Just Back

I thought Thanoj, Pearson and Townsend were our best players today and I think we were slightly unlucky and maybe a draw would have been a fair result. We need to concentrate on the league now and I'm sure the home game against York is now set up to be a great match which I think we will have a better chance of winning!

I was pleased with the level of commitment and hardwork today and clapped the team off at the end.

Made my main point about us dropping too deep(again) on another thread.

On reflection, York were generally closing us quicker than we were them and that's a bit suprising. (especially after Hearn and Coulo's pre-match comments)

We certainly battled and the lads put in a performace to be proud of, but we started nervy and at times maybe should have been all over them like a bad rash instead of standing off so far - push em back !

Eventually we got going and got stuck in.

It's the easiset thing after winning a tackle to want to get it forward quick but Townsend aside thought we lacked composure.
Seen it time and time again the balls bouncing about for eternity - you just want ONE player to control, get the ball down on the deck with a cool head !

This is the question though - is this the style S&H want to play to cos whilst I thought we passed it around really nicely at times, there was a lot of get-it-forward-quick ball today (especially from the back)

Long ball is great against the lower teams with Hearn running riot, but ideas wise, I'm not sure we knew exactly what our game plan was today.

Disley didn't pass it well but at times had little on - even Thanoj(who did well) lost the ball against a wall of players in front of him.

Did Scott and Hurst read the York managers article about them possibly going 5 at the back that may have suggested they were gonna park the bus at times ? I only saw it early this morning on the OS)

Our movement from throw ins is shocking and it sums up the lack of offensive movement at times.
Often when we did go forward, the support wasnt busting a gut to help out whilst York worked hard to get bodies back.

Don't get me wrong it was a close game and we could have won it as York did.

But if we want promotion we've got to raise our standards, be a bit smarter with ideas to break them down in the final 3rd and up our game a bit against the better sides like York. (especially those who pass it and have pace)

We can do it and we're not certainly not a million miles off but today is a reality check and there's work to be done.

I thought apart from the first 10 minutes, we dominated the 1st half, with Hearn really unlucky with a few chances (their keeper was excellent). They offered very little IMO.
Second half we didn't create as much, but neither did they. I personally thought Church played well, closing down and getting in tackles. We looked a lot weaker when he went off. And Serge was woeful when he came on. Duffy is a lot more effective as a substitute against tiring defences.

All-in-all I applauded the team for their efforts with a depleted squad. It was an undeserved smash-and-grab win for York and I think we'll be a different proposition in the league game with Miller, Garner, Soares, Artus and Elding available.

Quoted from HarryTheHaddock

I thought apart from the first 10 minutes, we dominated the 1st half, with Hearn really unlucky with a few chances (their keeper was excellent). They offered very little IMO.
Second half we didn't create as much, but neither did they. I personally thought Church played well, closing down and getting in tackles. We looked a lot weaker when he went off. And Serge was woeful when he came on. Duffy is a lot more effective as a substitute against tiring defences.

All-in-all I applauded the team for their efforts with a depleted squad. It was an undeserved smash-and-grab win for York and I think we'll be a different proposition in the league game with Miller, Garner, Soares, Artus and Elding available.

Strange you should mention that first ten minutes, because doesn't that seem to be a repetitive theme now?  We always seem to look (in footyspeak) as if we are 'on the back foot' for the first ten minutes of a game.  Not sure why that is...fortunately we usually seem to soak up the pressure and then take the game to the opposition.  Are the opposition just testing our defences?  Why don't we sound them out for a change and be a bit gung-ho for the first ten minutes of a game?

You mention Soares - I don't remember having seen him play.  Is he good?

Tbh i know we are out of the cup and it would have been nice to get to wembley, but cramming them two semi final legs into our already busy fixture list would have taken its toll on us i think, and i rather us stay fresh for the remaining league games.

Before kickoff we knew it was going to be difficult with Miller,Garner,Artus,Elding, Soares, and Hughes-Mason. But considering they brought there first team, I thought we matched them and the game could have gone either way,and a draw would have been a fair result.

The midfield was imbalanced with church having to play out wide, but considering York like to use the wings we cancelled the out. I know people say the boo boys get onto Duffy, but after todays performance you can see why, he doesn't look fit,he plods around aimlessly,doesn't win headers, doesn't hold play up, his passing was poor, id play Hughes Mason v Braintree.

York have now beat us twice and been honest they play some decent stuff, but at there place we had ridley,kempson and duffy starting and today we had 7 first teamers out. I cant wait for the league game at BP because i think we can turn them over with our strongest 11 on the field and wouldn't mind getting them in the playoffs should we get there. nothing to be scared of

Quoted from marinette

Strange you should mention that first ten minutes, because doesn't that seem to be a repetitive theme now?  We always seem to look (in footyspeak) as if we are 'on the back foot' for the first ten minutes of a game.  Not sure why that is...fortunately we usually seem to soak up the pressure and then take the game to the opposition.  Are the opposition just testing our defences?  Why don't we sound them out for a change and be a bit gung-ho for the first ten minutes of a game?

