Sedgwick wrote:I see alot of people moan about Atkinson... I thought the last two games his footwork and ability to keep to ball moving has been great. Not a starter, but deserves a bit of credit he never gets.
Sedgwick wrote:I see alot of people moan about Atkinson... I thought the last two games his footwork and ability to keep to ball moving has been great. Not a starter, but deserves a bit of credit he never gets.
Sedgwick wrote:I see alot of people moan about Atkinson... I thought the last two games his footwork and ability to keep to ball moving has been great. Not a starter, but deserves a bit of credit he never gets.
MTFCMusings wrote:
No wonder they couldn't be bothered the other night.
The One wrote:MTFCMusings wrote:
No wonder they couldn't be bothered the other night.
MTFCMusings wrote:The One wrote:MTFCMusings wrote:
No wonder they couldn't be bothered the other night.
???? I thought they did their job well, especially the keeper.
MTFCMusings wrote:The One wrote:MTFCMusings wrote:
No wonder they couldn't be bothered the other night.
???? I thought they did their job well, especially the keeper.
The One wrote:MTFCMusings wrote:The One wrote:MTFCMusings wrote:
No wonder they couldn't be bothered the other night.
???? I thought they did their job well, especially the keeper.
We've been over the keeper situation. They didn't do their job well at all apart from the fact they went away with a point, through sheer luck rather than good play/tactics/performance.
MTFCMusings wrote:The One wrote:MTFCMusings wrote:
No wonder they couldn't be bothered the other night.
???? I thought they did their job well, especially the keeper.
stagsfan6493 wrote:MTFCMusings wrote:The One wrote:MTFCMusings wrote:
No wonder they couldn't be bothered the other night.
???? I thought they did their job well, especially the keeper.
We've been over the keeper situation. They didn't do their job well at all apart from the fact they went away with a point, through sheer luck rather than good play/tactics/performance.
MTFCMusings wrote:The One wrote:MTFCMusings wrote:The One wrote:MTFCMusings wrote:
No wonder they couldn't be bothered the other night.
???? I thought they did their job well, especially the keeper.
We've been over the keeper situation. They didn't do their job well at all apart from the fact they went away with a point, through sheer luck rather than good play/tactics/performance.
"Latics had Daniel Iverson to thank in the first half for a number of brilliant saves, as well as the defensive unit who put their bodies on the line."
MTFCMusings wrote:They don't deserve any credit. Were you at the game? We missed an open net for starters. So that's 1-0. How much credit would they have got then?
They were anti-football and got lucky. There manager will get all the praise for getting a point away from home despite getting absolutely battered.
Hjeldefan wrote:MTFCMusings wrote:They don't deserve any credit. Were you at the game? We missed an open net for starters. So that's 1-0. How much credit would they have got then?
They were anti-football and got lucky. There manager will get all the praise for getting a point away from home despite getting absolutely battered.
I was at the game yes, don't live here either so had to travel if that helps me register a few 'superfan' points? They defended well, we finished badly. Yes we missed an open net, but did you notice the defender putting pressure on Khan to make that chance a lot harder? Good defending. They did play anti football I agree, and if any team deserved all 3 points it was us no doubt. But to not give them any credit is absolutely ludicrous, as keeping a clean sheet away from home at any level takes a good level of defending.
MTFCMusings wrote:Hjeldefan wrote:MTFCMusings wrote:They don't deserve any credit. Were you at the game? We missed an open net for starters. So that's 1-0. How much credit would they have got then?
They were anti-football and got lucky. There manager will get all the praise for getting a point away from home despite getting absolutely battered.
I was at the game yes, don't live here either so had to travel if that helps me register a few 'superfan' points? They defended well, we finished badly. Yes we missed an open net, but did you notice the defender putting pressure on Khan to make that chance a lot harder? Good defending. They did play anti football I agree, and if any team deserved all 3 points it was us no doubt. But to not give them any credit is absolutely ludicrous, as keeping a clean sheet away from home at any level takes a good level of defending.
It's not about being a superfan, I just wondered if you were at the game because you obviously missed all the clear chances that we made. Khan missed the open net because CJ's pass was behind him, nothing to with the defender putting pressure on. If the defender sliding in did impact Khan, it was a foul and a penalty because he didn't get the ball. So if you class getting away with a foul as good defending then fine. Second chance, first Oldham defender loses header to Walker, lets him run off, second defender loses header to Rose, Walker clean through, misses a sitter. Great defending? Third chance, CJ shot, defenders allow CJ to cut in on to his strong side and get a shot away, great defending. Walker second chance, centre half chests the ball up into the air inside his own half, midfielder sells other defender short with headed pass, other centre half loses 50-50 with Rose, Walkers shot going wide but keeper saves it anyway, stunnind defending, throwing their bodies on the line.
So that's at least 2-0, if not 4 without bad finishing. How can it be good defending when we've missed two clear opportunities? It's bad defending but got lucky.
