Bristol Rovers (H)

[Johnnyrotten]

13 minutes ago, CumbrianWhite said:

It’s hardly a fair comparison though is it.. Bods first game against the toughest opposition in the league and his second game we go down to 10 men? 
 

He’s an Icelandic international and had more championship appearances than Vic will ever have. 
 

We don’t lose Santos today and it’s a different story.

Don't spoil the narrative.  We lost at Pompey therefore Vic is better than Bod, and Bod is an impact sub only.  We lost today because Vic wasn't there to chase down their full backs, Bod's so lazy.

[Jol_BWFC]

I don’t get the Maghoma criticism. For me he’s one of the bright sparks in midfield. Neat turns, finds room from nowhere, willing to run at defences rather than constantly pass sideways when 25 yards out. Him and GT start and then pick another (but not Morley…).

Edited December 16, 2023 by Jol_BWFC

[victor meldrew]

Just not good enough 

[Big E]

20 minutes ago, gonzo said:

We were top with Vic in the team. All about what works best for Charles and pressing.

Sometimes its the stuff you dont see.

 

It’s a good job it’s the stuff you don’t see because his touch, hold up play and general attacking ability are woeful 

[captainmed]

1 hour ago, gonzo said:

Charles looked pissed off v Pompey at the lack of service on Monday. 

Not as pissed off as the 740 were when he missed that sitter.

[dusan nikolic]

7 hours ago, Jol_BWFC said:

I don’t get the Maghoma criticism. For me he’s one of the bright sparks in midfield. Neat turns, finds room from nowhere, willing to run at defences rather than constantly pass sideways when 25 yards out. Him and GT start and then pick another (but not Morley…).

Good point , at Oxford he was running everything in the 2nd half and our lack of intensity was evident when he was substituted. 

[Stig]

8 hours ago, Cheese said:

If we'd gone 4-4-1 and played Charles on the wing(!), we'd probably have got pumped 4 or 5-0, and you'd be slating Evatt for shoving round pegs in square holes, and forcing the players into an unfamiliar system. As it was, we dominated the second half and came very close to equalising from 2-0 down.

The ideal would have been to go 432 and change to proper full backs, so Forrester for Cogley and shuffle Jones to RB.

But if Evatt felt 441 was needed, as worked well for the last 20 mins v Peterborough then I'd be comfortable Charles could do a job on the right side of the midfield 4, and then he's on the pitch for any potential goalmouth scenarios from corners, free kicks etc. It's not like you're asking him to play centre back. Right midfield with a man fewer would be basically chasing around and harassing, which is Charles' game.

The worst option was going 531 and subbing your best striker off. Tactical inflexibility beggars belief

[deeane Koontz]

7 hours ago, Jol_BWFC said:

I don’t get the Maghoma criticism. For me he’s one of the bright sparks in midfield. Neat turns, finds room from nowhere, willing to run at defences rather than constantly pass sideways when 25 yards out. Him and GT start and then pick another (but not Morley…).

Correct. He's refreshing to me, direct, good on the half turn and taking people on. He's also one of the few players we have that will take a fucking risk!!

[radcliffe white]

10 hours ago, captainmed said:

Agree but I think we will.

Prob is I think Pompey have gone.

He can’t start a 5th season with 3 at this level.

I don’t want to harp back but we were bloody lucky to go up and he was lucky we weren’t in the ground.

Agree, I know I repeat myself but no better chance than this season and we should be ok but I do feel other teams are starting to flex now 

[desperado]

50 minutes ago, Stig said:

The worst option was going 531 and subbing your best striker off. Tactical inflexibility beggars belief

Definitely not the worst option. There’s a multitude of options I can think of which would have been much worse.

The 2nd half was our best half. To stay in the game we had to get a balance of attacking, possession, keeping a focal point in the last third, while being able to defend on the break. We did it pretty well TBF. 

[gonzo]

9 hours ago, Johnnyrotten said:

Don't spoil the narrative.  We lost at Pompey therefore Vic is better than Bod, and Bod is an impact sub only.  We lost today because Vic wasn't there to chase down their full backs, Bod's so lazy.

Nobody is saying that and certainly Nobody complained when Bod started v Pompey. His sub appearances warranted a start 100%.

But we were top and flying with Vic in the team. Thats fact. 

However Charles scores at Pompey we win and Santos doesnt commit suicide yesterday and we win too.

We are nowhere near panic stations.

Maybe the kick up the arse we needed.

[tomski]

All the subs were odd yesterday but fuck me what was he thinking at the triple change when we were battering them. He killed the game in that exact moment.

Rightly said no dramas after Portsmouth. Think it’s fair to call yesterdays performance as rubbish.

[desperado]

4 minutes ago, tomski said:

All the subs were odd yesterday but fuck me what was he thinking at the triple change when we were battering them. He killed the game in that exact moment.

Rightly said no dramas after Portsmouth. Think it’s fair to call yesterday’s performance as rubbish.

Thought it was more to do with them inevitably making 3 slow, singular subs  after that on 78, 80 then 86 that sucked the final life from the game. Would have happened whoever we had on the pitch.

