Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support Fans Focus by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content

Waltham Forest 0 Enfield Town 1

lovely stuff

By lovely stuff
in Not the ETFC Forum

 Share

Recommended Posts

Badger Newbie

Badger

Posted
Posted

A few minutes earlier, their No.3 beat Matty to a ball and headed clear. Matty turned, and tried to jump over the now prostrate Forest player, but clipped his leg. All the Towners had a go at him for feigning. Then, Matt and No.3 had what appeared to be a heated exchange of words whilst walking up the pitch near each other, and then came the headbutt. Not entirely unprovoked in the No.3's eyes, I suppose. Still, I reckoned a punch-up was on the cards from about the fifth minute when their No.2 (or possibly 4) got booked for throwing the ball at our injured layer (Bryan, I think).

Quite possibly the nastiest looking three points we've ever had. The football wasn't pretty, discipline was lacking on both siides, and several players picked up unnecessary injuries and bookings for both teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
andyetfc Collaborator

andyetfc

Posted
Posted

Message from Les, The director. Kojo suffered from concussion and will be kept in overnight.

 

Just to add to an earlier thread.

 

Just goes to show that ETFC has a system in hand to get a player off the pitch which does not include a player running 70 yards to find a stretcher. As for the presence of 1st Aiders!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jim Cunneen Newbie

Jim Cunneen

Posted
Posted
Quote:
Gazza said:
Quote:
OldTowner said:
Agree, not an easy place to go, but it could have been a lot easier if we had played football on the deck.
Our 5'6" forwards were no match for the 6'6" defenders, but still we persisted with the high ball ! ! ! Why ?
A good three point for sure, but, we still need that goal scoring centre forward. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/boxing.gif" alt="" />


Totally agree OT, all it did do was win us free kicks now & then which we then......floated into the box! <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/shrug.gif" alt="" />


Leonard Stanley won 9-0 Saturday with our centre forward scoring seven! (THornbury's defence was v.poor 2/10 see me!). The point is Matt Fanstone is 5' 7". The ball was either played over the top to him to run on to or played low into the box by the players who had got passed the defence.

THus showing the problem is not with the strikers size but the service they recieve.......

By the way last season we scored 98 goals all season at 1.81 goals per game. THis season we have scored 71 goals at 1.79 goals per game which suggests the problem is not that acute. At the other end however we conceded goals at .85 per game last season and this year at 1.05 which is a bit more concerning. All the talk about the lack of goals might be redirected to the goals we are conceding.

Just a thought....

Jim
<img src="/forum/images/graemlins/icon_smokin.gif" alt="" />
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldTowner Enthusiast

OldTowner

Posted
Posted
Quote:
Jim Cunneen said:
Quote:
Gazza said:
Quote:
OldTowner said:
Agree, not an easy place to go, but it could have been a lot easier if we had played football on the deck.
Our 5'6" forwards were no match for the 6'6" defenders, but still we persisted with the high ball ! ! ! Why ?
A good three point for sure, but, we still need that goal scoring centre forward. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/boxing.gif" alt="" />


Totally agree OT, all it did do was win us free kicks now & then which we then......floated into the box! <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/shrug.gif" alt="" />


Leonard Stanley won 9-0 Saturday with our centre forward scoring seven! (THornbury's defence was v.poor 2/10 see me!). The point is Matt Fanstone is 5' 7". The ball was either played over the top to him to run on to or played low into the box by the players who had got passed the defence.

THus showing the problem is not with the strikers size but the service they recieve.......

By the way last season we scored 98 goals all season at 1.81 goals per game. THis season we have scored 71 goals at 1.79 goals per game which suggests the problem is not that acute. At the other end however we conceded goals at .85 per game last season and this year at 1.05 which is a bit more concerning. All the talk about the lack of goals might be redirected to the goals we are conceding.

Just a thought....

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


Jim,
A good point and very well put. It is hard to disagree with your stats, however, if you had seen the games this season I am sure you would be making a similar point about the high ball game we seem to have adopted.
I do not know if these are planned tactics or just the way the games turn out.
What I do know is that the high balls are just hitting the rather tall / large defenders OR those defenders block the runs of the forwards.
Either way ( and I accept your point )it ain't working !!
In my view, a big forward would assist the playing style of messrs Bryne and Trevor, who could play off someone who could "hold up play".
Just my view !!! <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/boxing.gif" alt="" />
Link to comment
Share on other sites
lovely stuff Collaborator

lovely stuff

Posted
  • Author
Posted

The reason our goal stats don't look to bad;is that in the few games were have 'clicked' and 'gelled' as a team, we have scored 3,4,5 goals a time, in those half a dozen games.

