Gradel Earns First Online MOTM Award of the Season...just!

[Father Ted]

Very harsh on King although tbh, it was a great TEAM performance!

[Sparky]

King was our worst performer without doubt on sat (imo). wasn't awful by any means but his pass completion rate must have been 40-50% max, which aint great for a CM.

Was he bollocks , part of a centre midfield combination that dominated MK Dons . Howard , Mattock and Dyer were no better than King

[Thracian]

King was our worst performer without doubt on sat (imo). wasn't awful by any means but his pass completion rate must have been 40-50% max, which aint great for a CM.

Strange that cos for a guy who was often in a defensive midfield role, I cannot remember Henderson having a serious save to make or Milton Keynes making more than a couple of serious chances.

His passing, normally a major strength, wasn't at its best, particularly in the last five minutes but he (and Oakley) played a massive role in neutralising so many MK attacks almost at source.

[Joe.]

This should have been Levi's man of the match award. Disgusting.

[Bryn]

New signings usually get a good response early on as well - it justifies the accolades they're given just for being new signings. Remember all those who wanted Nielsen and Kaebi in the side without even having seen them and then it was Lackko and Bori? I gave Dyer 5 0 or 5.5 because he played okay for one half and because I didn't see much of him at all in the second half. I'd give him the same mark voting now.

bla bla bla bla bla. What rubbish.

[lcfc81]

I think your right, people have been a bit harsh on King (me included)

DM is a hard position to look 'good' in,

By nature if you do your job well people don't notice,

If you make a mistake everyone 'remembers'.

I must say MK Dons had very few meaningful attacks and that could (in part) be attributed to King.

I personally am glad to see him in the side and hope he is given a prelonged chance this year.

[sdb]

Was he bollocks , part of a centre midfield combination that dominated MK Dons . Howard , Mattock and Dyer were no better than King

he was in my judgement. OK 1st half but fairly quiet, so i thought i'd keep more of an eye on him 2nd half and his pass completion was really quite poor. I mentioned in my player ratings that he can't of been that bad given the overall team display, but i never even said he was bad, just our worst player. which i feel he was on sat.

[sdb]

Strange that cos for a guy who was often in a defensive midfield role, I cannot remember Henderson having a serious save to make or Milton Keynes making more than a couple of serious chances.

His passing, normally a major strength, wasn't at its best, particularly in the last five minutes but he (and Oakley) played a massive role in neutralising so many MK attacks almost at source.

i'm not saying he was awful by any means, but Oakley intercepted a lot of MK's passes, pushed forward more (didn't know King was a DM) and caused more problems for the opposition. He carried King a little i felt (which is no disgrace given their ages/experience).

Henderson didn't have much to do but that's not his fault. He dealt with what he had to, including a poor back pass and several dangerous crosses.

I'm not saying anthing radical (i.e. drop King) - why change a winning team? But i do feel he was our weakest link on the day.

[Bryn]

King did just fine in many peoples opinion. I saw many people giving him a 7 which is a good mark. Fact of the matter is though that most people thought Oakley was better and Thracian isn't pleased so he's wading in and out of threads bringing it up.

[Nugent]

I think it's a bit harsh to give Andy King flop of the match, he sprayed the ball around the pitch nicely and got a few tackles in.

I think he did well considering he is young.