|
|
Post by DrAgony on Oct 25, 2007 11:00:41 GMT
I wasn't there, but it sounds to me that it was a team failure and not down to just one player.
This squad have put in some good performances, so they definitely have the ability. The problem seems to be between the ears of some of the players, a problem that AP had tried to deal with after Alfreton and he probably - after Boston & Southport - thought he had done. What happened at Hucknall must have been as big a shock to AP as anyone, but now that the problem has re-occurred and shown itself to be a major one it is up to AP to sort it out once and for all.
I still think he can and will, so IMHO 'Preece Must Stay'.
|
|
niels
City Legend
Posts: 1,741
|
Post by niels on Oct 25, 2007 11:41:51 GMT
I think the key to Tuesday's result sadly lies with the goalkeeper situation. Had nothing to do with it Tim, imo. Yes the second goal seemed to go straight through him but the problem lay with the entire team not looking the least bit interested. They constantly gave away possession, didn't challenge in midfield or defence, didn't chase etc etc. Hucknall did this and couldn't believe their luck. The majority of the players looked like they would rather be curled up in front of Coronation Street instead of running around on a cold Tuesday night. Keeper could have played a blinder and it would have made no difference. |
|
dago
Reserve Teamer
Posts: 84 
|
Post by dago on Oct 25, 2007 11:49:43 GMT
I think the key to Tuesday's result sadly lies with the goalkeeper situation. Had nothing to do with it Tim, imo. Yes the second goal seemed to go straight through him but the problem lay with the entire team not looking the least bit interested. They constantly gave away possession, didn't challenge in midfield or defence, didn't chase etc etc. Hucknall did this and couldn't believe their luck. The majority of the players looked like they would rather be curled up in front of Coronation Street instead of running around on a cold Tuesday night. Keeper could have played a blinder and it would have made no difference. couldnt make the game myself.....but from reading all these posts and comments i actually agree with niels. you could have the best keeper in the world between the sticks but if he's got nothing in front of him to defend with then theres not a lot he can do. its a squad effort and blame always goes to the keeper and its wrong. |
|
|
|
Post by andy on Oct 25, 2007 12:50:25 GMT
I didnt mean to write stuff that may have sounded like a criticism of McKeown. Every 'keeper makes the occasional mistake, and everyone knows that and lives with that. Coming so soon after the first goal, the second was unfortunate as heads inevitably dropped further, and often a team that is 2-0 up will play differently from one leading by just the odd goal. Unfortunate overall and perhaps a minor contribution to the mindset. But certainly not the root cause.
I like Time to Kill's viewpoint above.
|
|
aj
Youth Teamer
Posts: 39
|
Post by aj on Oct 25, 2007 12:57:46 GMT
well we went in at half time 2-0 down, and at Boston we came back fighting in the second half and turned it round. So we should have been able to do the same this time, or at least we should have been able to try. But this time despite Preecey really giving them the hair dryer treatment (according to one of the stewards we talked to afterwards) they didn't respond at all.
|
|
|
|
Post by tim on Oct 25, 2007 12:58:37 GMT
But at the same time, letting a 30-yarder through your legs and then putting up a wall with more holes in than Hadrian's isn't exactly anyone else's fault!
He is obviously a very highly-rated keeper, and will definitely be one for the future. Let's hope he learns from Tuesday.
|
|
aj
Youth Teamer
Posts: 39
|
Post by aj on Oct 25, 2007 16:14:44 GMT
Agree with your earlier post, Time To Kill.
The team have already proved that they are good players, by their performances against the strong sides. If we played that way consistently then we would probably be top 6. The problem is that good players are turning in poor performances a lot of the time and therefore we as a team are punching well below our weight.
So we can't just say the players are rubbish so replace them - that's clearly not the *only* issue because they have already shown that they are very capable. So there's something else wrong. Is it tactics, motivation? if so then that's a management issue isn't it, and one for Preecey and maybe the captain to look at. And those issues won't be addressed by a clearout and buy-in - we'll just end up with the same problems with new players. So I'm hoping that as well as bringing in new blood, Preecey also looks at how the management can be improved. Also could training be a problem? If they are over-training then maybe they are coming into games physically or mentally tired and that's another issue that management would need to look at. Overall I'm just slightly concerned that we will bring in a fresh crop of players, still fail to get the best out of them, and not really improve.
|
|
|
|
Post by andy on Oct 25, 2007 16:39:34 GMT
Generally agreeing with what you say, aj, I'd go back to what I said before. Now finding ourselves with nine defenders and three in midfield, I think the squad has an unbalanced look to it. I think a better balance would be 7:5, or (if the squad needs to be cut) 7:4 or 6:5. I dont think that necessarily means there may be no changes among the current midfield 3, or that some of the 9 can simply be moved into midfield slots.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2007 22:41:47 GMT
aj has got it spot on.
|
|
|
|
Post by B*ue dragonstander on Oct 26, 2007 9:18:15 GMT
Agree with your earlier post, Time To Kill. The team have already proved that they are good players, by their performances against the strong sides. If we played that way consistently then we would probably be top 6. The problem is that good players are turning in poor performances a lot of the time and therefore we as a team are punching well below our weight. So we can't just say the players are rubbish so replace them - that's clearly not the *only* issue because they have already shown that they are very capable. So there's something else wrong. Is it tactics, motivation? if so then that's a management issue isn't it, and one for Preecey and maybe the captain to look at. And those issues won't be addressed by a clearout and buy-in - we'll just end up with the same problems with new players. So I'm hoping that as well as bringing in new blood, Preecey also looks at how the management can be improved. Also could training be a problem? If they are over-training then maybe they are coming into games physically or mentally tired and that's another issue that management would need to look at. Overall I'm just slightly concerned that we will bring in a fresh crop of players, still fail to get the best out of them, and not really improve. When you look at where the players travel from training and home matches must be a real grind over some of the busiest roads in Europe. Its no great surprise that we often lack energy at home and are sometimes better on the road (not on Tuesday obviously!) after a short drive or a relaxing coach journey. Perhaps we should open a traning base in Leicester and travel to home games from there? |
|
|
|
Post by Tim Munslow on Oct 26, 2007 16:24:55 GMT
They say a week is a long time in politics; well it's a bloody long time in football!
There was I setting off for a few days in North Wales with a cracking performance against Southport under our belt & a nice looking three points away @ Hucknall.
I simply couldn't believe the scores when I got them up on teletext in the hotel. I do believe this one result was the catalyst for AP's departure; I've seen it before. A club loses heavily to a lower graded club or one at the bottom of the league and it's curtains. And so it was.
|
|
