Trumpet Posted 11 August 2007 Share Posted 11 August 2007 What game did you watch! He made a couple of quality saves at players feet! A couple being 2. He done NOTHING out of the oprdinary, infact i'd say he was poor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webbo Posted 11 August 2007 Share Posted 11 August 2007 judging by some of the replies on here did some of you watch an entirely different game?we dominated that match, and on another day we would have scored 5, but the woodwork was hit twice and the keeper/defence got so jammy it was unreal! As for not wanting to win it, we had 21 shots compared to blackpools 3 shots, just cus we like to pass it around rather than play at 200mph some of you think we didn't want it? get real. despite the loss, i really enjoyed the game, it was exciting, had some quality and some mistakes (gotta laugh at hendo's holding the ball up!!!) and an all round entertaining game. player ratings... Henderson - 7.5 Chambers - 8 N'Gotty - 8.5 McAuley - 8 Mattock - 6.5 Wesolowski - 6.5 Clemence - 6.5 Kishishev - 6.5 Newton - 8 De Vries - 9 Hume - 7.5 Subs Campbell - 8 Hayes - 8 Stearman - 8 I think you're right ,it must have been a different game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trumpet Posted 11 August 2007 Share Posted 11 August 2007 Isn't it great to have the footballing season upon us again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
syston_fox Posted 11 August 2007 Share Posted 11 August 2007 judging by some of the replies on here did some of you watch an entirely different game?we dominated that match, and on another day we would have scored 5, but the woodwork was hit twice and the keeper/defence got so jammy it was unreal! As for not wanting to win it, we had 21 shots compared to blackpools 3 shots, just cus we like to pass it around rather than play at 200mph some of you think we didn't want it? get real. despite the loss, i really enjoyed the game, it was exciting, had some quality and some mistakes (gotta laugh at hendo's holding the ball up!!!) and an all round entertaining game. player ratings... Henderson - 7.5 Chambers - 8 N'Gotty - 8.5 McAuley - 8 Mattock - 6.5 Wesolowski - 6.5 Clemence - 6.5 Kishishev - 6.5 Newton - 8 De Vries - 9 Hume - 7.5 Subs Campbell - 8 Hayes - 8 Stearman - 8 Nice to see someone finally talking some sense! De Vries was one of the better players out there but people are always quick to jump on his back because of who he is. He's worked his b0llocks off over the summer to force himself back into the squad let alone the first eleven. He came within inches of scoring two quality goals today and still people are moaning about him. I personally think Mattock had a mare and his "pass back" from 65 yards was laughable! Wouldnt say it was the most entertaining game and Im thoroughly frustrated but on another day we could have scored at least 4 of those chances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
He's not bald Posted 11 August 2007 Share Posted 11 August 2007 At least people might now understand why I nominated Simon Grayson as first choice for manager. Somehow he got something out of nothing simply by getting his players to do what they could efficiently).Henderson 6 (apart from his bizarre bit of dribling had little to do) Chambers 6.5 (Efficient and made some useful drives forward) N'Gotty 7.5 (Looked in control. Did the simple things. Some excellent blocks.) McAuley 7 (Also blocked well and had control in the air) Mattock 5.75 (Goodish first half but made errors of judgement in the second although Newton left him up two blind alleys) Clemence 5 (Indifferent. Looked a bit of a Hughes today - plenty of touches but no real outcome.) Kishishev 6 (a bit sluggish but well involved) Wesolowski 7.75 (Our best midfielder by a distance. So unlucky with his blocked shot. Should have scored with a header but was forever in the box trying to make things happen and covered so much ground in energy sappin g sapping conditions). Newton 3 (I've said he's not good enough for what we want and it was plain to see. Mattock will get the blame for his bizarre backpass and his slip that eventually led to their goal but it was Newton who left him with no options and who failed to take responsibility by getting the ball into the box early when he had chance.) DeVries 7.75 (Hit the woodwork twice and led the line so well I cannot believe we failed to score. We had more chances than a Kelly team would create in a month). Hume 7 (Another to miss his half-chances but he was a constant menace) Subs: Hayes 7 (So close to making a goal for Campbell with his first cross. Had far more effect than Newton in a third of the time but is clearly not fit yet). Campbell 7 (Such a threat but strikers are paid to take chances and he should have taken two). Stearman 6.5 (Helped make a difference like the other subs as Leicester put more into attack and really wrested control) MoM: Mark DeVries. (So unlucky with his turn and volley). Allen 4 (Started one man light with the choice of Newton who is not good enough. Didn't choose enough attackers to start so didn't get the high tempo we needed and didn't get the two goals a game we need. I warned all that Mattock was being given too much responsibility too soon and that Sheehan had been more effective pre-season and that was bourne out. I also said no two strikers were enough, that we needed threee and that was shown by our uneventful first half and the improvement when DJ arrived. In my these errors cost us the initiative and the game. Forcing in form or any other players into unsuitable positions is no answer). (-1 for the home defeat, -1 for the tactical errors which contributed. +13 overall). You are really losing credibility with me...I used to have a lot of respect for your comment's and knowledge but why the hell do you keep bigging up De Vries?...he can't jump he can't turn on the ball and he can't fecking score! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJ Barry Hammond Posted 11 August 2007 Share Posted 11 August 2007 Allen 4 (Started one man light with the choice of Newton who is not good enough. Didn't choose enough attackers to start so didn't get the high tempo we needed and didn't get the two goals a game we need. I warned all that Mattock was being given too much responsibility too soon and that Sheehan had been more effective pre-season and that was bourne out. I also said no two strikers were enough, that we needed threee and that was shown by our uneventful first half and the improvement when DJ arrived. In my these errors cost us the initiative and the game. Forcing in form or any other players into unsuitable positions is no answer). (-1 for the home defeat, -1 for the tactical errors which contributed. +13 overall). Let me get this right - Allen gets a rating of 4 - so does that mean he started on minus 8? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moreton Posted 11 August 2007 Share Posted 11 August 2007 Henderson - 6 Chambers - 6 Mattock - 5 ----- not a good game for the young defender i think you will agree McAuley - 7 Bruno - 7.5/8 Newton - 6 Wesolowski - 7 Clemence - 6 Kishishev - 7 De Vries - 7 Hume - 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ibbosuk Posted 11 August 2007 Share Posted 11 August 2007 I Pridicted we would lose this game one 0-1 and it was as I expected here are my marks out of 10 Henderson - 5 Chambers - 6* Mattock - 3 McAuley - 5 Bruno - 5.5 Newton - 5 Wesolowski - 5 Clemence - 4.5 Kishishev - 4.5 De Vries -6 Hume - 5 Hayes - 5 DJ -5 Stearman - 5 Nothing more than midtable to lower half of the league team performance. PissPoor Mattock was our worst player by far & chambers our best. I found watching this game very VERY BORING, I am so glad I backed out on a season ticket ! lots of aimless ball to nobody, Blackpool were neat & tidy road there luck near the end, but fully deserved victory. We have all bought into the "MA Hype" I hope it has some substance,as I dont think Milan will put up with this all season, neither will I before I vote with my feet! BORING CLUELESS LEICESTER !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reynard Posted 11 August 2007 Share Posted 11 August 2007 Henderson 5 almost cocked up one clearance and doesn't communicate. chambers 5 no real imrovement especially in an attacking capability. caught out of position in 1st half quite a few times. n'gotty 6 badly caught for pace but great recovering tackle. steady mccauley 6 won a lot in the air but ultimately at fault for their goal as he didn't get across to cover even though he had the chance. mattock 3.5 showed exactly what he is a young lad with a lot of promise but only 3 games under his belt. is he a full back?? didn't look one today. 1 dreadful backpass in particular and not great in the air. very hesitant going forward. kishishev 5 a slightly better tiatto on this evidence though not as quick. clemence 6 worked hard but will need to be much much better if we are to reach the top half of the table. newton 5 flattered to deceive. yes he ran around a lot but with little or no effect. we need better if we are to challenge. weso 4.5 low score because he was shown up by being played out of position. should he have been subbed instead of kishishev? not a wide player! hume 6 usual performance. ran around alot but needs 6 or 7 chances to score. de vries 7 good effort one great swivel and shot which hit the cross bar. also one excellent glancing header which went close. probably our best player on the day which sums up the overall standard. subs dj 5 didn't offer a lot though played wide right. should play full game vs stanley stearman 6 average performance. did nothing wrong. loked better than chambers. hayes 5.5 looks like he might be a late impact player. worryingly reminded me a little of hammill. to be fair though he didn't get enough of the ball. overall this was a disappointng start. for the first 25 mins we were utterly outplayed by a side that passed and moved far better than us. overall they shaded the 1st half. we were better in the 2nd but like previous years it took a goal against us for us to up the ante. worrying that we have not addressed the left hand side problems or the fact that generally we just played with no width. Their goalie played well but we just don't look to have the strikers to put the ball in the net. Yes it is early days but the next 4 games are important. we must take at least 8 point from them and on this form it is hard to see where we wil get them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simi Posted 11 August 2007 Share Posted 11 August 2007 Allen 4 (Started one man light with the choice of Newton who is not good enough. Didn't choose enough attackers to start so didn't get the high tempo we needed and didn't get the two goals a game we need. I warned all that Mattock was being given too much responsibility too soon and that Sheehan had been more effective pre-season and that was bourne out. I also said no two strikers were enough, that we needed threee and that was shown by our uneventful first half and the improvement when DJ arrived. In my these errors cost us the initiative and the game. Forcing in form or any other players into unsuitable positions is no answer).