Back Just

What I've taken from todays game:

1) Talbot in CM is CLASS.
2) Bobby Reid needs a kick up the backside! We know there's a player there but it just isn't working right now.
3) Olly Lee can do things with a football, looked lively.
4) Jason Banton looks keen to work hard.
5) Though still fairly reliable, the defence had too many shaky moments - mostly Hartley today.
6) McCormick still didn't really have a save to make.
7) Even when injured, Reubs is still our biggest goal threat.
Not keen on THD, not great defensively and poor going forward.

All in all, I think we'll just hold onto 7th and lose in the play-offs. Personally thought that was a rather disappointing game, other than Talbot - who really was very, very good.

Ratings:
McCormick 7, Nelson 7, McHugh 7, Hartley 5, Mellor 5, THD 5, O'Connor 7, Bobby 5, Talbot 8, Alessandra 6, Reuben 6.

Lee and Banton both did alright, the former probably the better of the two and should start above Bobby on Saturday imo. Brunt didn't really do much.

Josh Pope wrote:

What I've taken from todays game:

1) Talbot in CM is CLASS.
2) Bobby Reid needs a kick up the backside! We know there's a player there but it just isn't working right now.
3) Olly Lee can do things with a football, looked lively.
4) Jason Banton looks keen to work hard.
5) Though still fairly reliable, the defence had too many shaky moments - mostly Hartley today.
6) McCormick still didn't really have a save to make.
7) Even when injured, Reubs is still our biggest goal threat.
Not keen on THD, not great defensively and poor going forward.

All in all, I think we'll just hold onto 7th and lose in the play-offs. Personally thought that was a rather disappointing game, other than Talbot - who really was very, very good.

Ratings:
McCormick 7, Nelson 7, McHugh 7, Hartley 5, Mellor 5, THD 5, O'Connor 7, Bobby 5, Talbot 8, Alessandra 6, Reuben 6.

Lee and Banton both did alright, the former probably the better of the two and should start above Bobby on Saturday imo. Brunt didn't really do much.

Good report Josh, you deserve a medal bhey for watching that.

Jesus, praise of Olly Lee?!?! You okay Josh?

Largely agree with that, although I like Holmes-Dennis. Both wing backs suffered today because of the poor pitch, THD in the first half and Mellor the second - although I felt Kelvin was fairly substandard for most of the match. Entirely forgettable performances from most of the players bar Talbot.

The Reid's had our best chances today, Bobby's deflected shot almost looped in and Reuben's header hit the crossbar and bounced just in front of the line. We failed to carve out many, if any, clear cut chances. Our midfield is pretty handy on the ball, yet we're still ignoring them far to often by hoofing balls up to Reid and Alessandra - it was easy to defend against. Both sides, strangely, seemed frightened to lose and thus played it safe throughout. On a better pitch our play may have come off and helped us earn the win, but it was disappointing that we didn't come out for the second half with any new ideas or spark.

A great turn out by the GA, the most out of tune and time fans in all the land.

A wasted afternoon by sounds of it.

Elias wrote:

A wasted afternoon by sounds of it.

Nah, met up with a mate and had a decent meal after.

Was listening to Talksport on the drive down, I like their kick football out of football campaign.

Never seen Lee drive with a football like he did, the ball rolls were a sight to behold!

Based on that cameo he definitely deserves a place above Bobby in the next squad.

Yeah, he was good today - had a greater impact than the other subs, but I still felt Bobby Reid was the wrong man to take off at the time. I'd have moved Talbot wide right and taken Mellor off. We needed to make better use of our width and I reckon Talbot would have performed far better there and Mellor was.

Talbot my motm. No other player registered.

Totally agree with spolly regarding the quality of our midfield, and the tendency to kick the ball 40 ft in the air. Think about it. We play with 5 in midfield, by far the most concentrated area of our formation. And yet we let the CBs boot it long aiming at one man - Reuben Reid. Our tactic boils down to long ball hoofing involving CBs as the architects (really?) and an injured player as the man to chase down these inaccurate toe punts and put them in the net.

Who needs a midfield when the tactics are that? And if those aren't our tactics, wtf did I just witness today?

Alessandra played a defensive role today. A supposed striker and his only purpose was to chase down and harry. I really don't understand why we didn't start Brunt if that was our game plan. His headers and flick ons were far more suited to the proceedings than Lewis trying to read punts and misguided flick ons.

Also agree Olly Lee looked decent too. Tried to play some actual football. Shame he only got 15 minutes.

I guess the logic of hoofin ahead of the five man midfield is that the other team then has to play back through them all whilst if one of the midfield gets caught in possession then we are straight into defence. I don't blame Shez for setting up not to lose but without the home team willing to try and break and score we can't counter.
Fwiw I don't think I've ever seen a goal scored between Argyle and Oxford, always dour.

