MK Dons Match - Player Ratings

[Bryn]

There are always reasons for playing cagey football. I just don't accept them in general. The teams I admire are the ones who play their football regardless and actually believe in playing their football.

Like we did long ago.

But we played good football yesterday for 60% of the game and I imagine that percentage will rise as the team gets more confident.

Why you have to be such a cock about everything I really don't know.

[Thracian]

But we played good football yesterday for 60% of the game and I imagine that percentage will rise as the team gets more confident.

Why you have to be such a cock about everything I really don't know.

If 60% of the game was played before Fryatt scored his penalty I'd agree but it wasn't. Cos after that, and particularly second half, we had no serious ambitions going forward and really had very few players attacking the box.

It was basically whoever made a breakthough plus one or sometimes two others.

Yes we were mostly effcient and quick to close down in defence but we were decidedly reluctant to go forward in any force.

Of course it was a good result, in functional terms, but how you can pretend that was a good performance I don't know.

Perhaps we simply have different ideas about what represents "good".

I'd just say we set out to do a job. We dominated the game until we went ahead and aspired to very little after that except protecting our lead.

Gradel and Fryatt were shining lights and beyond that it was all quite ordinary. And far, far less than the side is capable of.

[Asha]

If 60% of the game was played before Fryatt scored his penalty I'd agree but it wasn't. Cos after that, and particularly second half, we had no serious ambitions going forward and really had very few players attacking the box.

It was basically whoever made a breakthough plus one or sometimes two others.

Yes we were mostly effcient and quick to close down in defence but we were decidedly reluctant to go forward in any force.

Of course it was a good result, in functional terms, but how you can pretend that was a good performance I don't know.

Perhaps we simply have different ideas about what represents "good".

I'd just say we set out to do a job. We dominated the game until we went ahead and aspired to very little after that except protecting our lead.

Gradel and Fryatt were shining lights and beyond that it was all quite ordinary. And far, far less than the side is capable of.

Yes but at 1-0 if we threw everything forward and ended up conceding and not drawing, you'd only be on here complaining that we over-stretched ourselves and didn't think about the bigger of picture and the importance of a winning start.

[Thracian]

I want to be entertained Thracian, but at the same time i want to be in the championship and then the Premiership. It's a results business, and 46 1-0's will do me fine.

Going back to King aswel, i just find it so hard to believe you thought he was better than Oakley. He was average at best. first half he was decent, second he was garbage. I dont remember him finding a blue shirt with a pass in the second half. Oakley kept it simple, put in lots of tackles, made some good runs, and King was pretty anonymous i thought.

I'm well aware that 46 one-nils would suit a lot of people on here as has been mentioned on various occasions. It's one of the reasons the club has been able to get away with fielding so many lamentable players and having so many negative managers for so long while still retaining it's wonderful fan base.

Much of what you said about Oakley I agree with. My rating was "Oakley 6.5. Competent game. Showed some enthusiasm and got himself involved. Just not positive enough for a big mark," and I stand by that. I even asked if people would detail any memorable contributions he made in case I'd forgotten but nothing's been mentioned. He simply worked hard and remained combative but I never saw him getting into the box much whereas King had two pretty decent sorties which might have brought goals.

I think I picked King/Oakley as my preferred central midfield anyway for yesterday and I'd have no reason to think differently now. The defence seems to have tightened considerably since the partnership was formed but I remain concerned about the numbers we commit to supporting attacks as the game goes on or if we get ahead. I just don't think Oakley does that part of his job like he used to. Or it may be he's ordered to be less adventurous which just seems negative.

As for King's passing in the second half I think a good part of the problem was that while, first half, we had all sorts of movement and players breaking forward to offer passing oppportunities for everyone, that was much less the case second half and his only options were Jarrett/Hughes balls to the side and backwards. He wasn't the only one who faltered as a result either.

[Corky]

Henderson- 6

Gilbert- 7.5

Morrison- 7

Tunchev- 7

Mattock- 7

Gradel- 8

Oakley- 7.5

King- 7

Dyer- 7

Howard- 7

Fryatt- 9

Dickov- 6

Hobbs- N/A

[hebangsthedrums]

7's all round except for the centre backs, King and Mattock who get 6's (and maybe Hendo as he had nothing really to do). Joe did ok but lost his composure a bit in the second half, King faded a bit and had a spell where he couldn't pass to a blue shirt (blaming it on movement is laughable). I htought Howard did ok, won a few flicks - nearly getting Dyer in when he rounded the keeper for example, and will do better if with wingers who will cross for him. The centrebacks did ok but McDons got in behind us a few times and they were slow to react, against a better team we may have conceded. However its half a new team so with time it will come - the signs are there.

Pleased overall we showed good intent and although we did slow down for 30 mins in second half I think that was a combo of MK playing a bit better and some of the players losing a bit of momentum. It was hardly a shut up shop job though!

Also were the Franchise fans abysmal or is that just my dislike of their 'club'. I barely heard them aside from one chart 5 mins in.

[Joe.]

Lighten up Thracian. We've just won the first leageu game of the season 2-0 with a clean sheet and two goals scored. How long has it been since we've had it like that, and lets face it, it was fairly convincing.

I can understand your disappointment with the way we may have let them back into it, but we didn't and we went on to score again. Last season we just wouldn't have done that and we'd have lost.

[Thracian]

Yes but at 1-0 if we threw everything forward and ended up conceding and not drawing, you'd only be on here complaining that we over-stretched ourselves and didn't think about the bigger of picture and the importance of a winning start.

No-one is talking about "throwing everything forward". We didn't do that in the first half.

I've never complained about any team defending and attacking as a unit and up to the first goal we did exactly that.

Second half we defended as a unit but didn't attack as a unit at all.

And it is because I look at the bigger picture that I mention it.

MK could and should have equalised before we pinched our second. How ridiculous had we allowed them to do that when we had no need to voluntarily concede ground at all.

[DJ Barry Hammond]

I give up. Kingy plays defensive midfield, we don't concede a goal and he twice finds the time to burst through the middle and almost create a goal. Yet he gets a lower mark than Oakley from most. It's clear that I've forgotten Oakley's big moments. Will someone please remind me.

Going by the live text service on the Beeb's internet service Oakley was mentioned a lot, making a lot of clearences from corners and crosses it seemed. King's name was barely mentioned.

[Bryn]

If 60% of the game was played before Fryatt scored his penalty I'd agree but it wasn't. Cos after that, and particularly second half, we had no serious ambitions going forward and really had very few players attacking the box.

It was basically whoever made a breakthough plus one or sometimes two others.

Yes we were mostly effcient and quick to close down in defence but we were decidedly reluctant to go forward in any force.

Of course it was a good result, in functional terms, but how you can pretend that was a good performance I don't know.

Perhaps we simply have different ideas about what represents "good".

I'd just say we set out to do a job. We dominated the game until we went ahead and aspired to very little after that except protecting our lead.

Gradel and Fryatt were shining lights and beyond that it was all quite ordinary. And far, far less than the side is capable of.

IMO the fullbacks were already very exposed because I think we played very high tempo, very attacking football. I regularly saw players swarming their box. If they'd utilised the ball into the channel better they would already have had an easy route to our goal.

[Thracian]

Going by the live text service on the Beeb's internet service Oakley was mentioned a lot, making a lot of clearences from corners and crosses it seemed. King's name was barely mentioned.

King was forever involved in the first half. In fact I thought our entire team was involved and really cohesive in the first half an hour, Oakley included. When our tactics changed all the flow went and we simply became functional ie intent only on stopping MK doing anything or getting anywhere.

No-one doubts Oakley made clearances, tackles, passed the ball around. What I'm saying is that once we scored I didn't notice him pushing forward. When he first arrived my middle son, a Southampton supporter, said what a terrific signing he was cos he'd be solid in midfield and yet would back the attack with runs into the box, something we've been absolutely desperate for.

