Final Score Billericay 2 - Slough 0

[Blue Rebel]

Final Score Billericay 2 - Slough 0 <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />

[JA$]

how was the performane any good????

there ground any good????

attendance???????

[Yousef]

<img src="/forum/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />

[Blue Rebel]

Mate said we played much better in the second half but only created a couple of chances and the result was a fair reflection of the whole game.

[Ray Copper]

Blue Rebel got a mate?! Don't sound likely <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

[Guest]

First half we were poor and created only one real chance from Smurph 1 which their keeper did well to tip over shortly after they scored their first.

 

Second half we were better but failed to break them down, partly due to our inability and partly their robust (bordering on illegal) defensive tactics which meant consistently playing the man not the ball.

 

The referee was an ar$e and they were overly aggressive but neither was the reason we lost. Allaway proved tonight why I think he's not playing professionally and that's because his kicking was dreadful. Mind you, Parkin had the same trouble there against Chelmsford in the league.

[Don Juan DeMarcus]

Totally agree with Ian there, but we were denied a blatent penalty too...

[GarySTFC]

Thought Haddow took a bit of a dive on that penalty claim. Certainly looked inside the area though.

[Blue Rebel]

OK - an ex mate !

[Don Juan DeMarcus]

Yeah Gaz he made the most of it, but if the ref was going to give it.... It was def inside the box

[Martin]

Definately made the most of it but also it was inside the box. The ref should have either booked him for diving or given a penalty. Bottled both options and went for the safer free kick. To be honest though I have been impressed with the standard of the referees this season certainly an improvement on the previous two seasons. The ref last night was over fussy and made a few strange decisions but he kept up with play well and reacted calmly to the few flash points were there was pushing and shoving.

 

I personally did not think we were that bad in the first half. Played much better than we did against Dover in the second half or Harrow at any time after the first ten minutes but without ever really creating that many chances. I thought both Ricay goals were against the run of play although they did play very well in spells. Their defence certainly looks fairly robust.

 

I thought Hodgey was playing well and was surprised to see him go off. Perhaps Harris is battling with illness which would also explain his substitution.

 

Would be interested in a sensible Ricay perspective to their second goal. It was hard to tell what happened from my position seventy plus yards away but the celebrations were pretty muted from some players and the fans on the touchline. A hint of a foul perhaps?

 

A closer game than 2-0 might suggest but they probably did just edge it on chances created and I continue to hate Tuesday night trips to Essex.

[Radders]

Martin. having spoken to a couple of people on the coach who were standing down the side, the second goal was legal. When the ball got floated in Allaway tried to push it away and it hit their player (Gallagher?) and bounced into the net. That was what they saw anyway.

[Barry Scott]

roll on Monday

[GarySTFC]

Thought we played conservatively in the first half to try and come out with some legs left in the second. Not sure if that would have been the case if we'd have stolen a first half lead, I'm sure we'd have continued to sit back.

 

Similar to the league match at Chelmsford though, we didn't really create anything. Think Gothard had to make one save in the first half and that was it. I know the standard of football is beter than last year, but we're not that bad a team that we shouldn't feel confident to try and attack teams for continued lengths of time.

 

Matt Murphy looked knackered from the off, Hodgey seems to spend as much time moaning at long aimless balls from the back as he does doing anything else, and the midfield lacked any sort of presence.

 

Would still prefer to see us go 4-4-2 as I think this would at least give us stability down the flanks and conserve a bit of energy for Josi and Al to save them having to do the entire length of the pitch on their own.

[Martin]

Fair enoguh Radders, that does explain the comical appearance of the goal from our viewpoint and the muted celebration.

 

I think your being very harsh Gary but would agree that a change to 4-4-2 could be the way forward. How would you have it lining up though? Who plays right wing, who plays left back, left wing, do you leave one of the centre halfs out if so who, what is the centre midfield pairing? With the squad we have I can see why Eddie persists with the wing backs.

[GarySTFC]

My 4-4-2 line up:

 

Allaway - keeper

Carbon - right back

Daly & Saulsbury - centre backs

Michael Murphy - left back

Harris - right mid

Wilko & Mets/Spencer/Hakki - centre mid

Haddow - left mid

Hodges & Seedel/Matt Murphy/Miller - striker

 

With two target men upfront and less work for the wingers, I think we'd get into the box more, be less suspect down the flanks, especially later in the game, and it would still give us flexibility. As someone said, we're far too easy to work out how we play and more importantly, how to stop us at present.

[Don Juan DeMarcus]

Its an idea Gary, but would Harris be comfotable out on the right? I know he gets down the right regularly anyway, but is he really and out and out winger?

[Guest]

Totally agree, Martin. Eddie has built the squad to play a 3-5-2 formation. Up to Christmas last year I felt we tried to play a 3-5-2 without the right players to do so and we suffered for it. When Micky Lewis came in we seemed to switch to a 4-4-2 which suited the players we had even if it's clearly not Eddie's preferred formation.

 

With Haddow playing out of his skin, Josias and Saulsbury joining and Smurph 1 looking settled on the left of a back three, we're really set up to play a 3-5-2. I think if we tried to switch to 4-4-2 we'd suffer from a similar problem to last season where we tried to play a system we didn't have the personnel to play.

 

Personally, I've always been an advocate of 4-4-2 with proper wingers. The 3-5-2 system is great going forward when it works well but as we've found, if teams force Haddow and Carbon back we have very limited attacking potential. It also means you concede a few too as we've let in a lot this year despite the fact I think defensively we've played well with Saulsbury, in particular, being outstanding.

[Staines-upon-Thames Rebel]

I would go with Gary's line up.

 

But I would drop Mets and Handbag, as Wilko provides the strength/aggresion and Veli the quality.

 

Up front it should be Hodges as long as he is in the mood (starting to get like Winston - to much arguing and needs to work harder - will not get picked up by a larger team like this!) and then any other, or a mix of the other strikers.

 

In hindsight we are missing the probing runs of Boot to get into the box, attacks appear to stop on the edge of the box as no one will push through or shoot. Miller is the only one who seems to try this - well against Capital League sides.

[Barry Scott]

so he needs a run in the side