I'd say Oxford won the battle of the tactics. They had by far the better quality chances, but their inferior quality players couldn't finish.

We think we were defensively solid but we weren't. They were only a few misfired finishes away, and then we'd have been saying the exact same defending was a shambles.

The main problem is  Oxford were no decent side, we just didn't get at them at all. We didn't run at them from midfield. We didn't get down the wings. Alessandra never received the ball. Reuben only ever received it 8 ft in the air, or literally treble marked by Oxford defenders - with no support. Bobby Reid seemingly gave himself a day off. And it was only Talbot's occasional surges that provided ANY creativity.

10 games to go and we produced a seriously lethargic performance like that? Not good enough in my opinion.

Agree with Sam Powell in that had Reuben or Alessandra had the fortune of playing for Oxford yesterday, we'd have lost that game. Our tactics were crap and betrayed the talent in the team. Sort it out Sheridan! If Oxford could finish and/or Cambridge hadn't scored that goal, fans would have probably seen that crap performance for what it was - costing us a playoff spot. We can't keep playing so poorly when games and 3 points are there for the taking.

ejh wrote:

I'd say Oxford won the battle of the tactics. They had by far the better quality chances, but their inferior quality players couldn't finish.

We think we were defensively solid but we weren't. They were only a few misfired finishes away, and then we'd have been saying the exact same defending was a shambles.

The main problem is  Oxford were no decent side, we just didn't get at them at all. We didn't run at them from midfield. We didn't get down the wings. Alessandra never received the ball. Reuben only ever received it 8 ft in the air, or literally treble marked by Oxford defenders - with no support. Bobby Reid seemingly gave himself a day off. And it was only Talbot's occasional surges that provided ANY creativity.

10 games to go and we produced a seriously lethargic performance like that? Not good enough in my opinion.

Agree with Sam Powell in that had Reuben or Alessandra had the fortune of playing for Oxford yesterday, we'd have lost that game. Our tactics were crap and betrayed the talent in the team. Sort it out Sheridan! If Oxford could finish and/or Cambridge hadn't scored that goal, fans would have probably seen that crap performance for what it was - costing us a playoff spot. We can't keep playing so poorly when games and 3 points are there for the taking.

Argyle have the best defensive record in the country on a pro rata basis, so it would seem that quite a few teams have had a "few misfired finishes" this season. And what makes you say that "3 points were there for the taking"? The relative league positions? Oxford won at Bury the week before and were unbeaten in 5,so it was never going to be that easy-just ask Pellegrini whether relative league positions are of relevance on any given day.

ejh wrote:

I'd say Oxford won the battle of the tactics. They had by far the better quality chances, but their inferior quality players couldn't finish.

We think we were defensively solid but we weren't. They were only a few misfired finishes away, and then we'd have been saying the exact same defending was a shambles.

The main problem is  Oxford were no decent side, we just didn't get at them at all. We didn't run at them from midfield. We didn't get down the wings. Alessandra never received the ball. Reuben only ever received it 8 ft in the air, or literally treble marked by Oxford defenders - with no support. Bobby Reid seemingly gave himself a day off. And it was only Talbot's occasional surges that provided ANY creativity.

10 games to go and we produced a seriously lethargic performance like that? Not good enough in my opinion.

Agree with Sam Powell in that had Reuben or Alessandra had the fortune of playing for Oxford yesterday, we'd have lost that game. Our tactics were crap and betrayed the talent in the team. Sort it out Sheridan! If Oxford could finish and/or Cambridge hadn't scored that goal, fans would have probably seen that crap performance for what it was - costing us a playoff spot. We can't keep playing so poorly when games and 3 points are there for the taking.

Les Miserable wrote:

ejh wrote:

I'd say Oxford won the battle of the tactics. They had by far the better quality chances, but their inferior quality players couldn't finish.

We think we were defensively solid but we weren't. They were only a few misfired finishes away, and then we'd have been saying the exact same defending was a shambles.

The main problem is  Oxford were no decent side, we just didn't get at them at all. We didn't run at them from midfield. We didn't get down the wings. Alessandra never received the ball. Reuben only ever received it 8 ft in the air, or literally treble marked by Oxford defenders - with no support. Bobby Reid seemingly gave himself a day off. And it was only Talbot's occasional surges that provided ANY creativity.

10 games to go and we produced a seriously lethargic performance like that? Not good enough in my opinion.