(-1 for the home defeat, -1 for the tactical errors which contributed. +13 overall). Let me get this right - Allen gets a rating of 4 - so does that mean he started on minus 8? The rating of 4 was just for the match. The rest is an overall total. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomassi Posted 11 August 2007 Share Posted 11 August 2007 Umm.... we lost 1-0 to a poor team..end of! yep its something called football! It happens! We lost but we certainly didn't deserve to lose. Glad i watched it though and I'm not feeling down about it, 45 games to go and will see some more good football this season methinks! or would you rather we play like we have done past 3 seasons? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BartonFox Posted 11 August 2007 Share Posted 11 August 2007 Three strikers today and not one scored yet it is only de Vries who is getting negative press He and Hume don't work according to some, so the only thing to do is pair de Vries and Campbell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simi Posted 11 August 2007 Share Posted 11 August 2007 Three strikers today and not one scored yet it is only de Vries who is getting negative press He and Hume don't work according to some, so the only thing to do is pair de Vries and Campbell. Agreed. No matter what happened today I knew the talking point would be De Vries. He didn't actually do that badly, although he was far from outstanding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
He's not bald Posted 11 August 2007 Share Posted 11 August 2007 Nice to see someone finally talking some sense! De Vries was one of the better players out there but people are always quick to jump on his back because of who he is. He's worked his b0llocks off over the summer to force himself back into the squad let alone the first eleven. He came within inches of scoring two quality goals today and still people are moaning about him. I personally think Mattock had a mare and his "pass back" from 65 yards was laughable! Wouldnt say it was the most entertaining game and Im thoroughly frustrated but on another day we could have scored at least 4 of those chances. Worked his bollocks off! Came within inches of scoring 2 quality goals! Achieved exactly what? Moved us forward how? Made us all more confident and got us how many points? don't think so!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomassi Posted 11 August 2007 Share Posted 11 August 2007 I agree with Thracian, Mark De Vries was man of the match. His touch was spot on today, hit the post with a header, hit the bar with an awesome shot, bought others into play and linked very well. He won more headers than lost and Hume should have been playing closer to De Vries from the flick ons... ...those De Vries haters should forget about the past, its affecting your judgement for now! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thracian Posted 11 August 2007 Share Posted 11 August 2007 You are really losing credibility with me...I used to have a lot of respect for your comment's and knowledge but why the hell do you keep bigging up De Vries?...he can't jump he can't turn on the ball and he can't fecking score! His scoring record is perfectly acceptable overall - including at Hearts - and he so nearly had a couple today. He won plenty of headers today too. His nearest effort would have been a candidate for goal of the seaon had it gone in. Perhaps people should concentrate on our multi-million pound man. Quality player no doubt but he failed to despatch a bread and butter chance at the near post off Hayes from 7 yards out and missed another after beating two men near the far post and then failing to hit the target. As for my credibility suit yourself. But it's funny how many of the problems I mentioned in the pre-match build-up manifested themselves so clearly during the match - and cost us in the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simi Posted 11 August 2007 Share Posted 11 August 2007 Worked his bollocks off! Came within inches of scoring 2 quality goals! Achieved exactly what? Moved us forward how? Made us all more confident and got us how many points? don't think so!!! Let's all blame De Vries for losing 1-0? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dandannieldanok Posted 11 August 2007 Share Posted 11 August 2007 Hendo 6 (Distribution has improved) Chambers 6 (OK) N'Gotty 6.5 (Solid) McAuley 7 (Coped with having to cover numerous positions admirably) Mattock 2 (People ridiculed me for suggesting we get Stephen Crainey , Mattock was awful) Newton 5 (Not very good) Clemence 4.5 (I thought he was supposed to be good, passing was on Stephen Hughes' level, not a very inspirational captain) Kishishev 5.5 (Fumbled through with hard work) Wesolowski ?? (What can you say, played completely out of position, chopped and changed and never allowed to settle by the manager) Hume 5 (No service) De Vries ?? (Again, what can you say, the guy can't header the ball yet we persisted with hoofball which only works with the right players) Stearman 6 (Fine) Campbell 7 (Sharp and pacy, why did he not start?) Hayes 6.5 (Direct at least) Martin Allen (What a strange team selection, for all his huffing and puffing on the sideline he simply made a huge mess on his big day, appalling tactically and was clueless when we conceded.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
