dandannieldanok Posted 1 November 2008 Posted 1 November 2008 No chance. I agree with him personally, I thought Oakley was piss-poor for the umpteenth time this season. Each to their own though.
Daggers Posted 1 November 2008 Posted 1 November 2008 You can lose faith if you like but I shan't. Lose faith? The boy hasn't had one good league game while I've been at a match. Not one. I was away for the Franchise game and I was told he played a blinder but the only indication I've seen that he is capable of anything at all came at Hinkley - he has been abject shite since then. People can sing their songs and overhype him but it doesn't detract from the simple fact that he has not contributed to the team this season. I've said before, whatever the reasons for his dreadful form, he should be dropped and allowed to find himself and a bit of motivation. I'd rather see Stephen Hughes play right mid than another shocking performance from Gradel.
Thracian Posted 1 November 2008 Posted 1 November 2008 I'll try again shall I?On that statement, will you admit that you could have been wrong when you say King contributed a lot because he was mentioned more than others on the radio? I'm sure you have a point but I'm damned if I can understand what it is.
syston_fox Posted 1 November 2008 Posted 1 November 2008 I'm sure you have a point but I'm damned if I can understand what it is. You refusing to believe that King was awful against Brighton and arguing that he was still better than Berner because he was mentioned more on the radio. Now you've said the radio must have been wrong in the post I quoted above. Will you admit that you could have been wrong for once?
Thracian Posted 1 November 2008 Posted 1 November 2008 Lose faith? The boy hasn't had one good league game while I've been at a match. Not one. I was away for the Franchise game and I was told he played a blinder but the only indication I've seen that he is capable of anything at all came at Hinkley - he has been abject shite since then. People can sing their songs and overhype him but it doesn't detract from the simple fact that he has not contributed to the team this season. I've said before, whatever the reasons for his dreadful form, he should be dropped and allowed to find himself and a bit of motivation. I'd rather see Stephen Hughes play right mid than another shocking performance from Gradel. Don't think it even includes the assists from Brighton but no matter. He's also fifth in the shooting chart despite having played a lot fewer games than those ahead of him. That's not to disguise his inconsistent form but it does give an indication of his considerable contribution even when playing way below his best and latterly without any sort of wing-back assistance. http://www.football-league.co.uk/page/Assi...0810274,00.html http://www.football-league.co.uk/page/Shoo...0810274,00.html
hebangsthedrums Posted 1 November 2008 Posted 1 November 2008 No chance. Opinion mate. For me a couple of tackles and breaking into the odd jog does not outweigh disappearing for long periods and blindly giving the ball away, and the lack of any leadership whatsoever. Funny our ratings were very similar Oakley aside.
DJ Barry Hammond Posted 1 November 2008 Posted 1 November 2008 Henderson - 7 A decent stop in the second half, no chance with their goal, a decent performance Hobbs - 5 Some woeful play down the right trying to link up with the equally in-effective Gradel Tunchev - 8 This man in class, so calm and composed on the ball - just wish he could pass it on to some of his team mates Kis - 7 He's just not quite Tunchev Mattock - 7.5 Not a 7 but not an 8, didn't do anything wrong, didn't do anything of major note Gradel - 4 Not a good day for him - the ball seemed to be stuck under his boots at times. Playing with Hobbs doesn't help him as he often has to take on two defenders without having a full back looking to overlap Oakley - 8 I thought he was good today, energetic, showed a bit of fight and urgency at 1-0 down King - 7 A couple of decent first half efforts - he's quite slow though isn't he! Dyer - 7 Looked a threat first half but never beat his man to enable to get a good cross/shot in. Should have done better with his chance in the first half. Howard - 6 Won a few flick on's but that was often when Fryatt wasn't making a run. Had one chance that he headed across goal instead of going for goal himself. Stupid push in the first half when a decent chance was there Fryatt - 9 Two chances two goals - thats class. Wasn't involved much but took the first goal very well Adams - 7 Made things a bit more lively Hayles - 7.5 Helped up the tempo that bit more, even if what he does with the ball is useless. The bit of fisty cuff's that he managed to start (not his fault at all in my opinion.) seemed to gee up the lads a bit more Burner - 7 Again, added something to the team that helped get the result Pearson - 7.5 Hopefully he's realised that changes win matches, even if you're in front. Crowd - 7.5 Good work by the lads at the back of the South stand with the 'ring of fire - lcfc' chant that went on for ages. Other comments from the family My girlfriends 8 year old son found us playing hoof ball very funny indead - he was amazed by how high they could kick the ball! Girlfriend loved the heaters in the concourse - so did i! My girlfriends 12 year old daughter was most amused by the policeman's antics in the corner dealing with the Rovers fans - there was 3 arreasts I was told They enjoyed chelsea dagger when we scored (i'll put that right soon, HOWEVER i noticed a lot of people dancing to it
Fox You Forest Posted 1 November 2008 Posted 1 November 2008 Stephen Hughes. Atleast he kept on trying today more than Hughes ever did.
