Colchester player ratings

[Trent Canary 0]

Well that was some game! And with results going our way im very happy. Watched this one from the Jarrold stand. Its literally a morgue. About 10% sang OTBC before the game, no one stood up for the penalty, hardly anyone one clapped the subs off. Was embarassing to sit their to be honest.. But anyway.

Marshall - 6/7 - Did well. Made some good saves. Reasonable in the air. Not at fault for the goal in fact he could have very easily have fouled Lisbie and got sent off, with no keeper on the bench im glad he didnt! His kicking from the floor is good, his kicking from the hands is terrible. None of the defenders ever came short to receive the ball though which must be frustrating.

Otsemobor - 9 - Cracking performance. Defended well. Took his goal very well, and worked really effectively with Huckerby. Every time he got forward we looked dangerous.

Doc - 6 - Not much to do. Went off at half time for unknown reason.

Shacks - 6 - Kept them out well, but very much at fault for the goal. Handled their large striker in the air reasonably well.

Bertrand - 8 - Another good performance. Linked up well. Stopped crosses coming in. Looked good forward again and was unlucky not to score in the second half.

Fozzy - 7 - Played well, hassled, without much quality.

Russell - 9 - Can see what we have been missing. I bemoaned the lack of an attacking midfielder recently, but he was quality going forward. And got stuck in against the colly midfielders.

Pattison - 8 - Thought he had a great game in the first half. Linked up well, put in some good crosses and was effective in defence. The reaction of the other lads when he went off was good to see too. Won the penalty as well, good to see him getting forward.

Hucks - 8  - Attacked well in tandem with Semmy. Set up the second goal and the penalty. Looked back to his best on the right wing. Few bad crosses though and free kicks to be critical.

Cureton - 8/9 - Took all three goals very well, although the goals were down to the good work of others. He didnt do much on the side however, hence only an 8/9. Im sure others will give him higher. But great to see him get some goals, hopefully he will be finishing like this next season.

Dion - 8/9 - Back to his best. Won most of the headers, fantastic on the floor, great goal. He also spotted before everyone else the fact that we were getting great joy down the right wing in the first half. Due to that he looked for hucks and semmy often, and his header to huckerby led to the second goal, considering the header was from the other side of the pitch that was quite impressive! A true pro, wish there were more like him around.

Subs

Pearce - 6 - Not much to do but looked solid.

Croft - 6 - No real impression.

Ritgers - 6 - Looked sharp. I thought he set up CUretons third goal, but Radio Norfolk reckoned it was Dion. Either way I thought it was ritgers, and it was a great lay off.

Crowd - Better - Nowhere near the crowd of the 01-04, but better than ive seen recently.

[GJP 79]

Marshall - did well enough. Feel a bit sorry for him sometimes when the crowd gets on his back for his distribution as he hasn''t got a lot to aim for sometimes.

Semmy - showed today what he''s always looked capable of. If he can do that on a regular basis then he''ll be a brilliant player for us.

Doherty - thought he was defending pretty well. Shame he got injured.

Shackell - did ok, looked scared of Lisbie''s pace, obviously made an error for their goal.

Bertrand - once again he looked a class act. Just seems to have so much going for him as a player.

Huckerby - had a good game I thought. Gave Colchester something to worry about and linked up well with other players.

Fotheringham - our worst performer today, in my opinion. Didn''t start playing until we were in cruise control. Dreadful first half - didn''t win the ball and didn''t pass it. Sometimes too busy worrying about other people and not concentrating on his own game enough.

Russell - fairly steady game I thought. Always puts himself about and tries to keep things simple when they need to be.

Pattison - full credit to the lad I thought he had a good game. He looked lively, got involved in the game, put the ball in the box and made things happen.

Cureton - a hat trick and nothing else really. Had made no impact on the game until he scored. Funny that it sometimes seems acceptable for Cureton to score and do nothing else when Earnie got stick for not being a "team player" despite his prolific goalscoring.

Dublin - did his job well enough and added a few moments of pure class. Nice goal.

 

Subs:

Pearce - did ok again, I think this looks his level.

Croft - gave Colchester something us to worry about and they couldn''t live with threats on both wings.

Rigters - didn''t look afraid to work hard and stand up to challenges. Looking forward to seeing what else he''s got.

