team v guildford

[epicrebel]

Grant, Deeney,A, Murphy, Brown, Bowden-haase, Woozley, Logie, Deeny,D, Burnell, Sonner, Rhone.

 

 

SUBS

Burgess, Abbey, Mason, Swift, Fowler

[grandad]

As a matter of interest, what happened about Charlie Fanner re-signing?

[Nathan]

Lost 2-1. These games cost us last season. No shape and no desire, until the 93rd minute when we scored.

 

At home against a promoted team, and we only manage 2 shots on target. Not good enough!

[Ian]

Guildford proved tonight that if you do simple things well you win football matches. Slough proved that if you only muster two shots on goal in an entire game you don't.

[Cookham Rebel]

I didn't comment on the Northwood game as I felt it was summed up pretty well by others on here!

 

Tonight?!?! Well, abject and "nothing changes" spring to mind! Absolutely no invention, hopefully this will be a wake up call because it felt like the players thought they could walk out and win this league at a canter!

 

Any danger of another centre forward????

[Sir Rebel1965]

A very poor performance with no consistancy and the type of performance that will not win us the leauge - that was just the ref who managed to kill a potentially good game with excessive and inconsistent bookings - it is refs like this that are killing off non-league football.

 

The league need to get a grip of refs as the quality varies greatly, from the excellent ref on saturday who ran the game fairly and managed the game so that he did not need to issue any cards, to the overweight and unfit individual who was unable to keep up with play and therefore made calls on what he guessed had happened rather than the facts.

 

 

From a Slough team perspective Nathan has hit the nail on the head with the lack of shots on target.

 

Burgess needs to start on Saturday in the cup, and Thursdays training needs to go back to basics like passing to a player in an amber and blue shirt.

 

The contrast between Saturdays game and tonight is the reason we did not go up in the last 3 seasons - Bateman still has a lot to do.

[Ted]

Guildford were a well organised side who showed us how to play football. We again allowed the opposition lots of room on the edge of the box, and paid for it with their first goal. Only after we scored deep into injury time did we put them under pressure, and they were struggling, but sadly we had left it far too late. Early days yet, but a very ordinary performance.

[A Rebel and a Saint]

Agree about Burgess, 2 goals in 2 sub appearances must warrant a start on Saturday.

 

We just seem to panic too easily and start hoofing the ball up the pitch, which is when we start to struggle. When we kept the ball on the floor and passed it around, things worked much better.

From what I saw, Guildford were nothing special and were just typical of the well organised teams that can be found at this level. We put them under some pressure but we seemed to lose momentum when we got in and around the box.

 

We must move on though, bring on the weekend!

[Cookham Rebel]

Just wanted to ask, what did others make of the referee?

 

2 decisions baffled me. 1st up, the phantom foul on Burnell, Danny over ran the ball, the defender got in front, slid in and cleared the ball, Danny's momentum took him into the players legs and over he went, 4 yards inside the box. It was not a foul but the referee gives a free kick outside the box to us? Left me scratching my head!

 

Next up, Woozley's booking, thought it was a fantastically won header but the referee blew up because Woozley apparently led with the elbow, I don't know how else you get leverage when attempting to win the ball in the air but there you go, if the referee saw the use of an elbow it's a straight red card not a yellow!

 

The referee ruined the game from very early on last night, he stopped the game at every opportunity rather than letting it flow!

 

Also, have to say this, why on earth we didn't just make our 3 substitutions at the same time really angered me, by making them individually it led to more breaks in play and lost time searching for a goal!

[Mark44]

Last night was very disappointing and has brought up a couple of points.

 

At some point the debate over a tall target man will come back.

 

My opinion of it is that we have far too much quality in Danny and Sean to need a target man......

 

However, if we employ long ball tactics that we did last night then we will lose every game without a target man.

 

Also, our midfield does not look anywhere near as good as last year when we had Coyne, Martin and Seeby. We need to sort this out as I think we have different options on the bench.

 

My team for Saturday would be the following:

 

Grant

 

Brown NBH Woozley

 

A.Deeney Fraser Mason Burgess Murphy

 

Burnell Sonner

 

 

Early days yet and we need to nip it in the bud now

[Sue]

CR cant put on here what I think of the referee !!

 

Also didnt give us a blatant penalty in the first half.

 

Not blaming him for losing just didn't think he was very good. Anyway it's only two games in, a long way to go yet, same words I expect Fergie told his team on Monday night.

 

 

[Rebel Yeller]

Agree with Mark 44 above.

 

I mentioned in a post before the season started about not having enough forwards and I was shot down. Danny and Sean will score if we make chances I was told. Well,last night there were virtually no chances ( none in the second half when Ollie's goal was our first of the half ) and Danny and Sean could have played until midnight and not scored. Don't think Danny had a shot all night.

 

I don't have a problem with us going long ball if that's our plan B, but going long ball to short forwards is bonkers. If long ball is the fallback then fine, but then we must have a tall forward on the bench to capitalise on it. Otherwise, as proved not only last night but many times before, long ball is pointless.

 

Guildford were a well organised and robust side who knew how to deal with short forwards, even good ones like ours. And they did. They all knew their jobs in the team and they did them very well. If they carry on like that they'll be in the shake-up and the end of the season.

 

Surely Ollie must start on Saturday. Rhone has been really disappointing, and quite rightly substituted twice. In pre-season he looked really good, but in the heat of battle he shows glimpses of skill, but then disappears from the game. His passing was not good - it was his woeful pass to a Guildford player which ultimately led to the first goal.

