ContinueWe use cookies to ensure that you get the best experience on our website; if you continue without changing your settings - or dismiss this message - we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies on

Return to front page

Newest article: Re: SOAP by Don of CaddingtonYesterday 20:27Yesterday at 20:27:35view thread

Oldest article: Disastrous start for new home by jacaranda22/7/2013 17:36Mon Jul 22 17:36:39 2013view thread


Next thread: Easy Fundraising - Thank You (and a challenge) by John14/8/2013 15:23Wed Aug 14 15:23:51 2013view thread

Brought back down to earth....

By SteveHFC (legacy user)12/8/2013 23:47Mon Aug 12 23:47:53 2013

Views: 4805

... with a bump tonight. Thoroughly outplayed by a pacy, quick, and excellent Dulwich side. We just couldn't cope. Very disappointed with workrate of 2 or 3 players in the first half. Second half did see some improvement - but much more required Saturday if we are to get anything out of the game.

Good attendance - with a good travelling support from Dulwich. Not often we get over 150 midweek, let alone just over 250.

Greensnet - The Official Hendon FC Website
Hendon FC Supporters Trust Official Website

reply to this article | return to the front page

Fairly disappointing

By Bry (legacy user)13/8/2013 08:58Tue Aug 13 08:58:57 2013In response to Brought back down to earth....Top of thread

Views: 4383

Really not at the races in the first half. Quite frustrating, as we are capable of so much more, but I'd hazard a guess that we will not be the only defence that is troubled by Hamlet this season. Bit of an improvement second half, but too little too late.
Hats off to their support. Very vocal in a positive way (apart from one chap who seemed to have something personal against Duberry - most odd) and well done for being the first fans I've heard who've worked in a Dead Kennedys melody into their repertoire.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Contributing factors...

By rwakeley (legacy user)13/8/2013 11:08Tue Aug 13 11:08:57 2013In response to Fairly disappointingTop of thread

Views: 4371

Sounds pretty rough, and if I'm being brutally honest, not totally unexpected. The work-rate is unquestionable, the cohesion is. I maintain we need time to gel into our new home. I even have a whack theory that Earlsmead is expansive and counter-productive to our play. That may of course be garbage, but I can't help thinking it.
I also maintain it's uber unfortunate to be playing Dulwich and Maidstone out the traps. Their clearly adept, nimble and up-for-it. Too see Dulwich and the K's at the top early doors is testimony to their style.
I have a deluge of un-answered questions, with regards to our set-up and personnel. I have another notion that we were going to set-up differently at home to away. The role of Anthony Thomas is intriguing. I don't know about last night, but the lad Seeby at right-back impressed me at Thamesmead. We've got Scotty, Kevin Mac, Flegg, Fisher and George McCluskey on the side-lines. Any one of those players could walk into a League XI. It's clearly way to early to draw any conclusions - but the success of our season has to be determined by our home form - and that's my overriding concern.
As for the Dead Kennedys - I've always thought a bit of Tempole Tudor might suffice!
It's only one game, let's put it right Saturday!


reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Contributing factors...

By SteveHFC (legacy user)13/8/2013 12:16Tue Aug 13 12:16:52 2013In response to Contributing factors...Top of thread

Views: 4309

Unfortunately, the work rate of 2 or 3 individuals was questionable last night, and that was a contributing factor, but by no means the only factor, to the defeat.

Greensnet - The Official Hendon FC Website
Hendon FC Supporters Trust Official Website

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Contributing factors...

By Paul Butler (legacy user)13/8/2013 13:10Tue Aug 13 13:10:22 2013In response to Re: Contributing factors...Top of thread

Views: 4418

If we look that lethargic every time we play Monday after Saturday, we're in trouble. The scoreline flattered us big time, and made me think Saturday showed how bad Thamesmead are rather than how good we are, Dulwich looked very good because we let them play, they were busier and wanted it more, but I doubt they will be a top six side come the end of the season.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Contributing factors...

By ChrisHFC (legacy user)13/8/2013 16:07Tue Aug 13 16:07:47 2013In response to Re: Contributing factors...Top of thread

Views: 4437

I'm not so sure that Dulwich looked good because we let them play - I think that Dulwich are good and made us look poor because they stopped us playing, though as Steve has said the workrate of several of our players was questionable.

I thought Dulwich's main assets last night were movement and pace. When in possession their players always seemed to have three or four colleagues available in space, and their pace throughout the side was something that we could not cope with. Too often last night our players were static, waiting for the ball to arrive, whereas Dulwich were always on the move and able either to put our men under immediate pressure, or, even better from their point of view, to intercept the pass before it reached our player.

Dulwich may not make the top six, but on last night's showing they won't be far away, and any side that finishes above them will have to play extremely well throughout the season.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Contributing factors...