Lovejoy Posted 1 November 2008 Posted 1 November 2008 How the fook did you come to that conclusion? just wondered if others agreed with mattocks score. radio was sayin man of match and made some important tackles?????? Woops . I assure all of you that is an error, I shall modify it immediately .
Head Honcho Posted 1 November 2008 Posted 1 November 2008 The radio guys were pointing to Mattock being MOM but that was 20 minutes before the end of the match ffs! After 90 mins any fool has to give it to Fryatt for his goals alone.
Bert Posted 1 November 2008 Author Posted 1 November 2008 Henderson: 7 (Thank God he's back. Steady as a rock and no chance with the goal. Fifth game without a defeat. Well done son).). Hobbs 4 (Even managed to misdirect two of the simplest passes to Gradel and added no support or overlaps whatsoever. Why he got picked I've no idea) Tunchev 6.5 (He or Kisnorbo gave Kuffour a free shot from 28 yards. I've no idea why but it could have cost us the match and, my life, they had precious little else to do). Kisnorbo 6.5 (See above) Mattock 6 (Okay but still not as influential as I expect from full-backs. He should be grateful he plays for Pearson and no for me). Gradel 5 (Deserves five for never failing to try to make something happen. Unfortunately nothing worked or was going to work. I have a little symnpathy because he totally lacked support from behind but his substitution was justified) King: 7.5 (Had a hand in our opening goal and rarely put a foot wrong. Supplied Gradel with plenty of ball. Broke up attacks and launched new ones. As good as anyone on the day, apart from Fryatt). Oakley: 6.5 (Back with King to give our midfield a look of solidity. Nothing spectacular but the fact that we won says something for his influence). Dyer 6 (Not his best game. Had one decent one-on-one chance which he fluffed and offered a bit or hope at times but Bristol had done their homework). Fryatt 8.5 (Fivc minutes before his first goal I was wondering what the hell he had contributed. But, that first effort was the finish of a natural marksman and the second that of a predator. Thirteen goals before Christmas is a massive achievement and, though I've criticised the bloke when he's offered little I'm delighted to celebrate and to appreciate a match-winning performance. He's paid to score goals and four in two matches is exceptional). Howard 5 (Taken off and rightly so. Offered very little and in fact I thought our side looked far more threatening without him) Subs Adams: 7 (Had a hand in the second goal and generally looked as if he had a point to prove. Suddenly our side looked to have more options and to mean business). Hayles: 6.5 (A hand in Fryatt's first goal and, like Adams, gave us new options that disrupted the previously comfortable Bristol defence). Berner 4 (I don't want to talk about the bloke. He was bound to be an improvement on Hobbs but that's about it) Pearson: 8 (Made his substitutions a little late for my liking but they certainly had an effect and I'm glad that, at long last, he's involving others in the squad even if Porter appears to have died or something equally horrible judging by his total lack of mention or involvement). Do you want to contradivt yourself any more? Btw, King was not our 2nd top performer.
