Football 2, Rabble 0

[Making Plans 936]

Only one team in it, the team that played football.Thought 1p5wich were poor overall, relying on hoofball.Howson my Man of the Match but everyone had a great game.

[Crafty Canary 495]

Mings is a decent player with that touch of sly nastiness that successful teams need. He''s wasted at Piswich.

[Herman 9,713]

Maybe we could poach him at the end of the season[:P]

[Nuff Said 5,089]

No thanks. Looked like he was one step away from either a hissy fit or tears most of the game.

[Katie Borkins 1]

It was all a bit blood and thunder, and not much composure from either aide, but we tried to play the right way and we''re well worth the win. Grabban ran his socks off upfront today and his goal, lucky though it was, was well deserved.

[93vintage 16]

In the first half we were terrible, it was poor quality hoofball with terrible control. The second goal settled us and we controlled the game better.

[snake-eyes 13]

The quality of the football on show in tge first half wasn''t pretty, but there is a simple reason for that.

MM and Ipswich knew full well the could not match us in a passing game. If they had tried even with the players they have missing they would have been Mullered!

Therefore their only option was to spoil it and hope to snatch something from a set piece or a lucky break.

AN also knew this and so filled the midfield with Strength, but also just enough guile and pace to make the most of the moments when the ball would be on the deck.

Fact is he got it spot on. Despite tge game being scrappy the quality eventually showed.

What makes me laugh is how delusional the binners are on TWTD. They really believe they could have beaten us without their injuries and would have passed us off the park. Really?

Must be something on the water down there or is it just breeding?

?????

[Big John 0]

We were also playing against a strong wind, and from midfield back were being dazzled by very bright sunlight...which made defending long balls that bit harder which probably goes some way to explain the lack of quality in the first half.  Lucky for Ipswich, the wind had died down and the sky had clouded over by the second half..

[Phillip J Fry 0]

Both sides played a high-pressing game that stopped anyone asserting control of the ball. The centre-backs couldn''t pass out from the back as the strikers would press them to try and make a mistake. Tettey, who is often the easy pass out of defence, was man-marked throughout the game in an attempt to try and stop him starting our attacks. Norwich, not wanting to give the ball away cheaply, instead played the ball long with the first pass and then relied on Grabban to either hold the ball up.

The real difference in the sides was in there approach once the initial long-pass had been played. Grabban tried to take the ball down and protect it, allowing his midfielders to get near him and attempt to play Norwich''s quick, direct, passing game that looked attack the Ipswich defence before it got settled. The Ipswich strikers tried to flick the ball on to a strike partner. Ipswich looked utterly incapable of holding the ball up, getting players around the strikers and attempting to build attacks, often resorting to a backwards pass followed by another long-ball.

It''s a difference that reflects the beliefs of their managers. Alex Neil wants his team to play a quick, technical, passing game that looks to exploit an unsettled defence before it can recover from losing the ball. MM distrusts technical players and technical football, so his team are incredibly direct, constantly playing long to the strikers and attempting to earn set-pieces. 

[Yellowbeagle 0]

[quote user="Crafty Canary"]Mings is a decent player with that touch of sly nastiness that successful teams need. He''s wasted at Piswich.[/quote]

Nothing wrong with abit of attitude as you say if it''s done to improve you influence on the game. But to me Mings looked like he already thinks he''s a big time charlie, before he''s backed up his undoubted ability. Premier league reserves beckons i feel.

[Norfolk Mustard 94]

[quote user="Phillip J Fry"]Both sides played a high-pressing game that stopped anyone asserting control of the ball. The centre-backs couldn''t pass out from the back as the strikers would press them to try and make a mistake. Tettey, who is often the easy pass out of defence, was man-marked throughout the game in an attempt to try and stop him starting our attacks. Norwich, not wanting to give the ball away cheaply, instead played the ball long with the first pass and then relied on Grabban to either hold the ball up.

The real difference in the sides was in there approach once the initial long-pass had been played. Grabban tried to take the ball down and protect it, allowing his midfielders to get near him and attempt to play Norwich''s quick, direct, passing game that looked attack the Ipswich defence before it got settled. The Ipswich strikers tried to flick the ball on to a strike partner. Ipswich looked utterly incapable of holding the ball up, getting players around the strikers and attempting to build attacks, often resorting to a backwards pass followed by another long-ball.

It''s a difference that reflects the beliefs of their managers. Alex Neil wants his team to play a quick, technical, passing game that looks to exploit an unsettled defence before it can recover from losing the ball. MM distrusts technical players and technical football, so his team are incredibly direct, constantly playing long to the strikers and attempting to earn set-pieces. 

[/quote]

Well articulated - I thoroughly agree...