PAULCFC Posted 9 December 2007 Posted 9 December 2007 Or more Stearmans fault, he was letting the ball run out for a throw in despite the fact Brunt was going to keep it in, who's inch perfect cross led to the goal. Mattock played very well today. Stearman was at fault for their first,he definatly slowed down expecting a throw.From where we was in the right hand side of the Kop there was a part time left back playing today.Their left winger had all the time and space in the world if they could find em
FilboFox Posted 9 December 2007 Posted 9 December 2007 I love Mattock... he's a GREAT youngster that we need to keep hold of!
Lillehamring Posted 9 December 2007 Posted 9 December 2007 And don't even get me started on Porter... has porter died or been sold???? considering what IH has said about forgotten men & needing some width....
The Stig Posted 9 December 2007 Posted 9 December 2007 has porter died or been sold???? considering what IH has said about forgotten men & needing some width.... Porter is injured and out for the season.
teblin Posted 9 December 2007 Posted 9 December 2007 Fulup 6 had nothing to do Stearman 4 the weak link in the side, got done twice on the first goals but the guy should have even got the ball as stearman stopped running. Mattock 5 Stuggles defensivly, looked ok coming forward late on. Kisnorbo 7 Made 4 or 5 vital block. McAulley 7 Decent game, passing was poor. Kenton 7 Works hard, gets stuck in. Clememce 6 Played better yesterday, tried to get things going but wasn't to be. Hard against a very good WBA side. Weso 4 - Just can't see this guy making it, has he ever player more than 7 or 8 games in a row? Might not be his fault. Chambers 5 - not ready Cort 6 - Held the ball well first half, but very isolated, faded second. Hume 6 - Worked hard. Hayes 6 - Looks lively, at least he has a go at a defender King 5 - wasn't in it really.
reynard Posted 9 December 2007 Posted 9 December 2007 Utter tripe. Thier first goal was Stearmans fault. Stearman thought the ball was rolling out of play but then the winger came in and picked it up, and when Stearman caught up he proceeded to get raped TWICE and let the winger cross it. But i can see why you would blame Mattock The goal was both their fault. Stearman didn't prevent the cross but equally Mattock completely lost his man at the back post allowing him a free header which he couldn't miss. If you think not marking an attacker at the back post is not culpable play then I'm glad your not the manager. The truth at the moment is that Mattock is not as good as some on here want to believe. I'm not saying he won't be but at the moment he is a young pro still learning his craft. For me he has two main weaknesses the first is he is not great in the air and the second is his lack of pace.
Nath Posted 9 December 2007 Posted 9 December 2007 I don't think i'm anyone mate. I just find it amusing, how you can question what my ratings were, when you didn't even go to the game. Absolutely spot on Bert.
Thracian Posted 9 December 2007 Posted 9 December 2007 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. Stearman's played several games at centre-back in the reserves too but if you're happy with what we've got we'll have to agree to differ, again. As for Elvis you're exaggerating. It's true rate him compared with the options we have at City just now. He is far more dangerous than all sort of players who've been turning out for us. But a) I would never have signed him in the first place because he didn't have a scoring record of any consequence as a striker. b) I didn't expect him to be here this season, except perhaps as a fast alternative off the bench. I said on several occasions that I couldn't imagine him getting a game under the MM regime but that we shouldn't get rid until we signed a quick replacement.
WetFlannel Posted 9 December 2007 Posted 9 December 2007 but that we shouldn't get rid until we signed a quick replacement. dj?
Thracian Posted 9 December 2007 Posted 9 December 2007 dj? No problem at all when he's fit but what happens when he's not? Were Hammond in the team or on the bench right now he might well have helped make a difference to some of our results because, much as I rate Chambers for the future, he isn't ready for more than cameo appearances in the first team yet and who else do we have as a fast/strong option?
WetFlannel Posted 9 December 2007 Posted 9 December 2007 No problem at all when he's fit but what happens when he's not? Were Hammond in the team or on the bench right now he might well have helped make a difference to some of our results because, much as I rate Chambers for the future, he isn't ready for more than cameo appearances in the first team yet and who else do we have as a fast/strong option? is there any need having all these strikers though... campbell = pace, cort = targetman (sort of), hume = work rate, john = goal scorer, fryatt = finisher but not much else......... that should cover us for the season aswell as chambers and sappleton to come in
Raj Posted 9 December 2007 Posted 9 December 2007 I dont do player ratings but if i did they'd be well worth reading.
Guest ttfn Posted 9 December 2007 Posted 9 December 2007 Fulop 6 - Possiblynot commanding enough for first goal, otherwise steady Stearman 6 - Ok Kisnorbo 5.5 - Not great, but made a couple of good blocks. McAuley 3.5 - Useless. At fault for 2nd goal and looked dodgy all game Mattock 4.5 - Mixed bag, some terrible play (giving ball away easily), some good play (run and shot) Kenton 7.5 - Good display, charged everything down, ran more than anyone else on the pitch Clemence 5 - What's happened to him? Weso 5.5 - Didn't do much Hume 6 - Did sweet FA, but got a goal Cort 6 - Some decent hold up play, but also a bit of rubbish thrown in Chambers 5 - Never in it, one good run Fans 3 - Great last ten minutes but the defeatist air around the Walkers (for which the fans can't reallybe blamed) is unhelpful and needs changing
teblin Posted 10 December 2007 Posted 10 December 2007 No problem at all when he's fit but what happens when he's not? Were Hammond in the team or on the bench right now he might well have helped make a difference to some of our results because, much as I rate Chambers for the future, he isn't ready for more than cameo appearances in the first team yet and who else do we have as a fast/strong option? BUT HE CAN'T PLAY FOOTBALL!!!!!!!!
hairy Posted 10 December 2007 Posted 10 December 2007 You cant fault them for commitment and passion which is something we all wanted to see. Now all we need is a bit of talent then we might look like winning. I just wish the crowd would wake up.
