by winchester_royal » 07 Aug 2010 19:32
by Terminal Boardom » 07 Aug 2010 19:33
by Dirk Gently » 07 Aug 2010 19:35
by Royal Lady » 07 Aug 2010 19:37
by andrew1957 » 07 Aug 2010 19:41
by Plymouth_Royal » 07 Aug 2010 19:44
Dirk Gently Long is is a good, honest, second striker - he'll chase the lost causes and win the ball for a main striker to score with - he's particularly ineffective playing as main striker in a 4-5-1 (or a 4-4-1-1 if you consider Gylfi playing behind him). But why we play 4-5-1 at home is beyond me anyway!
We created some decent chances in the first 10 minutes, then seemed to sit back and think "this'll be easy" and we didn't compete after that.
Great goal from Gylfi, but that was just about his only touch of the ball - a centre-forward can get away with that but a midfielder can't.
Agreed on the Pearce comments, but he has something that no other centre back has - he's fit!
by buzzbee » 07 Aug 2010 19:46
by Dirk Gently » 07 Aug 2010 19:48
Plymouth_RoyalDirk Gently Long is is a good, honest, second striker - he'll chase the lost causes and win the ball for a main striker to score with - he's particularly ineffective playing as main striker in a 4-5-1 (or a 4-4-1-1 if you consider Gylfi playing behind him). But why we play 4-5-1 at home is beyond me anyway!
We created some decent chances in the first 10 minutes, then seemed to sit back and think "this'll be easy" and we didn't compete after that.
Great goal from Gylfi, but that was just about his only touch of the ball - a centre-forward can get away with that but a midfielder can't.
Agreed on the Pearce comments, but he has something that no other centre back has - he's fit!
A striker should not be Honest, hard working and second striker. I hate it when people use words like these to describe a professional footballer. No-one cares if he's a nice guy, works hard means well. He's paid to hit the oxf*rd net, be clinical and have some sort of ability that can make you see why he's professional. Any poor mug off the park can be hard working, honest and nice.
by Man Friday » 07 Aug 2010 19:49
by Dirk Gently » 07 Aug 2010 19:51
Man Friday Was their player in an offside or onside position when their other player shot? That's the bottom line.
by andrew1957 » 07 Aug 2010 19:52
by Man Friday » 07 Aug 2010 19:53
buzzbee Just to clear up the reason for the first goal being allowed, having watched it at half time, the ball in from their guy was actually going backwards until it hit Mills. You can't be off-side from a ball going away from goal.
by Dirk Gently » 07 Aug 2010 19:54
Man Fridaybuzzbee Just to clear up the reason for the first goal being allowed, having watched it at half time, the ball in from their guy was actually going backwards until it hit Mills. You can't be off-side from a ball going away from goal.
I don't think that's right. What about most crosses from near the by-line with a player not receiving the ball in an active position?.
by Terminal Boardom » 07 Aug 2010 19:56
Man Friday Was their player in an offside or onside position when their other player shot? That's the bottom line.
by rob the royal » 07 Aug 2010 19:57
Man Friday Looks like we slipped up with Bertrand. And is Long McDermott's lovechild?
by sandman » 07 Aug 2010 19:58
by Tony Le Mesmer » 07 Aug 2010 19:59
Man Fridaybuzzbee Just to clear up the reason for the first goal being allowed, having watched it at half time, the ball in from their guy was actually going backwards until it hit Mills. You can't be off-side from a ball going away from goal.
I don't think that's right. What about most crosses from near the by-line with a player not receiving the ball in an active position?
Also, we must have had 4-5 good chances before they scored.
by FiNeRaIn » 07 Aug 2010 20:02
by rob the royal » 07 Aug 2010 20:04
andrew1957 Some of the comments about Long and playing 4-2-3-1 are wide of the mark. In the last 10 matches of last season we won 8 drew 1 lost 1 and Long played up front on his own in that formation for most of those games. no one complained then. The problem today was that he did not get the service and we looked generally disjointed.
by Terminal Boardom » 07 Aug 2010 20:05
Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 253 guests