Agree with Sam Powell in that had Reuben or Alessandra had the fortune of playing for Oxford yesterday, we'd have lost that game. Our tactics were crap and betrayed the talent in the team. Sort it out Sheridan! If Oxford could finish and/or Cambridge hadn't scored that goal, fans would have probably seen that crap performance for what it was - costing us a playoff spot. We can't keep playing so poorly when games and 3 points are there for the taking.

Bring back Luke Young and Nathan Thomas. Absolutely setting the world on fire they are. Wonder if Luke's move to Bristol City is still on? Probably waiting until they get to the championship before they make a move.

To be fair I was looking at that side yesterday and thinking what the difference would have been if it was Luke Young playing there rather than Bobby Reid.

Also agree about the defence thing, we made so many mistakes and poor passes it was really only down to inferior players who couldn't put the ball away, we gifted them posession so much.

Game was there for the taking but we didn't seem to want it - neatly dazed by a great session in the Royal Blenheim, a great Everards pint did flow!! Always a silver lining!!

Greenskin wrote:

ejh wrote:

I'd say Oxford won the battle of the tactics. They had by far the better quality chances, but their inferior quality players couldn't finish.

We think we were defensively solid but we weren't. They were only a few misfired finishes away, and then we'd have been saying the exact same defending was a shambles.

The main problem is  Oxford were no decent side, we just didn't get at them at all. We didn't run at them from midfield. We didn't get down the wings. Alessandra never received the ball. Reuben only ever received it 8 ft in the air, or literally treble marked by Oxford defenders - with no support. Bobby Reid seemingly gave himself a day off. And it was only Talbot's occasional surges that provided ANY creativity.

10 games to go and we produced a seriously lethargic performance like that? Not good enough in my opinion.

Agree with Sam Powell in that had Reuben or Alessandra had the fortune of playing for Oxford yesterday, we'd have lost that game. Our tactics were crap and betrayed the talent in the team. Sort it out Sheridan! If Oxford could finish and/or Cambridge hadn't scored that goal, fans would have probably seen that crap performance for what it was - costing us a playoff spot. We can't keep playing so poorly when games and 3 points are there for the taking.

Argyle have the best defensive record in the country on a pro rata basis, so it would seem that quite a few teams have had a "few misfired finishes" this season. And what makes you say that "3 points were there for the taking"? The relative league positions? Oxford won at Bury the week before and were unbeaten in 5,so it was never going to be that easy-just ask Pellegrini whether relative league positions are of relevance on any given day.

If you were at the game I will happily debate the points raised. The fact you are bringing up Oxford's recent form leads me to believe you are judging Oxford on your prior expectation of them, not what you saw. So I won't really be patronised by someone who possibly wasn't there telling me it was a good valuable point. We got a point because their players couldn't drill a free shot on target several times. Oxford are having their worst season for a long time for a reason. The fact you are bringing up Luke Young and Nathan Thomas suggests some long standing bitterness on me from the past. I don't really care, but I'd rather not get involved as whatever I say you will want an argument. On the point of Nathan Thomas though, oh what to have had him on for half an hour yesterday! In a team full of static, defence minded midfielders scared to carry the ball, wing backs frightened of the opposition half - Thomas really would have broke the mould, shouted loud with arms in the air, wanted to collect the ball and sought to personally get the thing in net or at least in the box using the most direct method possible - his own two feet.

Thomas infected our performances with his attitude and willingness plenty of times last season, it takes a special kind of numpty to write him off as a bad player just because Sheridan didn't like the kid.

Yeah I agree about Thomas there ejh, made no secret of my admiration for Young either - a player like him would thrive alongside O'Connor and Talbot imo, you'd have a complete midfield trio for this league then. Ball winning, tackling, dribbling, pace, passing, set-pieces.. Bobby offered disappointingly little today. Tried the odd exciting ball but nothing came off for him.

Lee should start above him on Saturday imo.

Retrospective shit talk IMHO.

Tynan and Reid, what a dream strike partnership they would've been, can't believe we let Tommy go to Tower Cabs for a feckin pittance. SORT IT OUT SHERIDAN FFS !!!

AstiSpumante wrote:

Retrospective shit talk IMHO.

In all fairness their names were only mentioned to make some totally unrelated points of mine seem stupid.

But now they have been mentioned and brought up for the hundredth time, it is fitting that both realistically might have a decisive influence in that kind of stale game. One player incredibly direct and aggressive with fantastic dribbling ability, and the other with a decent passing range, good vision and creativity (if little else).

It is ironic both could have unlocked the 3 points if given half an hour in that kind of match. Even though in reality Sheridan would probably not have given either a chance.

We talk about our famous superb defence, but how about another stat for the Sheridan is God camp? Only Morecambe and Oxford have scored less than us in the top 18 teams of this division. It really doesn't pay tribute to our creativity or attacking threat and yesterday was a perfect example of where we could have gone for it, we could have tried something different - but all we had was the same blunt match plan with a taller forward for the last 15 and the same stale ideas.

A good team and a good manager would have won that match, instead too many fans are deluding themselves it was a well earned, hard fought point. It was a dour insipid point, only brought about because the opposition struggled as much to score a goal as we do.

More is needed on Tuesday. And if we don't show more urgency than that in the next 10 games, we will miss these playoffs. Up to Sheridan to work some variation into our play because we are a metaphorical sitting duck with tactics like that, and the more clinical teams will gun us down.

Surprised there hasn't been a special mention for the Devonport dockyard apprentice sheet metal workers up in the corner. They were magnificent crash, crash, boom, boom, bang, bang. At times they were quite melodic in their crashing and banging. The side panels of the stand made great replacement drums and were extremely well used.

Such a shame these drums drowned out any attempt by other fans to sing until nobody bothered any more. Or was it the fact there was absolutely nothing to sing about?

A point was taken prisoner but at what cost? Thousands of Oxford & Argyle fans could have been asleep and missed some goalmouth action if it wasn't for the valiant efforts of the metal workers to keep everyone awake.

ejh wrote:

AstiSpumante wrote:

Retrospective shit talk IMHO.

In all fairness their names were only mentioned to make some totally unrelated points of mine seem stupid.

But now they have been mentioned and brought up for the hundredth time, it is fitting that both realistically might have a decisive influence in that kind of stale game. One player incredibly direct and aggressive with fantastic dribbling ability, and the other with a decent passing range, good vision and creativity (if little else).

It is ironic both could have unlocked the 3 points if given half an hour in that kind of match. Even though in reality Sheridan would probably not have given either a chance.

We talk about our famous superb defence, but how about another stat for the Sheridan is God camp? Only Morecambe and Oxford have scored less than us in the top 18 teams of this division. It really doesn't pay tribute to our creativity or attacking threat and yesterday was a perfect example of where we could have gone for it, we could have tried something different - but all we had was the same blunt match plan with a taller forward for the last 15 and the same stale ideas.

A good team and a good manager would have won that match, instead too many fans are deluding themselves it was a well earned, hard fought point. It was a dour insipid point, only brought about because the opposition struggled as much to score a goal as we do.

More is needed on Tuesday. And if we don't show more urgency than that in the next 10 games, we will miss these playoffs. Up to Sheridan to work some variation into our play because we are a metaphorical sitting duck with tactics like that, and the more clinical teams will gun us down.

Reasonable comment, had rather too many sherbets on Saturday night and was feeling cranky yesterday, so I admit the comments were uncalled for and due apologies are offered.

You're a nice man, Skinny

Charlie Wood wrote:

You're a nice man, Skinny

Greenskin wrote:

ejh wrote:

AstiSpumante wrote:

Retrospective shit talk IMHO.

In all fairness their names were only mentioned to make some totally unrelated points of mine seem stupid.

But now they have been mentioned and brought up for the hundredth time, it is fitting that both realistically might have a decisive influence in that kind of stale game. One player incredibly direct and aggressive with fantastic dribbling ability, and the other with a decent passing range, good vision and creativity (if little else).

It is ironic both could have unlocked the 3 points if given half an hour in that kind of match. Even though in reality Sheridan would probably not have given either a chance.

We talk about our famous superb defence, but how about another stat for the Sheridan is God camp? Only Morecambe and Oxford have scored less than us in the top 18 teams of this division. It really doesn't pay tribute to our creativity or attacking threat and yesterday was a perfect example of where we could have gone for it, we could have tried something different - but all we had was the same blunt match plan with a taller forward for the last 15 and the same stale ideas.

A good team and a good manager would have won that match, instead too many fans are deluding themselves it was a well earned, hard fought point. It was a dour insipid point, only brought about because the opposition struggled as much to score a goal as we do.

More is needed on Tuesday. And if we don't show more urgency than that in the next 10 games, we will miss these playoffs. Up to Sheridan to work some variation into our play because we are a metaphorical sitting duck with tactics like that, and the more clinical teams will gun us down.

Reasonable comment, had rather too many sherbets on Saturday night and was feeling cranky yesterday, so I admit the comments were uncalled for and due apologies are offered.

Haha don't worry this isn't the House of Commons, or even worse, Pyongyang Farm. I don't mind a wholehearted disagreement on here, in fact that is what I come for - to moan about my opinions, and squabble with those who see things differently. You certainly haven't offended me and don't ever worry about calling me a tosser if that's what you think :-D