 

Jim,i would be interested if you could come up with stats showing what percentage of games that we have scored one goal or less in, compared to last season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Southport - TOWNER Newbie

Southport - TOWNER

Posted
Posted

well it was not the most enjoyable ground to go to, and as for a director suffering discrimination in the board room, summed it up really.............

 

 

 

(it appears it is ok for ladies to wear jeans but not blokes!!)

 

couple of points

 

* Let's hope Kojo makes a speedy recovery

 

* Big "well done" to the hard working Roy

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jim Cunneen Newbie

Jim Cunneen

Posted
Posted
Quote:
lovely stuff said:
The reason our goal stats don't look to bad;is that in the few games were have 'clicked' and 'gelled' as a team, we have scored 3,4,5 goals a time, in those half a dozen games.

Jim,i would be interested if you could come up with stats showing what percentage of games that we have scored one goal or less in, compared to last season.


last season we played 54 competitive games and scored 1 goal or less in 23 of them = 42.59%

this season we have played 39 games and have scored 1 goal or less in 18 of them = 46.15 %.

still doesnt get away from the goals we are conceding or the way we play to the front men tho does it....

jim <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/icon_smokin.gif" alt="" />
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jim Cunneen Newbie

Jim Cunneen

Posted
Posted
Quote:
OldTowner said:
Quote:
Jim Cunneen said:
Quote:
Gazza said:
Quote:
OldTowner said:
Agree, not an easy place to go, but it could have been a lot easier if we had played football on the deck.
Our 5'6" forwards were no match for the 6'6" defenders, but still we persisted with the high ball ! ! ! Why ?
A good three point for sure, but, we still need that goal scoring centre forward. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/boxing.gif" alt="" />


Totally agree OT, all it did do was win us free kicks now & then which we then......floated into the box! <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/shrug.gif" alt="" />


Leonard Stanley won 9-0 Saturday with our centre forward scoring seven! (THornbury's defence was v.poor 2/10 see me!). The point is Matt Fanstone is 5' 7". The ball was either played over the top to him to run on to or played low into the box by the players who had got passed the defence.

THus showing the problem is not with the strikers size but the service they recieve.......

By the way last season we scored 98 goals all season at 1.81 goals per game. THis season we have scored 71 goals at 1.79 goals per game which suggests the problem is not that acute. At the other end however we conceded goals at .85 per game last season and this year at 1.05 which is a bit more concerning. All the talk about the lack of goals might be redirected to the goals we are conceding.

Just a thought....

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


Jim,
A good point and very well put. It is hard to disagree with your stats, however, if you had seen the games this season I am sure you would be making a similar point about the high ball game we seem to have adopted.
I do not know if these are planned tactics or just the way the games turn out.
What I do know is that the high balls are just hitting the rather tall / large defenders OR those defenders block the runs of the forwards.
Either way ( and I accept your point )it ain't working !!
In my view, a big forward would assist the playing style of messrs Bryne and Trevor, who could play off someone who could "hold up play".
Just my view !!! <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/boxing.gif" alt="" />


sorry - that is exactly the point i made with my comments about the mighty Stanley scoring 9 yesterday. BTW Matt's strike parner (who scored the other 2 goals) is only 5' 8" as well.

Jim
<img src="/forum/images/graemlins/icon_smokin.gif" alt="" />
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Arkwright Newbie

Arkwright

Posted
Posted
Quote:
lovely stuff said:
Most of us,Arky.

How exactally do you 'provoke' a headbutt??

From what saw,Matty and their No3 were engaged in conversation as they walked towards the penalty area.Suddenly the No3 Nutted Matty in the side of the face.


Did you see why the number 3 needed treatment a few minutes before?.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
lovely stuff Collaborator

lovely stuff

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I did.Apparently Matty accidently caught his heel as they challenged for the ball.I saw them challege together ,i didn't see matty touch him.If you say he did, then i accept that.

 

At the time the no3 went down.Players from his own team (and the ref) were not overly convinced he was really injured at all.In fact when he went dowen he was holding his left ankle.Then changed his mind when the trainer came on , and had his right ankle treated.

 

Anyway, even if Matty did catch him, was that really 'provication' for a headbuttt?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lovely stuff Collaborator

lovely stuff

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Obviously a headbutt is more provocation than clipping someones heel,but apart from Campbell pushing the No3 in the chest.I didn't really see a punch thrown.'Handbags' really.

 

Anyway,Its important that a team sticks together.If i were playing and was headbutted to the ground ,i would expect my fellow players to be extremely annoyed.Or if i were playing and one of my fellow teammates was headbutted ,i would feel entitled to stick up for them.

 

Not to throw punches of course,but to unite and stay strong as a team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...