Good observation marinette.
Normally we're confident we can dominate teams over 90 minutes.
As for today, I'm not sure but there's no hard and fast rule that says you must start quick. (but I agree maybe we could have)
But I do notice it's often used by teams who might arguably struggle if they don't ?
So maybe it shows confidence is good ?
Who knows !

Not a bad performance today, really. A draw looked the most likely outcome until their late spell of pressure led to the goal. Other than that, neither keeper had too much to do although their keeper's save at the near post from Hearn in the first half was brilliant - I still don't know how he managed to get down to it so quickly.

Ultimately, the difference between the two teams was that they were able to lift their game a little towards the end of the second half due to some attacking substitutions. We, on the other hand, were down to the bare bones on the bench and neither Wood nor Makofo played very well when they came on. This isn't, perhaps, too much of a surprise as neither of them has played for a couple of months! Our defending for the goal was very lax, however, as we failed to clear the ball properly and didn't put enough effort into blocking the crosses which subsequently came in and it was almost inevitable that they were going to get a chance at some point. When it came, their player didn't make any mistake with his header.

Overall, York looked to play some decent football and had a lot more pace than us with several nippy players. However, they weren't overly impressive and I think our full-strength team would have had enough in the bank to beat them. Our squad is still badly lacking in pace, however and I fear that this may be our downfall, should we make it into the play-offs.

Church was fine, considering he was playing out of position. As usual, I'm baffled as to why some players who do decently well seem to get slated on here. Duffy was the same as usual. Wins some headers, does some good stuff but never really looks like scoring and is ultimately disappointing. Of course, he had to get his usual booking at the end as well! That said, he was incorrectly flagged offside when put clean through by Hearn's flicked header in the second half - at least 2 of their defenders looked to be playing him onside.

Disley had a disappointing game for me. I just can't understand why such an experienced and otherwise capable player looks so off colour in some games. Some awful passes from midfield cocked up various chances for counter-attacks or just gave the ball away poorly. He's generally a capable player but I've not yet seen him lift his game when things aren't going well. I think our lack of goals from central midfield this season could also cost us in the long run.

Not sure about the penalty claim. It was one of those where the defender looked as though he was trying to keep his arm out of the way behind his back but still leant into the cross and it definitely hit his arm. I've seen them given before, that's for sure.

Though you never like to see a defeat, I think we would have struggled to win this competition as it would have been difficult to field anything like a full-strength team for the rest of the competition with injuries and some important players cup-tied. It may be the proverbial blessing in disguise to be knocked out at this stage and avoid the additional tiring fixture congestion. We just need to make sure that we can continue our good League form.

I thought we would struggle with the squad but the team would be ok.  We made 4 enforced changes to a winning team, 2 positional changes (Coulson and Church),  Disley having a poor game, Duffy in and out and not much on the right hand side going forward.  The subs added nothing.  

My original view of the team was more optimistic than it should have been.  However,we still did ok until about 3 mins before the goal when we could not clear our lines.  

Agree Thanoj played very well.  Townsend was good.  I loved his little cameo in the first half on the touchline opposite the corner on the Main Stand, when he dummied the City player by cutting back inside instead of putting into touch. Cool and confident.

I am more confident that we can beat them on the 13 March.  Hurst said on RH afterwards that they are pleased with the progress Artus is making, he should be back in a couple of weeks.This makes it touch and go for York game.

Quoted from HarryTheHaddock

I thought apart from the first 10 minutes, we dominated the 1st half, with Hearn really unlucky with a few chances (their keeper was excellent). They offered very little IMO.
Second half we didn't create as much, but neither did they. I personally thought Church played well, closing down and getting in tackles. We looked a lot weaker when he went off. And Serge was woeful when he came on. Duffy is a lot more effective as a substitute against tiring defences.

All-in-all I applauded the team for their efforts with a depleted squad. It was an undeserved smash-and-grab win for York and I think we'll be a different proposition in the league game with Miller, Garner, Soares, Artus and Elding available.

Don't forget KHM!

Quoted from TownSNAFU5

I am more confident that we can beat them on the 13 March.  Hurst said on RH afterwards that they are pleased with the progress Artus is making, he should be back in a couple of weeks.This makes it touch and go for York game.

I think Louis Soares will be playing in the league game should Artus not be fit, and looking at his goal haul from the wing for Hayes, (16) he aint a bad replacement, plus players like Miller and Elding will be back so we will be loads stronger!!!