|
Post by baldy on Feb 12, 2011 18:02:38 GMT
Clarke 7 - Dealt well with long balls into box. Purkiss 7 - Seems to have added a bit of pace to his game. Worley 7 - Sloppy goal to concede but he did well on the whole. Wright 7 - Snuffed out the threat of Le Fondre Tonkin 7 - Good game defensively and attacked with purpose. Hall 6 - OK in fits and starts. Needs to stamp authority on game. Heslop 7 - Simply put - we're better with him in the side. McLaren 7 - Always aware of whats going on around him. McLean 7 - Fortunate penalty but a lot of clever play. Constable 6 - Ball bounced off him far too easily at times. Midson 7 - Super play to make the goal but I prefer Craddock !
Hackney 7 - A 'straight line winger'. Doesn't jink about and lose possession. Clist 7 - Helped steady the ship at a time Rotherham had a lot of ball. Potter 6 - Not as direct as Hackney but did OK
|
|
|
Post by Beav on Feb 12, 2011 18:09:48 GMT
Clarke 7 - Dealt well with long balls into box. Slow to come out when taking ALF down. Purkiss 7 - Seems to have added a bit of pace to his game but maybe lacking fitness? Worley 7 - Sloppy goal to concede but he did well on the whole. Wright 8 - Dealt perfectly with ALF **MOTM** Tonkin 7 - Good game defensively and attacked with purpose. Hall 7 - Best midfielder first half, great cover for Tonkin always. Heslop 7 - Didn't think he had a great first half except goal, caught out of position dragging McLaren out for their goal. Needs to cover Purk better. McLaren 7 - Always aware of whats going on around him. MacLean 7 - Fortunate penalty but a lot of clever play. Constable 6 - Ball bounced off him far too easily at times. Good work rate Midson 7 - Super play to make the goal. Deserved his place today.
Hackney 8 - Assist for second goal. Lively and great technique - one to watch. Clist 7 - Helped steady the ship at a time Rotherham had a lot of ball. Potter 6 - Not as direct as Hackney but did OK seeing as noone would actually pass the ball to him
Used baldy's as a template as he's normally well thought out
|
|
|
Post by bluealice on Feb 12, 2011 18:09:50 GMT
I hate to say it but Beano was pretty awful today! but even the good and great are allowed an off day, Midson was excellent, which was nice to see. Overall the Team was average BUT we got the points!!!
|
|
|
Post by oxontop on Feb 12, 2011 18:15:37 GMT
I didn't think anyone particularly stood out - in either a positive or negative way. A true team performance, but CW got the tactics right: starting Midson would have caught Rotherham off-guard.
|
|
|
Post by unification on Feb 12, 2011 18:16:55 GMT
Clarke 7 - Didn't have much to do. Could his decision making have been better for the goal? Just a question, not a criticism. Purkiss 5 - Seemed to sh*t himself whenever Daley was on the ball. Delivery wasn't great either. Worley 7 - Solid performance and did what he had to do. Wright 7 - As the Bald man said, kept ALF quiet. Tonkin 7 - The good form continues for him. No mistakes, attacked well and seems to have got a bit pacier of late. Hall 7 - He's one that really splits the fans. I like him and he does the 'watercarrier' job well. Silly booking though. Heslop 7 - Interesting to hear Wilder's thoughts on him after the game. Looked surprisingly fast as well, but went a bit quiet in the second half. McLaren 8 - Tidied up so many stray passes and tackled back superbly. Ronnie Moore said that they went out to try to shut out McLaren and it didn't pay off. MOTM. McLean 7 - Can a penalty be 'bad' if it goes in?! Still think he needs to play down the middle. Bizarre decision to turn around with the ball when in the area. Still a class act though. Constable 5 - Should have had about five today. Off day for him and his misses just show he is better when he doesn't have to think about finishing it. Midson 7 - Persevered to set up the first. Quiet game out on the left other than that.
Hackney 8 - Looks exciting. Caused Rotherham no end of problems. Our team looked surprised by how good his crossing was as well! Clist 7 - Usual Clist performance. Tidy, didn't lose possession. Potter 6 - Didn't do too much to warrant anything higher than a 6.
|
|
|
Post by hablopicasso on Feb 12, 2011 18:34:30 GMT
Agree with unification here. Purkiss definitely a 5, Tonkin really showed his pace at times today, Heslop started well and continued, McLean turning to the wing when in the box at the end was strange, Hackney's first corner was a shocker but then put some good dipping & pacy balls in.