 

[Tookie140 0]

Marshall - 7

Otsemobor - 9

Doc - 6 -

 Shacks - 6

Bertrand - 9

Fozzy - 7

Russell - 9

Pattison - 8

Hucks - 8 

Cureton - 10

Dion - 9

Subs

Pearce - 6

Croft - 6

Ritgers - 6

[kdncfc 0]

Marshall 6 Not much to do but doesn''t command his area well enough for me.

Bertrand 8 Looked class and linked up well with Hucks.

Otsemebor 7 A threat going forward and defended well.

Shackell 5 Unconvincing, at fault for the goal.

Doc 6 Did ok.

Fotheringham 5 Still don''t really see what he gives us, doesn''t really create enough and looked disinterested to me.

Pattison 5 As above, don''t rate him at all, why he was so rapturously recieved today is beyond me.

Hucks 6.5 Did ok but still failed on to many occasions to get his cross in, has lost a yard of pace and only looks half the player he was as a result.

Dion 6 Excellent goal but his touch seems to be a bit off at the moment, gave the ball away quite a lot but did do some good things, looks like a player who can''t wait for the end of the season so he can retire for me which is perfectly understandable.

Cureton 8 Took his goals well, shocking miss when Dions shot came back off the bar even though he was offside.

Pearce 6 Did ok apart from a miskick near the end

Croft 6.5 Looked lively

Rigters 6 Set up 4th goal, looks a strong player.

Ref 2 Absolute pants, didn''t give us anything at all in the first half and booked Cureton for diving when he was clearly fouled.

Crowd 0 It was like being in a library at times today, when they do sing it''s the same old songs, boringly predictable.

Overall a deserved win against a poor team that looked to have accepted their fate from the start, played well in patches but most of the time the game resembled a practice match.

[Boyo 0]

I agree with Trent Canary, apart from Marshall he was very poor, I would give him a 4.

Also Rigters put the ball across the box and Dion laid it off for Cureton to score, so I hope I have cleared that up for you.  And Rigter was also involved in the fifth goal aswel, and I am pleased with him I would give him a 7.

[Trent Canary 0]

"I agree with Trent Canary, apart from Marshall he was very poor, I would give him a 4.

Also Rigters put the ball across the box and Dion laid it off for Cureton to score, so I hope I have cleared that up for you.  And Rigter was also involved in the fifth goal aswel, and I am pleased with him I would give him a 7."

 

Boyo - Yeah to be honest my mind has muddled up the fourth goal. By all accounts it was Dublin who laid it off, so extra credit to him.

Didnt think Marshall was that bad at all, the defenders IMO never look to receive the ball short, which is the main problem for him. It means he has to hoof it up the pitch, which he aint that good at.

[Graham Humphrey 13]

Marshall - 7
Otsemobor - 7
Doherty - 7
Shackell - 5
Bertrand - 6
Fotheringham - 5
Russell - 7
Pattison - 6
Huckerby - 6
Cureton - 6
Dublin - 5

Pearce - 6
Croft - 6
Rigters - 6

[Chesney Hawkes 0]

[quote user="kdncfc"]

Marshall 6 Not much to do but doesn''t command his area well enough for me.

Bertrand 8 Looked class and linked up well with Hucks.

Otsemebor 7 A threat going forward and defended well.

Shackell 5 Unconvincing, at fault for the goal.

Doc 6 Did ok.

Fotheringham 5 Still don''t really see what he gives us, doesn''t really create enough and looked disinterested to me.

Pattison 5 As above, don''t rate him at all, why he was so rapturously recieved today is beyond me.

Hucks 6.5 Did ok but still failed on to many occasions to get his cross in, has lost a yard of pace and only looks half the player he was as a result.

Dion 6 Excellent goal but his touch seems to be a bit off at the moment, gave the ball away quite a lot but did do some good things, looks like a player who can''t wait for the end of the season so he can retire for me which is perfectly understandable.

Cureton 8 Took his goals well, shocking miss when Dions shot came back off the bar even though he was offside.

Pearce 6 Did ok apart from a miskick near the end

Croft 6.5 Looked lively

Rigters 6 Set up 4th goal, looks a strong player.

