Re: vs Wimbledon

[Zippers Left Foot 0]

Your summary is correct - a game dominated by City but for some odd reason all sense of composure departed the dominant team once the clock hit 80 mins. The feedback is nearly all positive - with all of the starting line up warranting at least 7/10.

McVeigh, Holt & Francis dominated the show and the team moved the ball around well. Roberts led the line expertly against an inexperienced dons defence and brought the rest of the team into the game. The defence was comfortably in control.

The downsides were that Roberts should have been taken off after 60ish mins - he had done an excellent job and the match was won. He can no longer last a full game and Worthy should have conserved his energy for the Forest game once we were three up. His influence vanished after an hour.

Some of the distribution from the back could have been better - c''est la vie with Malky and Henderson was very ineffective when he came on.

Most worrying was the last 10 minutes when instead of getting stuck in as we had been all game we suddenly started back off players running at goal and being indecisive - this led to both goals and straight after their first goal Wimbledon somehow squandered their best chance of the game - over looked as immediately afterwards their player was sent off. That would have led to a very nervy last 7-8 minutes. Their goals WERE stoppable had we put a challenge in earlier rather than standing off.

However anything other than a City win would have been a travesty as for 80 mins there was only ever one team on the pitch and the length of this note devoted to the downsides is out of all proportions to the actual performance - I just want to to get better thats all - I am not being negative!

Roll on the old bogey game - away at forest - mind you it looks like this might be the best time to play them as their form is not aas strong as last years...

OTBC

[Border player 0]

"McVeigh, Holt & Francis dominated the show"...

On the basis of what you saw last night, where does Mulryne fit in now? Should he have been the player brought on in place of Rivers?

[MPR 0]

With Mulryne we''re too slow, Francis is a more ''thrusting'' player.

The thing that stuck out last night was how we wasted every corner and free kick we had. Short corners didn''t work last season and didn''t last night. Waste of time. Why we also insist on taking outswinging corners beats me. Surely swapping Rivers (The Tackling Wonder!) and Easton around would put more pressure on keepers with inswingers?

[Bury Yellow 2]

At a risk of upsetting all the Rivers haters, to me and all sitting near me the turning point was Worthy''s masterly substitution of Rivers. Really bad man-management. It was his game and he may have got a third. The team was balanced and controlling the game so why change it that early in the second half? Unless Rivers was injured it was another bad move as per Bradford away. He didn''t look too happy and went straight to the changing room

I know everyone seems to criticise Rivers tackling ability, but the boy has skill and keeps the opposing fullback occupied. OK he''s not a world beater but I think he''s the best we''ve got, particularly at home.

Why is it that if we are playing badly Worthy does not use subs until it''s too late but when we are controlling the game (Bradford Rotherham Wimbledon) he does the complete opposite?

Having said all that, we played well and look a different team when the ball is played on the ground.

OTBC

[GMF 1,010]

I was surprised that Rivers was substituted as early as he was, although he did have a "bad period", just before he came off, missing several tackles, which just added to the momentum Wimbledon were gaining.

The corners and free-kick situation needs addressing, as we are missing opportunities to keep pressure on the opposition, often giving away cheap possession.

Thought Easton had his moments, but he does look to off load the ball immediately, irrespective of which way he is facing and I do wish he would look to "attack his full back" more often.

Otherwise, the correct result, even if two wonder strikes rather flattered the visitors in terms of the final score line

[alex_ncfc 686]

Well listening to the commentary on Radio Norfolk, they said that Rivers wasn''t feeling well so that''s why he was substituted. Worthington had no choice but to sub him I guess. Didn''t go but sounded like a great game.

[Coelho 0]

As far as I''m concerned, when we''re 3-0 up it makes sense to rest players. What if Rivers had stayed on last night, got his hat-trick and then pulled his hamstring? I like Rivers, but he''s not the most consistent player, and neither is he the most fit. He''d played a huge part in getting us 3-0 up with his surging runs; he''d done his job and deserved a rest. Henderson needs the experience, he''s struggling to make the grade in my opinion, and if we can give him half an hour when we''re 3-0 up, it might improve his confidence.

Everyone seems to be praising McVeigh, and the EDP gave him Man of the Match; I counted at least ten occasions when his passes went astray, and he got robbed quite a few times. I really felt for him out there, because he was obviously giving 100%. He was making the right decisions and trying to make the right passes, but nothing seemed to come off. Seeing as our strikers can''t score at the moment, I''d drop Easton and play McVeigh left of midfield until Brennan comes back, with Roberts and Jarvis (or Hammond?) up front. McVeigh and Rivers out wide would give us skill and pace on either flank.

[Zippers Left Foot 0]

I agree that the substitutions were again strange.

Rivers was having a solid game and did give the side balance - I wonder if the couple of challenges that he (and Easton) pulled out of (which were 60/40 in his favour) led Worthy to take him off for a lack of effort? He did not appear injured and the team lost momentum with his removal. So we lose an opportunity to get a rare hat-trick.

McVeigh was excellent, instrumental in all three goals and causing them problems all over the park, we lost more attacking thrust with his removal. Not the fault of Elvis - he was given v little time/ball to make an impression.

Roberts off earlier to give him more time to recover before Saturdays game the tactical change needed.

City till I die.

[Zippers Left Foot 0]

For last nights game Holt & Francis played well and really dominated the centre of the park. It gave the rest of the team the platform to play the ball on the ground and dictate the game. Where our opponents play a high pressure game on turn the centre of the park into a battle field on last nights form I would stick with these two. However where the opponents are not highly combatative in the middle of the park I would start with Mullers & Francis on the basis that Francis can do the three lungs Holt job and both give us a better attacking options.

If we go to 3-5-2 then all three can play but I think that we will stick to the 4-4-2; the defensive/tackling committment of both Easton & Rivers were on clear display again last night!

Mulryne as a replacement for Rivers would have meant a full formation change so is not a move I would have made either - Hendo was the right choice IF Rivers needed to come off; he just had one of his poorest appearances yet with less committment to tackle than even Rivers.

[Gromitt 15]

Apparently rumored around us at game that Rivers came off as feeling unwell and promptly departed down tunnel to lose his lunch. How true this is I don''t know, but if correct sounds good reason to leave pitch in a hurry.

[we8wba 0]

those were the days vs wimbledon

miles apart we are now

[Mr. Bump 0]

[quote user="billy bunter"]

those were the days vs wimbledon

miles apart we are now

[/quote]

Because Wimbledon as it was no longer exists you fag

[Lord Horn 0]

[quote user="billy bunter"]

those were the days vs wimbledon

miles apart we are now

[/quote]

 

Exactly who are you talking about - recently promoted to the Blue Square South AFC Wimbledon or the bogus Franchise FC from Concrete Cow  territory?

 

[we8wba 0]

im on about wimbledon

not mk

[Lord Horn 0]

[quote user="billy bunter"]

im on about wimbledon

not mk

[/quote]

Well, if you know anything about non-league footie, you will know that AFC Wimbledon are on the up, have good gates and have gained promotion almost consistently since re-forming themselves.