Last years ticket prices

2 hours ago, Casino said:

the club claim they turned all the cameras off but theres a location setting in the app

i guess they didnt know that and werent able to tell the 'parking partner' not to charge

hart should be all over this but ive long thought hes not as good as he thinks he is

Seems familiar and a fair assessment 

1 minute ago, tomski said:

Seems familiar and a fair assessment 

you're almost as boring and repetitive as cheese

its not healthy

4 minutes ago, Casino said:

you're almost as boring and repetitive as cheese

its not healthy

😂

36 minutes ago, Casino said:

you're almost as boring and repetitive as cheese

its not healthy

Like Statler and Waldorf in that East Upper 

36 minutes ago, Casino said:

you're almost as boring and repetitive as cheese

its not healthy

"Boring" I'll take, but "repetative"?!? I'll take that too.

4 hours ago, Cheese said:

It's utter bollocks, because I got charged and have never downloaded the app.

We're the same. 

Anyone asked for refund for their ticket yet ? Can’t believe the players didn’t offer to pay 😁

On 12/05/2024 at 03:01, Wanderlust said:

I'd have loved goal line tech at that Everton game and I think VAR tech is great BUT the problem is the humans and the rules not the tech. Offside for an inch is bollocks - offside for a foot is fair enough - but wherever you draw the line players will push the boundary. Seeing as it's measured in pixels they should just agree a number of pixels that isn't taking the piss for offside and agree a degree of of directional movement towards a ball that isn't taking the piss for handball and measure the movement of a striker's leg towards a defender to determine a foul or diving. If we're going down the road of measuring with technology they should just go the whole hog instead of this unworkable halfway house. It works for goal line technology (either it;s in or not) and equally they should take the decision out of the ref's hands for offside and pens etc by measuring the pixels. No argument if done properly. Nobody whinges about goal line tech so just do it.

Var would have given a foul on Southall.

1 hour ago, Pablo said:

Var would have given a foul on Southall.

True. I've always said it was a foul.

5 minutes ago, Traf said:

True. I've always said it was a foul.

If it was in injury time I could sort of understand the anger 

But it was in the first half, so losing Everton could have come out and score two in the second half 

1 hour ago, DirtySanchez said:

If it was in injury time I could sort of understand the anger 

But it was in the first half, so losing Everton could have come out and score two in the second half 

We also had all season to save ourselves.

1 minute ago, Traf said:

We also had all season to save ourselves.

Leeds at home, maybe 

Fourth game into the season, nah

Read this on OxfordWays a few days after the game. Just saying like. From one WEYellow, who you will note says he has his professional hat on as well as being a fan, whatever the fuck that means:

 

 

 

 

Everything and I mean everything we set out to do worked absolutely perfectly, and Bolton having no answer to it/playing a completely different way than normal made the game look such a walk in the park.

I have watched the game back 3 times now, one as a fan in the ground, one as a fan hungover on Sunday afternoon, and one with my professional hat on yesterday morning. There are a lot of things I picked up on but I'll try and be brief.

We set up in our recently familiar 4-1-4-1 formation; "reverse mullet" is a phrase that has been coined in the media. Our full backs played narrower than usual but were clearly instructed to engage with Bolton's wingbacks as soon as they received the ball. This, coupled with Rodrigues and Goodrham marking Maghoma and Thomason tight, meant that Bolton had to either go back to their centre backs or try a clipped ball over the top of our centre halves, which they dealt with impeccably for the whole 100 minutes.

Cumming went long with his kicks an awful lot more than usual, it effectively made Bolton's press completely pointless, but I think it was also a ploy to get their centre halves on the ball as much as possible. Harris cut out the passing lane from Santos-Sheehan meaning that they very rarely got the ball to their dictator of play, and Santos was allowed to progress with the ball a good 20 yards up the pitch, before again trying a clipped ball out to their wing backs.

With Rodrigues and Goodrham keeping man to man tight on their opposite midfielders, it created so much space between the lines, where is we got the most joy. Both goals were perfect examples of this to be honest, for the first, Rodrigues has space to run into and pick out Murphy, who keeps wide and forces Dagres-Cogley to cover the outside allowing him the space to cut inside. For the second goal, I think Bolton had cottoned onto Murphy being our biggest threat out wide, and went narrow and high in an attempt to counter it - this allowed the space in behind for Murphy to run into and be picked out - it was noticeable that Murphy himself had got wind of Bolton's new tactic, and made a brilliant run across the defensive line which was picked out perfectly by Rodrigues. It was an absolute world class goal, all of it.

