Just back, or still there

Quoted from TownSNAFU5

Chelsea spend the millions - Pulnisic £58m - but their young players are the real stars.  There could be 8 or more full England capped players from their squad last night. They have that much quality.  

Well frankly they should be given that Chelsea have been vacuuming up all the youth talent for years, despite never playing them. The plaudits last night about them being fantastic for fielding teenagers made me a bit sick.

Worth remembering that any cup shocks almost exclusively occur when the prem team are playing away, on a pitch that isn't as condusive to passing footbsll. Yesterday, the pitch was like a pool table as you'd expect. Had the game been at Blundell Park, their style of play becomes much harder to implement. Thst's why Newport have been succesful st home in the cup, even Sunday league players are used to playing on better surfaces than theirs.

Well that was a chastening experience and one I would not like to go through again.

I think the manager got just about everything wrong. To play a team of centre-halves and holding midfield players, some of whom haven't even played regularly in League 2 this season was a big mistake.

With no outlet of Ogbu or Wright or any forward momentum from Cook we were like lambs to the slaughter. To allow their centre halves to casually stroll well into our half to start every attack - what was that all about??

Chelsea were fantastic and would have beaten most premier league teams with that side, whoever started for us, but our manager put out just about the worst team he could to confirm to Chelsea that we are just league 2 fodder.

In our league campaign I wish we had players who would stay wide to give us options on the ball; I think this idea of having to defend with 11 players when the opposition have the ball is a bit old hat isn't it?

We scored a great goal which was fantastic for the fans, but it could and perhaps should have been a cricket score.

No escaping the fact that we were torn a new anus last night.  Chelsea were streets ahead of us in every aspect.  As a unit and individually just so superior, as you would expect.

If I'm honest I think the score probably flattered us in the end.  You can argue that it was only towards the end that they really started to cut us open again but football is a 90 minute game, not a 75 one.  Our lads were left dead on their feet whereas the Chelsea lads looked like they could go for another hour.

Unfortunately I do agree that we set up a bit too negative and naively.  First of all going man-to-man for everyone against players like those that Chelsea fielded is asking for trouble in my mind.   With such system as soon as someone beats their man, that's it everything else is open as the other defenders are pre-occupied.  I won't claim to know how we should have set up but I don't think the system did us any favours.   Starting with a side to grind it out also brings the risk of your game plan going out the window to an early goal, as it did for us.

That all said, we could have played any system and Chelsea would have beat us, comfortably.  Big shame we couldn't get to the break at 2-1 as that third goal killed us off.  Would liked to have seen us hold out for 60 minutes and then unleash Rose and Wright on them.

Don't think anyone let themselves down and a great experience for our lads.  

Absolutely boiling in that ground though, couldn't do that every other week.  Give me a fresh sea breeze!!

Quoted from diehardmariner

No escaping the fact that we were torn a new anus last night.  Chelsea were streets ahead of us in every aspect.  As a unit and individually just so superior, as you would expect.

If I'm honest I think the score probably flattered us in the end.  You can argue that it was only towards the end that they really started to cut us open again but football is a 90 minute game, not a 75 one.  Our lads were left dead on their feet whereas the Chelsea lads looked like they could go for another hour.

Unfortunately I do agree that we set up a bit too negative and naively.  First of all going man-to-man for everyone against players like those that Chelsea fielded is asking for trouble in my mind.   With such system as soon as someone beats their man, that's it everything else is open as the other defenders are pre-occupied.  I won't claim to know how we should have set up but I don't think the system did us any favours.   Starting with a side to grind it out also brings the risk of your game plan going out the window to an early goal, as it did for us.

That all said, we could have played any system and Chelsea would have beat us, comfortably.  Big shame we couldn't get to the break at 2-1 as that third goal killed us off.  Would liked to have seen us hold out for 60 minutes and then unleash Rose and Wright on them.

Don't think anyone let themselves down and a great experience for our lads.  

[/b]Absolutely boiling in that ground though, couldn't do that every other week.  Give me a fresh sea breeze!!

[b]

It was a tad stuffy - I kept asking the stewards to open a window to let some air in but they just looked at me gone out

I do believe we need to start with either Cook or Robson every game now.  I like all of our midfielders, but those two have that extra guile needed, and we really needed it last night.

No arguments from me, Chelsea were superb.  I know some have said that CHO didn't do much, but I think this was his first game since April, and considering that he was still pretty damn good!  We could list the other Chelsea players who stood out but it would take ages.

