billybantam
15th November 2008, 08:50 PM
As i seem to be the first home, though not really a fair race, and first to logon i shall say what i thought. I did think that it was the type of game which will have as many different opinions as the amount of people at Adams Park but this is my take on it....
First and foremost Wycombe Wanderers are a very good side at this level and that shouldnt be under estimated, and i thought they were better than darlo but cant comment on shrewsbury so dont know whether they are the best.
First half started well and they were bricking themselves when omar ran at them but for some reason this wore off and we reduceed ourselves to aiming long towards Conlon and Thorne, which, in my experience of the season is not where our goals have come from so i was surprised to see us try and attack like this for so long. Only about 10% of the long ball seemed to see us retain possesion and a similar thing could be said for WW.
Both defences played very well and were well organised and cleared everything, especially Graeme Lee, even though he had a full blown slagging match with Moncur as Wycombe took a throwing. On top of the solid defences neither team were 'winning' set pieces so few chances were created this way.
To give Stuart and Wayne credit they obviously told them what we were all thinking and we started hitting balls to the channels aiming to get the centre back out of posistion although as you can imagine with Thorne and Conlon proved tricky. Tom Clarke did the Bulock role ok, and like Bullock was not too noticeable but seemed to do the simple things well. For me McLaren had a very good game (controversial?) and made good passes and thoughtful passes and was trying other stuff than long balls. Our chances were reduced to long range efforts but the keeper was never tested properly either at taking crosses or stopping shots.
At the beginning of the 2nd half WW's change seemed to give them extra impetous but without creting clear cut chances until they hit the post. Evans played well marshalling his box and coming for balls but had few saves to make. Then they scored. I will leave judgement of it until i have seen the highlights but on 1st viewing it seemed to take a lucky bounce into their full backs path and he buried it.
At this point for some unknown reason we resorted back to plan A and punting long balls at Thorne and Conlon even though the threat was coming more from the 4 wide players. Boulding came on - somewhat overdue IMO - but was never able to run the channels and, like v barnet had us playing a weird lob sided 4-3-3 formation.
The reason i have called the thread, one of those things is because i thought the effort was applied by most players and that the tactics were rectified and may have allowed us to draw/win the game.
Ratings:
Evans: 7 - played well, commanded his box well and did what was expected
Moncur - 6 - defended well but hit too many long balls and didnt run with the ball enough, though was dangerous when he did
Lee - 7 - Solid
M Clarke - 7 - as above jawdrop:
O'Brien - 8 - kept their wide player quiet and looked good coming forward, solid display
Law - 6 - drifted inside but played ok, but not great
McLaren - 8 - Best game for City IMO
T Clarke - 6 - played ok, not his posistion
Daley - 6 - played well when he was involved but went missing for long periods
Conlon - 6 - Seemed to work hard and put himself about but with no consequence
Thorne - 5 - Not involved
Subs - Boulding - 5
McCall - 6 - Had us going long ball for too long but did change it, didnt make subs til too late IMO
D'Urso - 7 - You can tell a good ref from amile off because of the way they manage the game and seem in control and for me D'Urso was, odd weird decision but is too be expected and may just be my blinkers!!
Phew!!
Thanks for readingtup:tup:
First and foremost Wycombe Wanderers are a very good side at this level and that shouldnt be under estimated, and i thought they were better than darlo but cant comment on shrewsbury so dont know whether they are the best.
First half started well and they were bricking themselves when omar ran at them but for some reason this wore off and we reduceed ourselves to aiming long towards Conlon and Thorne, which, in my experience of the season is not where our goals have come from so i was surprised to see us try and attack like this for so long. Only about 10% of the long ball seemed to see us retain possesion and a similar thing could be said for WW.
Both defences played very well and were well organised and cleared everything, especially Graeme Lee, even though he had a full blown slagging match with Moncur as Wycombe took a throwing. On top of the solid defences neither team were 'winning' set pieces so few chances were created this way.
To give Stuart and Wayne credit they obviously told them what we were all thinking and we started hitting balls to the channels aiming to get the centre back out of posistion although as you can imagine with Thorne and Conlon proved tricky. Tom Clarke did the Bulock role ok, and like Bullock was not too noticeable but seemed to do the simple things well. For me McLaren had a very good game (controversial?) and made good passes and thoughtful passes and was trying other stuff than long balls. Our chances were reduced to long range efforts but the keeper was never tested properly either at taking crosses or stopping shots.
At the beginning of the 2nd half WW's change seemed to give them extra impetous but without creting clear cut chances until they hit the post. Evans played well marshalling his box and coming for balls but had few saves to make. Then they scored. I will leave judgement of it until i have seen the highlights but on 1st viewing it seemed to take a lucky bounce into their full backs path and he buried it.
At this point for some unknown reason we resorted back to plan A and punting long balls at Thorne and Conlon even though the threat was coming more from the 4 wide players. Boulding came on - somewhat overdue IMO - but was never able to run the channels and, like v barnet had us playing a weird lob sided 4-3-3 formation.
The reason i have called the thread, one of those things is because i thought the effort was applied by most players and that the tactics were rectified and may have allowed us to draw/win the game.
Ratings:
Evans: 7 - played well, commanded his box well and did what was expected
Moncur - 6 - defended well but hit too many long balls and didnt run with the ball enough, though was dangerous when he did
Lee - 7 - Solid
M Clarke - 7 - as above jawdrop:
O'Brien - 8 - kept their wide player quiet and looked good coming forward, solid display
Law - 6 - drifted inside but played ok, but not great
McLaren - 8 - Best game for City IMO
T Clarke - 6 - played ok, not his posistion
Daley - 6 - played well when he was involved but went missing for long periods
Conlon - 6 - Seemed to work hard and put himself about but with no consequence
Thorne - 5 - Not involved
Subs - Boulding - 5
McCall - 6 - Had us going long ball for too long but did change it, didnt make subs til too late IMO
D'Urso - 7 - You can tell a good ref from amile off because of the way they manage the game and seem in control and for me D'Urso was, odd weird decision but is too be expected and may just be my blinkers!!
Phew!!
Thanks for readingtup:tup: