Witney 2 - 0 Slough Town

[Staines-upon-Thames Rebel]

Better level of oposition that tested our players, far more competative.

 

Not sure we have the defence sorted yet, but it might be due to us pushing forward more and leaving gaps at the back.

 

Attack looked strong, but would like to see more of Danny Jordan partnered with Platt and Pritchard just behind them feeding them balls to run onto - think this will be a major strength.

 

 

[Matt]

I thought we were poor all round today. The defending at times was all over the place, possibly having a lot to do with it being a bit makeshift in nature with Roberts drafted in.

 

Witney were the better side throughout, we had our best efforts on goal in the first 20 minutes. Danny Jordan was up front on his own with Pritchard supporting, which looked ok in the first half but in the second, Witney had control of the midfield and Jordan barely had a kick. Riddell and Dickens looked ineffective and Gray tried hard but was ultimately frustrated as Witney played well.

 

Bit surprised we only took a squad of 14 with no new faces as well. I think we need a centre-back, a right winger, another central midfielder and another striker as cover for Jordan and Platt, who will surely be the first choice front line.

[grandad]

Witney wanted it more, even though only friendly. Some of their challenges well dodgy, as was ref most of game. ritch looked ok up front, poss tried out to see if could be used in emergency. Trouble was, he was not then controling midfield. Looked sharper up front after Gumbs came on. Gray was at least prepared to try and run at them, most of rest were looking for long cross field balls. Defence looked awol at times, thought Pierson was evereywhere covering for absent teamates at times. Dead ball play was hopeless. I know only friendly, so used to get match fitness and pairings sorted, but a bit of work still needed. Do not want a third dodgy season please. Highlight was Red Arrows at halftime, on way back from Bleinham.

[Matt]

http://www.sloughtownfc.net/news/article.php?news_id=61

[Mr Rebel]

wheres Fenton??

 

wasnt at game but im pretty worried. from thursday it was clear to see we had an awful lot of improvement required for certain positions

 

we cant expect to move very far up the league with 2 main strikers + roy (no offence to him) and of course Pierson needs a regular specialist defence partner not players out of position

 

why wasnt some of the youth team there to make up the members on the bench??

[Tom]

Pretty poor today all round, especially in midfield. Was no service to the front 2 from the midfield, I don't think Pritchard can play up front without someone decent in midfield to replace him. Without him there the current midfield can't seem to control the game. Why not try a 4-5-1 formation and keep him in his best position?

 

Pretty shocked that in just two weeks we have gone from having close to 2 teams of players and now only enough to place 3 on the bench - as said why not bring some of the under 18s?

 

Might have been handy to keep hold of Jermaine Gumbs until a decent replacement was found. Can't start the season without a centre back, right wing and another forward.

[Reading Rebel]

Firstly, I would like to say that I'm amazed and disappointed that we only turned up with 14 players today when we could have taken 2 or 3 of the under 18's (especially the number 8) to, at the very least, give them some experiance of being involved with the 1st team because, at present, we only have 15 players signed on and if it remains that way we are going to have to call on them during the season and what better opportunity than today to give them a run out?

 

Perhaps Gary can enlighten us on why we never involved some of the under 18's today?

 

A couple of times it has been mentioned that we need another centre half to partner Pierson. I might be mistaken but don't we have 3 centre halves in the squad Pierson, Daly and Harper?

 

It seems that Craig Roberts was partnering Pierson at the back today and Harper was right back, just a suggestion but it might have been worthwhile seeing how a Harper/Pierson partnership worked and putting Roberts at right back?

 

Because Platt was missing I think Pritchard started up front against Holyport and then dropped back into midfield. Pritchard is the one who pulls all the strings from midfield and is not a forward full stop.

 

Why not start with Gumbs and Jordan up front to see how that partnership worked from the start of the game today? Again I would assume that Gumbs will be our spare striker and what better opportunity than today to start with him and Jordan up front to see how they worked together?

 

So, the players missing were Daly, Platt and Fenton. It is worrying that out of 3 friendlies Fenton has only played in 1.

