Port Vale Match Thread.

[lancsdave]

Originally Posted by Redraine

and taking off Toto (precaution as he had been booked?)

Originally Posted by football19

PS,Big decision to take Toto off,but Eckersley fitted in perfectly and his time will surely come

Wasn't Toto injured, he was down in the area just before being subbed and came off with a bit of limp. ?

[cashman]

Originally Posted by SamF

Cracking performance for the first 60 minutes.

Dominated possession, created chances and the 3 centre backs took care of absolutely everything.

After the hour mark we sat back way too deep and when we did have possession we gave it away far too cheaply.

Good win but we were lucky to hold on for so long with giving them so much of the ball. Another day and it would have been 2-1 to Vale.

To me much of giving Vale the ball, was the result of Dunbavins distribution, Whilst i agree deserved MoM fer his saves, His all-round game leaves much to be desired. Yeh would think the time hes been around the penny would have dropped by now.

[yerself]

Originally Posted by cashman

To me much of giving Vale the ball, was the result of Dunbavins distribution, Whilst i agree deserved MoM fer his saves, His all-round game leaves much to be desired.

Agree about his distribution and all-round game, disagree about MOM. It's because of his distribution and all-round game he didn't deserve MOM. Liddle and Hatfield joint MOMs for me.

[Whalley Red]

Bavs predominantly kicked it out to the right touchline and not once did Lindfield try to head the ball - every time he jumped against the PV defender with his back to the oncoming ball. Sometimes it enabled the ball to deflect off the defender for a Stanley throw-in; but most of the time it resulted in a wasted ball (i.e. it was Lindfield to blame and not Bavs' distribution).

[Greeny]

I thoroughly enjoyed the game from start to end , a nailbiter if ever there was one.The PV radio broadcaster said that Port Vale were doing all the playing of the game , he was watching a different game to me. We do need to keep the ball down though,when playing against 6 ft + we are never going to get the ball while it is high in the air . Roll on Sat, bring em on!

[maccawozzagod]

Originally Posted by lancsdave

Wasn't Toto injured, he was down in the area just before being subbed and came off with a bit of limp. ?

that might have been the one where he dived in nuts first to block a shot. Definitely ball to ball

[ddevil2006]

got to disagree liddle got ripped to pieces with that winger, most of the night its a good job he could'nt cross the ball.but i will take three points, so thats southend and port vale sulking now.

[cashman]

Originally Posted by Whalley Red

Bavs predominantly kicked it out to the right touchline and not once did Lindfield try to head the ball - every time he jumped against the PV defender with his back to the oncoming ball. Sometimes it enabled the ball to deflect off the defender for a Stanley throw-in; but most of the time it resulted in a wasted ball (i.e. it was Lindfield to blame and not Bavs' distribution).

We will have to disagree, unless yeh can explain the sense in belting high balls up, when the opposition defence are jolly green giants.

[Pendle Red]

Thoroughly enjoyed last night it was real team effort, sorry put in the wrong thread while half asleep this morning Dunbavin was mom and desrved it I thought distribution in fairness was as good as it has been for a while with plenty of distance sometimes hard to judge from the Clayton End shop stopping world class.

Shape for me looked as good as anything I have seen from Stanley first line of defence was attack with good link up play from Karl & Podge that partnership will grow & grow, I also disagree about Liddle got beat early on but other than that hardly put a foot wrong.

Last fifteen minutes was back to the wall stuff and maybe against other teams we would come unstuck but that takes nothing away from three points, two goals, a clean sheet and a very very good team performance where they all worked for each other if that is what is meant by a "hungry team" then starve em cause that was a great performance.

[football19]

It's all about opinions,but like on Saturday,thought liddle struggled against a really. Good player,but never gave up,and will learn more against better opposition.

[cashman]

Originally Posted by football19

It's all about opinions,but like on Saturday,thought liddle struggled against a really. Good player,but never gave up,and will learn more against better opposition.

Must agree the guy really gave him the run around, was just glad his end product wasn't so good last night. in fact thought the Vale had 3/4 really good lads playing.

[football19]

To be fair cashy,the lad was quick,and although on the right wing,his stronger foot was his left,this caused liddle a few problems by cutting inside.When he went on the outside,his final ball was only average,as it was on his weaker foot

[MikeA]

Video link: Sky Sports | Video | Football | League Two | Accrington Stanley

This link takes you to a page of Sky's latest Stanley or Stanley-related clips. Then you can choose which one you want from those displayed under the screen. All three of our matches are there at the moment so it looks worth adding the link to favourites/bookmarks ready for future games.

Great stuff from Bavs!

[mab]

Cheers MikeA

[Whalley Red]

Originally Posted by Whalley Red

Bavs predominantly kicked it out to the right touchline and not once did Lindfield try to head the ball - every time he jumped against the PV defender with his back to the oncoming ball.

Just watched the highlights - thanks for the link MikeA - and Lindfield did exactly the same in his own penalty box which knocked the ball back towards goal and created a great chance for Port Vale (@ 23 seconds on the highlights). Someone should teach him how to head a ball.