Missed the post-match with Wilder as our radio is up the shoot, what did he say about Heslop?
|
|
|
Post by Paul Cannell on Feb 12, 2011 18:36:51 GMT
I'd give Purkiss a 6, Daley was a handful and he didn't have a lot of support at times, Constable a 6 - he made chances for himself and Midson a 6 - he didn't do much other than the run for the goal.
Otherwise agree with unification.
|
|
|
Post by Cardiff Yellow on Feb 12, 2011 18:39:08 GMT
just said that beano is a bit down that he didnt score a few, CW happy with performance but critical of finishing and decision-making at times.
|
|
|
Post by ox1yellow on Feb 12, 2011 19:47:31 GMT
Hackney looked a class act in the short time he had on the pitch today. Given the short time he has been with the team, I thought he did very well. I'm looking forwrd to seeing a lot more of him.
I have a huge amount of time for Beano, but felt he should have been replaced with Craddock towards the end. There is no excuse for missing the late chances he had. Yes he did well to get into the positions but he has to hit the back of the net. I'm just glad we didn't end up drawing the game 2-2.
Midson was poor.
|
|
|
Post by Beav on Feb 12, 2011 19:53:48 GMT
Hackney looked a class act in the short time he had on the pitch today. Given the short time he has been with the team, I thought he did very well. I'm looking forwrd to seeing a lot more of him. I have a huge amount of time for Beano, but felt he should have been replaced with Craddock towards the end. There is no excuse for missing the late chances he had. Yes he did well to get into the positions but he has to hit the back of the net. I'm just glad we didn't end up drawing the game 2-2. Midson was poor.[/color][/quote] Really?? How do you justify such a statement?
|
|
|
Post by macleanmassivefan on Feb 12, 2011 20:00:25 GMT
Midson was given a chance, if we start with an unchanged team for Stevenage we can get the points. Stevenage's confidence will be up the shoot, they haven't won in 5
|
|
|
Post by basingstokeox on Feb 12, 2011 20:16:45 GMT
Hackney looked a class act in the short time he had on the pitch today. Given the short time he has been with the team, I thought he did very well. I'm looking forwrd to seeing a lot more of him. I have a huge amount of time for Beano, but felt he should have been replaced with Craddock towards the end. There is no excuse for missing the late chances he had. Yes he did well to get into the positions but he has to hit the back of the net. I'm just glad we didn't end up drawing the game 2-2. Midson was poor. Mids won virtually every header and supplied the 1st goal what is poor about that?? Where you at the game?? Plod was poor 2 one on ones with the keeper and he didnt score, fair pay to the crowd for getting behind him after the 2nd miss
|
|
|
Post by ox1yellow on Feb 12, 2011 20:19:27 GMT
Hackney looked a class act in the short time he had on the pitch today. Given the short time he has been with the team, I thought he did very well. I'm looking forwrd to seeing a lot more of him. I have a huge amount of time for Beano, but felt he should have been replaced with Craddock towards the end. There is no excuse for missing the late chances he had. Yes he did well to get into the positions but he has to hit the back of the net. I'm just glad we didn't end up drawing the game 2-2. Midson was poor.[/color][/quote] Really?? How do you justify such a statement?[/quote] I know some people rate him but I just haven't seen enough from him this season to warrant a place in the team above someone like Craddock (perhaps there was an injury issue and if this was the case I fully understand his inclusion). I don't doubt his service to the club over the past year or two, and I don't dislike him as a player, I just think we have moved up a level and we now have better players at the club. Perhaps I missed something today from my viewpoint in the OM stand, but he didn't stand out for me and after his last couple of appearances I have been left feeling that someone else could have done better. This was an opinion shared by a few people around me. In the Beano, MacLean, Craddock, Midson pecking order, Midson is always going to be fourth in my mind. Again, not because he has done anything wrong, just because we now have better players at the club. IMO he's a good player to have on the bench.
|
|
|
Post by basingstokeox on Feb 12, 2011 20:29:02 GMT
Really?? How do you justify such a statement? I know some people rate him but I just haven't seen enough from him this season to warrant a place in the team above someone like Craddock (perhaps there was an injury issue and if this was the case I fully understand his inclusion). I don't doubt his service to the club over the past year or two, and I don't dislike him as a player, I just think we have moved up a level and we now have better players at the club. Perhaps I missed something today from my viewpoint in the OM stand, but he didn't stand out for me and after his last couple of appearances I have been left feeling that someone else could have done better. This was an opinion shared by a few people around me. In the Beano, MacLean, Craddock, Midson pecking order, Midson is always going to be fourth in my mind. Again, not because he has done anything wrong, just because we now have better players at the club. IMO he's a good player to have on the bench. Sorry re the striker pecking order, rotate them just like Fergie, so noone thinks they are guaranteed a place a work harder just like the "contreversial" dropping of berbatov today.