[tomski]

2 minutes ago, desperado said:

Thought it was more to do with them inevitably making 3 slow, singular subs  after that on 78, 80 then 86 that sucked the final life from the game. Would have happened whoever we had on the pitch.

I think that’s being kind. IE has had a lot of credit and rightly so but I think he deserves to own the defeat yesterday.

No one thinks bringing Victor on is finding us a goal.

The Charles sub and timing was also baffling. 

[Lostock Whites]

God this past week has been horrendous, couldn't have gone worse.

But let's fucking get on with it now.

Win our game in hand and can still go back to 2nd, it's on the team and Evatt to respond properly now.

[desperado]

8 minutes ago, tomski said:

I think that’s being kind. IE has had a lot of credit and rightly so but I think he deserves to own the defeat yesterday.

No one thinks bringing Victor on is finding us a goal.

The Charles sub and timing was also baffling. 

But you can’t have it both ways. You were giving Evatt grief for not starting with JDB. You were predicting that Evatt would find a way of not starting with JDB yesterday because he prefers Vic. So when he does start and he’s run himself into the ground as a lone striker, you can’t moan that bringing Vic on isn’t going to bring us a goal!

Otherwise let’s start with Vic! 🤣Round in circles 

Edited December 17, 2023 by desperado

[dusan nikolic]

I think we were perhaps guilty of showing them too much respect , especially in the first 70 minutes . I get life becomes much harder but you have to keep some kind of attacking threat . The stats after 65 minutes were particularly alarming .

 

[desperado]

2 minutes ago, dusan nikolic said:

I think we were perhaps guilty of showing them too much respect , especially in the first 70 minutes . I get life becomes much harder but you have to keep some kind of attacking threat . The stats after 65 minutes were particularly alarming .

 

Finished with that though.

Plenty to criticise in the first half. But I think it’s very harsh to have a go at the way we approached the 2nd half with 10 men. 

Look at Pompey the other week, they capitulated to 4 -0 with 10 men

[Rizlar]

45 minutes ago, gonzo said:

Nobody is saying that and certainly Nobody complained when Bod started v Pompey. His sub appearances warranted a start 100%.

But we were top and flying with Vic in the team. Thats fact. 

However Charles scores at Pompey we win and Santos doesnt commit suicide yesterday and we win too.

We are nowhere near panic stations.

Maybe the kick up the arse we needed.

Hindsight what a wonderful gift

[tomski]

2 minutes ago, desperado said:

But you can’t have it both ways. You were giving Evatt grief for not starting with JDB. You were predicting that Evatt would find a way of not starting with JDB yesterday because he prefers Vic. So when he does start and he’s run himself into the ground as a lone striker, you can’t moan that bringing Vic on isn’t going to bring us a goal!

Otherwise let’s start with Vic! 🤣Round in circles 

I did call it and still see it coming. Don’t disagree on Bod needing subbing. Let’s agree no one in the ground thought ‘oh yes Vic is coming on, we will score here’ 

I agree with Radcliffe that IE has to get us out this season. I think we will but it’s gonna be a squeeze.

Performances  like yesterday deserve calling out. Avoidable defeats.

[dusan nikolic]

4 minutes ago, desperado said:

Finished with that though.

Plenty to criticise in the first half. But I think it’s very harsh to have a go at the way we approached the 2nd half with 10 men. 

Look at Pompey the other week, they capitulated to 4 -0 with 10 men

The problem was it was too little too late , why did we wait until the last quarter before asking any questions. Like I said it's much harder down to ten but you've got to ask some questions.

Edited December 17, 2023 by dusan nikolic

[Cheese]

44 minutes ago, tomski said:

All the subs were odd yesterday but fuck me what was he thinking at the triple change when we were battering them. He killed the game in that exact moment.

Rightly said no dramas after Portsmouth. Think it’s fair to call yesterdays performance as rubbish.

We scored AFTER those subs...

[desperado]

8 minutes ago, tomski said:

I did call it and still see it coming. Don’t disagree on Bod needing subbing. Let’s agree no one in the ground thought ‘oh yes Vic is coming on, we will score here’ 

I agree with Radcliffe that IE has to get us out this season. I think we will but it’s gonna be a squeeze.

Performances  like yesterday deserve calling out. Avoidable defeats.

Yes, agree, common ground there both on yesterdays result and not feeling the 3 subs had the desired impact. 

Just variations of opinion on why and degree of criticism which is all good on here 👍

[tomski]

Just now, Cheese said:

We scored AFTER those subs...

We did but while we are pointing obvious points out. We needed to score twice

[tomski]

3 minutes ago, desperado said:

Yes, agree, common ground there both on yesterdays result and not feeling the 3 subs had the desired impact. 

Just variations of opinion on why and degree of criticism which is all good on here 👍

No issue with debate and different views mate.

Win the game in hand and we are back where we need. 

Just feel we all tick this off as a win in our predictors before hand and a lose is disappointing and can be queried.

Oddly a mate of man predicted a 2-1 defeat beforehand, so maybe not all of us.