But it's not been the case. I wish it was. And Saturday I just didn't see why not. I don't see why we stopped doing what gave us such ascendency in the first place.

Anyway, enough.

I'm quite happy to say we played like a team of maestros, created chances from first to last, that Oakley was box-to-box brilliant throughout and Pearson a tactical inspiration with no thoughts of ever failing to attack as a unit.

Cos it all seems a long time ago and I'm looking forward to Tuesday's match now.

[Joe.]

When he first arrived my middle son, a Southampton supporter, said what a terrific signing he was cos he'd be solid in midfield and yet would back the attack with runs into the box, something we've been absolutely desperate for.

Thracian. What happened?

[Cobbo]

I have been mostly drunk after the game and played in Oxford today so my memory may be a bit hazy haha. I thought it was a very encouraging all round display though, even in iffy spells we never looked like conceding.

Henderson - 7 - did all he had to do.

Gilbert - 7 - good link up work with Maxi and gernerally solid except for a couple of hiccups.

Morrison - 8 - thought he was very solid and looked very composed on the ball. Could be a great signing, seems to certainly be a good find. Along with being solid and calm on the ball, he was shouting and organising all game. Probably my MOTM.

Tunchev - 7.5 - just a quality defender, again, doesn't panic when he has the ball and uses it well. Good to see him get a standing ovation. I think Pearson took him off so he'd get a good clap to make him feel at home

Mattock - 6 - average Joe. But not particularly poor. did his job.

Gradel - 8 - not everything went his way today, but his willingness to work to get the ball back and potential to beat a defender (several times over) is great to see. A real asset. Dunno how long we'll hang to him for!

King - 7 - kept things ticking over. Neat & tidy. Played some poor passes in the 2nd half though!

Oakley - 7.5 - impressive in there from him, good passing and put his foot in too.

Dyer - 7 - great start but faded out of the game a bit. Still did a good job and again offers us width.

Howard - 7 - great understanding with Fryatt. Thouht he battled well for headers. Could really see that we missed him when he had to go off.

Fryatt - 8 - 2 goals and about 800 dummies that came off! He instigated some sexy football with the combination with Howard. Loved it.

Subs:

Dickov - 6.5 - didn't really have any joy in front of goal, but then didn't really have much of the ball. Still saw the fire in his belly and work ethic that's made him a fans favourite wherever he's been.

[Thracian]

Thracian. What happened?

It doesn't bear talking about. But as soon as he saw what Matt Le Tissier could do with a football he was hooked.

[Stuliasz]

Don't forget to post your ratings at www.player-ratings.com/rate. Voting closes tomorrow evening so look out for the results.

[Guest Chocolate Teapot]

Going by the live text service on the Beeb's internet service Oakley was mentioned a lot, making a lot of clearences from corners and crosses it seemed. King's name was barely mentioned.

It was like playing with one centre midfielder, whilst king has his quality (a fantastic shot is all i've seen from him so far) i think weso is a better option as he will get us the ball and allow oakley to push on. King thought he was glen hoddle pinging sixty yards passes, except these were to no one. He was virtually anomymous in the second half, he could neither get the ball, and then on the rare occasion he was given it he wasted possesion, something he can probably get away with at this level.

[Bert]

King was forever involved in the first half. In fact I thought our entire team was involved and really cohesive in the first half an hour, Oakley included. When our tactics changed all the flow went and we simply became functional ie intent only on stopping MK doing anything or getting anywhere.

No-one doubts Oakley made clearances, tackles, passed the ball around. What I'm saying is that once we scored I didn't notice him pushing forward. When he first arrived my middle son, a Southampton supporter, said what a terrific signing he was cos he'd be solid in midfield and yet would back the attack with runs into the box, something we've been absolutely desperate for.