|
|
|
Post by ox1yellow on Feb 12, 2011 20:32:07 GMT
I know some people rate him but I just haven't seen enough from him this season to warrant a place in the team above someone like Craddock (perhaps there was an injury issue and if this was the case I fully understand his inclusion). I don't doubt his service to the club over the past year or two, and I don't dislike him as a player, I just think we have moved up a level and we now have better players at the club. Perhaps I missed something today from my viewpoint in the OM stand, but he didn't stand out for me and after his last couple of appearances I have been left feeling that someone else could have done better. This was an opinion shared by a few people around me. In the Beano, MacLean, Craddock, Midson pecking order, Midson is always going to be fourth in my mind. Again, not because he has done anything wrong, just because we now have better players at the club. IMO he's a good player to have on the bench. Sorry re the striker pecking order, rotate them just like Fergie, so noone thinks they are guaranteed a place a work harder just like the "contreversial" dropping of berbatov today. Fair comment.
|
|
|
Post by luvthepink on Feb 12, 2011 20:37:53 GMT
didnt the goalie make some good saves against Beano??? the radio peeps seemed to think it was the saves ratherthan him actually missing....he did get them on target...thats the way t goes methinks.....our side without Beano isnt half as effective....stop the dissin
|
|
|
Post by oxfordboy on Feb 12, 2011 22:02:57 GMT
didnt the goalie make some good saves against Beano??? the radio peeps seemed to think it was the saves ratherthan him actually missing....he did get them on target...thats the way t goes methinks.....our side without Beano isnt half as effective....stop the dissin The goalie made a great save against Beano 1v1, but with all the time he had he really shouldn't have given Warrington a chance.
|
|
|
Post by secondsout on Feb 12, 2011 22:17:18 GMT
Clarke 7 - In fairness he didnt have much to do but did well when called upon. Purkiss 6 - A better defender than Batt but his lack of getting forward hurts his game. We look lopsided and predictable when he stops in space to hit a 30yrd diagonal ball. Worley 6 - Had his moments but wasnt as good as Wright for me today. Wright 7 - For me he has been a bit patchy since he returned but was bang on form today. Tonkin 7 - Reminds me of Glen Johnson. If you can get past his routine mistake he is a consistently decent performer. It all depends on what his routine mistake leads to though (Southend!) Hall 6 - Picked for his height today but for me plays much better with Maclaren & Clist rather than Maclaren & Heslop. Heslop 6 - Scored but we look much poorer in midfield without Clist. McLaren 7 - Hes been better for us but had a decent enough game. McLean 7 - Seemed to tire early but with him you get what you expect. His forms dipped since he re-signed with us but even then he means so much to the others around him. Constable 5 - Not because he missed his chances but because he just looked off the pace today. No shame in it. Bad day at the office is all. Midson 6 - Did well for the goal and in the air in the first 30-35 mins. Faded quite quickly before half time though. Replaced at the right time.
Hackney 8 - Hes a lazy passer in that he never seems to quite put enough in to his passes but hes a great crosser of the ball and it seems to stick to his feet. Much like Potter can be, hes a great impact player, as shown against Southend when he was probably the only one to deserve any credit. Clist 6 - On the basis that he didnt really have time to impress. Did what you would expect though. Potter 6 - Much like Clist he didnt have a lot of time. I have noticed though that his forms dipped quite a lot since his injury. I assume its just lack of fitness but I would say hes playing probably 20% below his potential.