In the second half especially, Dale, Harris and Murphy were effectively man for man on the 3 Bolton centre halves - in the first half we stopped Sheehan, but in the second half we stopped their whole team. With the ball at the feet of their back 3, they had absolutely nowhere to go (in terms of space to run into) and no options to pass it to. It led to 55 minutes of pure hoofball and the only half chance they had came from Jerome, which is when they essentially had 4 big lumps on our back 4, but by then it was way too late to have a sustained effect on the game.

It's hard to say at the time that you think the game was won at any point before 99 minutes of the match, mainly due to nerves and sods law, but watching back it was shocking how easy it was for us. Evatt had no idea how to counter act our threat and thought the best way of getting back into the game was by making the pitch wide and lumping it to two big men, but little did he know the space they created actually helped us, and we looked even more dangerous on the counter in the 2nd half. It was a tactical masterclass from Des and full credit to him and the team for carrying it out with such little fuss - Crawley were mightily impressive vs Crewe on Sunday, but I think you'd be hard pressed to find a play off final performance that was as dominant as ours was.

14 minutes ago, SatanGreavsie said:

Read this on OxfordWays a few days after the game. Just saying like. From one WEYellow, who you will note says he has his professional hat on as well as being a fan, whatever the fuck that means:

 

 

 

 

Everything and I mean everything we set out to do worked absolutely perfectly, and Bolton having no answer to it/playing a completely different way than normal made the game look such a walk in the park.

I have watched the game back 3 times now, one as a fan in the ground, one as a fan hungover on Sunday afternoon, and one with my professional hat on yesterday morning. There are a lot of things I picked up on but I'll try and be brief.

We set up in our recently familiar 4-1-4-1 formation; "reverse mullet" is a phrase that has been coined in the media. Our full backs played narrower than usual but were clearly instructed to engage with Bolton's wingbacks as soon as they received the ball. This, coupled with Rodrigues and Goodrham marking Maghoma and Thomason tight, meant that Bolton had to either go back to their centre backs or try a clipped ball over the top of our centre halves, which they dealt with impeccably for the whole 100 minutes.

Cumming went long with his kicks an awful lot more than usual, it effectively made Bolton's press completely pointless, but I think it was also a ploy to get their centre halves on the ball as much as possible. Harris cut out the passing lane from Santos-Sheehan meaning that they very rarely got the ball to their dictator of play, and Santos was allowed to progress with the ball a good 20 yards up the pitch, before again trying a clipped ball out to their wing backs.

With Rodrigues and Goodrham keeping man to man tight on their opposite midfielders, it created so much space between the lines, where is we got the most joy. Both goals were perfect examples of this to be honest, for the first, Rodrigues has space to run into and pick out Murphy, who keeps wide and forces Dagres-Cogley to cover the outside allowing him the space to cut inside. For the second goal, I think Bolton had cottoned onto Murphy being our biggest threat out wide, and went narrow and high in an attempt to counter it - this allowed the space in behind for Murphy to run into and be picked out - it was noticeable that Murphy himself had got wind of Bolton's new tactic, and made a brilliant run across the defensive line which was picked out perfectly by Rodrigues. It was an absolute world class goal, all of it.

In the second half especially, Dale, Harris and Murphy were effectively man for man on the 3 Bolton centre halves - in the first half we stopped Sheehan, but in the second half we stopped their whole team. With the ball at the feet of their back 3, they had absolutely nowhere to go (in terms of space to run into) and no options to pass it to. It led to 55 minutes of pure hoofball and the only half chance they had came from Jerome, which is when they essentially had 4 big lumps on our back 4, but by then it was way too late to have a sustained effect on the game.

It's hard to say at the time that you think the game was won at any point before 99 minutes of the match, mainly due to nerves and sods law, but watching back it was shocking how easy it was for us. Evatt had no idea how to counter act our threat and thought the best way of getting back into the game was by making the pitch wide and lumping it to two big men, but little did he know the space they created actually helped us, and we looked even more dangerous on the counter in the 2nd half. It was a tactical masterclass from Des and full credit to him and the team for carrying it out with such little fuss - Crawley were mightily impressive vs Crewe on Sunday, but I think you'd be hard pressed to find a play off final performance that was as dominant as ours was.

Fucking hell thanks for triggering my PTSD again 🤣

1 minute ago, desperado said:

Fucking hell thanks for triggering my PTSD again 🤣

I aim to please 😃

11 hours ago, SatanGreavsie said:

Read this on OxfordWays a few days after the game. Just saying like. From one WEYellow, who you will note says he has his professional hat on as well as being a fan, whatever the fuck that means:

 

 

 

 

Everything and I mean everything we set out to do worked absolutely perfectly, and Bolton having no answer to it/playing a completely different way than normal made the game look such a walk in the park.

