Daggers Posted 12 November 2008 Posted 12 November 2008 I've given him an additional mark for that interception but it doesn't make our problems in the right back position any less pressing. As for older players generally, I do have serious reservations about their ability to last the pace of a league campaign in general. He was made to look a total muppet three times shortly before he hobbled off, he obviously lacked anything to offer in the face of pace. As a stop-gap he is all we have ~ I wonder how much Mandaric is planning on giving Pearson from the sale of MAttock?
Jimmy Posted 12 November 2008 Author Posted 12 November 2008 Radio Leicester were saying after the game that Gilbert should be over his illness and available for saturday
The People's Hero Posted 12 November 2008 Posted 12 November 2008 Rob Jones/John Scales could solve our right back issue.
Ric Flair Posted 12 November 2008 Posted 12 November 2008 no rating for Hobbs? Shit, forgot about Hobbs/ Hobbs get's a 6.5
Tilley Posted 12 November 2008 Posted 12 November 2008 DJ - When will he get a chance Who ****ing knows.
Bert Posted 12 November 2008 Posted 12 November 2008 Hendo 7 - His return to the starting line up has gave him a lot of confidence. Edworthy N/A Morrison 7 - Very good, adapted very well to right back. Tunch 7.5 - Just different class. Mattock 7.5 Very good again, brilliant going forward last night. Oakley 7 - Had a very good first half, but faded second. Dyer 8 - Always looked a threat and scored with a great finish. King 8 - Awesome last night, everything he did was spot on. Berner 6 - He does a lot that goes un-noticed. Fryatt 7 - A willingness to chase everything down, and brought more players into the game last night. Howard 7.5 - An assist, won everything in the air, top stuff. Hobbs 7 - Looked much better at centre back.
Webbo Posted 12 November 2008 Posted 12 November 2008 Hendo 7 Edworthy 6 Morrison 7 Tunchev 7 Mattock 8 Oakley 7 Berner 6.5 King 7 Dyer 8 Fryatt 6 Howard 6.5 Hobbs 6.5
Daggers Posted 12 November 2008 Posted 12 November 2008 Berner 6 - He does a lot that goes un-noticed.
Bert Posted 12 November 2008 Posted 12 November 2008 Daggers mocking other people's opinions? There's a first.
Daggers Posted 12 November 2008 Posted 12 November 2008 Daggers mocking other people's opinions? There's a first. It's almost as unheard of as Bert having little sulks because he thinks his opinion is being invalidated in some way
Ross-Kemp Posted 12 November 2008 Posted 12 November 2008 Daggers mocking other people's opinions? There's a first. It's almost as unheard of as Bert having little sulks because he thinks his opinion is being invalidated in some way Leave the handbags at home girls.
lcfc81 Posted 12 November 2008 Posted 12 November 2008 When Morrison played a pass from right back that was it, job done. Except it's not. He needs to move forward and take up another supporting position ready to receive the ball again. It wasn't done and times in the second half such moves as we had became more and more ragged. Berner contributed to this. First half he was fine. Plenty of involvement and that excellent pass you mentioned. Second half I didn't think he gave King anything like the support he needed and if people are going to function well for one half instead of two they're not going to get high marks. Fair point about the second half. I must say when we slowed down I couldn't put my finger on why. I think that Morrison was still better than Hobbs however at RB, but Gilbert is far better there. As for CM where would you go from here? Because I like you am a fan of King, who would you partner with him to get the best out of him?
Thracian Posted 12 November 2008 Posted 12 November 2008 Fair point about the second half.I must say when we slowed down I couldn't put my finger on why. I think that Morrison was still better than Hobbs however at RB, but Gilbert is far better there. As for CM where would you go from here? Because I like you am a fan of King, who would you partner with him to get the best out of him? Morrison was better at right back and Hobbs infinitely more comfortable at centre-back. But I'd like to see Lee Cox, a specialist, get his chance at right back, or at least a place on the bench if Gilbert's fit. Cox is comfortable in the position. He expects to get the ball back and to get forward. He's not that quick but he's easy in possession, quite mobile and a determined tackler. Once we have two specialist full-backs again I would honestly look at 3-4-3 or 3-5-2. Because I'm quite sure Gilbert, Tunchev, Mattock and Cox will manage fine with King and Berner in front of them. Can you imagine the attacking potential of this? Henderson; Gilbert, Tunchev, Mattock; Gradel, Oakley, King, Berner, Dyer; Howard, Fryatt. With the likes of Adams, Dickov and DJ on the bench? King has played centre-back and I see no reason Berner couldn't fall back to help either. But, other than occasionally or at set-plays I don't think they'd need to. That side could press the life out of almost anyone in this league and is so flexible.