 

Perhaps Gary can put our minds at rest as to where Fenton is?

 

 

 

 

[Ian]

The full-backs didn't do enough to stop the crosses coming in whereas our wide players were closed down quickly and effectively. The centre half pairing allowed the Witney players to get through almost at will. Why isn't Harper at centre back? Jordan looked isolated up front and needs a strike partner.

 

It could be that they were trying a few things out as it was a friendly but I would hope that after today they would realise that those things didn't work!

[Reading Rebel]

I think I've said a few times that imo because of his strengths i.e heading & reading of the game Harper should be played at centre back unless there is no other option.

 

Unless he's played there before Craig Roberts at centre back is a strange choice.

 

Roy Gumbs (as far as I'm aware) hasn't been signed on yet, so what better opportunity than to give him 90 minutes up front with Danny Jordan? An opportunity wasted.

[Reading Rebel]

Also noted that in the three friendlies so far that Harper has been right back for all three and a combination of Howell, Fenton, Riddell and Roberts has been the pairing with Pierson.

 

It is either that Sweetman doesn't fancy Harper at centre half or he is struggling big time for a right back.

[Guest Reardon was God]

It gives me no great pleasure to say that I was right in so much as Witney would be a better test of our progress,and we failed that test.Bearing in mind that they are from a lower league,it started well but went down hill very fast.

As I am an ex manager and professional scout I was ask my opinion of the present team, this was the first time I had seen them this season, so here goes.

For a big lad the keeper is nowhere near enough commanding in his area.The right back looked useful, quite athletic and he seems commited, but not big enough for a centre back.I thought the left back showed good promise,though he tired towards the end.Pierson I thought played well at his level and as he gets fitter he will be just that bit more mobile, his centreback partner the number 4 was completely out of his depth.The number 8 and 10 were also found wanting, the 8 never stuck to or covered his position much at all, the 10 should have stayed at home if he is not going to play with his fellow team mates, instead of trying to do it all himself( you really have to be good to do that.)I felt there was hope for the number 6 who looked committed and very athletic.So to the better players or those that impressed me above the rest.They were the number 7,9,and 11.Those three all looked keen and of a reasonable standard, also I can see a use for the substitute Gumbs, though I understand that the main striker was injured.

So the main areas to fix I would conclude are the keeper,another centre back,another playmaker in midfield and a right sided forward/midfielder.

So a lot of work still to be done if ambitions of the club are to be realised.

ps.Can't say that I heard the manager much during the game either-and his late late use of the subs doesn't bode well.

[Reading Rebel]

Due to absentees/lack of numbers for one reason or another I think you will find that we had players who were playing out of position.

 

The left back is not really a left back but a central defender, the little central defender is really a midfield player and one of the forwards is a midfield player, so to sum it up due top our lack of depth we had a few players who were playing out of position.

[Reading Rebel]

Sorry meant right back is really a central defender.

[HEAVY TRUCKER]

again it goes to show that the lone forward does not work, you need a good defence and a mobile and inventive mid field, much better to have multiple forwards with athletic wingers that can support both defence and attack when called to do so, perhaps our manager is trying out things and this is the right time to do it but i do hope he is learning the errors of his efforts so far and he gets it right before the start of the season

[Reading Rebel]

I think the main lesson to be learnt is don't put square pegs into round holes!

[HorshamRebel]

Photos from the game are now on my website.

 

 

It was a bad performance all round, bar one or two, against a team that played the game competively on a very hot day.

[Guest Reardon was God]

Originally Posted By: Reading Rebel

I think the main lesson to be learnt is don't put square pegs into round holes!

No! the main lesson to be learnt is that some of the players are not good enough, even at this level!!
See my report above.......

[HorshamRebel]

and you are ?

[Ian]

Originally Posted By: HorshamRebel

and you are ?

....an "ex manager and professional scout" obviously not sufficiently convinced about his own credibility to put his real name!

[HorshamRebel]

Indeed