I have watched the game back 3 times now, one as a fan in the ground, one as a fan hungover on Sunday afternoon, and one with my professional hat on yesterday morning. There are a lot of things I picked up on but I'll try and be brief.

We set up in our recently familiar 4-1-4-1 formation; "reverse mullet" is a phrase that has been coined in the media. Our full backs played narrower than usual but were clearly instructed to engage with Bolton's wingbacks as soon as they received the ball. This, coupled with Rodrigues and Goodrham marking Maghoma and Thomason tight, meant that Bolton had to either go back to their centre backs or try a clipped ball over the top of our centre halves, which they dealt with impeccably for the whole 100 minutes.

Cumming went long with his kicks an awful lot more than usual, it effectively made Bolton's press completely pointless, but I think it was also a ploy to get their centre halves on the ball as much as possible. Harris cut out the passing lane from Santos-Sheehan meaning that they very rarely got the ball to their dictator of play, and Santos was allowed to progress with the ball a good 20 yards up the pitch, before again trying a clipped ball out to their wing backs.

With Rodrigues and Goodrham keeping man to man tight on their opposite midfielders, it created so much space between the lines, where is we got the most joy. Both goals were perfect examples of this to be honest, for the first, Rodrigues has space to run into and pick out Murphy, who keeps wide and forces Dagres-Cogley to cover the outside allowing him the space to cut inside. For the second goal, I think Bolton had cottoned onto Murphy being our biggest threat out wide, and went narrow and high in an attempt to counter it - this allowed the space in behind for Murphy to run into and be picked out - it was noticeable that Murphy himself had got wind of Bolton's new tactic, and made a brilliant run across the defensive line which was picked out perfectly by Rodrigues. It was an absolute world class goal, all of it.

In the second half especially, Dale, Harris and Murphy were effectively man for man on the 3 Bolton centre halves - in the first half we stopped Sheehan, but in the second half we stopped their whole team. With the ball at the feet of their back 3, they had absolutely nowhere to go (in terms of space to run into) and no options to pass it to. It led to 55 minutes of pure hoofball and the only half chance they had came from Jerome, which is when they essentially had 4 big lumps on our back 4, but by then it was way too late to have a sustained effect on the game.

It's hard to say at the time that you think the game was won at any point before 99 minutes of the match, mainly due to nerves and sods law, but watching back it was shocking how easy it was for us. Evatt had no idea how to counter act our threat and thought the best way of getting back into the game was by making the pitch wide and lumping it to two big men, but little did he know the space they created actually helped us, and we looked even more dangerous on the counter in the 2nd half. It was a tactical masterclass from Des and full credit to him and the team for carrying it out with such little fuss - Crawley were mightily impressive vs Crewe on Sunday, but I think you'd be hard pressed to find a play off final performance that was as dominant as ours was.

So the question to the tacticians out there, because I'm not one, is if everyone turns up and does this to us next season, how do we counter it, how do we change our game for the better?

15 minutes ago, Zico said:

So the question to the tacticians out there, because I'm not one, is if everyone turns up and does this to us next season, how do we counter it, how do we change our game for the better?

put CJ et al on in 65th minute and bombard them aerially. its almost too easy 

50 minutes ago, Zico said:

So the question to the tacticians out there, because I'm not one, is if everyone turns up and does this to us next season, how do we counter it, how do we change our game for the better?

That's my concern, because any manager worth his salt will watch what Oxford and Stevenage did to us and replicate it.

Evatt needs to have a Plan B ... but we've known this for a long time now.

12 hours ago, SatanGreavsie said:

Read this on OxfordWays a few days after the game. Just saying like. From one WEYellow, who you will note says he has his professional hat on as well as being a fan, whatever the fuck that means:

 

 

 

 

Everything and I mean everything we set out to do worked absolutely perfectly, and Bolton having no answer to it/playing a completely different way than normal made the game look such a walk in the park.

I have watched the game back 3 times now, one as a fan in the ground, one as a fan hungover on Sunday afternoon, and one with my professional hat on yesterday morning. There are a lot of things I picked up on but I'll try and be brief.

We set up in our recently familiar 4-1-4-1 formation; "reverse mullet" is a phrase that has been coined in the media. Our full backs played narrower than usual but were clearly instructed to engage with Bolton's wingbacks as soon as they received the ball. This, coupled with Rodrigues and Goodrham marking Maghoma and Thomason tight, meant that Bolton had to either go back to their centre backs or try a clipped ball over the top of our centre halves, which they dealt with impeccably for the whole 100 minutes.