Thracian Posted 10 December 2007 Posted 10 December 2007 BUT HE CAN'T PLAY FOOTBALL!!!!!!!! Neither could Frank Large but he did well enough cos he created havoc. Take the defeats against Southampton and WBA. We're not talking about us getting a hammering. Some even think we were unlucky to lose. If we use our most creative players positively and we had a disruptive player like Hammond I honestly believe we'd have got something from both of those games. It's a fine line but at the moment we have insufficient players to make things happen. Hammond disturbed every single defence I can remember him playing against. I don't feel that about Cort.
stevec Posted 10 December 2007 Posted 10 December 2007 Neither could Frank Large but he did well enough cos he created havoc. Take the defeats against Southampton and WBA. We're not talking about us getting a hammering. Some even think we were unlucky to lose. If we use our most creative players positively and we had a disruptive player like Hammond I honestly believe we'd have got something from both of those games. It's a fine line but at the moment we have insufficient players to make things happen. Hammond disturbed every single defence I can remember him playing against. I don't feel that about Cort. I don't see what Cort does at all. I'm not going to start slating him for not putting effort in as sometimes that can be deceiving (I can run around like a blue arse fly and look like I care - but I wouldn't do anything worthwhile). His career is over (and has been a while) his injuries must really play on his mind and cannot mentally stretch for anything whether in the air or with his feet. His control is such that he is not even a hold up player, his ineffectiveness in the air means he is not threat at corners, neither can he flick on that brilliantly (and when he does noone is around to collect), neither can he move with the ball - so what does he do for the team - other than putting the already weak midfield under pressure by losing the ball pretty much most of the time he gets it. Whilst Hammond is low quality, I can only agree he would have more use than Cort - if only for the disruption and moving the defence around. Shame he has this permanent ankle injury. I was surprised Sappleton came on as a second half sub for the Academy Sat - after playing a lot of reserve football and coming on the other week. With his size I would have thought he was our best option for at least a bench player with the injuries we have. Maybe there is something internally going on we do not know about (I have read "rumours" of discontent from him on this site).
teblin Posted 10 December 2007 Posted 10 December 2007 Neither could Frank Large but he did well enough cos he created havoc. Take the defeats against Southampton and WBA. We're not talking about us getting a hammering. Some even think we were unlucky to lose. If we use our most creative players positively and we had a disruptive player like Hammond I honestly believe we'd have got something from both of those games. It's a fine line but at the moment we have insufficient players to make things happen. Hammond disturbed every single defence I can remember him playing against. I don't feel that about Cort. Elvis is not good enough. If you want to progress you need better players than him. Though i do agree we do lack pace and power up top.
Thracian Posted 10 December 2007 Posted 10 December 2007 I don't see what Cort does at all. I'm not going to start slating him for not putting effort in as sometimes that can be deceiving (I can run around like a blue arse fly and look like I care - but I wouldn't do anything worthwhile).His career is over (and has been a while) his injuries must really play on his mind and cannot mentally stretch for anything whether in the air or with his feet. His control is such that he is not even a hold up player, his ineffectiveness in the air means he is not threat at corners, neither can he flick on that brilliantly (and when he does noone is around to collect), neither can he move with the ball - so what does he do for the team - other than putting the already weak midfield under pressure by losing the ball pretty much most of the time he gets it. Whilst Hammond is low quality, I can only agree he would have more use than Cort - if only for the disruption and moving the defence around. Shame he has this permanent ankle injury. I was surprised Sappleton came on as a second half sub for the Academy Sat - after playing a lot of reserve football and coming on the other week. With his size I would have thought he was our best option for at least a bench player with the injuries we have. Maybe there is something internally going on we do not know about (I have read "rumours" of discontent from him on this site). That ankle injury of Hammond's does seem to have lasted an awful long time and you have to wonder about his future either here or anywhere else.
teblin Posted 10 December 2007 Posted 10 December 2007 I don't see what Cort does at all. I'm not going to start slating him for not putting effort in as sometimes that can be deceiving (I can run around like a blue arse fly and look like I care - but I wouldn't do anything worthwhile).His career is over (and has been a while) his injuries must really play on his mind and cannot mentally stretch for anything whether in the air or with his feet. His control is such that he is not even a hold up player, his ineffectiveness in the air means he is not threat at corners, neither can he flick on that brilliantly (and when he does noone is around to collect), neither can he move with the ball - so what does he do for the team - other than putting the already weak midfield under pressure by losing the ball pretty much most of the time he gets it. Whilst Hammond is low quality, I can only agree he would have more use than Cort - if only for the disruption and moving the defence around. Shame he has this permanent ankle injury. I was surprised Sappleton came on as a second half sub for the Academy Sat - after playing a lot of reserve football and coming on the other week. With his size I would have thought he was our best option for at least a bench player with the injuries we have. Maybe there is something internally going on we do not know about (I have read "rumours" of discontent from him on this site). We need a big mobile striker. Have done ever since we got relegated and marcus bent left.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.