But it's not been the case. I wish it was. And Saturday I just didn't see why not. I don't see why we stopped doing what gave us such ascendency in the first place.

Anyway, enough.

I'm quite happy to say we played like a team of maestros, created chances from first to last, that Oakley was box-to-box brilliant throughout and Pearson a tactical inspiration with no thoughts of ever failing to attack as a unit.

Cos it all seems a long time ago and I'm looking forward to Tuesday's match now.

If this happened, and they scored from Oakley being out of position, you'd be the first to point it out and make a big deal out of it. He can't win.

[Ric Flair]

Henderson 6.5 - Had nothing to do, could have found Mattock/Dyer or Gilbert/Gradel on a few occasions but decided to go route one with it instead.

Gilbert 7 - Thought he did well. Good understanding with our right wing maestro. Get's forward well and other than a few positional errors, which Max mopped up from, he was solid.

Morrison 7 - Steady peformance, few stray passes, but some excellent positional work to snuff out Wilbraham.

Tunchev 7.5 - Never in any danger whatsoever. Pounces on anything that falls in his remit, passing is quality and I think once he get's his match fitness up, he'll be safe as houses all day long.

Mattock 7 - Good going forward, defensively spot on as well. Nice to see us have 2 full-backs who can attack and support the wingers. A couple of times, under pressure Mattock came to the rescue with some vital clearances.

Gradel 8.5 - First half, he didn't get the ball as much as he'd have liked. Second half he took the piss. Knowing Gradel, he'll think he can do better and there's much more to come from him. That bit of skill in the second half mugging those 2 players was superb. Good assist as well. Crossing will get better, he showed he has a mean right peg on him against Luton.

King 6 - Started well, but thought he was the weak link as the game went on. Passing got worse and he seemed to lose confidence. He's better than that and i'm sure he'll improve when he next is given the chance.

Oakley 8 - As King faded, Oakley took charge and I thought it was his best game for us. Showed great energy and won a lot of 50/50 balls. Looked to find Gradel as much as he could in the second half.

Dyer 7 - First half he was superb. Second half, Gradel took over but he was always on hand to support the attack. Better than anything he showed in pre-season.

Howard 6.5 - Didn't do anything wrong, linked up well with Fryatt and pushed MK Dons defence right back due to his aerial presence.

Fryatt 8 - Looks a different player. Got confidence in abundance and took both goals well. Keep it up.

Subs:

Dickov 6 - Didn't have the ball much, but looked keen. Linked up well with Gradel in the first few mins he came on, which Fryatt should have got on target when the cross came in.

Hobbs - Not on long enough.

[Dr The Singh]

Henderson 6.5 - Acceptable. Poor kicking on occassions

Gilbert 7 - Solid, plenty handled all situations well

Morrison 6.5 - Steady peformance, passing was poor

Tunchev 7.5 - Handled all situations well, too good for this level

Mattock 7 - Solid performance

Gradel 7.5 - Very skillful, poor crosssing and shooting.

King 6 - Steady performance, didn't excel in any form

Oakley 7 - Steady, was rarely troubled

Dyer 7.5 - Marginally more impressive then Gradel

Howard 6.5 - Aerial pressence was there but nothing much else, his passing was poor and rarely threatened in any other manner

Fryatt 7.5 - Always made himself available, seems to be playing with more confidence and gave 100%

Subs:

Overall a good first 20 minutes, after scoring we pulled back on the peddle. Second half we weren't so impressive, but were still too good for MK Dons!!

On saying that we look very creative but are abit shot shy and sometimes overplay it, with all the position and territory we didn't have many shots on target!!!

[Foxhateram]

Henderson 6 - Looked wobbly at times. There were times where i was panicing a bit, He is very hesistant at times. However his kicking has improved by a country mile, he did ok. Good man.

Gilbert 7 - Him and Maxi seemed to work well at times, but in other occasions they seemed like they had never seen eachother before. He did pretty well, and i felt he was our best defender on the day. He did well and kept there Left winger in check most of the game.