Ref 2 Absolute pants, didn''t give us anything at all in the first half and booked Cureton for diving when he was clearly fouled.

Crowd 0 It was like being in a library at times today, when they do sing it''s the same old songs, boringly predictable.

Overall a deserved win against a poor team that looked to have accepted their fate from the start, played well in patches but most of the time the game resembled a practice match.

[/quote]I agree with absolutely everything you say here.  We beat Colchester 5-1 yet overall we played worse than we did in losing to Stoke.The way I think of Mark Fotheringham is this: my washing machine has a part inside the drum that is removable.  Now for the life of me, I can''t understand what this part actually does, or what benefit it adds, but I don''t take it out of the machine in case the whole thing somehow goes wrong.  To me, this is Mark Fotheringham.

[Citizen Journalist Foghorn 0]

[quote user="Graham Humphrey"]

Marshall - 7Otsemobor - 7Doherty - 7Shackell - 5Bertrand - 6Fotheringham - 5Russell - 7Pattison - 6Huckerby - 6Cureton - 6Dublin - 5Pearce - 6Croft - 6Rigters - 6

[/quote]Bertrand 6, Cureton 6......  You are an idiot mate. Plain and simple.  I cannot even be bothered to explain why as it would do no good.

[whack6 0]

how on earth can you give dublin a 5? he was supream yestorday, pure class act. near enough every move norwich made went through him.

[BCanary 0]

[quote user="Graham Humphrey"]

Marshall - 7Otsemobor - 7Doherty - 7Shackell - 5Bertrand - 6Fotheringham - 5Russell - 7Pattison - 6Huckerby - 6Cureton - 6Dublin - 5Pearce - 6Croft - 6Rigters - 6

[/quote]That''s the most laughable post in the history of all posts. Ever.Opinions are great and all, but that''s just an insult to common sense

[can u sit down please 0]

Marshall - 7 - Not a great deal to do but came for a couple of crosses and distribution was generally good, feeding the full back to go forward.

Otsemobor - 8 - Superb today. The best game i have seen him play. Always wanted the ball, supported Hucks and didnt get caught out defensively. Cracking goal too!

Bertrand -9- Get on the phone GR, the boy has to stay. Has a superb touch, never looks hurrried and rarely wastes possession. Linked up well with "Party" and linke Semmy looked good defensively.

Shackell -6- What was he doing for the goal? IMO i would have started him on the bench. Recovered well after the break but still makes me nervy.

Doc 6- Not a foot wrong but went off injured.

Pattison 8- The left is clearly his best position. Rarely wasted possession, kept things tidy and delivered some good crosses. A brave performance from him, could have so easily hid up.

Fozzy-7- I thought him and Russell were 2nd best in the first half but 2nd half looked better. Got forward well, things he does go un noticed as he is always keeping the game ticking over. I think he''s marmite. I like him.

Russell-7- Slow start but got better. Neat,tidy and combative. Exactly what you expect from him.

Dublin 8- What can i say? If only he was 10 yrs younger! Great goal, superb shot that hit the bar, his touch is sublime. Will be missed next yr!Legend after only 2yrs.

Cureton 9- Despite missing a couple that he knows he should have put away he left with a hat trick. The thing i like about him is he is not afraid to try things. Never hides and keeps going. A real predator. I think thats 14 goals now....not bad for an average season!

Pearce 7 - Solid, should have started.

Rigters 7- Had a hand in 2 goals, looked intelligent and bright. Cant wait to see more of him,

Croft 6 - Lively, had a couple of shots but not getting any closer!

Roeder 8- When i heard the team i was a bit miffed. No Evans,Croft,Pearce, Camara, Pattison starting and Rigters on the bench. He knows the squad better than us and today he got it spot on.

Crowd. 1- Were we there?

[Mister Chops 7]

I can''t score any player over eight because we weren''t value for the flattering scoreline... and I haven''t seen an away team have as much time around our penalty area for a good while.  Lucky Colchester were truly poor and gave up after the penalty.

Marshall - 6
Otsemobor - 7.5
Doherty - 6
Shackell - 5
Bertrand - 7.5
Fotheringham - 6
Russell - 7
Pattison - 6.5
Huckerby - 7
Cureton - 8
Dublin - 7

Pearce - 6
Croft - 6
Rigters - 6

[Graham Humphrey 13]

[quote user="MK Canary"]

That''s the most laughable post in the history of all posts. Ever.