|
|
|
Post by basingstokeox on Feb 12, 2011 22:38:57 GMT
Clarke 7 - In fairness he didnt have much to do but did well when called upon. Purkiss 6 - A better defender than Batt but his lack of getting forward hurts his game. We look lopsided and predictable when he stops in space to hit a 30yrd diagonal ball. Worley 6 - Had his moments but wasnt as good as Wright for me today. Wright 7 - For me he has been a bit patchy since he returned but was bang on form today. Tonkin 7 - Reminds me of Glen Johnson. If you can get past his routine mistake he is a consistently decent performer. It all depends on what his routine mistake leads to though (Southend!) Hall 6 - Picked for his height today but for me plays much better with Maclaren & Clist rather than Maclaren & Heslop. Heslop 6 - Scored but we look much poorer in midfield without Clist. McLaren 7 - Hes been better for us but had a decent enough game. McLean 7 - Seemed to tire early but with him you get what you expect. His forms dipped since he re-signed with us but even then he means so much to the others around him. Constable 5 - Not because he missed his chances but because he just looked off the pace today. No shame in it. Bad day at the office is all. Midson 6 - Did well for the goal and in the air in the first 30-35 mins. Faded quite quickly before half time though. Replaced at the right time. Hackney 8 - Hes a lazy passer in that he never seems to quite put enough in to his passes but hes a great crosser of the ball and it seems to stick to his feet. Much like Potter can be, hes a great impact player, as shown against Southend when he was probably the only one to deserve any credit. Clist 6 - On the basis that he didnt really have time to impress. Did what you would expect though. Potter 6 - Much like Clist he didnt have a lot of time. I have noticed though that his forms dipped quite a lot since his injury. I assume its just lack of fitness but I would say hes playing probably 20% below his potential. hello!!!!!! Where you there? Hackney a lasy passer like McLean prehaps a class or 2 above L2 pURKISS a better crosser than Batt but not as fast Worley a 6 sorry at least a 7 wright an 8 Heslop a 6 sorry 8 Mc lauren an 8 Mclean an 8 hes just class above our strikers, and hes playing to deep to get the ball Mids at least a 7 won every header ** No idea why clist came on before Potter other than CW negativiness as we had them
|
|
|
Post by hairy on Feb 12, 2011 22:44:36 GMT
Midson was average as usual, I know he only has to control the ball to give some of you a semi but f*cking hell to praise him after that performance is going over the top.
Heslop on the other hand showed how he is the best attacking midfielder at the club and he deserves to start over our "goalscoring " midfielder Hall.
|
|
|
Post by wewillsingonourown on Feb 13, 2011 0:56:06 GMT
Midson was average as usual, I know he only has to control the ball to give some of you a semi but f*cking hell to praise him after that performance is going over the top. Heslop on the other hand showed how he is the best attacking midfielder at the club and he deserves to start over our "goalscoring " midfielder Hall. Yeh, it's not like he made the first goal single handedly was it? Maybe people to over hype Jack at times, but today he was good and give him credit for that. He didn't deserve to be replaced.
|
|
|
Post by verbal kint on Feb 13, 2011 0:57:52 GMT
Sorry thought purkiss was exposed today,, stood off far to much and let Daley dictate the play. Thought Worley was top drawer today
|
|
|
Post by Long John Silver on Feb 13, 2011 1:11:42 GMT
Clarke 7 - Didn't have much to do. Could his decision making have been better for the goal? Just a question, not a criticism. Purkiss 5 - Seemed to sh*t himself whenever Daley was on the ball. Delivery wasn't great either. Worley 7 - Solid performance and did what he had to do. Wright 7 - As the Bald man said, kept ALF quiet. Tonkin 7 - The good form continues for him. No mistakes, attacked well and seems to have got a bit pacier of late. Hall 7 - He's one that really splits the fans. I like him and he does the 'watercarrier' job well. Silly booking though. Heslop 7 - Interesting to hear Wilder's thoughts on him after the game. Looked surprisingly fast as well, but went a bit quiet in the second half. McLaren 8 - Tidied up so many stray passes and tackled back superbly. Ronnie Moore said that they went out to try to shut out McLaren and it didn't pay off. MOTM. McLean 7 - Can a penalty be 'bad' if it goes in?! Still think he needs to play down the middle. Bizarre decision to turn around with the ball when in the area. Still a class act though. Constable 5 - Should have had about five today. Off day for him and his misses just show he is better when he doesn't have to think about finishing it. Midson 7 - Persevered to set up the first. Quiet game out on the left other than that. Hackney 8 - Looks exciting. Caused Rotherham no end of problems. Our team looked surprised by how good his crossing was as well! Clist 7 - Usual Clist performance. Tidy, didn't lose possession. Potter 6 - Didn't do too much to warrant anything higher than a 6. Pretty much would agree with those marks, except would up Constable to 6 or 6.5 for at least getting in the scoring positions, with only a good save stopping one of the chances when he was 1 on 1, and another good save stopping a flicked shot at the near post. I also thought he did chase as much as usual today, contrary to what some others have said.
|
|
|
Post by Beav on Feb 13, 2011 1:12:01 GMT
Sorry thought purkiss was exposed today,, stood off far to much and let Daley dictate the play. Thought Worley was top drawer today Purkiss was exposed because Heslop was nowhere to give him any sort of cover. Look at their goal - McLaren is pulled out of his position to cover for Heslop to cover Purkiss
|
|
|
Post by Long John Silver on Feb 13, 2011 1:14:48 GMT
Sorry thought purkiss was exposed today,, stood off far to much and let Daley dictate the play. Thought Worley was top drawer today Purkiss was exposed because Heslop was nowhere to give him any sort of cover. Look at their goal - McLaren is pulled out of his position to cover for Heslop to cover Purkiss Can't use that excuse. Playing 3 in midfield both our full backs are always exposed, not just Purkiss.
|
|
|
Post by Beav on Feb 13, 2011 1:19:16 GMT
Disagree LJS
Hall (and Clist) always provide excellent cover!
