v Bedworth

[Glover]

^^^ what he said with frilly bits on them.

[epicrebel]

pantaloons

[Reading Rebel]

No surprises how my comments were taken. Considered opinion, doesn't comply with others (especially managers, who are ultra defensive as we know) get jumped on.

 

 

Just because someone has a different opinion doesn't mean they are right or you are wrong.

[jonblack]

Knickers

Lol point proven.

[Sir Rebel1965]

Degenerates into name calling by the anonymous and the righteous.

[The Iver Amigos]

When Bedworth went down to 10 men -  instead of playing wide and stretching them, we had Charlie, Wossa, Putts ALL playing central and long balls were all gobbled up by their central defenders. All the possession we had, there were not many actual good chances. I feel we are still lacking central midfielders to create chances for the forwards. Thoughts - bakes and unders??

[Jon Underwood]

 

 

When Bedworth went down to 10 men -  instead of playing wide and stretching them, we had Charlie, Wossa, Putts ALL playing central and long balls were all gobbled up by their central defenders. All the possession we had, there were not many actual good chances. I feel we are still lacking central midfielders to create chances for the forwards. Thoughts - bakes and unders??

 

 

Ok my thoughts as requested...

 

I am not sure what the obsession seems to be with Warren's position. He is told to give us width high up the pitch which he does in every game. Does he tuck in now and again? Yes of course, as any good wide midfielder does when required. For example at Dorking in the cup they had 3 vs our 2 in central midfield so of course the wide players need to help the 2 out now and again or we'll be over-run. But we give him freedom to play as a winger and that is what he does. I must have been watching a different game on Saturday!

 

On Saturday we pushed our full backs right on after the sending off to give us additional width. Warren played high and wide all game as he always does and we only pushed Puts to the left slightly (a role he is very used to) to accommodate another body in Dan Hicks who we threw on when Macca got injured. At that point we left 1v1 at the back to gamble and try to get something from the game. it worked for the goal but the quality of the crosses from 3 of our players in great WIDE positions in the last 10 mins was terrible to be honest.

 

Did we go too direct? Yes I think we did and I would accept that point and it's something we said to the players afterwards. Maybe that came from a bit of desperation to get that 1st goal and get back in the game.

 

I think we created better clearer chances in the first half if I am honest. Probably as a result of not being so "desperate" at that point and playing some decent stuff to open them up time and time again but we weren't clinical enough in the final third.

 

I do believe our midfield play was not good enough on Saturday and in general could be improved upon so far this season but I don't agree that we are not creating enough chances to win games. I believe we have created more chances than our opponents in all of the recent games vs Cirencester, Dorking and Bedworth. I would be surprised if anyone who attended those games disagreed. The fact that we have only scored 1 in each game is a real disappointment clearly, particularly on Saturday where it cost us the game (along with the poor start) and we need to be more clinical.

 

That's all from me, I'm firmly focused now on getting a positive result tonight. See you all later.

Edited September 22, 2015 by Jon Underwood

[Glover]

Thanks for that update Jon, looking forward to tonight's game.

[3spirit]

Good to read Jon's explanation, makes sense.

 

I wasn't at the Bedworth game, so can't comment on the tactics.

My two gripes from the starting line-up was my surprise to see Charlie Mpi omitted from the starting eleven, given that he had scored two in the most recent two games, but this has nothing to do with Slough conceding goals.

 

Also thought we may have tinkered with our centre midfield, from the pairing at the Dorking game ie Clurgy and Adam M., as they haven't been functioning well together.

Having said that we are limited by Adrian Sear's absence, Nathan Webb having to play on the left and I suppose Ben Edwards lessening match appearances.

 

Regardless of personnel, though, you cannot legislate for individual errors that cost us two goals so early.

 

Also think we have to bear in mind that Scott Harris's holiday and Lewis Putman's honeymoon and Ed Smith's injury and Charlie Mpi' s recent recruitment has all interrupted our fluidity up front, so must have some bearing on Slough not being clinical enough.

Give anyone of our strikers service in front of goal and on the break, and we should start seeing the benefits of such a rich array of talent.

[3spirit]

One other point to what Unders said about the Bedworth game, is regarding about our directness.

Having no natural left sided winger type, we end up being reliant on Lewis Putman working the left channel but then of course, limiting his chances of getting a goal, as invariably he's away from his most likely scoring position.     

While I wouldn't say that is how I want to see one of our best strikers play, I think while we are so hampered on the left, we should play him wide left in a 4-4-2,as he crosses well and has pace.

 

What we shouldn't do is dither whether he is an out and out striker or someone we want to play on the left side.

 

To me this is not helping our attacking play ,as often when in space down the left he crosses to strikers who aren't in the box !  Also Putt's gets confused that he's the striker !

[michaelSTFC]

I can assure you and 3spirit that sloughboy has nothing to do with me.But he is right in one respect not many of you can take honest criticism without offering schoolboy jibes in response.

 

We could take honest criticism, but you've barely said a positive word on this forum.

 

Even after promotion! No pleasing some people. I don't clap like a sea-lion every time the club breaks wind, but I try to make a fair go of actually supporting the club and its staff rather than bending everything towards an agenda.

[jonblack]

We could take honest criticism, but you've barely said a positive word on this forum.

 

Even after promotion! No pleasing some people. I don't clap like a sea-lion every time the club breaks wind, but I try to make a fair go of actually supporting the club and its staff rather than bending everything towards an agenda.

I am sure there are teams with a budget less than ours much higher than we are in the league, so explain that one.Then you'll discover where we are going wrong.

[GlenSTFC]

Or maybe explain Jon how you know what our budget is? Unless you actually know any players and they've told you what they and others earn you're just assuming figures.

[Reading Rebel]

I am sure there are teams with a budget less than ours much higher than we are in the league, so explain that one.Then you'll discover where we are going wrong.

 

 

You cannot be sure, you're only making another negative assumption again.

Edited September 23, 2015 by Reading Rebel

[Irishadrian]

Cant see the point in this constantly recurring reference to our budget  On this forum there are some(most) who dont know what our budget is and a few who do know but for obvious reasons dont say. If anyone  who does  know can truthfully claim to know the budget of every other team in the league then they could make comparisons   but of course no-one knows.  There are a few big spenders who dont make any secrets of that but imo the majority have similar budgets unless anyone has persuasive credible evidence that my opinion is flawed

[Sloughboy]

That's very true IrishAdrian!

 

It is fair to assume from that though that we are massively underachieving currently as most budgets apart from few at top and few at bottom are more or less the same.

 

Agree it's a mute point to throw budget at the managers as we aren't majorly high or low as far as we can all assume.

[Irishadrian]

No I dont think thats a valid assumption. Ive never believed you can always buy success by throwing money at it.Take a look at the current league table  Chippenham and Cirencester have never been considered high spenders yet known high spenders like  Merthyr and Kettering are well down the table. Teams who believe they can buy success usually find that they cant or its very short lived because the type of players only interested in personal gain will always whore their talents to the highest bidder. The parity of most budgets is only my opinion and Ive invited rebuttals from anyone who can prove otherwise.

[redwine rebel]

The budget is only known by Steve, Jon and Neil and rightly so, absolutely nothing to do with any of us.

[Irishadrian]

Exactly redwine rebel   Hence my post that all discussions about it are pointless

[Sloughboy]

Come on now, at any level but particularly non league the position you finish is largely dictated by the budget you have. Surely that goes without saying. Some slightly over achieve and others slightly under, in the main budget will dictate.

 

Irrelevant regards slough as none of us know, highly unlikely we have one if the lowest but also certainly not in top few... Just from what you hear around.