Morrison 6 - Not sure about this guy, he was very slow on the turn in many occasions, and MK managed to get behind the two CB's far to often. A better team would have taken advantage of this.

Tunchev 6 - I think people are over-rating this guy. He had his arms all over the attackers everytime the ball came near him, he got away wsith it on satdeh, but i think this may cost us if he continues to do it. He was also very slow to turn aswell. If the two CB's dont sort this then faster strikers and better teams will rip them apart. However he kept MK at bay, just slightly worried by the CB pairing.

Mattock 7 - Solid performance again, he didnt shine like he did last season, but he seems to have calmed down alot. He pushed the winger out wide and prevented the cross almost everytime, and also pushed forward. He's a good little player i was impressed.

Gradel 8 - What a player this guy is! Exciting to watch is an understatment. We didn't use him anywhere enough in the first half, The oppositions left wing was so so poor. Their LB was pissing himself at the site of Maxi everytime he got the ball, was funny to watch. Maxi needs to be included so much more.

King 6 - I He was very qiute i expected more from him. However he made some important ball winning challenges and got back when it was required. Prefer Weso in here though.

Oakley 7.5 - Oakley did very well, he was looking for the ball all of the time, he was making useful runs and his delivery out wide was good. He won every challenge in the centre aswell. A much better Oakley performance.

Dyer 7 - He did alright, but was outshone by Maxi. He has alot of work to do on his deliveries though, especially corners.

Howard 6.5 - He did his job well, which was to hold the ball up and/or knock it on. However there were a few occasions where his delivery was just plain crap. He didnt venture into the box very much either, he seemed to jog in rather then run, and was only just reaching the box as Maxi was crossing it. He looks so disinterested at times, i dont think we will ever see the Howard that played for Derby, i dont think he has it in him anymore.

Fryatt 8 - Loved that performance by him, a true striker. Instict, passion, commitment and consistance. He closed down their defence throughout the game, and also picked up the ball and sprayed it wide perfectly. He deserved the goals and im glad he got his chance. I think with Dickov in Fryatt may feel at threat, it looks like he knows what to do to give Pearson a headache though. it's great to see so much commitment, good man.

Subs:

Dickov 6 - I didn't see enough of him in this game so i will hold judgement. However he seemed like he hadn't changed much, he was closing down their keeper and defence, they were pissing themselves at the sight of him. I think with his arrival DJ may be off. We dont have space For DJ, Fryatt, and Dickov who are not disimilar to eachother.

Hobbs - He seemed to do alright, he was only bought on to waste a bit of time and break up the MK string of attacks though.

[Corky]

There are always reasons for playing cagey football. I just don't accept them in general. The teams I admire are the ones who play their football regardless and actually believe in playing their football.

Like we did long ago.

There are times in a match where the opposition will grow and come back into the match. It was the first competitive match together for the team. If we'd have conceded four goals and hardly got out of our half then I'd understand your complaints. The first half we were all over them, our tempo dropped in the second half but we still looked dangerous on the counter attack.

I think you are asking too much of this team too soon.

[Scow]

Henderson - 7

Didn't have much to do.

Gilbert - 7

Steady at right back and linked up well with Gradel.

Morrison - 8.5

Superb at organising the defence. Strong in the challenge and forged a good understanding with Tunchev.

Tunchev - 7.5

Assured and confident.

Mattock - 7

Defended well. Showed some promising moments going forward.

Gradel - 7.5

Things didn't always for him, but he worked hard and gave their left back plenty of problems. Instrumental in Fryatt's second.

Oakley - 7.5

Ran the midfield in the first half, though he was less effective in the second.

King - 7

Efficient performance. Sometimes his passing was a little wayward though.

Dyer - 6

He had a storming 20 minutes as his direct running put them on the back foot. He somewhat faded after Fryatt's opener and his set-pieces were generally poor.