Thracian Posted 2 November 2008 Posted 2 November 2008 Do you want to contradivt yourself any more?Btw, King was not our 2nd top performer. Where's the contradiction? Two goals to win the match is plenty for today's MoM, however late they might have come. And King might not have been your second top performer but he was mine. The competition came from Tunchev and possibly Kisnorbo but those two allowed their goalscorer a free potshot from just outside the box and were rarely under a great deal of presure anyway. Oakley and Dyer were okay too but Dyer's one-v-one miss and Oakley's lack of goal attempts swung my view to King who had a hand in our equaliser, fired off three shots and did a whole lot of good general work.
skinnydipper Posted 2 November 2008 Posted 2 November 2008 Radio's wrong. Fryatt was Man of the Match and no-one else was close. Mattock did a solid enough job defensively but Bristol were hardly the Mongol hoardes in attack. As for supporting Dyer, he seemed restrained. A contributive but average day at the office, I'd say. Disagree with you there Thracian. In B2 I had a really good view of Mattock's first half performance and I thought he was exceptional, showing great energy and resolve defensively and getting forward to support the attack.I know I hadn't totally lost my marbles because the bloke in front of me expressed the same view. Admittedly I didn't have such a good view of his play in the second half although from my side of the ground he looked solid enough. For what it's worth, I thought King had a really good game yesterday doing a lot of the bits and pieces work in midfield. You described him as a player who would burst into the box in his youth team days and I'd like to see this from him and Oakley as this is something we're lacking at the moment
Stuliasz Posted 2 November 2008 Posted 2 November 2008 Thrac, would you have King down as your player of the season so far? I can't remember a game where you think he played badly..and for the record I thought he wasn't too bad yesterday but not as much of a driving force in midfield as Oakley (which also makes a change).
Candidcamera Posted 2 November 2008 Posted 2 November 2008 Gradel is perhaps our most creative player. Gilbert is missing and confidence is the key. Fryatt would be a few goals less but for Gradel. This win may be the turning point. Look at Spurs to know what a few wins can do.
Ultra Posted 2 November 2008 Posted 2 November 2008 Henderson - 6. Good to see him back. Had no chance with their goal. Hobbs - 5. Not a right-back. Earned extra mark for his challenge on Lescott though. Kisnorbo - 5. Still looking rusty after his lay-off. Tunchev - 7. Quality again, had the dangerous Lambert in his pocket throughout. Mattock - 6. Solid enough, but still not as good as Powell. Gradel - 4. Another disappointing showing. Wasted no end of crosses and setpieces Oakley - 6. Woke up in the last 10 minutes. King - 5. Missing in action again for long spells. Dyer - 6. Industious without being a real threat. Howard - 4. As disappointing as Gradel, should really have done much better. Fryatt - 8*. Anonymous in the first 85 minutes, his efforts in the last 10 turned the match and possibly even the season. Adams - 7. Did the job Gradel should have done. Hayles - 7. Did the job Howard should have done. Berner - 6. Added creativity to the midfield.
Tilley Posted 2 November 2008 Posted 2 November 2008 Oakley - 4.5 - Anonymous for large periods again, yes he made a few tackles and actually ran a bit but where was he when they scored? Firing the team up? No in the centre circle, hand on hips. Passing under pressure is poor for a player of his supposed pedigree.
syston_fox Posted 2 November 2008 Posted 2 November 2008 Where's the contradiction? Two goals to win the match is plenty for today's MoM, however late they might have come.And King might not have been your second top performer but he was mine. The competition came from Tunchev and possibly Kisnorbo but those two allowed their goalscorer a free potshot from just outside the box and were rarely under a great deal of presure anyway. Oakley and Dyer were okay too but Dyer's one-v-one miss and Oakley's lack of goal attempts swung my view to King who had a hand in our equaliser, fired off three shots and did a whole lot of good general work. Long ball by Mattock, headed on by Hayles, scored by Fryatt. During all this time, King was on the edge of the Rovers penalty area...... very, very, generous saying he had a hand in the goal!
