |
| |
| We got it wrong on 01:22 - Dec 5 with 1113 views | ShawLatic |
I thought you looked a good side, comfortable in possession just lacking a goal threat, which sounds like us a lot of the time.
Thought Allen, and the left back Tandser?
Be interesting to see how it turns out at Boundary Park when you have Done and Vincenti back. The gap between home and away game is a bit odd being so short. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