Sparky Posted 12 November 2008 Posted 12 November 2008 Morrison was better at right back and Hobbs infinitely more comfortable at centre-back. But I'd like to see Lee Cox, a specialist, get his chance at right back, or at least a place on the bench if Gilbert's fit.Cox is comfortable in the position. He expects to get the ball back and to get forward. He's not that quick but he's easy in possession, quite mobile and a determined tackler. Once we have two specialist full-backs again I would honestly look at 3-4-3 or 3-5-2. Because I'm quite sure Gilbert, Tunchev, Mattock and Cox will manage fine with King and Berner in front of them. Can you imagine the attacking potential of this? Henderson; Gilbert, Tunchev, Mattock; Gradel, Oakley, King, Berner, Dyer; Howard, Fryatt. With the likes of Adams, Dickov and DJ on the bench? King has played centre-back and I see no reason Berner couldn't fall back to help either. But, other than occasionally or at set-plays I don't think they'd need to. That side could press the life out of almost anyone in this league and is so flexible. Most naive team i have ever saw anyone put up , Mattock and Gilbert would need to play as centre halfs and GRADEL AS A WING BACK !!!!! Teams would murder us by knocking simple balls in to the channels , yeah we would be more attacking but that side would be so so vunerable
Koke Posted 12 November 2008 Posted 12 November 2008 Henderson 7 (Deserves 7 for his second successive clean sheet and for another night of faultless handling and good decision making. Looked totally in charge even if there wasn't a lot of threat).Edworthy 4 (Not sure he deserved that. Yes he was present while we played some good football and he made one vital interception but he was twice skinned alive by their winger and his departure only emphasised the risks of playing veterans with questionable ability to last the pace. If Gilbert remains unfit the sooner we get Lee Cox involved now the better. the right back spot is becoming an embarrassment.). Morrison 6 (No sort of advert for the beautiful game but helped maintain another clean sheet). Tunchev 7.25 (Defensive kingpin. He just reads things so well and tries to do be constructive on the ball). Mattock 7 (Showed something close to his best Academy form. Got forward with enthusiasm and defended soundly. Never slipped into the mentality of "anything will do"). Oakley 6 (First half fine, just a continuation of the Stevenage adventure. Offered precious little second half). Berner 5.5 (His first 45 minutes was the best I've seen from him but he didn't spoil me with extras after the break. Became totally anonymous and left King desperately looking for a passing option at times). King 7.5 (MoM for me. Totally orchestrated our first half dominance and delivered one or two visionary passes including one in particular which almost gave Oakley a goal. Found he'd been almost deserted by his team-mates second half because so many of them stopped looking for the ball and the team stopped trying to move forward collectively). Dyer 7 (Quality goal from a quality move. His goals return is excellent for a winger at this stage of the season and he threatened on other occasions but just didn't get the necessary movement and support around him seocnd half). Fryatt 6 (Like a firework he showed a few pretty colours then faded. One early shot from a Howard pass was not far wide but Howard 7 (Set up Dyer's goal and had a few worthwhile efforts himself. Looked increasingly tired second half). Subs: Hobbs 6 (Defensively sound enough). Campbell (irrelevent). Pearson 5.5 (First half terrific, second half took the idea of being functional to new depths). I'd agree with that. But I'd give Oakley a 7.
Raj Posted 12 November 2008 Posted 12 November 2008 Dyer,Fryatt,King-7 Rest all 5-6(*Defence only cos they had a fairly easy night) Oakley 4 Thats why i dont do ratings!!!
dilko2008 Posted 12 November 2008 Posted 12 November 2008 Edworthy 4 (Not sure he deserved that. Yes he was present while we played some good football and he made one vital interception but he was twice skinned alive by their winger and his departure only emphasised the risks of playing veterans with questionable ability to last the pace. If Gilbert remains unfit the sooner we get Lee Cox involved now the better. the right back spot is becoming an embarrassment can i add edworthy was injured quite early on and struggled on for a fair while afterwards??,
Legend_in_blue Posted 12 November 2008 Posted 12 November 2008 Tunchev was far better than the 7 he's received from the majority. I'd give him a 9 based on last nights performance. He is far too good for this level of football and will prove to be an extremely valuable asset for a championship charge next season. Tunchev - steady, rock, calm, composed, cool, looks to make a pass - all the time, quality. Sums him up. Best player in the squad.
Stuliasz Posted 12 November 2008 Posted 12 November 2008 Don't forget to post your ratings at www.player-ratings.com/rate. Results will be posted tomorrow.
Thracian Posted 13 November 2008 Posted 13 November 2008 Most naive team i have ever saw anyone put up , Mattock and Gilbert would need to play as centre halfs and GRADEL AS A WING BACK !!!!! Teams would murder us by knocking simple balls in to the channels , yeah we would be more attacking but that side would be so so vunerable Into the channels for whom? Most teams have two strikers tops against us and often one. Furthermore they can't knock the ball down two channels at once and that back three is quite quick enough and comfortable enough to focus on whichever chanel is being attacked. We've shown we can monopolise possession against poorer teams even with 4-3-3 but with two wingers and three strikers our pressing would be greater and our potency and pace in possession considerably increased. Four against one at the back is unnecessarily cautious.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.