Thracian Posted 2 November 2008 Posted 2 November 2008 Thrac, would you have King down as your player of the season so far? I can't remember a game where you think he played badly..and for the record I thought he wasn't too bad yesterday but not as much of a driving force in midfield as Oakley (which also makes a change). Player of the season? 1. Fryatt. Frustrating at times but his 13 goals are what has maintained our challenge at the top. 2. Dyer. Has scored goals, made goals and been a regular threat. 3. Tunchev. His calm defending and usually constructive distribution has provided the anchor for what has generally ben a reliable defence. 4. Gilbert. Quick and reliable right-wing-back who is much missed when absent. 5. Andy King. Much under-rated and overlooked in a virtually ever-present stint. His three goals from central midfield and willingness to shoot have given us some threat there where non previously existed. We have also benefitted from his positional covering and passing both in defensive and attacking situations with the result that we have scored fairly consistently and not conceded many goals or indeed many chances. Works well in tandem with Oakley and that solid platform has left us in an excellent position to challenge for promotion. 6. Matt Oakley etc, etc.
Thracian Posted 2 November 2008 Posted 2 November 2008 Disagree with you there Thracian. In B2 I had a really good view of Mattock's first half performance and I thought he was exceptional, showing great energy and resolve defensively and getting forward to support the attack.I know I hadn't totally lost my marbles because the bloke in front of me expressed the same view. Admittedly I didn't have such a good view of his play in the second half although from my side of the ground he looked solid enough. For what it's worth, I thought King had a really good game yesterday doing a lot of the bits and pieces work in midfield. You described him as a player who would burst into the box in his youth team days and I'd like to see this from him and Oakley as this is something we're lacking at the moment You may see that I have revised my assessment of Mattock. I didn't realise he started the move for our first goal and wasn't best placed to see all his work in the second half. But having read the comments of those who were I've been happy to up his rating a notch.
Head Honcho Posted 2 November 2008 Posted 2 November 2008 Player of the season?1. Fryatt. Frustrating at times but his 13 goals are what has maintained our challenge at the top. 2. Dyer. Has scored goals, made goals and been a regular threat. 3. Tunchev. His calm defending and usually constructive distribution has provided the anchor for what has generally ben a reliable defence. 4. Gilbert. Quick and reliable right-wing-back who is much missed when absent. 5. Andy King. Much under-rated and overlooked in a virtually ever-present stint. His three goals from central midfield and willingness to shoot have given us some threat there where non previously existed. We have also benefitted from his positional covering and passing both in defensive and attacking situations with the result that we have scored fairly consistently and not conceded many goals or indeed many chances. Works well in tandem with Oakley and that solid platform has left us in an excellent position to challenge for promotion. 6. Matt Oakley etc, etc. Classic I like the way you give King a paragraph of praise as opposed to a few words for the rest!
Stuliasz Posted 2 November 2008 Posted 2 November 2008 Come on guys, if you haven't posted your ratings at www.player-ratings.com/rate, you still have until tomorrow evening to do so.
The People's Hero Posted 2 November 2008 Posted 2 November 2008 I can't believe some of the ratings in this thread! We were poor, especially in the middle of the park. Our midfield is gutless..
The People's Hero Posted 2 November 2008 Posted 2 November 2008 Henderson - 6. Good to see him back. Had no chance with their goal.Hobbs - 5. Not a right-back. Earned extra mark for his challenge on Lescott though. Kisnorbo - 5. Still looking rusty after his lay-off. Tunchev - 7. Quality again, had the dangerous Lambert in his pocket throughout. Mattock - 6. Solid enough, but still not as good as Powell. Gradel - 4. Another disappointing showing. Wasted no end of crosses and setpieces Oakley - 6. Woke up in the last 10 minutes. King - 5. Missing in action again for long spells. Dyer - 6. Industious without being a real threat. Howard - 4. As disappointing as Gradel, should really have done much better. Fryatt - 8*. Anonymous in the first 85 minutes, his efforts in the last 10 turned the match and possibly even the season. Adams - 7. Did the job Gradel should have done. Hayles - 7. Did the job Howard should have done. Berner - 6. Added creativity to the midfield. This is about the best assessment I've seen in this thread. I'd perhaps modify Berner up to a 7 because I liked a lot of what he did when he came in. Likewise, I don't think Howard was as bad as a 4. Still, this is the best assessment I've seen. I'm not sure why we're otherwise seeing so many 7s and 8s?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.