MAtch thread vs Burton

[vicburdett]

hereford was bad but that was away,last night we were at home, which makes it worse in my eyes.

[Scott_ASFC]

last night we was rubbish, we just didnt seem to get going and IMHO i dont think that grant and kee work up front... and i didnt get why he put mconville on at 1-0 down as he has shown in the past that he is unable to make any inpact on the game what so ever... does coleman not like chris turner or is it because he is not from near the river mersey as he does'nt seem to get a look in the side when he is our best winger by far. Also the teal looked very tired from last nights display and we are makin stupid mistakes at the back. have we just signed a defender on loan??? why not use him he might come in handy

well anyway rant over... 3 points at bournmouth will be nice

ON STANLEY ON

[Revived Red]

Originally Posted by Redraine

I wasn't at Hereford but I don't think we were as bad as some people have reported. At times we did play some good football without much end product, and as for our players not being passionate enough - RUBBISH.
Nobody has yet given any credit to Burton, who I thought were very strong and mobile in defence, and in Harrad and Pearson had two front men of high quality. You don't need that many chances when you have those two guys up front.

At Hereford, we were every bit as bad as reported.

Although many of us may want to imagine otherwise, our squad is NOT good enough for the play off places. If it were good enough, we would have beaten Macclesfield (twice), Torquay and Burton at least in recent weeks.

The issue of fatigue is being raised. We know that Coley has been reluctant to use substitutes. Why? Does he feel that the players on the bench are not good enough? To have used them could have given a chance for some players to be rested for the latter part of a game.

The underuse of Chris Turner is quite astonishing.

Other teams seem to have the ability to pass the ball into space knowing which players will be running on to it. We are not doing that. Stanley players look up and seek to pass to a player every time. That gives the opposition the opportunity to cover and even intercept as happened so often on Tuesday. To my mind, the problem on Tuesday was not the weather or the referee (both bad) nor the missing Michael Symes, but disorganisation. How often did we see two, sometimes three, Stanley players going for the same ball? How much variety do we ever see at throw-ins?

[Pendle Red]

I know it's not linked to us but a refreshingly different approach for a PL Chairman:

Message from the Chairman | News | Latest News | News | West Ham United

[vicburdett]

if michael symes would have played we would not have lost that game,it is as simple as that,

[MCR ADIM]

Is he going to be here next year though! i really hope he is, as we will do really well if is does stay, as we will get stronger and stronger

[Pendle Red]

I think David Blaine would have struggled on Tuesday to conjure anything up for the Reds

[VALAIRIAN]

Originally Posted by vicburdett

if michael symes would have played we would not have lost that game,it is as simple as that,

Strange theory!!!!?????

[Redraine]

Originally Posted by Revived Red

At Hereford, we were every bit as bad as reported.

Not that it matters, but I didn't mean we were not as bad as reported at Hereford. I meant we were not as bad as reported by some on Tuesday. Still think we should give credit to Burton. It really pees me off when we win away and all the home fans can do is rubbish their own team instead of acknowledging Stanley's part in the victory. It works both ways!

[cashman]

Originally Posted by Redraine

Not that it matters, but I didn't mean we were not as bad as reported at Hereford. I meant we were not as bad as reported by some on Tuesday.

Think the fall banged yer head mate.

[Scott_ASFC]

if michael symes would have played we would not have lost that game,it is as simple as that

we can't depend on one player, As good as he is, he is out for 2 more games and we have to deal with it. IMHO i dont think we will get play-offs now and we deffo wont go down so why no try new things instead of the same thing and same team. could change things round a little bit.... just a thought

[Redraine]

Originally Posted by cashman

Think the fall banged yer head mate.

You may be right.

[Exile on Spencer St]

Originally Posted by Revived Red

Other teams seem to have the ability to pass the ball into space knowing which players will be running on to it. We are not doing that. Stanley players look up and seek to pass to a player every time. That gives the opposition the opportunity to cover and even intercept as happened so often on Tuesday.

Well observed.
Since Roberts passed on (contractually speaking) in the games I've seen Stanley appear rarely willing to pass the ball and then run forward into the space behind defenders, yet it's the oldest and simplest trick in the world. Stanley play a tight, one touch game where they try and squeeze play and get players as close to one another as possible; like in their warm up routine. Look where Stanley's other wide player is whenever the ball is down the opposite wing - usually 'marking' the full back in the middle of the pitch so, if he ever gets the ball, he has little space in which to use it. They play to where their players are not where the space is.
Rochdale figured it out for the second half and sprayed the ball across the width of the pitch, thereby stretching Stanley and opening up holes.
What I can't figure out is whether Coley (like some other world famous managers afore him) just doesn't like wingers who can get behind defenders or simply thinks he doesn't have the players who can play that way.
But, pretty though Stanley's intricate midfield passing and possession can be, sometimes the game cries out for simple triangular passes where the object is to get behind the ball and attacker into the open space behind the full back.