Clist a perfect example of dropping LB after Tonkin ventured forward in the second half.
|
|
|
Post by longliveclarkey on Feb 13, 2011 8:58:41 GMT
If a fullback has to face 2 players charging at him, then he needs support. Heslop, for all the good he did coming forward, didn't provide that, Beav's got this one spot on. While I wasn't impressed with the way Purkiss just stood off the ball and gave the winger space, he was always 2nd favourite because it was always 2-on-1. Hall and Clist are there to do that most of the time, Payne and Maclaren sometimes but both are more central, but Heslop didn't at all, really. I thought he deserved a 7/10 though, very good coming forwards although not as dominant as he can be. Clarke - 7 Purkiss - 5 (Poor for goal and offside chance, very lucky, but not awful) Worley - 7 (giving him benefit of doubt for goal because he was marking someone else) Wright - 7 Tonkin - 7 Maclaren - 7 Hall - 6 Heslop - 7 (goal didn't look like his to me, very clearly own goal. Nonetheless, it was his shot/cross thing) Midson - 6 (fine, but missed great chance early on) Beano - 6 (Yes, he missed a few good chances, but he bullied the f**k out of their defence, and his ability to run at defenders and turn them every few steps is extraordinary) Maclean - 7 (Plays with swagger and a sense of humour. Turn to the corner flag at the end was very funny, although if the game finished 2-2 I'd be seriously p*ssed at him) Subs: Hackney - 8 (excellent, really excellent. So fast, great cross, and what's this about sloppy passing? He misplaced what, maybe 1 pass?) Clist - 6 (no real impact, played his part) Potter - 6 (A little impact, I think his passing was a little loose in the short time he was on)
We came up today against a good team, did a job on the top striker in the league and finally got a penalty. Good team performance, though no standouts. We'll have better days, but this was an excellent win from a good performance, and could have been 5-1 but for all three strikers missing sitters.
|
|
|
Post by baldy on Feb 13, 2011 9:25:42 GMT
5 for Purkiss is ridiculous. What the **** do you want from a full back ?
He's not as athletic as Batt, few are, so you need to remove that aspect when judging him but I thought there was a marked improvement in his mobility yesterday and while he doesn't head for the byline like Batt he got himself in support of the attack.
I've been critical previously that he plays the safe ball into the channel and doesn't take enough responsibility on the ball but yesterday he looked to play it inside to feet and look for the return. I wasn't in a good position to see their goal so can't say whether Purkiss was culpable, to me it looked a poor goal collectively to concede.
|
|
|
Post by longliveclarkey on Feb 13, 2011 9:36:30 GMT
5 might be a little harsh, but what I expect from a supposedly better defensive fullback than Batt is a better defensive performance, and there wasn't one. I don't dislike him, I think he's alright but he HAS to play better than that to keep his place in the team. Was one of the players at fault for their goal and at fault for that strange offside chance later on, could never stop crosses coming in either. Something you regularly criticise kinni for, baldy. In fact his whole performance was basically like kinni's this season, which I remember you rating 5 for regularly.
|
|
|
Post by followtheox (the original) on Feb 13, 2011 10:06:45 GMT
He's not as athletic as Batt, few are, so you need to remove that aspect when judging him . Bizarre thing for to say Baldy. Why would you remove the athletic bit when judging him? Surely that is the point of comparing two different players in the same position, you compare all their attributes ie this one is more athletic or this one is better in the air ect. In this case athleticism is key to Batts good play so would be one of the first things you judge with his replacement. Very weird thing for you to say. Anyway for me its clear that we miss Batt (in the form he is in although he is the type of player who when out of form is really out of form). He pushes the opposition midfield and defence back with his attacking play ie the best form of defence is attack. We miss his width in the 433, although that is not Purkiss's fault as he does not have the pace to get up and down. I don't subscribe to the fact he is a better defender than Batt either. However, I think Purkiss was solid enough today and he did look up a bit more when passing than i have seen him previously. He was possibly at fault for the goal as somebody should have picked their player up but there were others around too ie the midfield. i think for a replacement right back at this level he is more than good enough. We cannot expect with budget restraints ect that we can get the same quality in each position as cover and in a different formation Purkiss would perhaps look better.
|
|