Howard - 7

Showed some nice touches and linked up well with Fryatt.

Fryatt - 8

It seems Pearson has asked him to play further forward - this proved to be a menace for their defence. He made some clever runs, one of them resulting in the penalty.

Subs:

Dickov - 7

Same old Dickov - running down everything and providing a useful outlet. Did the simple things well when the ball was played to him.

Hobbs - N/A.

[Thracian]

There are times in a match where the opposition will grow and come back into the match. It was the first competitive match together for the team. If we'd have conceded four goals and hardly got out of our half then I'd understand your complaints. The first half we were all over them, our tempo dropped in the second half but we still looked dangerous on the counter attack.

I think you are asking too much of this team too soon.

I accept that teams will respond and sometimes come at you. What I don't accept is voluntarily allowing them to. Are you really suggesting a team that took 39 minutes to have it's first serious attack can suddenly change so much as to pen us into our own half for most of the next half-hour?

We consciously changed to defence mode. And if they have equalised, as they should have done and gone on to draw the match, then some would have had the good grace to agree with me and accept what a risky policy it is - as well as being a killer for the afternoon's entertainment value.

[Guest]

Henderson - 7

Didn't have much to do.

Gilbert - 7

Steady at right back and linked up well with Gradel.

Morrison - 8.5

Superb at organising the defence. Strong in the challenge and forged a good understanding with Tunchev.

Tunchev - 7.5

Assured and confident.

Mattock - 7

Defended well. Showed some promising moments going forward.

Gradel - 7.5

Things didn't always for him, but he worked hard and gave their left back plenty of problems. Instrumental in Fryatt's second.

Oakley - 7.5

Ran the midfield in the first half, though he was less effective in the second.

King - 7

Efficient performance. Sometimes his passing was a little wayward though.

Dyer - 6

He had a storming 20 minutes as his direct running put them on the back foot. He somewhat faded after Fryatt's opener and his set-pieces were generally poor.

Howard - 7

Showed some nice touches and linked up well with Fryatt.

Fryatt - 8

It seems Pearson has asked him to play further forward - this proved to be a menace for their defence. He made some clever runs, one of them resulting in the penalty.

Subs:

Dickov - 7

Same old Dickov - running down everything and providing a useful outlet. Did the simple things well when the ball was played to him.

Hobbs - N/A.

I'd pretty much agree with that except giving Gilbert a 6.5 and Morrison a 7.5.

Thought Gilbert got caught out of position a couple of times but fortunately the guy's got plenty of pace, and a couple of miscommunications between him and Gradel meant a loss of momentum going forward but generally was very impressed with all our players.

Oakley I thought was fantastic and really showed that he can be an effective leader, plenty of times I saw him win crucial balls in the middle of the park. Tunchev was hugely impressive, and I think we've got the makings of a good defence there making me less nervous about the numerous personnel changes in that area over the summer.

[league1]

Hendo 6 - Nothing to do.

Gilbert 7.5 - Had a solid game today, always tight to his man, never gave him a second.

Mattock 6.5 - Fairly solid, dealt with what he had to fairly well.

Morrison 7 - Mostly good all round, positioning was sometimes not at 100%.

Tunchev 7 - Pretty much the same as Morrison.

Gradel 8.5 - The lad is awesome, never gives up, always looks to beat his man, if his crossing was better he'd be at a 9.

Dyer 7 - Started off strong with some good runs, should've played Gradel in, never gave up though.

King 7 - Started off stronger than Oakley, won a lot of niggly battles in midfield, seemed to just fade out of the game in the second half.

Oakley 7 - Grew in confidence as the game went on, won his share and played some nice balls.

Howard 6 - Didn't really offer that much, all he done was take their big centre back out of the game.

Fryatt 8 - Effort, endeavour, work-rate and 2 goals.

Dickov 6 - Made life hard for defenders, still closed down like he always did.

Hobbs - Not on long enough.

These aint dons players. I wish they were though