Cumming went long with his kicks an awful lot more than usual, it effectively made Bolton's press completely pointless, but I think it was also a ploy to get their centre halves on the ball as much as possible. Harris cut out the passing lane from Santos-Sheehan meaning that they very rarely got the ball to their dictator of play, and Santos was allowed to progress with the ball a good 20 yards up the pitch, before again trying a clipped ball out to their wing backs.

With Rodrigues and Goodrham keeping man to man tight on their opposite midfielders, it created so much space between the lines, where is we got the most joy. Both goals were perfect examples of this to be honest, for the first, Rodrigues has space to run into and pick out Murphy, who keeps wide and forces Dagres-Cogley to cover the outside allowing him the space to cut inside. For the second goal, I think Bolton had cottoned onto Murphy being our biggest threat out wide, and went narrow and high in an attempt to counter it - this allowed the space in behind for Murphy to run into and be picked out - it was noticeable that Murphy himself had got wind of Bolton's new tactic, and made a brilliant run across the defensive line which was picked out perfectly by Rodrigues. It was an absolute world class goal, all of it.

In the second half especially, Dale, Harris and Murphy were effectively man for man on the 3 Bolton centre halves - in the first half we stopped Sheehan, but in the second half we stopped their whole team. With the ball at the feet of their back 3, they had absolutely nowhere to go (in terms of space to run into) and no options to pass it to. It led to 55 minutes of pure hoofball and the only half chance they had came from Jerome, which is when they essentially had 4 big lumps on our back 4, but by then it was way too late to have a sustained effect on the game.

It's hard to say at the time that you think the game was won at any point before 99 minutes of the match, mainly due to nerves and sods law, but watching back it was shocking how easy it was for us. Evatt had no idea how to counter act our threat and thought the best way of getting back into the game was by making the pitch wide and lumping it to two big men, but little did he know the space they created actually helped us, and we looked even more dangerous on the counter in the 2nd half. It was a tactical masterclass from Des and full credit to him and the team for carrying it out with such little fuss - Crawley were mightily impressive vs Crewe on Sunday, but I think you'd be hard pressed to find a play off final performance that was as dominant as ours was.

That's a really good analysis, it was shockingly easy.

51 minutes ago, Zico said:

So the question to the tacticians out there, because I'm not one, is if everyone turns up and does this to us next season, how do we counter it, how do we change our game for the better?

I've said it a few times but 532/352 struggles against this kind of set up. Evatt has to acknowledge it and switch to a 433 and get the ball forward faster.

27 minutes ago, Stig said:

That's a really good analysis, it was shockingly easy.

I've said it a few times but 532/352 struggles against this kind of set up. Evatt has to acknowledge it and switch to a 433 and get the ball forward faster.

Is that an in game switch to 433 or start every game 433 you reckon?

1 hour ago, Dr Faustus said:

put CJ et al on in 65th minute and bombard them aerially. its almost too easy 

I posted pretty much this at half time. I was pissed off at the time and fully admit it was a simplistic idea from someone without a deep knowledge of football tactics. That being said I don't think it could have been any worse than what we served up in that second half and it may have led to a goal, then who knows how the game goes.

1 minute ago, Zico said:

Is that an in game switch to 433 or start every game 433 you reckon?

If we face similar tactics taking off a CH and playing Vic, Charles and Collins would give the opposition a different thing to think about.

1 hour ago, Zico said:

So the question to the tacticians out there, because I'm not one, Ian Evatt, is if everyone turns up and does this to us next season, how do we counter it, how do we change our game for the better?

 

59 minutes ago, Stig said:

That's a really good analysis, it was shockingly easy.

I've said it a few times but 532/352 struggles against this kind of set up. Evatt has to acknowledge it and switch to a 433 and get the ball forward faster.

And sign/play some wingers 😀 

I just can't see a scenario where only 2 out of our 7 or whatever CBs start a game, its not happening under IE.

Although I don't care what formation we play as long as we can improve our ability to break down the better sides, that's for IE to sort out, whether its formations/tactics or better players.  An easy one to start with though would be not bringing 11 back at corners, and those that are defending to mark players rather spaces.

32 minutes ago, Zico said:

Is that an in game switch to 433 or start every game 433 you reckon?

In game switch. I prefer 433 but no need to ditch 532 completely as it's served us well and gets results against the lower teams and definitely suits the strength of the squad.

Where it doesn't work is either against a team like Oxford who allow Santos to have the ball but press everyone else so they slow us down but are ready for quick counter attacks (we saw it against Shrewsbury and Wigan away also), or a team that can do a really effective high press and then it looks chaotic as we get penned in.

On both of these if you switch to a 433 we can immediately get an overlap going down the flanks which just creates a different problem for the opposition to deal with. Might not work every time but is surely better than staying rigidly in the same system when it's not going well?