By essex don (legacy user)13/8/2013 21:07Tue Aug 13 21:07:12 2013In response to Re: Contributing factors...Top of thread

Views: 4308

think(and I am loathe to say this)gary got the formation wrong.did we not know that Dulwich play 2 wide men with electric pace.they play that way but we had 2 non full backs in seeby and Bennett and personally I don't think carl mcklusky is a centre half(sam flegg is and was on the bench)also at no stage in the 1st half did we have a midfield 4(we seemed to have more of a diamond) with the 2 wide midfielders helping the full backs defensively.i agree with steve Dulwich are a good side but not sure other teams will be as accommodating in the way they set up,however think they will be top half minimum.on another matter does anyone know what happened to Jamie busby,i know he was taking time out but will he be back

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Contributing factors...

By SteveHFC (legacy user)13/8/2013 21:24Tue Aug 13 21:24:03 2013In response to Re: Contributing factors...Top of thread

Views: 4252

Just to come in on a couple of points on player's positions. Chris Seeby, to my knowledge, has always been either a right back or centre back. Jack Bennett did very well at left back during pre-season and earnt his starting slot there, particularly with Scott Cousins and George McCluskey both carrying knocks.

Carl McCluskey apparently began his career as a centre half (info courtesy of his Dad), and he hasn't looked out of place in my opinion either at the end of last season or this. Sam Flegg picked up a knock at Marlow in pre-season, but I'm guessing he can't be far away from getting back in the starting XI as he's been an unused sub in the first two games.

It'll be interesting to see how we set up on Saturday against Maidstone. I know what changes I'd make - it'll be interesting to see if Gary & co agree.

As for Jamie Busby - I'll try and remember to ask Gary next time I speak to him.

Greensnet - The Official Hendon FC Website
Hendon FC Supporters Trust Official Website

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Contributing factors...

By Paul Butler (legacy user)13/8/2013 21:59Tue Aug 13 21:59:02 2013In response to Re: Contributing factors...Top of thread

Views: 4219

....and to strengthen my point about Thamesmead, they were beaten 5-0 at Lowestoft tonight!

reply to this article | return to the front page

Post-match statement...

By rwakeley (legacy user)13/8/2013 23:15Tue Aug 13 23:15:02 2013In response to Re: Contributing factors...Top of thread

Views: 4347

Kudos to the Gaffer. I was heartened to read the post-match reference from the Gaffer in the match report. He made a timely comparison to our in-different period a couple of seasons past when teams launched continual waves of attacks similar to the Luftwaffe. I think he's absolutely spot-on and hopefully we can nip things in the bud.
Let's get behind the lads, they have worked hard and have promise. Practically half the team made their debut last week - that's a lot for any side to absorb. I was also impressed with Jack Bennett, for an un-naturalised position his inter-action with Tony Taggart was as impressive as previously instigated by his predecessors.
I maintain it's a difficult phase, clearly compounded by injuries, and as we overcome this period we can prosper.


reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Post-match statement...

By Pink Panther (legacy user)14/8/2013 13:29Wed Aug 14 13:29:13 2013In response to Post-match statement...Top of thread

Views: 4386

I thought Hendon essentially tried to play constructive football, which made the game a far better spectacle than Hamlet's first Premier Division match on Saturday, thanks to Lowestoft's attritional and cynical approach, but we simply outplayed Hendon from start to finish. (4-0 would have been an accurate reflection of the ninety minutes.)

Hendon are a good benchmark for where Dulwich need to be in our new division. They seem to be a very stable club, generally holding their own in mid-table and guided by an established management team of ex-Hendon players who have built a squad that has evolved steadily over a number of seasons, much like ourselves. But we have the advantage of having our own ground and growing numbers of supporters - average league attendance has risen from 180 in 2009/10 to 491 last season. So whereas Hendon are hampered by something of a glass ceiling unless they can find a proper home ground of their own we should ultimately be able to push on to a level that is currently beyond Hendon.

Dulwich have always played the patient passing game you saw on Monday evening. We thrive on denying our opponents the ball, and although we always play with pacy wingers we're not really a counter-attacking side. We're possibly the smallest team in the league with no natural ball winners ahead of the back four, and we tend to struggle most when confronted by big physical sides like Lowestoft who press us in our own half and bypass the midfield. (Faversham and Hythe were similar in Division 1 South.) We've consistently played the same "4-2-3-1" formation with a pair of wingers and the little number 10 Oztumer supporting a lone striker regardless of who we're playing or whether any of our players are unavailable, so it's hard to see how Gary McCann could have "got his tactics wrong" in terms of how he expected us to play. I think you simply caught us at our best and had a bit of an off day yourselves.

As for Thamesmead, we played them in the League Cup Semi Final last season and I thought they were a very good side. We beat them on penalties after a 1-1 draw and I rated them as one of the best three Step 4 teams we faced last season along with Maidstone and Godalming, whom be beat on penalties in an FA Cup replay. They may well struggle as they have tiny support and I don't suppose they have much of a playing budget, but Lowestoft away on a Tuesday night is a bit of a tougher proposition than catching them cold on your home turf on the first day of the season in front of 500 of your own noisy and enthusiastic supporters. Lowestoft will obviously have been stung by getting turned over by the Hamlet and Thamesmead copped the backlash.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Previous thread: 4-0 by mello10/8/2013 17:18Sat Aug 10 17:18:29 2013view thread