Re: The (early) Mansfield thread.
 

[QUOTE=VALAIRIAN;1274334]My good friend, I feel you are a tad hash :)

Shaun Whalley - as always - gave 100% and never stopped running.

Jack Nolan was OK.

Seamus, was Seamus :)

Coyle had an off day - to say the least....

Do not know what has happened to Tommy.......

I repeat Joe !,
Midfield... i wonder if we will ever see any semblance of a desire to attack the opposing defence from them and , wait for it , actually shoot a ball at goal ?.

"Unfit for purpose ". comes to.mind ?

Remember Sir Bobby Robsons paradigm ?... No Goals = No Wins = Relegation !.
Without a better 'Engine Room' the Reds WILL suffer I'm afraid .

Re: The (early) Mansfield thread.
 

Did anybody else think that Whalley should have had a penalty midway through the second half???


:)

Re: The (early) Mansfield thread.
 

Yes, but that’s clutching at straws, Val.
My frustrations with the way Stanley play, or are told to play, include that the ‘wing’ players rarely seem to receive the ball unless they are on the half-way line and invariably facing their own goal.
For a text book lesson in an alternative and effective way of playing down the wing, running into the space behind a defence, check out Mansfield’s second goal on iFollow or here…

https://www.skysports.com/watch/vide...two-highlights

Also, Mansfield’s third goal came about because no outfield player made themselves available for a pass from Hills or Mellor, so it was left to Savin to clear it in panic.

As the great man himself once said “ “Football is a simple game based on the giving and taking of passes, of controlling the ball and of making yourself available to receive a pass. It is terribly simple.”

Re: The (early) Mansfield thread.
 

everybody around us.we played well for approx 25 mins the rest of the game rubbish.

Re: The (early) Mansfield thread.
 

Straw clutching maybe Exile, but if we got and scored a penalty, it is a different game at 1-2 :)

Not pointing any fingers - at a young lad especially - but at 0-0, Josh had a good chance with a header - it went wide, that goes in and we take the lead, again a different game :)

I understand fully, if, if, if, but it does have a bearing on things...

J.R.B. was booked early - and correctly, I thought.

The lad who scored the 'wonder goal' made a much more aggressive, two footed attempt - missed our lad thankfully, nothing at all was done!!!

J.R.B. was targeted from that card on, throughout the game.

Some say good game management, some say cheating?!?!?!

There is not a person on this planet who can convince me that 3-0 was a true reflection of yesterday :)

:)

Re: The (early) Mansfield thread.
 

Absolutely agree Val. It was 100% a penalty and at 2-0, we convert the penalty and Stanley would be in the ascendancy and pressing for an equaliser! Totally inept refereeing! If it wasn’t a penalty in the referee’s opinion why did he not yellow card Shaun for simulation? We noted lots of other inconsistencies in the referee’s performance yesterday too. However, poor refereeing does not explain some poor decision making from Stanley at key moments, ie …the goals! For the over head kick goal, Savin, Coyle and Seamus all stood off which gave their lad the time to set himself up. Poor decision by Savin to kick out with his left foot for the third ‘wonder’ goal! Savin had previously botched a couple of attempted left foot clearances earlier in the match. I think that playing Seamus and Coyle together in deep midfield leaves us short of creativity going forward. I was somewhat disappointed with Tommy yesterday and perhaps a fully fit Joe Pritchard could help both Tommy and our creativity going forward. For most of the match we seemed to be playing against twelve men though!
KEEP THE FAITH:theband:
ON STANLEY ON:wave8:

Re: The (early) Mansfield thread.
 

It's not lack of ambition it's the I,m not spending anymore money on the club and really I want out is what is glaringly apparent to me.

Re: The (early) Mansfield thread.
 

[QUOTE=VALAIRIAN;1274348]Straw clutching maybe Exile, but if we got and scored a penalty, it is a different game at 1-2 :)

Not pointing any fingers - at a young lad especially - but at 0-0, Josh had a good chance with a header - it went wide, that goes in and we take the lead, again a different game :)

I understand fully, if, if, if, but it does have a bearing on things...

J.R.B. was booked early - and correctly, I thought.

The lad who scored the 'wonder goal' made a much more aggressive, two footed attempt - missed our lad thankfully, nothing at all was done!!!

J.R.B. was targeted from that card on, throughout the game.

Some say good game management, some say cheating?!?!?!

There is not a person on this planet who can convince me that 3-0 was a true reflection of yesterday :)

Your right it could have been 4 or 5.

Re: The (early) Mansfield thread.
 

From yesterday,s game stats shots on target Stanley 2 Mansfield 5 for a home side 2 on target is abysmal 5 and to score 3 for an away side is good clinical finishing referees good bad or indifferent dictate your shots on target apart from penalties.

Re: The (early) Mansfield thread.
 

I totally agree with the comments about the standard of refereeing but there is very little we can do to alter it. I also remember complaining about the refs during the season we were promoted, so even if the refs are against us we have been able to win games in the past.

Re: The (early) Mansfield thread.
 

Not to mention Mansfield fans throwing a second ball onto the pitch in the first half...

Re: The (early) Mansfield thread.
 

Same as last week Mike, becoming a theme now that we have the 'multi ball' system in place...


:)

Re: The (early) Mansfield thread.
 

And no-one in the Ivory Towers of Football Admin couldn’t foresee that happening.
But, heh, if the officials just ignore a spare ball lying in the six yard box, what’s the problem! :rolleyes:
Bring back ball boys and girls.

Re: The (early) Mansfield thread.
 

Mike A and all

You'll be please to hear that this culpret was ejected by the stewards for his actions

Re: The (early) Mansfield thread.
 

Bob !.. :singer:*

Have you noticed that this thread is almost a facsimile of those which we used to label
" IF " notices in the early days of our Forum ?.
'If' Josh's header had gone in the Goal !
' If' the Referee knew what he was supposed to be doing ?..and had he allowed Shaun's trip/fall/ foul and awarded a penalty !.
' If' the Substitutions at 97 minutes + had, questioning the Mangers strategic nouse,
been made earlier ?.
'If' Stanley had scored 4 goals ?
And, I noticed, an ' If ' from me !.' If Stanley just had a midfield which might go forward for once and then create just one chance in a game '?

Then one wouldn't need to think something which we might think is unthinkable !.."IF the Management Team don't create a situation soon which will allow the Reds to play some football ,then their seemingly well-protected tenure might well become a thing of the past ?"....
" IF" my meandering is seen as harsh and unfeeling towards our team, then put it down to
another trip through my dotage !. All I ask for is something better from the Club which I
have watched, followed , and admired for so long .

See you around Bob.. Keep singing !