Mikey Posted 8 December 2007 Posted 8 December 2007 Fulop - 6 - Did what he had to do, maybe could have done better with the 1st goal. Stearman - 4 - Poor Mcauley 5.5 - Good defending, poor distribution. Kisnorbo 5.5 - Above Mattock - 6 - Looked brilliant going forward, poor defensively. More of a LM. Kenton - 7 - Battled brilliantly, solid in the tackle, good. Clemence - 6.5 - Better than the past games and tried to make things happen. Weso - 5 - Battled for the 20 minutes he was on. Chambers - 6 - Looked pacy and good enough when the ball actually came to him. Cort - 6 - First half very good, second half poor. Hume - 7 - Ran around, put in effort and tried different things. Looking one of the best again. Subs: King - 6 - Solid Hayes - 6 - Looked good going forward and caused them problems. It was a good performance altogether I think. First half was poor but 2nd half we really picked up and caused them problems.
ThorpeAstleyFox Posted 8 December 2007 Posted 8 December 2007 Fulop 5 Stearman 5 McAuley 6 Kisnorbo 5 Mattock 6 Kenton 7 Clemence 5 Weso 5 Chambers 5 Cort 6 Hume 5 Subs: King 4 Hayes 6
coale39 Posted 8 December 2007 Posted 8 December 2007 Fulop - 7 - Didn't have much to do Stearman - 9 Fantastic. 2 assists and two goal line clearances, cant ask for much more Mcauley 8.5 Class above Kisnorbo 8.5 Above Mattock - 9 - Looked brilliant going forward. Superb 40 yrd goal. Kenton - 7 - Battled brilliantly, solid in the tackle, good. Clemence 9 - Orchestrated all of our attacks. A midfield dynamo. Weso - 7 - Battled like a warrior for the 20 minutes he was on. Chambers -10 This guy was a different class. To dribble the ball in to the net 2 times was fantastic. Cort - 8 - Built like a bull, he was Heskey like today. Only scored one goal but hey maybe more next time eh? Hume - 10 He should be in the circus he can jump so high. 4 goals, 2 assists. Glad we turned down that 15mil bid from Barca. Subs: King - 6 - Solid Hayes - 6 - Looked good going forward and caused them problems. A live wire. To beat Man u so emphatically was fantastic. How we are not topping the league, I will never know. Keep it up lads!
danny. Posted 8 December 2007 Posted 8 December 2007 Fulop - 7 - Didn't have much to doStearman - 9 Fantastic. 2 assists and two goal line clearances, cant ask for much more Mcauley 8.5 Class above Kisnorbo 8.5 Above Mattock - 9 - Looked brilliant going forward. Superb 40 yrd goal. Kenton - 7 - Battled brilliantly, solid in the tackle, good. Clemence 9 - Orchestrated all of our attacks. A midfield dynamo. Weso - 7 - Battled like a warrior for the 20 minutes he was on. Chambers -10 This guy was a different class. To dribble the ball in to the net 2 times was fantastic. Cort - 8 - Built like a bull, he was Heskey like today. Only scored one goal but hey maybe more next time eh? Hume - 10 He should be in the circus he can jump so high. 4 goals, 2 assists. Glad we turned down that 15mil bid from Barca. Subs: King - 6 - Solid Hayes - 6 - Looked good going forward and caused them problems. A live wire. To beat Man u so emphatically was fantastic. How we are not topping the league, I will never know. Keep it up lads! twat.
Yaxx Posted 8 December 2007 Posted 8 December 2007 Fulop - 7 - Didn't have much to doStearman - 9 Fantastic. 2 assists and two goal line clearances, cant ask for much more Mcauley 8.5 Class above Kisnorbo 8.5 Above Mattock - 9 - Looked brilliant going forward. Superb 40 yrd goal. Kenton - 7 - Battled brilliantly, solid in the tackle, good. Clemence 9 - Orchestrated all of our attacks. A midfield dynamo. Weso - 7 - Battled like a warrior for the 20 minutes he was on. Chambers -10 This guy was a different class. To dribble the ball in to the net 2 times was fantastic. Cort - 8 - Built like a bull, he was Heskey like today. Only scored one goal but hey maybe more next time eh? Hume - 10 He should be in the circus he can jump so high. 4 goals, 2 assists. Glad we turned down that 15mil bid from Barca. Subs: King - 6 - Solid Hayes - 6 - Looked good going forward and caused them problems. A live wire. To beat Man u so emphatically was fantastic. How we are not topping the league, I will never know. Keep it up lads! :laugh: Hang on though. That sounds remarkably like Olly's post match assessment.