Opinions are great and all, but that''s just an insult to common sense
[/quote]

Well thanks for the constructive reply.

God help us if we played a good team yesterday. We would have been dead and buried by half-time (which is why some of the marks aren''t that high; if Dublin and Bertrand turned up in the first half too they would have got higher marks).

[Mason 47 1,926]

GH thats a tad harsh!

Those ratings are more fitting for a gmae we lost rather than our biggest win of the season...

And for those marking Dion down... please rethink- who else would have tried that lob for 40 yards, the score a sublime one at the end like that? The technical ability to do that is immense! 

[BCanary 0]

You can only beat what''s in front of you. If you''re not happy with a 5-1 win, then really, what is the point in you watching football at all?Out of curiosity, how many goals would Cureton have had to have scored for you to give him an 8 or a 9? Bertrand and Dublin were a class act for the full 90 minutes, too.

I''m all for people having different views and raising different questions from different angles to create message board debate, but the performances of Curo, Dublin and Bertrand yesterday are in absolute no doubt, and anyone who suggests otherwise is simply seeking attention for the sake of having an "alternate view" on proceedings

[Freeza 0]

I agree with most of Trent Canary''s analysis but here''s my ratings:

Marshall - 7

Semmy - 8

Doherty - 6

Shackell - 6

Baertrand - 7

Pattison - 7

Russell - 6.5

Fozzy - 6.5

Hucks - 7

Cureton - 8

Dion - 7.5

Subs

Pearce - 6.5

Croft - 6

Rigters - 6.5

A good performance against poor opposition. If only all games were this easy!

[Trent Canary 0]

[quote user="Graham Humphrey"]

[quote user="MK Canary"]

That''s the most laughable post in the history of all posts. Ever.

Opinions are great and all, but that''s just an insult to common sense
[/quote]

Well thanks for the constructive reply.

God help us if we played a good team yesterday. We would have been dead and buried by half-time (which is why some of the marks aren''t that high; if Dublin and Bertrand turned up in the first half too they would have got higher marks).

[/quote]

You didnt think Bertrand or Dion had a good first half? Well agree to disagree, but I thought Dion was quality. Won so much in the air, was good on the floor and picked the pass to the midfielders the vast majority of the time. And as I said in my opening post, the fact he kept trying to get the ball out to the right wing when no one else really did showed his footballing brain?

[Graham Humphrey 13]

[quote user="MK Canary"]You can only beat what''s in front of you. If you''re not happy with a 5-1 win, then really, what is the point in you watching football at all?

Out of curiosity, how many goals would Cureton have had to have scored for you to give him an 8 or a 9? Bertrand and Dublin were a class act for the full 90 minutes, too.



I''m all for people having different views and raising different questions from different angles to create message board debate, but the performances of Curo, Dublin and Bertrand yesterday are in absolute no doubt, and anyone who suggests otherwise is simply seeking attention for the sake of having an "alternate view" on proceedings
[/quote]

True, you can indeed only beat what''s in front of you. I never said I wasn''t happy though, I am, just that I didn''t think it was a particularly good display and a better side would have beaten us but then I guess that''s irrelevant. That''s what I''m taking issue with - I''m certainly not unhappy with winning 5-1.

As for Cureton, he didn''t have to score any more goals, he just has to stop looking so lazy and disinterested. He did literally nothing apart from those goals but then as a striker I guess that''s what he''s there for. Most of his performances have been of that standard but he did at least take his goals well albeit against a Sunday League-standard defence.

As for "seeking attention", you''re totally wrong but if you think I am, surely you would be better off ignoring me rather than replying?

[Mister Chops 7]

[quote user="Graham Humphrey"]

True, you can indeed only beat what''s in front of you. I never said I wasn''t happy though, I am, just that I didn''t think it was a particularly good display and a better side would have beaten us but then I guess that''s irrelevant. That''s what I''m taking issue with - I''m certainly not unhappy with winning 5-1.

[/quote]

I think that''s entirely reasonable.  We played poorly for large parts of yesterday''s game and were better 1st half against Stoke than we were yesterday.

[quote user="Graham Humphrey"]

As for Cureton, he didn''t have to score any more goals, he just has to stop looking so lazy and disinterested. He did literally nothing apart from those goals but then as a striker I guess that''s what he''s there for. Most of his performances have been of that standard but he did at least take his goals well albeit against a Sunday League-standard defence.

[/quote]

But isn''t that a bit like saying "the defence literally did nothing apart from keep a clean sheet" or "the goalie literally did nothing apart from save a penalty"?

His blaze over from the Dublin lob-off-the-bar was comedy gold, but I thought Cureton was good yesterday and I am not his biggest fan (unless waist size counts).

[Buncey 1]

I was unable to attend yesterday so did we play well or did we play badly? Because if we played as bad as we did against stoke I dunno how we could have won a game let alone by 4 goals. It just seems people seem to be making things up because I am generally confused, some ratings go from 9 to 5, how does that work?

[Graham Humphrey 13]

[quote user="Mister Chops"]

[quote user="Graham Humphrey"]

As for Cureton, he didn''t have to score any more goals, he just has to stop looking so lazy and disinterested. He did literally nothing apart from those goals but then as a striker I guess that''s what he''s there for. Most of his performances have been of that standard but he did at least take his goals well albeit against a Sunday League-standard defence.

[/quote]

But isn''t that a bit like saying "the defence literally did nothing apart from keep a clean sheet" or "the goalie literally did nothing apart from save a penalty"?

His blaze over from the Dublin lob-off-the-bar was comedy gold, but I thought Cureton was good yesterday and I am not his biggest fan (unless waist size counts).

[/quote]

I guess it is, really, yeah. And it is what he''s paid to do and he hasn''t done it nearly often enough. So full credit to him for putting three away. It''s just that I thought he looked rather unconvincing but that could be levelled at a lot of players for most of the season.

On reflection I was probably a bit harsh on Dublin too - I think 6 is a fairer mark than 5, considering his impact later on.

[Mister Chops 7]

[quote user="Fellas"]I was unable to attend yesterday so did we play well or did we play badly? Because if we played as bad as we did against stoke I dunno how we could have won a game let alone by 4 goals. It just seems people seem to be making things up because I am generally confused, some ratings go from 9 to 5, how does that work?[/quote]

Some people obviously mark based on the scoreline, others on the performance.  If we''d been playing a good team yesterday (e.g. Burnley, for example), we would have taken a draw at best.

 

[Gingerpele 0]

why russell getting 9s? he wasnt that good, he was out of the game for ages, didnt get stuck in as much as normall, and fozzy was attacking just as much as he was, they where equal at least

[First Wizard 0]

[quote user="GJP"]

 

.

Cureton - a hat trick and nothing else really. Had made no impact on the game until he scored.

 

[/quote]

Are you for real?

Some of the anti Cureton brigade have become so transparent in their childish biase now that its bloody certifiable!.

[mr happy 0]

[quote user="Trent Canary"]

Well that was some game! And with results going our way im very happy. Watched this one from the Jarrold stand. Its literally a morgue. About 10% sang OTBC before the game, no one stood up for the penalty, hardly anyone one clapped the subs off. Was embarassing to sit their to be honest.. But anyway.

Marshall - 6/7 - Did well. Made some good saves. Reasonable in the air. Not at fault for the goal in fact he could have very easily have fouled Lisbie and got sent off, with no keeper on the bench im glad he didnt! His kicking from the floor is good, his kicking from the hands is terrible. None of the defenders ever came short to receive the ball though which must be frustrating.

Otsemobor - 9 - Cracking performance. Defended well. Took his goal very well, and worked really effectively with Huckerby. Every time he got forward we looked dangerous.

Doc - 6 - Not much to do. Went off at half time for unknown reason.

Shacks - 6 - Kept them out well, but very much at fault for the goal. Handled their large striker in the air reasonably well.

Bertrand - 8 - Another good performance. Linked up well. Stopped crosses coming in. Looked good forward again and was unlucky not to score in the second half.

Fozzy - 7 - Played well, hassled, without much quality.

Russell - 9 - Can see what we have been missing. I bemoaned the lack of an attacking midfielder recently, but he was quality going forward. And got stuck in against the colly midfielders.