As for Stamford Bridge, I liked it and the view was great, but a bit like Palace, the concourses were again a bit pokey, and the staff were not geared-up for serving 5,000 Mariners with food and drinks.  I think this poor planning has to be addressed at our new ground, if we are to ever get one, and I honestly believe it would be relatively easy for a decent professional person who's in the service industry to set-up.  No clubs seem to have this element sorted, not one.  Also, simply not enough bogs either.  Oh, and the entry points to the seats were narrow too - I'm surprised these grounds get their fire certificates if I'm honest, god knows how you'd get out if there was a real issue, it would take an age.....

The fans did the club proud last night, but it's always inevitable when you have 5,000 travelling fans that a certain percentage of pond life will turn up, and they did not disappoint.  The police seemed very reasonable, but I can't help but think they were woefully understaffed if trouble had started.  The stewarding outside the ground seemed really good, though, very helpful.

Did anyone else see Lloyd Griffiths possibly getting a bit of hassle at the end from a drunken tool?  Not sure what was happening there, but Lloyd was trying to get away from this guy.  I took my eye off what was happening and they seemed to disappear, so hopefully the issue went away and wasn't too serious.......

Oh, and the journey home - my god, that was a nightmare.  Got to Cockfosters at 11:30pm, and the drive from there took 4 hours because the A1 exit on the M25 was closed, there was a sign saying the M1 was closed between junctions 8 and 9, so I had to take a diversion through St Albans to get onto the A1.  But that was nothing - on the A1 it just closed, had diversion signs that took you south by about 10 miles, then across to Cambridge!  All that added an hour.  I'll probably not travel home on the same night if we have a similar southern midweek fixture again.

Quoted from diehardmariner

No escaping the fact that we were torn a new anus last night.  Chelsea were streets ahead of us in every aspect.  As a unit and individually just so superior, as you would expect.

If I'm honest I think the score probably flattered us in the end.  You can argue that it was only towards the end that they really started to cut us open again but football is a 90 minute game, not a 75 one.  Our lads were left dead on their feet whereas the Chelsea lads looked like they could go for another hour.

Unfortunately I do agree that we set up a bit too negative and naively.  First of all going man-to-man for everyone against players like those that Chelsea fielded is asking for trouble in my mind.   With such system as soon as someone beats their man, that's it everything else is open as the other defenders are pre-occupied.  I won't claim to know how we should have set up but I don't think the system did us any favours.   Starting with a side to grind it out also brings the risk of your game plan going out the window to an early goal, as it did for us.

That all said, we could have played any system and Chelsea would have beat us, comfortably.  Big shame we couldn't get to the break at 2-1 as that third goal killed us off.  Would liked to have seen us hold out for 60 minutes and then unleash Rose and Wright on them.

Don't think anyone let themselves down and a great experience for our lads.  

Absolutely boiling in that ground though, couldn't do that every other week.  Give me a fresh sea breeze!!

but the idea is not simply man to man, it is based on us playing with a floating man at the back a 'mopper up' like we had with Rose at Palace, so that if our player gets beaten there is a spare man available to 'mop up' . this obviously leaves the opponents with 1 spare man; versus palace and Malmo MJ identifies the opponent with the least technical ability (usually the lumbering  centre half as we saw at Palace). Every other of the 9 remaining outfield players is man marked by 1 of our remaining 9 outfield players, so making them play the ball to the technically inept centre half.He is allowed to bring the ball forward, because on the balance of probabilities he is going to feck it up (as he repeatedly did at Palace). the problem last night is that Zouma may not be quite as good technically as Berekely or Hudson-odoi, but he is still bloody good! didn't help that we didn't have any pace or that Clifton was painfully shown up in terms of pace and ability

Quoted from Mariner93er

Worth remembering that any cup shocks almost exclusively occur when the prem team are playing away, on a pitch that isn't as condusive to passing footbsll. Yesterday, the pitch was like a pool table as you'd expect. Had the game been at Blundell Park, their style of play becomes much harder to implement. Thst's why Newport have been succesful st home in the cup, even Sunday league players are used to playing on better surfaces than theirs.

If you select a starting eleven like we had, it would not have mattered if the game was on Bradley Pitches.

Heisenberg, another comment on the Upper Shed:  there were no rails for getting up to the higher rows.  At least the UF has these!

After a few beers had a coffee at the ground.  Very surprised that it was only a £1.

Am i alone thinking Whitehouse been a bit off the boil for a few games barring last night?
I do like the look of Robson to be fair.

Think Hess at the moment is the only consistent mid we have, Clifton will come good but remember hes still a kid and learning.

Think our mid is and has been not great for a good while now and teams can at time pretty much cut through us like we have 2 Jamie Clarkes(remember him?) playing there.