Thracian Posted 8 December 2007 Posted 8 December 2007 It was Mattocks man but I dont think it was his fault, sometimes you just get done by some excellent movement by the attacker and a beautiful cross. But when i see it on tv tomorrow my opinion could change. It would have been Stearman or Sheehan's fault in they'd been there!
danny. Posted 8 December 2007 Posted 8 December 2007 It would have been Stearman or Sheehan's fault in they'd been there! no it wouldn't, that cross shouldn't have been made, strearman cocked the whole thing up 15 seconds before the cross was even put it.
Fat Ron Posted 8 December 2007 Posted 8 December 2007 Hayes. 5 - Lazy twat. Good attacking runs, but get back and defend lad. My opinion only!!!!! After this i really dont see the point in commenting on the game as my thoughts would be lost on most on here... clearly sections still think we are Premier League class and in a position to beat quality sidea like WBA with no problems at all.. Had a superb afternoon. met the mighty Mauchlen and Mr Walsh who gave honest opinions of the team, met Hume after the game again, genuine guy.. Free bar all game so loved the becks and bacardi throughout.... Disapointed to lose the game , especially against the run of play second half but the effort by the players was there to see by all ...... maybe... ~I would like to comment on the support tonight, good when the going got tough but Jobber only seems to start banging the drum whe we are attacking.... Jobber... Sort it out, lets build the atmosphere!!!!!! (Again, lots will disagree and fair enough, all entiltiled to an opinion...)
The Reverend Posted 8 December 2007 Posted 8 December 2007 It would have been Stearman or Sheehan's fault in they'd been there! Wrong. The situation COULD and SHOULD have been prevented by Stearman. If someone such as Kaebi had made such an error in the reserves you would be the first to pounce.
Thracian Posted 8 December 2007 Posted 8 December 2007 Wrong. The situation COULD and SHOULD have been prevented by Stearman.If someone such as Kaebi had made such an error in the reserves you would be the first to pounce. If you'd want your team to give free headers from a few yards at the far post fair enough. I wouldn't want it in my team and I'm bloody sure they'd know that they defend as a team not just as individuals.
The Reverend Posted 8 December 2007 Posted 8 December 2007 If you'd want your team to give free headers from a few yards at the far post fair enough. I wouldn't want it in my team and I'm bloody sure they'd know that they defend as a team not just as individuals. Thracian. Who and would you play at right back, and why?
AyewJoking Posted 8 December 2007 Posted 8 December 2007 I wasnt pointing the finger at Mattock, I genuinely couldnt remember who was there when it happened. Stearman wasnt doing his job but neither was Mattock in this case so personally I dont lay all the blame at Stearmans door. Its a good thing Mattock was within 5 yards of the WBA scorer else we'd have a whole new topic to moan about .
Thracian Posted 8 December 2007 Posted 8 December 2007 Thracian.Who and would you play at right back, and why? Right now I would play James Chambers, as I said a while ago, and not because of anything that happened today. And it certainly doesn't mean I like people making him shoulder the blame for all sorts while ignoring the error of others. I've long said that Stearman would be best as a centre-half. He's always looked more comfortable there and he'd provide faster cover for full-backs than is presently given and could also push up in central midfield if King goes on a sortie. His passing would be an added bonus. At full-back he's vulnerable when he's turned and, operating as a wing-back that's always likely to happen. He's also forced into passing too many hopeful balls. There ought to be cover for our full-backs but Mcauley's not fast enough for that and is himself vulnerable in one-on-one situations, especially when there's pace behind him. Chambers impressed me greatly at Nottingham. He defends with the bravery of Kisnorbo but brings the ball out faster and better. He ought to have the speed and energy to get forward but I'm not sure because Stearman's skill on the ball going forward (for a full-back) is much underrated.
The Reverend Posted 8 December 2007 Posted 8 December 2007 Right now I would play James Chambers, as I said a while ago. But that doesn't mean I like people attacking Stearman for the sake of it and somehow making him shoulder the blame for everything while ignoring the error of others.I've long said that Stearman would be best as a centre-half. He's always looked more comfortable there and he's provide faster cover for full-backs than is presently given and could also push up in central midfield if King goes on a sortie. At full-back he's vulnerable when he's turned and, operating as a wing-back that's always likely to happen. There ought to be cover but Mcauley's not fast enough for that and is himself vulnerable in one-on-one situations, especiallywhen there's pace behind him. Chambers impressed me greatly at Nottingham. He defends with the bravery of Kisnorbo but brings the ball out faster and better. He ought to have the speed and energy to get forward but I'm not sure because Stearman's skill on the ball going forward (for a full-back) is much underrated. So Chambers then, and i agree. If Stearman makes mistakes and look vulnerable like he has, theres bound to be discontent, and he should be dropped for the better player/s. There are better options, its as simple as that.
