Lessons from the Cup Match

[Salopian 1]

A good, professional performance, but we would have been punished by a team with better strikers!There are at least two major areas for improvement:1) The defence seems to lack cohesion, as if they do not know each other''s games. This applies easpecially in the centre. Neither Doherty nor Shackell played badly, but they did not seem to play together. Shackle, especially in the first half, was regularly wide on the left. Was this because he was following his player, or more likely was it because there was a gaping hole which was quickly filled by speedy Tamworth players?2) We still seem incapable of crossing the ball. I can understand it if the crosses were of full height, giving the defenders a chance, but they were usually waist high and didn''t reach far. Even the first goal required a dive to a low ball. The same was true from corners and free-kicks. When will these become fruitful? We even had the two centre-backs up each time because of Ernie''s lack of height, plus Dickson and Dion, but if the ball doesn''t reach them is there any point in leaving us vulnerable to the quick counter-attack.Ratings:Gallacher - 5 - raises your pulse rate for the wrong reasonColin - 7 - very competent, quick and thoughttfulDoherty - 6 effective, but crude, and like Gallacher, each time your heart''s in your mouthShackell - 6 prone to mistakes, distribution has deteriorated - misses Dion''s organisation?Drury - 6 - generally sound, although still fails to close players downCroft - 7 - very committed, tried very hard, good controlEtuhu - 7 - his presence and bulk meant that he was always likely towin the ball, passed well generallySafri - 8 - everywhere, collecting and using the ball well, possibly MOMHuckerby - 6 - good in phases, although generally well marshalled by the defenderEarnshaw - 6 - not his sort of pitch, and was generally tackled before he could control the ballDublin - 8 - enormous influence, although given the pitch and his age he was not going to lastOthersRobinson - 7 - very mobile, available - not a bad gameThorne - 4 - immobile and ineffective - Ryan would surely be better!Hughes - 5 - good for effort and mobility, but not much chanceI would struggle to decide between Safri and Dublin for MOM.

[ronbol ronbol 0]

all good points apart from giving hux a 6. two goals and a hand in dublins.should have been an 8 for me.

[Baldyboy 1]

up until cross for first goal looked like hux didnt give a toss, no way did he deserve an 8

[Citizen Journalist Foghorn 0]

Etuhu a 7!! Hucks a 6!! opinions I guess

[sheded 0]

[quote user="baldyboy"]up until cross for first goal looked like hux didnt give a toss, no way did he deserve an 8[/quote]

I agree Baldy  , Hucks should have  scored more than two  !   ....... give me strength   ....[:''(]

[ZLF 342]

Gallacher  5 - we need a better keeper

Colin   7 - solid

Shacks 6

Doc 6 - glorious ball for the first goal

Drury 6

Croft 6

Etuhu 6

Safri 6

Hux 7

Dion 7

Earnie 5

Subs

All 6 Hughes ran around hard,  Robbo kept things OK and Thorne won a few headers, all once the game was already won and we simply   professionally closed up shop.

 Can we only make the 4th round by drawing a non league club?

[Regime Change 0]

[quote user="baldyboy"]up until cross for first goal looked like hux didnt give a toss, no way did he deserve an 8[/quote]

Imo Hucks was the only player in the first 10 or 15 minutes who produced a half decent performance.

He had to drop far too deep to pick up the ball, and, some of Drury''s passing was woeful.

[Chunky Norwich 0]

My lessons learnt from watching the Tamworth game:

Pluses:

1. Colin is looking fairly good and is my vote so far for POTS. In the first half he was probably our only player who got stuck in and actually looked like wanting the ball and trying to make something happen when he had it. He''s starting to overlap and bomb forward now as well and his crossing is rapidly improving.
2. Dublin is looking good as well. Our first proper number nine since a certain Mr Roberts.
3. Safri was preferred ahead of both Robinson and Hughes
4. Croft is looking pretty nifty as well
5. Earnshaw started which looks like he''s staying
6. Grant cunningly told Earnshaw to play a shocker to deter any interest
7. We won!

Negatives:

1. Dickson ''Lazy Bones'' Etuhu
2. Drury, Doherty and Shackell can do nothing but pump it long from their eighteen-yard line
3. No-one in the side can take a decent corner
4. No-one in the side can take a decent free kick
5. No-one in the side can take a decent throw-in
6. Doherty is very good for heading back long balls. And nothing else. (I defended him LOADS for his first two seasons)
7. What on Earth did Robinson, Hughes and Thorne do when they came on? How many touches did they have between the three of them?

Overall though I am really happy and I''m not knocking the team per se. Our starting XI was, in my opinion, the starting XI we should be playing in every game. Hopefully Grant knows this by now and will carry on starting with these players. I think the main concern is our complete lack of any form of back-up.

[huck tastic<IMG src="http:new.pinkun.comforumsimagesline.gif"><BR><FONT face="Comic Sans MS">Bryan Hamilton could turn this around...<BR><FONT> 0]

I think that''s the current first choice 11, in best formation...and finally Safri picked ahead of Bobinson....

[Chapman Baxter 0]

Agree with pretty much everything Forbes17 says, although I thought Etuhu did pretty well.

Worst thing for me was Shackell''s distribution - astonishingly poor.

[ricky knight 0]

[quote user="Salopian"]A good, professional performance, but we would have been punished by a team with better strikers!

