East Thurrock

By Deadman (legacy user)10/2/2015 09:46Tue Feb 10 09:46:42 2015

Views: 3420

Not the greatest game last night. It looked as if the team were under instruction to lump the ball from the back and run the channels (probably due to the pitch). There was very little width and I haven't been convinced by the diamond formation employed in the last couple of games (Da Costa behind the front two doesn't seem to add much and I thought Dean might've have had a go there). East Thurrock were tidy and restricted us to probably three decent moments...an Ibe header put wide from close range, the very well taken goal by Charlie Goode and the superb pile-driver from Dave, which was brilliantly tipped over by the keeper (that was an exceptional save!) As ever. there was plenty of effort but a second Hendon goal never looked likely.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: East Thurrock

By Paul Butler (legacy user)10/2/2015 10:52Tue Feb 10 10:52:47 2015In response to East ThurrockTop of thread

Views: 3311

A good point I think, can tell why they are high in the table as referees clearly buy their consistent whinging, diving, and appealing for everything. So much so last night that we were playing against twelve men for the entire second half.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Short corners

By John Fordham (legacy user)10/2/2015 20:33Tue Feb 10 20:33:57 2015In response to Re: East ThurrockTop of thread

Views: 3292

Is anyone in favour of these? To me they just don't work. We get far more success from standard corners straight into the danger zone. Baffled and bemused.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Short corners

By Richard Church (legacy user)11/2/2015 23:05Wed Feb 11 23:05:08 2015In response to Short cornersTop of thread

Views: 3324

Agreed. Short corners are far too easy to defend against. Also, if you give the ball away you run the risk of conceding a break away goal.

Given we now have a lot of height in the team with Elliot. Charlie. Dave and Chris Seeby, I would always go for the long corner.

I'm surprised we don't try the infamous 'Sutton near post flick'. Older supporters will recall the trips to Gander Green Lane where we regularly shipped 4, 5 and possibly 6 goals.  We knew what they were going to do but simply couldn't stop them doing it. Mind you, first division Coventry couldn't either.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Short corners

By dw (legacy user)10/2/2015 21:39Tue Feb 10 21:39:44 2015In response to Short cornersTop of thread

Views: 3473

The direct corner which led to the goal last night was especially effective last night in atrocious conditions. Earlsmead was only slightly better than a "park's pitch". The set pieces that were played short , even with East Thurrock only covering two Hendon players with one defender, did not work out. Were East Thurrock deliberately tempting Hendon to play the set pieces short, knowing that the pitch would have the last answer? Who knows?

Good result last night in the circumstances, but if ever there were an argument for Silver Jubilee 3G, there it was.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Short or long - it's very simple.

By David B (legacy user)12/2/2015 12:18Thu Feb 12 12:18:54 2015In response to Re: Short cornersTop of thread

Views: 3217

As with all set pieces, the most important thing is the quality and accuracy of the delivery into the danger area.

A short corner might drag one or two players out of position more than one hit deep. But from one of our corners, if the ball doesn't go to a Hendon player in the box, the chances of a goal for us are diminished as much as they are improved for the opposition (home v Enfield Town this season and last!).

I don't mind short corners, if the ball is delivered quickly, but the faffing about we are too frequently guilty of is not good and if possession is lost then too many players are caught out of position.

reply to this article | return to the front page