Pattison - 8 - Thought he had a great game in the first half. Linked up well, put in some good crosses and was effective in defence. The reaction of the other lads when he went off was good to see too. Won the penalty as well, good to see him getting forward.

Hucks - 8  - Attacked well in tandem with Semmy. Set up the second goal and the penalty. Looked back to his best on the right wing. Few bad crosses though and free kicks to be critical.

Cureton - 8/9 - Took all three goals very well, although the goals were down to the good work of others. He didnt do much on the side however, hence only an 8/9. Im sure others will give him higher. But great to see him get some goals, hopefully he will be finishing like this next season.

Dion - 8/9 - Back to his best. Won most of the headers, fantastic on the floor, great goal. He also spotted before everyone else the fact that we were getting great joy down the right wing in the first half. Due to that he looked for hucks and semmy often, and his header to huckerby led to the second goal, considering the header was from the other side of the pitch that was quite impressive! A true pro, wish there were more like him around.

Subs

Pearce - 6 - Not much to do but looked solid.

Croft - 6 - No real impression.

Ritgers - 6 - Looked sharp. I thought he set up CUretons third goal, but Radio Norfolk reckoned it was Dion. Either way I thought it was ritgers, and it was a great lay off.

Crowd - Better - Nowhere near the crowd of the 01-04, but better than ive seen recently.

[/quote]are you sure you were in the jarrold stand mate,or are you unfamiliar with carrow road

[mr happy 0]

[quote user="Graham Humphrey"]

Marshall - 7
Otsemobor - 7
Doherty - 7
Shackell - 5
Bertrand - 6
Fotheringham - 5
Russell - 7
Pattison - 6
Huckerby - 6
Cureton - 6
Dublin - 5

Pearce - 6
Croft - 6
Rigters - 6

[/quote]get a life mate and try watching the game with your eyes open.Fans like you who needs enemies

[Mister Chops 7]

[quote user="1st Wizard"][quote user="GJP"]

 

.

Cureton - a hat trick and nothing else really. Had made no impact on the game until he scored.

 

[/quote]

Are you for real?

Some of the anti Cureton brigade have become so transparent in their childish biase now that its bloody certifiable!.

[/quote]

Self-awareness isn''t your strong point is it, Wiz?

Childish bias?  Shall we talk about your attitude to Roeder again?

[GJP 79]

[quote user="1st Wizard"][quote user="GJP"]

 

.

Cureton - a hat trick and nothing else really. Had made no impact on the game until he scored.

 

[/quote]

Are you for real?

Some of the anti Cureton brigade have become so transparent in their childish biase now that its bloody certifiable!.

[/quote]

Yes, I am for real.

You tell me what he did in that game apart from score a hat-trick? Good for him that he did score a hat trick but what did he contribute to open play? Very little. He''s a "nearly" player when it comes to that. I don''t see what your issue is with what I said, surely if you watch and read the game properly you''d know that apart from tuck away the odd goal Jamie Cureton very rarely does much else. But I know that Jamie''s "passion" for the club prevents a lot of people seeing things how they really are.

[Trent Canary 0]

[quote user="Fellas"]I was unable to attend yesterday so did we play well or did we play badly? Because if we played as bad as we did against stoke I dunno how we could have won a game let alone by 4 goals. It just seems people seem to be making things up because I am generally confused, some ratings go from 9 to 5, how does that work?[/quote]

Depends how you look at it. Some people say the opposition was poor, and Id agree if we won by the odd goal. But you cant get much better than 5-1. Some people say Colly had chances, I say we missed a load of good chances. I dont remember Marshall having much to do in goal.

I didnt go to Stoke so I cant compare. But we really werent that bad in my opinion.

Obviously some people have different rating styles, if we lose I usually crack out the 4s, 5s, and 6s. So id like to think im not a generally positive rater. But everyone sees things differently. All ill add is that some players have been given 5s and 6s, and id love to know what they would have to do to get a 9 or so!

As for giving Russell a 9, I thought he was what we lacked the last few games. An attacking midfielder. He also for me passed well and tackled well. On reflection maybe an 8 is more suited, but given ive been moaning about the centre mids not getting forward, his comeback showed what we have lacked.