There are at least two major areas for improvement:
1) The defence seems to lack cohesion, as if they do not know each other''s games. This applies easpecially in the centre. Neither Doherty nor Shackell played badly, but they did not seem to play together. Shackle, especially in the first half, was regularly wide on the left. Was this because he was following his player, or more likely was it because there was a gaping hole which was quickly filled by speedy Tamworth players?

2) We still seem incapable of crossing the ball. I can understand it if the crosses were of full height, giving the defenders a chance, but they were usually waist high and didn''t reach far. Even the first goal required a dive to a low ball. The same was true from corners and free-kicks. When will these become fruitful? We even had the two centre-backs up each time because of Ernie''s lack of height, plus Dickson and Dion, but if the ball doesn''t reach them is there any point in leaving us vulnerable to the quick counter-attack.

Ratings:
Gallacher - 5 - raises your pulse rate for the wrong reason
Colin - 7 - very competent, quick and thoughttful
Doherty - 6 effective, but crude, and like Gallacher, each time your heart''s in your mouth
Shackell - 6 prone to mistakes, distribution has deteriorated - misses Dion''s organisation?
Drury - 6 - generally sound, although still fails to close players down
Croft - 7 - very committed, tried very hard, good control
Etuhu - 7 - his presence and bulk meant that he was always likely towin the ball, passed well generally
Safri - 8 - everywhere, collecting and using the ball well, possibly MOM
Huckerby - 6 - good in phases, although generally well marshalled by the defender
Earnshaw - 6 - not his sort of pitch, and was generally tackled before he could control the ball
Dublin - 8 - enormous influence, although given the pitch and his age he was not going to last

Others
Robinson - 7 - very mobile, available - not a bad game
Thorne - 4 - immobile and ineffective - Ryan would surely be better!
Hughes - 5 - good for effort and mobility, but not much chance
I would struggle to decide between Safri and Dublin for MOM.

[/quote]

how the hell could you give earnie the same as hucks, earnie done jack worth about 3 imo, hucks scored two created one thats at least a 7 right there. Drury did not pass to a yellow shirt all day, for all his critics doc did well today, the rest i would agree with.

[Saint Canary 0]

I want to give him a special mention because I actually thought Colin was worth an 8 and our best player today.  He looked the most comfortable on the ball of all our players, used it well, played some clever passes, rarely gave it away, got forward well, put a couple of nice crosses and kept any danger at bay from his side of the pitch.  However, he well and truly went back in his shell when Croft went off.  When all is said and done though he really got stuck in and it''s sad that the Dutchman seemed most passionate of all our players on FA Cup day.

As for the rest;

Gallacher 5 - Looked poor.  Came when he should of stayed a couple of times and nearly gave goals away for it.
Drury 5 - Poor.  Gave away too much space and awful use of the ball.
Shackell 5 - Too mant mistakes and gave the ball away too often when under no pressure.  Solid in the air but as with Drury gave too much space away.
Doc 6 - OK and slightly more solid that Shackell.
Croft 7 - Did well, carried the ball when he got the chance.
Safri 6 - Have to strongly disagree with the potential MOM rating.  He may have been everywhere but he everywhere the ball wasn''t in the first 20 minutes.  He was one of the main reasons Tamworth could have been a couple up because he never got close enough to make a tackle let alone win the ball.  He was in no mans land too much and didn''t look bothered. 
Etuhu 6 - Same as Safri in the first 20 minutes. 
Hux 7 - Scored two, made one.
Dublin 8 - Did exactly what was required of him. 
Earnie 5 - Just not his sort of game really. 

Subs
Hughes 6 - Did what I expected him to do.
Robinson 6 - Was available and used the ball well.  Actually saw him make a couple of tackles as well.
Thorne 5 -  Won maybe 2 or 3 headers at best.

Overall I am glad we won because we were lucky not to be at least 2 down with only 20 minutes gone.  This performance summed us up perfectly for me and highlights the problems we have had for a long, long time now.  Tamworth, I repeat Tamworth opened us up far too easily without having to do anything of any real quality.  We allowed them too much space early on with Safri and Etuhu MIA in midfield.  The amount of space granted was highlighted best when their centre forward brought down a long ball, turned and found himself with no one near him.

 

[Ark 0]

Defence:Drury - gave the ball away numerous times with unnecessary long throws forward. Otherwise not such a bad turn out.Doherty - slow to react, ever erratic.Shackell - positioning poor today.Colin - as good as could be expected.As someone else said, FAR too many tong balls out of the centre of defence. It was embarrassing in the first 15 minutes... Tamworth were winning all the headers, yet we were the team playing the up-and-under.Low/waist height crosses up front... Not such a bad ball to play since Earnie, for one, isn''t going to score many from the high balls, but need to mix it up.

[Syteanric 1]

im shocked Croft got a 7.. all he did was run around and smack a Tamworth player in the face...

jas :)

[CanaryNut 0]

It was not easy to play there today but this is no excuse for Shackell especially to not make more use of the ball when clearing the ball. Can''t more time be spent with him at Colney to improve his distribution rather than either a hoof up field, a mis skewed pass that goes nowhere, or a pass that goes straight to the opposition. He has been guilty of this all season. A pity, because otherwise heis a solid defensive player, even if he and Doherty have been caught out at times.

I also agree with a previous post expressing concern over our crosses. Too many of these are wasted on a regular basis. Surely its not too much to expect the likes of Colin and Drury as well to improve in this respect?