Thracian Posted 8 December 2007 Posted 8 December 2007 So Chambers then, and i agree.If Stearman makes mistakes and look vulnerable like he has, theres bound to be discontent, and he should be dropped for the better player/s. There are better options, its as simple as that. I don't know that because I've not seen a lot of Chambers. As I've said he certainly wasn't very creative in midfield. All our players make mistakes - serious ones. A good part of the reason I'd play Chambers right back is to move Stearman into the middle with N'Gotty. Why N'Gotty seems to have slipped off the radar I don't know - but I have my thoughts.
Thracian Posted 8 December 2007 Posted 8 December 2007 Fulop. 6 - What did he have to do? pick the ball out of the net twice.Stearman. 4 - At fault for the first goal, got done twice in the space of 5-10 seconds leading toward the cross, took too long on the ball too. Mattock. 5 - Looked god in attack, which is a stark contrast to his defending. Kisnorbo. 5 - Won headers. Gave theball away too much. McAuley. 5 - Hoof. Hoof. Hoof. Kenton. 7 - Always closing down, mean in the tackle. Clem. 7 - Much better tha his past few games, tried to make things happen, decent forward runs too. Weso. 5 - Harried well, so frustrating about his injuries. Chambers. 6 - Some decent runs, great pace, with some nice touches, players seemed reluctant to use him Hume. 7 - Looks as if he's getting back to his best. Neeeds better sevice, always looking to make things happen. Cort. 6 - Had a great first half, but died down in the 2nd, should've had a penalty. King. 6 - Got well stuck in, kept it tight, playe dthe simple balls. Hayes. 5 - Lazy twat. Good attacking runs, but get back and defend lad. Referee. 0 - What a dipstick. I've no comment to make about the ref but the guy behind me today was chopsing on with some conviction about how he was the best we've had at the Walkers for ages. He might, of course, have been emphasising how bad the others have been.
danny. Posted 8 December 2007 Posted 8 December 2007 i agree with the guy behind you where do u sit thracian?
Fez of Mahrez Posted 8 December 2007 Posted 8 December 2007 I've no comment to make about the ref but the guy behind me today was chopsing on with some conviction about how he was the best we've had at the Walkers for ages.He might, of course, have been emphasising how bad the others have been. I agree. He was good. Let the play go most of the time, was lenient with bookings and gave us a goal that was never a goal in a million years.
Thracian Posted 9 December 2007 Posted 9 December 2007 i agree with the guy behind you where do u sit thracian? E2. Behind and above the goal.
danny. Posted 9 December 2007 Posted 9 December 2007 That's good. I wouldn't be happy if you sat in front of the goal.
WetFlannel Posted 9 December 2007 Posted 9 December 2007 That's good.I wouldn't be happy if you sat in front of the goal. it might make it a bit harder to score against us
Thracian Posted 9 December 2007 Posted 9 December 2007 That's good.I wouldn't be happy if you sat in front of the goal. The way things are at the moment I could probably sit in a deckchair on the six yard line not get disturbed if City were kicking that way.
Ultra Posted 9 December 2007 Posted 9 December 2007 I agree. He was good. Let the play go most of the time, was lenient with bookings and gave us a goal that was never a goal in a million years. ...as well as missed blatant fouls under his nose, and a stonewall penalty for us at 1-1.. So he'll probably end up in the Premier League soon!
Scow Posted 9 December 2007 Posted 9 December 2007 I've long said that Stearman would be best as a centre-half. He's always looked more comfortable there and he'd provide faster cover for full-backs than is presently given and could also push up in central midfield if King goes on a sortie. His passing would be an added bonus. Stearman's passing? It's about effective as Junior Lewis. He makes a 5 yard forward pass look like a strain. And Stearman isn't strong enough at centreback - physically and mentally. He's about as strong as a sponge and shite in the air. Playing well against Quorn at centreback is a rather flawed argument for claiming Stearman should play at centreback. Then again, you're the person who rates Elvis Hammond, so you do post a birrof crap.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.