Hjeldefan wrote:MTFCMusings wrote:Hjeldefan wrote:MTFCMusings wrote:They don't deserve any credit. Were you at the game? We missed an open net for starters. So that's 1-0. How much credit would they have got then?
They were anti-football and got lucky. There manager will get all the praise for getting a point away from home despite getting absolutely battered.
I was at the game yes, don't live here either so had to travel if that helps me register a few 'superfan' points? They defended well, we finished badly. Yes we missed an open net, but did you notice the defender putting pressure on Khan to make that chance a lot harder? Good defending. They did play anti football I agree, and if any team deserved all 3 points it was us no doubt. But to not give them any credit is absolutely ludicrous, as keeping a clean sheet away from home at any level takes a good level of defending.
It's not about being a superfan, I just wondered if you were at the game because you obviously missed all the clear chances that we made. Khan missed the open net because CJ's pass was behind him, nothing to with the defender putting pressure on. If the defender sliding in did impact Khan, it was a foul and a penalty because he didn't get the ball. So if you class getting away with a foul as good defending then fine. Second chance, first Oldham defender loses header to Walker, lets him run off, second defender loses header to Rose, Walker clean through, misses a sitter. Great defending? Third chance, CJ shot, defenders allow CJ to cut in on to his strong side and get a shot away, great defending. Walker second chance, centre half chests the ball up into the air inside his own half, midfielder sells other defender short with headed pass, other centre half loses 50-50 with Rose, Walkers shot going wide but keeper saves it anyway, stunnind defending, throwing their bodies on the line.
So that's at least 2-0, if not 4 without bad finishing. How can it be good defending when we've missed two clear opportunities? It's bad defending but got lucky.
We did miss chances, and they were not perfect at defending. But we had about 70% possession and created 3 clearcut chances. Based on what you are saying 'it was pure luck' they may as well have not had a defence. You are being far to black and white about it. Like most things in football, its a bit of both. On the whole they defended well, and got a point out of it. Their other clean sheets show that they have a solid defence (albeit boring style) away from home. But we contributed to it with terrible finishing yes, which you could attribute to luck on their part. Bit of both, but give some credit to their defence.
MTFCMusings wrote:Hjeldefan wrote:MTFCMusings wrote:Hjeldefan wrote:MTFCMusings wrote:They don't deserve any credit. Were you at the game? We missed an open net for starters. So that's 1-0. How much credit would they have got then?
They were anti-football and got lucky. There manager will get all the praise for getting a point away from home despite getting absolutely battered.
I was at the game yes, don't live here either so had to travel if that helps me register a few 'superfan' points? They defended well, we finished badly. Yes we missed an open net, but did you notice the defender putting pressure on Khan to make that chance a lot harder? Good defending. They did play anti football I agree, and if any team deserved all 3 points it was us no doubt. But to not give them any credit is absolutely ludicrous, as keeping a clean sheet away from home at any level takes a good level of defending.
It's not about being a superfan, I just wondered if you were at the game because you obviously missed all the clear chances that we made. Khan missed the open net because CJ's pass was behind him, nothing to with the defender putting pressure on. If the defender sliding in did impact Khan, it was a foul and a penalty because he didn't get the ball. So if you class getting away with a foul as good defending then fine. Second chance, first Oldham defender loses header to Walker, lets him run off, second defender loses header to Rose, Walker clean through, misses a sitter. Great defending? Third chance, CJ shot, defenders allow CJ to cut in on to his strong side and get a shot away, great defending. Walker second chance, centre half chests the ball up into the air inside his own half, midfielder sells other defender short with headed pass, other centre half loses 50-50 with Rose, Walkers shot going wide but keeper saves it anyway, stunnind defending, throwing their bodies on the line.
So that's at least 2-0, if not 4 without bad finishing. How can it be good defending when we've missed two clear opportunities? It's bad defending but got lucky.
We did miss chances, and they were not perfect at defending. But we had about 70% possession and created 3 clearcut chances. Based on what you are saying 'it was pure luck' they may as well have not had a defence. You are being far to black and white about it. Like most things in football, its a bit of both. On the whole they defended well, and got a point out of it. Their other clean sheets show that they have a solid defence (albeit boring style) away from home. But we contributed to it with terrible finishing yes, which you could attribute to luck on their part. Bit of both, but give some credit to their defence.
We're never going to agree by the looks of it. I'm being too black and white about it but because they kept a clean sheet they defended well? We only had 58% possession by the way, and created plenty enough to win the game, we just couldn't finish. If that's your idea of good defending then I can only say I hope Stags don't employ your method for the rest of the season.
MTFCMusings wrote:So no bad defending at all then?
Return to Stagsnet Main Discussion Forum
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], chesystagsfan, Costastag, DAVE H, Frankenstag, kieranbenton, marker_mtfc95, MTFC Man, MTFCMusings, Paulstag, Sneag, Spiritater, teg41 and 161 guests