Newest article: Re: PA system at SJP by ktfcprogrammes7328/9/2023 23:09Thu Sep 28 23:09:24 2023view thread
Oldest article: "Hither & Thither"? by alan ainsworth24/11/2013 12:59Sun Nov 24 12:59:08 2013view thread
Next thread: Kevin Maclaren by Mike Cox5/8/2016 15:39Fri Aug 5 15:39:14 2016view thread
Wingate & Finchley
Views: 2637
That was better than Worthing - but still not good enough (I wasn't at Kingstonian - but understand that was a decent performance).
I thought for the first half hour we played well, and just lacked the final cutting edge in front of goal. Plenty of possession despite being in a strong headwind. Their goal was very well taken, even if it did look a little wind assisted - he still had to strike it well. Berkley had no chance.
Second half I didn't feel we made the right use of the wind assistance, and we seemed to lose the midfield battle, but we did largely look solid at the back throughout the 90 minutes. Much much prefer four at the back. Not so bothered about whether we play 4-3-3, 4-5-1, 4-4-2 or whatever, but four at the back does look much more secure. Shame about Casey picking up an injury - hopefully it's not too serious.
We do need to start winning soon if we want to be at the right end of the table as the season progresses, but I don't think we're too far away.
First time I've sat in the stand at Wingate - despite the distance from the pitch, its a good view.
Re: Wingate & Finchley
Views: 2741
Some good points in there from Steve that haven't made it into my musings on this afternoon. I think I got too caught up on one particular deficiency.
Whilst things are more encouraging than they were this time last week, for some reason I feel much unhappier with the result today than I was last week.
https://hfchomecoming.wordpress.com/2016/08/20/unhappy-hump-day/
Re: Wingate & Finchley
Views: 2495
Very fair blog, John. I also came away more depressed than is usual after a defeat. Nothing in the first half hour hinted at defeat. Yet brilliant positional sense by Shane Gore was possibly more significant than inaccurate shooting from the chances we created. Where I think we were victims of bad luck came in the awarding of the decisive free kick. It was a very soft decision and with a gale force south westerly behind the kick a good strike was all that was needed. Countless other contacts were not penalised. Also, the disallowed goal was debatable in my opinion. All those standing near me behind the goal saw no infringement. The keeper simply said "with so many people surrounding me, not looking at the ball, what could I do?"
Having said that, we blazed over from a great position in the second half and never adjusted to the conditions.
Edited by dw at 23:56:39 on 20th August 2016
Re: Wingate & Finchley
Views: 2465
Regarding the excellent post above....and before I get started on Hendon
I bashed on about this post the K's. This for me is an exceptionally important aspect of the modern game, at all levels and one we have to place extreme emphasis on.
The modern era of football's psyche is bloody shot. Kids are more interested in the colour of their boots than learning how to tackle properly. Ironically, another soft free kick contributed to their goal. This is utterly endemic in our game throughout and weakens the overall standard. Everybody growing up today hero worships these half-baked individuals as Demi-Gods and wants to play like Ronaldo.
Actually yesterday, I thought the tackling was reasonable. Players are generally play-acting and on another day the ref yesterday could have blown up a thousand times.
This rant is not directed at Hendon in the critical aspect, but we have to wake up and take into consideration that the modern game as moved on for the worse. We've got to man up - in the right way, because set-pieces are crucial. More-over the referees have to acknowledge that physical contact is part of the game.
Re: Wingate & Finchley
Views: 2515
As everyone else has expressed their thoughts - here's mine for what it's worth.
I think we are suffering from a conflict of interests. A dichotomy. The gaffer is understandably trying to put into a practice a system to exert dominance. Identify the problems and implement solutions. Easy on paper.
We have all been these grounds enough times to fully understand the oppositions and their characteristics.
To date it hasn't worked. The dichotomy is the implementation of a system with it's rigid compliance. It even seems to restrict our options from the bench.
More-over I maintain it can actually be counter-productive. Dichotomy again, I maintain it can actually work - but only on given back-drops against certain oppositions.
Sir Alex was an advocate of Horses for Courses and I agree wholesale. Never afraid to drop a star player when required. Last pre-season we had pace on the flanks in abundance and no spine. This year, so far, we have turned it on it's head. An effective part of our Arsenal is sitting idle. I've been impressed with Murph pre-season and Andre has yet to get going. I'm not sure they fit the system.
Then there is Seebs. I prefer him doing what is instinctively natural.
Personally, I would include Kezie up-front. A young dynamic approach needs goals to maintain confidence.
Kezie holds the ball up well as demonstrated last season. Young players need help. I like Karl a lot, but his head does drop. Kevin may well be the catalyst to spark our season into life.
In trying to pass the opposition of the park, we are creating problems. It's as if we are in a straight-jacket - we need flexibility. We have the assets at our disposal, its getting them to function.
Despite the angst, and we are all feeling it, I genuinely feel optimistic.
Edited by rwakeley at 09:55:28 on 21st August 2016
Re: Wingate & Finchley
Views: 2471
I agree, Rob. I really don't think we are too far away from giving someone a bit of a thrashing and kick starting things. Tuesday would be a brilliant time to slip into gear.
Re: Wingate & Finchley
Views: 2348
I was at the game one Saturday and at Kingstonian but not the Worthing game. I also attended several pre-season games. This team is potentially very good but they are lacking something. Technically they are sound, individually they are at times excellent. There is an on pitch leadership missing. It often appears to me that individuals are expecting someone else to do the hard work. Perhaps the team just hasn't come together enough to want to sacrifice for each other. They just need someone to have a gritty performance that will spark and inspire the rest.
Previous thread: Kingstonian highlights by FITB18/8/2016 11:26Thu Aug 18 11:26:26 2016view thread