egg_fried_rice Posted 11 August 2007 Share Posted 11 August 2007 Hendo - 6 - Not too bad, one slightly dodgy punch, found himself 30 yards from goal once, but otherwise did what he had to and no chance for the goal Mattock - 4 - Worst I've seen him play; when not giving the ball away his play was predictable and rarely well executed. I was surprised to see him start. N'Gotty - 7 - Brick wall for the most part. Let a player past once but made excellent recovery tackle. McAuley - 6.5 - Won almost every header, solid partnership with N'gotty. even looked half decent going forward when we had them pinned back late in the second half. Chambers - 6 - Energetic and committed. some of his decision making was dubious, but a promising start. I hope the injury isn't serious. Newton - 7 - despite his lack of pace, took on his men well, passed effectively for the most part, and looked like he wanted to compete. Wesolowski - 5 - gave the ball away far too often, and was frequently out of position. Clemence - 6 - when good, he looked a class act on the ball and sent off some good passes, when poor, looked a little panicky. More consistency needed from captain clem Kish - 5.5 - good ball winning and passing/moving in places, but frequently looked a yard or too off the pace. A few too many times he gave away possession, also. Hume - 7 - typical dogged display. De Vries - 7 - had a solid game, won many of his aerial balls (despite what some numptys are saying) and displayed good holding-up skills. Hit the bar, the post and should have scored his headed chance in the box. On another day, it could have been a deep freeze hattrick. Hayes -6- lively, not given the ball often enough to shine, but made some decent runs and often gained us ground. Campbell -6- looked a bit of a headless chicken at times, generally being out of position and chasing the game. However showed flashes of pace and got a couple of goalscoring chances. Stearman - solid and did his job. supported well, too. I believe we were rather unlucky to lose today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Royston. Posted 11 August 2007 Share Posted 11 August 2007 Hendo 5 Chambers 5 Mattock 5 N'Gotty 7 Macauly 6 Newton 6 Wesolowski 6 Kishishev 5 Clemence 5 De Vries 7 Hume 6 Hayes 6 Stearman 6 Campbell 6 When Mattock made a mistake, loads of idots were slagging him off and his confidence was shot there and then. A couple of middle aged chavs sat next to me obviously knew their football and said "thank god for that" wehn he was taken off. de Vries impressed me, showed good control at times and was the closest thing we had to a "menace" in the air. I instantly liked N'Gotty. So long since we have had a butch defender. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
He's not bald Posted 11 August 2007 Share Posted 11 August 2007 yep its something called football! It happens! We lost but we certainly didn't deserve to lose. Glad i watched it though and I'm not feeling down about it, 45 games to go and will see some more good football this season methinks! or would you rather we play like we have done past 3 seasons? Well there wasn't much of an improvement today...don't keep on about what we will be like...we were as crap today as we've ever been and until I see an improvement I'm not going to change my opinion! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
He's not bald Posted 11 August 2007 Share Posted 11 August 2007 His scoring record is perfectly acceptable overall and he so nearly had a couple today. He won plenty of headers today too). nearly don't get goals points or promotion...sorry Thrac! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Messi Posted 11 August 2007 Share Posted 11 August 2007 hendo 6 mattock 4 (hayes 6) mcauley 7.5 n'gotty 6.5 chambers 6 (stearman 5) Clemence 6 kishishev 5(campbell 6) newton 6 wesolowski 5.5 de vries 6 hume 7 McAuley played great, mattock played shite- well 2 be honest it was a pretty bad performance, just booting the ball whenever we got it. better not lose to accrington stanley cause that will be very very bad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thracian Posted 11 August 2007 Share Posted 11 August 2007 yep its something called football! It happens! We lost but we certainly didn't deserve to lose. Glad i watched it though and I'm not feeling down about it, 45 games to go and will see some more good football this season methinks! or would you rather we play like we have done past 3 seasons? Couldn't agree more. The tempo of the first half-hour was disappointing and there was much to criticise but the football and excitement was infinitely better than anything we were used to under Kelly apart from Cuop matches. It's a long time since I can remember us have 8/10 pass moves a string of decent chances and some numbers in the box later on. I just hope MA learns quickly from his mistakes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
syston_fox Posted 11 August 2007 Share Posted 11 August 2007 Worked his bollocks off! Came within inches of scoring 2 quality goals! Achieved exactly what? Moved us forward how? Made us all more confident and got us how many points? don't think so!!! Need I remind you as to how Matty Fryatt came back from pre-season last year over weight and not performing well at all.... and yet everyone still insisted that he would come good. Anyone else but Mark De Vries and people would say he played well! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.