 

Perhaps the tacticians amongst us can explain what Dave Deeney's role is. He just seems to be out there - is he defensive or attacking. I just can't make it out. Ashley has looked the best of our three big signings so far.

 

And don't fixate on the ref. No he wasn't much good, but poor reffing is what we get at this level so we have to live with it. He booked seven players in a game with virtually no fouls, but Guildford suffered too and the ref is not the reason we lost.

 

What really concerns me is not that we lost, but that this forum has seen all of the above texts written on it before after other woeful showings. We all have bad days at the office from time to time, but I'd be happier if I felt we were learning some lessons from these defeats. I'm not sure that we are.

[readingrebel]

As a matter of interest, what happened about Charlie Fanner re-signing?

 

 

I heard that he had damaged his fingers again but who knows?

[readingrebel]

Lost 2-1. These games cost us last season. No shape and no desire, until the 93rd minute when we scored.

 

At home against a promoted team, and we only manage 2 shots on target. Not good enough!

 

 

I think desire is one thing you cannot accuse us of not having.

[readingrebel]

I didn't comment on the Northwood game as I felt it was summed up pretty well by others on here!

 

Tonight?!?! Well, abject and "nothing changes" spring to mind! Absolutely no invention, hopefully this will be a wake up call because it felt like the players thought they could walk out and win this league at a canter!

 

Any danger of another centre forward????

 

 

CR, if you look at the home page we have signed another forward but he wasn't at the game last night.

[Martin]

The thing that really annoys me about yesterday was the fact that once again we failed to test the goalkeeper. Now, I spotted fairly early on that he was a little tubby. My immediate conclusion was that he might not be the most agile. Therefore why not test him with some long shots. The pitch was slick, the ball slippery, even if he got to it there might be a chance to benefit from rebounds etc. But we can only have managed two or three shots on target in the whole game. Their keeper may be great, he might have great agility but we are not going to know unless we work him.

[Cookham Rebel]

Agree with Mark 44 above.

 

I mentioned in a post before the season started about not having enough forwards and I was shot down. Danny and Sean will score if we make chances I was told. Well,last night there were virtually no chances ( none in the second half when Ollie's goal was our first of the half ) and Danny and Sean could have played until midnight and not scored. Don't think Danny had a shot all night.

 

I don't have a problem with us going long ball if that's our plan B, but going long ball to short forwards is bonkers. If long ball is the fallback then fine, but then we must have a tall forward on the bench to capitalise on it. Otherwise, as proved not only last night but many times before, long ball is pointless.

 

Guildford were a well organised and robust side who knew how to deal with short forwards, even good ones like ours. And they did. They all knew their jobs in the team and they did them very well. If they carry on like that they'll be in the shake-up and the end of the season.

 

Surely Ollie must start on Saturday. Rhone has been really disappointing, and quite rightly substituted twice. In pre-season he looked really good, but in the heat of battle he shows glimpses of skill, but then disappears from the game. His passing was not good - it was his woeful pass to a Guildford player which ultimately led to the first goal.

 

Perhaps the tacticians amongst us can explain what Dave Deeney's role is. He just seems to be out there - is he defensive or attacking. I just can't make it out. Ashley has looked the best of our three big signings so far.

 

And don't fixate on the ref. No he wasn't much good, but poor reffing is what we get at this level so we have to live with it. He booked seven players in a game with virtually no fouls, but Guildford suffered too and the ref is not the reason we lost.

 

What really concerns me is not that we lost, but that this forum has seen all of the above texts written on it before after other woeful showings. We all have bad days at the office from time to time, but I'd be happier if I felt we were learning some lessons from these defeats. I'm not sure that we are.

 

I personally don't think Rhone can be labelled disappointing as he is being played out of position, last night he looked a bit lost, not knowing whether to hug the touch line or move inside! Dave Deeney is a good player but he is no Paul Coyne, there lies the problem, I personally do not think Dave Deeney and Adam Logie can be played in the same central midfield, both are very similar!

 

In pre-season we played 4-4-2 unless I'm mistaken, and I think the players we now have suit this formation better than 3-5-2... On Saturday we should line up:

 

Grant

 

A.Deeney NBH Woozley Murphy

 

Fraser D.Deeney Burgess Rhone

 

Sonner Burnell

 

Or even put Rhone up front in a 4-3-3! Also, looking at the pitch at Holloways Park, can't help but think that Ashley Deeney and Steve Sinclair would tear teams apart on the right side and the same on the other with Murphy and Rhone!

 

Lastly, I'm not looking to blame the ref, he was as bad for both teams last night, just thought his decisions were surreal! Last night reminded me of the game at home to Burnham last season, it proved a catalyst but we were abject that night, and was the referee!!!

[hotspur]

Though Bateman has done reasonable well since becoming manager,he does not seem to reconise that his teams lack that little bit extra that makes champions, so yet again our best bet will be to scrape into play offs-you may say its too early for that conclusion but sadly i have been right these last 5 years.Its rather like when he was a player yes a Bateman but not a JEFF BATEMAN!

[Mark44]

Very harsh Hotspur

 

I would challenge your assumption around scraping into the playoffs.......

 

Where were you last season where we were comfortably second?

 

I do have some criticism of the team this year but its constructive and im sure the team will mature. Your post just seems that bit personal against SB

[readingrebel]

Credit to Guildford, they are a good functional team that play to their strengths.

 

They came to spoil and frustrate us and left with 3 points, job done!

 

It was just unfortunate that a few of our players did not perform on the night.

 

FA cup on Saturday so a good chance for SB to ring the changes. There are players in the squad like Mason, Fraser etc that need game time. Also a good chance to see our new Forward Eddie Smith.