Simo's attempted tip over

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Micalijo

DELETED USER
Joined
Aug 15, 2009
Messages
0
Reaction score
0
PURE COMEDY GOLD

By the way boys and girls - not a cat in hells chance of winning play-offs. Zero pace, and Swiss thinks Flynn is quick!!!!!
 

I find little to disagree with here, apart from the constant Simo hate.

One question though, where has our pace been this season? You know, the season that got us to 90 points?

Ched certainly wasn't quick. Only Philips I can think of and he wasn't here that long, nor on our best runs.
 
I find little to disagree with here, apart from the constant Simo hate.

One question though, where has our pace been this season? You know, the season that got us to 90 points?

Ched certainly wasn't quick. Only Philips I can think of and he wasn't here that long, nor on our best runs.

It is true that our success this season has been mostly down to our players' technical ability. No teams in this division can match our skill. Ched has looked quicker than most opponents though and we have definitely missed his running on and off the ball, not just his goalscoring.
 
It is true that our success this season has been mostly down to our players' technical ability. No teams in this division can match our skill. Ched has looked quicker than most opponents though and we have definitely missed his running on and off the ball, not just his goalscoring.

Don't disagree with that at Bergs. Although, I'd still never have called Ched quick. Just 'better' and that extra talent and movement made him look half a yard quick.

I'd go Cresswell and O'Hall on Monday.
 
Don't disagree with that at Bergs. Although, I'd still never have called Ched quick. Just 'better' and that extra talent and movement made him look half a yard quick.

I'd go Cresswell and O'Hall on Monday.

Difficult one, isnt it? They all did well last night and I thought we edged it. But for all the craft and defensive work, we don't look like we've got goals in us set up like that.

UTB
 
Difficult one, isnt it? They all did well last night and I thought we edged it. But for all the craft and defensive work, we don't look like we've got goals in us set up like that.

UTB
Don't agree. I thought we looked more dangerous as the game went on and Quinn was the key to this.

Cresswell for Porter for me would be the only change with us keeping the same system. Lat 20 bring O'Halloran on. I also reckon Philliskirk might be on the bench
 
As long as Porter doesn't start, I'll be happy. Taylor in for Hill too please.

I've never been one for scapegoating players, but these two just aren't good enough. Sorry lads.
 
As long as Porter doesn't start, I'll be happy. Taylor in for Hill too please.

I've never been one for scapegoating players, but these two just aren't good enough. Sorry lads.

Absolutely agree with this. Porter and hill are the weakest link! Would actually like to see cresswell and philliskirk start personally.
 
Hill played well last night. Stronger than Taylor,quicker and better in the air. Both have a touch of 'Nyron' about them defensively. I wouldn't have Taylor on the bench let alone starting
 
It's definitley the distribution that lets Hill down. He's nowhere near as good as Taylor for that but he's more of an overall athlete. Both are 3rd division players in fact and ability.

UTB
 
Hill played well last night. Stronger than Taylor,quicker and better in the air. Both have a touch of 'Nyron' about them defensively. I wouldn't have Taylor on the bench let alone starting

Really? I thought he was absolutely awful. Aimless passing down the flanks, fair support going forward, but clumsy and horrible in possession. Many of this misplaced passes resulted in pressure on us.

Contrast with Taylor who has a much better pass on him and about the same level of defensive work.
 

It's definitley the distribution that lets Hill down. He's nowhere near as good as Taylor for that but he's more of an overall athlete. Both are 3rd division players in fact and ability.

UTB

Agree, Hill's crossing and passing is shocking, but he kept Wilson much more quiet than he was at the Lane. Taylor is decent on the ball, but in the league match he twice looked to just lay down and die as his opponent flew past him and I'd be nervous if he was picked in the second leg.
 
Problem is Bergs, I think we come under more pressure overall when Hill plays as we don't retain the ball.

I wonder if we combined all 4 of our left backs, would we get one good one?
 
who says wilson wont stick with the same starting 11?
i hope cresswell starts upfront monday alongside philly(think we need some young legs upfront)to offer a dimension up front that we have missed since c@@d.
the goals have to come from somewhere,why not take a gamble on the young lad-or stick with poorter.
 
who says wilson wont stick with the same starting 11?
i hope cresswell starts upfront monday alongside philly(think we need some young legs upfront)to offer a dimension up front that we have missed since c@@d.
the goals have to come from somewhere,why not take a gamble on the young lad-or stick with poorter.
Oh come off it , porter wasn't great but philliskirk is totally unproven with not one scrap of evidence to suggest he might be any good in the first team
Not one scrap
 
Oh come off it , porter wasn't great but philliskirk is totally unproven with not one scrap of evidence to suggest he might be any good in the first team
Not one scrap
thank god for a voice of reason at last.
hill is the scapegoat in a lot of this thread, i thought last night he was strong and a lot of the time composed and he made some good tackles. the back four played well to a man and i wouldnt slate any of them for last night...but if anyone was guilty of poor distribution amongst them it was maguire, though ive not seen that said once! willo lost the ball too much for my liking and if he'd caught up with the people he lost it too we might have seen him sent off, thank goodness he didnt. porter isnt a target man, it was the one aspect of the formation that reminded me of that old patched up teams put out by warnock, with a non target man as the lone striker struggling to do his best. monday night - cressy in for flynn, quinny back out wide and we'll be off to wembley, no probs.
 
As long as Porter doesn't start, I'll be happy. Taylor in for Hill too please.

I've never been one for scapegoating players, but these two just aren't good enough. Sorry lads.

I thought Hill did fairly well to be honest. I'd prefer him to Taylor, who was woeful aganst Stevenage at BDTBL. He got turned more times than a revolving door. And besides that, not a time to be tinkering with the defence IMHO
 
I thought Hill had some dodgy moments but the evidence is there to say that with the back 4 we had on Friday we kept a clean sheet. No point changing it for the 2nd leg. I would imagine there'll be changes in other areas.
 
I'm not particularly happy with anyone at left back but, given we've just kept our first clean sheet in how ever many games, stick with the same back 4 for the home leg.
 
Flynn is quick!!!!!

Speaking of Flynn, in the first half, he skipped past Wilson just outside their box before being pushed to the ground. Looked a shocking decision not to give him a free kick?? On the other hand I think the referee was right in not giving Williamson a penalty when he went down.
 

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom