Every where is wor, lighters in the air..wycombe 2nd leg match thread

I'm sayin nothin..........................it's all too predictable wherever you look at PAFC these days.

Never mind,'the players still applaud the fans and the fans still applaud the players' 

 there i go again................bleddy one trick pony.

Les Miserable wrote:

jabba the gut ecfc wrote:

It's an invidious position to be in though. If the team does well (which is what you all want) Brent and his lackeys bask in the reflected glory and Brent's critics and their awkward questions are much easier to squash.

Ffs gut, not now.

Fair enough. Given that you have to suffer the Reluctant Builder Bidder, his oleaginous enforcer and his vainglorious answer to Cardinal Richelieu, it would probably be inhuman to rub it in. I suppose the compassionate thing to do would be to leave a suitable amount of time for the wake to take place and restrict myself to lurking for a couple of days. However I would be genuinely interested if someone could explain how on earth your defensive record has deteriorated in the way it has. Given that you were virtually impregnable for nearly the entire season I was sure that come the sharp end you would be able to grind out the necessary 1-0, 0-0 and 1-0 even if you didn't inspire any neutrals in the process.

Baffling.

Gooooooooooooooooooooood Morning A T Deeeeeeeeeeee.

Just finished work. Was there a game last nght? Ow did argo geddon?

Homeslice wrote:

At home, drinks to hand. Saw a near-empty away fans Marquee on Spotlight. I guess that's because they'd all heard that Webb was on his way and the fans all scarpered before he got there, just in case he tried it on with their other halves.

At least Brentford are doing worse than us 5-1 down on aggregate

Their manager will be available after tonight, he's done a cracking job there but I doubt he'd be prepared to lower himself to our level if Sherry was to go.

OK. It's been two days.

As I said before, I'd be genuinely interested to know what happened to your defence all of a sudden. It's not unknown for a team to lose form or for them to rely on a striker who then stops scoring, but it seems unusual to see a side have a virtually impregnable defence for 90% of the season to suddenly crumble - at least one of the goals they showed on SSN was very poor.

I wasn't blown away by you in terms of general play at SJP - IMO we were victims of our own ineptitude to some degree. However you did look very solid at the back - or more correctly at the back and in defensive midfield. The dark-haired defensive midfielder was constantly shuffling across field to help double up on our attacking player in possession and cover gaps. For example,  I can barely recall us getting a cross in - at least from our right-hand side. We were regularly prevented from advancing too far towards the 18-yard line when out wide.

So what happened? Was it misguided tactical changes, injuries, players losing confidence or something else?

In my opinion our inability to offer anything in the game in an attacking sense piled far too much pressure on the defense than they could cope with. The first half of that second leg was wave after wave of attack, corner after corner... They defended plenty of them with conviction, some with nerves, and the others truly got the better of us. Don't forget that Wycombe didn't score a goal against us from open play.

SwimWithTheTide wrote:

In my opinion our inability to offer anything in the game in an attacking sense piled far too much pressure on the defense than they could cope with. The first half of that second leg was wave after wave of attack, corner after corner... They defended plenty of them with conviction, some with nerves, and the others truly got the better of us. Don't forget that Wycombe didn't score a goal against us from open play.

Would you say that explains the downturn that occurred a few games before? If so why did the forward play deteriorate so much? Reid's injury problems?

In one-off pressure games its better to be defensively strong than flamboyant IMO. In fact I had an argument on the topic with someone last time I was in Exeter a while back. I was aware of the opinion of those who don't like Sheridan that you that you weren't pulling up trees and all was lost. However the standard was such that you didn't need to be that good to go up in the playoffs and so I was 100% convinced that you would get to the final and possibly go up, purely on the basis of not letting in goals and nicking results.

Culmination of many things. Certainly Reuben's injury played its part in our decline, we lost our main outlet - as much as Reid doesn't like to play "the target man", his availability as a quick outlet from the back would have eased pressure over the season. As his injury worsened, the opposition's defensive duties eased. Lewis and Reid were renowned in the division for hurrying the opposition defense into making errors, barely giving them any time to compose themselves - but Lewis can only do so much, while Reuben (through no fault of his own) couldn't pull his weight. Reuben should have been allowed to fully recover after we beat you guys. 

Hartley and McHugh have both been playing through injury over recent weeks. Its the end of the season and those niggles are going to be getting fairly sore. Mellor likewise hasn't been 100% and that's probably reflected in his performances. I'm not sure if THD had any particular injury, but he regularly felt around his hamstring throughout games. But, our squad is more fit than most - certainly it showed in the two play off games that our energy levels were still high in the final 10 while Wycombe were running on fumes.

Its hard to pin down exactly what went wrong for us. In my opinion it was very much to do with Sheridan's over reliance on both Reuben and the 3-5-2 system. The system didn't work against some teams and it did others, less to do with the efforts of the players and more to do with how the opposition system coped with our own. Ainsworth set up with a 4-3-3, meaning we had 3 central defenders up against 1 leading striker. They matched us man for man in midfield. And they doubled up on our wingbacks to pin them right back. Of course that meant Reid and Lewis were effectively left one on one against the centre back pairing, but with our midfield 3 losing their individual battles and our wingbacks deeper than , its no surprise that the only supply our strikers received was from our centrebacks (usually Hartley) hoofing it down field. Shrewsbury played 4-4-2 against us I think? And 3-5-2 worked, we out numbered them in midfield which gift at least 1 midfield player the chance to shine and with two fit and energetic strikers the Shrews backline found themselves on the back foot. This in turn allowed our wingbacks to play with a bit more confidence and position themselves higher up the pitch. When we switched to 4-4-2 in the play off games, we stopped Wycombe bossing us totally on the flanks and provide our own attacks with a bit of width. O'Connor did an excellent job doing the defensive work and it allowed Bobby time in the middle to act as the midfield play maker he can. Our 4 attacking players were incredibly energetic and constantly chasing Wycombe down, we started to see more desperate hoof balls from them rather than the composed play of the previous halves. Sheridan's stubborn resistance to deviate from 3-5-2 and ignorance to the extent of Reuben's injury ("he's injured? First I've heard of it") ultimately cost us in my opinion.

My biggest defense of Sheridan earlier in the season, when others were slating him, was that I truly believed he was trying to get us to play very attractive football and that with that kind of approach to a slick passing style of play results would click into place over the course of the season - however we regressed massively into a route one side over the latter half of the season. I held faith for so long, but in the end there's only so much shite you can put up with. The play off debacle all too much for me. I'll stick behind him if he stays, but make no mistake I'd sooner he was replaced (though not by just anyone).

jabba the gut ecfc wrote:

OK. It's been two days.

As I said before, I'd be genuinely interested to know what happened to your defence all of a sudden. It's not unknown for a team to lose form or for them to rely on a striker who then stops scoring, but it seems unusual to see a side have a virtually impregnable defence for 90% of the season to suddenly crumble - at least one of the goals they showed on SSN was very poor.

I wasn't blown away by you in terms of general play at SJP - IMO we were victims of our own ineptitude to some degree. However you did look very solid at the back - or more correctly at the back and in defensive midfield. The dark-haired defensive midfielder was constantly shuffling across field to help double up on our attacking player in possession and cover gaps. For example,  I can barely recall us getting a cross in - at least from our right-hand side. We were regularly prevented from advancing too far towards the 18-yard line when out wide.

So what happened? Was it misguided tactical changes, injuries, players losing confidence or something else?

1st leg -
Goal One: Hayes unmarked literally on the goal line. Was marking McCormick and we didn't track back.
Goal Two: Such a clear handball, our players switched off and a good finish.
Goal Three: Hartley has a brain fart and blames Mellor but McCormick no chance.

2nd leg -
Goal One: Overrated McCormick's fault.
Goal Two: Overrated McCormick's fault.

At the end of the day we lost and are not going to Wembley. We are in L2 next season.

Think yourselves lucky you don't have to work with loads of Wycombe fans!

Just to add to the above an observation from the home game in the league v Wycombe we lost 1-0. The goal? A corner from their right wing pinged  into the heart of the 6 yard box, a flap by the defence and Hayes scored from hooking the loose ball in from close range. It was all-but identical to the first goal they scored in the play-off at Home Park, horribly similar to the first they scored in the away leg and not a million miles away (near-post corner this time headed in directly) from their second in the away leg.

Our inability to defend 4 corners (3 of them more or less identical) cost us dear in the end.

mouldyoldgoat wrote:

At the end of the day we lost and are not going to Wembley. We are in L2 next season.

Think yourselves lucky you don't have to work with loads of Wycombe fans!

The best to hope for there is that Southend go up then!

Paven wrote:

jabba the gut ecfc wrote:

OK. It's been two days.

As I said before, I'd be genuinely interested to know what happened to your defence all of a sudden. It's not unknown for a team to lose form or for them to rely on a striker who then stops scoring, but it seems unusual to see a side have a virtually impregnable defence for 90% of the season to suddenly crumble - at least one of the goals they showed on SSN was very poor.

I wasn't blown away by you in terms of general play at SJP - IMO we were victims of our own ineptitude to some degree. However you did look very solid at the back - or more correctly at the back and in defensive midfield. The dark-haired defensive midfielder was constantly shuffling across field to help double up on our attacking player in possession and cover gaps. For example,  I can barely recall us getting a cross in - at least from our right-hand side. We were regularly prevented from advancing too far towards the 18-yard line when out wide.

So what happened? Was it misguided tactical changes, injuries, players losing confidence or something else?

1st leg -
Goal One: Hayes unmarked literally on the goal line. Was marking McCormick and we didn't track back.
Goal Two: Such a clear handball, our players switched off and a good finish.
Goal Three: Hartley has a brain fart and blames Mellor but McCormick no chance.

2nd leg -
Goal One: Overrated McCormick's fault.
Goal Two: Overrated McCormick's fault.

In the second leg, McCormick punched the first up in the air. That got it away from the goal line, crucially, to be defended. WHY does their player react (despite having back to goal) But Hartley doesnt? Answer is Wycombe wanted it more. Like when Hayes scored in the first leg, he got there first, Argyle busy having a nap.

Second one is Anthony O'Connor's man all day long. It is a free header from point blank range, you shouldn't be counting on your goalkeeper to be second guessing that! O'Connor caught napping all day long.

Five set piece goals tells its own story, we just weren't drilled, organised or prepared at all.

ejh wrote:

Paven wrote:

jabba the gut ecfc wrote:

OK. It's been two days.

As I said before, I'd be genuinely interested to know what happened to your defence all of a sudden. It's not unknown for a team to lose form or for them to rely on a striker who then stops scoring, but it seems unusual to see a side have a virtually impregnable defence for 90% of the season to suddenly crumble - at least one of the goals they showed on SSN was very poor.

I wasn't blown away by you in terms of general play at SJP - IMO we were victims of our own ineptitude to some degree. However you did look very solid at the back - or more correctly at the back and in defensive midfield. The dark-haired defensive midfielder was constantly shuffling across field to help double up on our attacking player in possession and cover gaps. For example,  I can barely recall us getting a cross in - at least from our right-hand side. We were regularly prevented from advancing too far towards the 18-yard line when out wide.

So what happened? Was it misguided tactical changes, injuries, players losing confidence or something else?

1st leg -
Goal One: Hayes unmarked literally on the goal line. Was marking McCormick and we didn't track back.
Goal Two: Such a clear handball, our players switched off and a good finish.
Goal Three: Hartley has a brain fart and blames Mellor but McCormick no chance.

2nd leg -
Goal One: Overrated McCormick's fault.
Goal Two: Overrated McCormick's fault.

In the second leg, McCormick punched the first up in the air. That got it away from the goal line, crucially, to be defended. WHY does their player react (despite having back to goal) But Hartley doesnt? Answer is Wycombe wanted it more. Like when Hayes scored in the first leg, he got there first, Argyle busy having a nap.

Second one is Anthony O'Connor's man all day long. It is a free header from point blank range, you shouldn't be counting on your goalkeeper to be second guessing that! O'Connor caught napping all day long.

Five set piece goals tells its own story, we just weren't drilled, organised or prepared at all.

Here's your starter for 10. Who's Argyle's Defensive Coach? Hint: Bleeds Green, just retired, being put forward as Sheridan's replacement by so many oh-so-knowledgeable fans...

Nope you got me there!

I wouldn't expect a goat to know

Homeslice wrote:

ejh wrote:

Paven wrote:

jabba the gut ecfc wrote:

OK. It's been two days.

As I said before, I'd be genuinely interested to know what happened to your defence all of a sudden. It's not unknown for a team to lose form or for them to rely on a striker who then stops scoring, but it seems unusual to see a side have a virtually impregnable defence for 90% of the season to suddenly crumble - at least one of the goals they showed on SSN was very poor.

I wasn't blown away by you in terms of general play at SJP - IMO we were victims of our own ineptitude to some degree. However you did look very solid at the back - or more correctly at the back and in defensive midfield. The dark-haired defensive midfielder was constantly shuffling across field to help double up on our attacking player in possession and cover gaps. For example,  I can barely recall us getting a cross in - at least from our right-hand side. We were regularly prevented from advancing too far towards the 18-yard line when out wide.

So what happened? Was it misguided tactical changes, injuries, players losing confidence or something else?

1st leg -
Goal One: Hayes unmarked literally on the goal line. Was marking McCormick and we didn't track back.
Goal Two: Such a clear handball, our players switched off and a good finish.
Goal Three: Hartley has a brain fart and blames Mellor but McCormick no chance.

2nd leg -
Goal One: Overrated McCormick's fault.
Goal Two: Overrated McCormick's fault.

In the second leg, McCormick punched the first up in the air. That got it away from the goal line, crucially, to be defended. WHY does their player react (despite having back to goal) But Hartley doesnt? Answer is Wycombe wanted it more. Like when Hayes scored in the first leg, he got there first, Argyle busy having a nap.

Second one is Anthony O'Connor's man all day long. It is a free header from point blank range, you shouldn't be counting on your goalkeeper to be second guessing that! O'Connor caught napping all day long.

Five set piece goals tells its own story, we just weren't drilled, organised or prepared at all.

Here's your starter for 10. Who's Argyle's Defensive Coach? Hint: Bleeds Green, just retired, being put forward as Sheridan's replacement by so many oh-so-knowledgeable fans...

I don't know about not being "drilled, organised or prepared" at all. I'm sure they were. I can't believe that they weren't.

I rather suspect it is more to do with the quick free-kick goal at Home Park. At crucial times crucial personel just weren't switched on to the danger. It's far more likely that there was an individual or individuals at fault on the pitch rather than on the bench. That's my take anyway. Who really knows either way?

SwimWithTheTide wrote:

Culmination of many things. Certainly Reuben's injury played its part in our decline, we lost our main outlet - as much as Reid doesn't like to play "the target man", his availability as a quick outlet from the back would have eased pressure over the season. As his injury worsened, the opposition's defensive duties eased. Lewis and Reid were renowned in the division for hurrying the opposition defense into making errors, barely giving them any time to compose themselves - but Lewis can only do so much, while Reuben (through no fault of his own) couldn't pull his weight. Reuben should have been allowed to fully recover after we beat you guys. 

Hartley and McHugh have both been playing through injury over recent weeks. Its the end of the season and those niggles are going to be getting fairly sore. Mellor likewise hasn't been 100% and that's probably reflected in his performances. I'm not sure if THD had any particular injury, but he regularly felt around his hamstring throughout games. But, our squad is more fit than most - certainly it showed in the two play off games that our energy levels were still high in the final 10 while Wycombe were running on fumes.

Its hard to pin down exactly what went wrong for us. In my opinion it was very much to do with Sheridan's over reliance on both Reuben and the 3-5-2 system. The system didn't work against some teams and it did others, less to do with the efforts of the players and more to do with how the opposition system coped with our own. Ainsworth set up with a 4-3-3, meaning we had 3 central defenders up against 1 leading striker. They matched us man for man in midfield. And they doubled up on our wingbacks to pin them right back. Of course that meant Reid and Lewis were effectively left one on one against the centre back pairing, but with our midfield 3 losing their individual battles and our wingbacks deeper than <insert crude your mum joke>, its no surprise that the only supply our strikers received was from our centrebacks (usually Hartley) hoofing it down field. Shrewsbury played 4-4-2 against us I think? And 3-5-2 worked, we out numbered them in midfield which gift at least 1 midfield player the chance to shine and with two fit and energetic strikers the Shrews backline found themselves on the back foot. This in turn allowed our wingbacks to play with a bit more confidence and position themselves higher up the pitch. When we switched to 4-4-2 in the play off games, we stopped Wycombe bossing us totally on the flanks and provide our own attacks with a bit of width. O'Connor did an excellent job doing the defensive work and it allowed Bobby time in the middle to act as the midfield play maker he can. Our 4 attacking players were incredibly energetic and constantly chasing Wycombe down, we started to see more desperate hoof balls from them rather than the composed play of the previous halves. Sheridan's stubborn resistance to deviate from 3-5-2 and ignorance to the extent of Reuben's injury ("he's injured? First I've heard of it") ultimately cost us in my opinion.

My biggest defense of Sheridan earlier in the season, when others were slating him, was that I truly believed he was trying to get us to play very attractive football and that with that kind of approach to a slick passing style of play results would click into place over the course of the season - however we regressed massively into a route one side over the latter half of the season. I held faith for so long, but in the end there's only so much shite you can put up with. The play off debacle all too much for me. I'll stick behind him if he stays, but make no mistake I'd sooner he was replaced (though not by just anyone).

Jeez - I needed a day or two to compose myself. Years spent on exeweb tends to leave you unprepared for intelligent tactical analysis, as opposed to learning all the variations of "your mum smells" known to man.

One thing that occurs to me is that if Wycombe were playing 4-3-3 it should have made them less able to double-up on attacking wide players which Sheridan could have exploited. However from what you lot say he seems to have been more concerned to keep his wingbacks withdrawn. I don't know whether that was due to innate caution, not trusting his defensive midfielders to provide security when the wing-backs are out of position, or whether Wycombe used the long diagonal ball from full-back into the opposite corner to pin your wing-backs in their own half.

I used to post on the old Football Forums site and there were a couple of (incredibly obnoxious) Chesgterfield fans who didn't like Sheridan and thought he was too conservative, which might explain things.

mouldyoldgoat wrote:

At the end of the day we lost and are not going to Wembley. We are in L2 next season.

Think yourselves lucky you don't have to work with loads of Wycombe fans!

Well knowing Wycombe I think myself lucky not to live there, if that's what you're getting at.

jabba the gut ecfc wrote:

SwimWithTheTide wrote:

Culmination of many things. Certainly Reuben's injury played its part in our decline, we lost our main outlet - as much as Reid doesn't like to play "the target man", his availability as a quick outlet from the back would have eased pressure over the season. As his injury worsened, the opposition's defensive duties eased. Lewis and Reid were renowned in the division for hurrying the opposition defense into making errors, barely giving them any time to compose themselves - but Lewis can only do so much, while Reuben (through no fault of his own) couldn't pull his weight. Reuben should have been allowed to fully recover after we beat you guys. 

Hartley and McHugh have both been playing through injury over recent weeks. Its the end of the season and those niggles are going to be getting fairly sore. Mellor likewise hasn't been 100% and that's probably reflected in his performances. I'm not sure if THD had any particular injury, but he regularly felt around his hamstring throughout games. But, our squad is more fit than most - certainly it showed in the two play off games that our energy levels were still high in the final 10 while Wycombe were running on fumes.

Its hard to pin down exactly what went wrong for us. In my opinion it was very much to do with Sheridan's over reliance on both Reuben and the 3-5-2 system. The system didn't work against some teams and it did others, less to do with the efforts of the players and more to do with how the opposition system coped with our own. Ainsworth set up with a 4-3-3, meaning we had 3 central defenders up against 1 leading striker. They matched us man for man in midfield. And they doubled up on our wingbacks to pin them right back. Of course that meant Reid and Lewis were effectively left one on one against the centre back pairing, but with our midfield 3 losing their individual battles and our wingbacks deeper than , its no surprise that the only supply our strikers received was from our centrebacks (usually Hartley) hoofing it down field. Shrewsbury played 4-4-2 against us I think? And 3-5-2 worked, we out numbered them in midfield which gift at least 1 midfield player the chance to shine and with two fit and energetic strikers the Shrews backline found themselves on the back foot. This in turn allowed our wingbacks to play with a bit more confidence and position themselves higher up the pitch. When we switched to 4-4-2 in the play off games, we stopped Wycombe bossing us totally on the flanks and provide our own attacks with a bit of width. O'Connor did an excellent job doing the defensive work and it allowed Bobby time in the middle to act as the midfield play maker he can. Our 4 attacking players were incredibly energetic and constantly chasing Wycombe down, we started to see more desperate hoof balls from them rather than the composed play of the previous halves. Sheridan's stubborn resistance to deviate from 3-5-2 and ignorance to the extent of Reuben's injury ("he's injured? First I've heard of it") ultimately cost us in my opinion.

My biggest defense of Sheridan earlier in the season, when others were slating him, was that I truly believed he was trying to get us to play very attractive football and that with that kind of approach to a slick passing style of play results would click into place over the course of the season - however we regressed massively into a route one side over the latter half of the season. I held faith for so long, but in the end there's only so much shite you can put up with. The play off debacle all too much for me. I'll stick behind him if he stays, but make no mistake I'd sooner he was replaced (though not by just anyone).

Jeez - I needed a day or two to compose myself. Years spent on exeweb tends to leave you unprepared for intelligent tactical analysis, as opposed to learning all the variations of "your mum smells" known to man.

One thing that occurs to me is that if Wycombe were playing 4-3-3 it should have made them less able to double-up on attacking wide players which Sheridan could have exploited. However from what you lot say he seems to have been more concerned to keep his wingbacks withdrawn. I don't know whether that was due to innate caution, not trusting his defensive midfielders to provide security when the wing-backs are out of position, or whether Wycombe used the long diagonal ball from full-back into the opposite corner to pin your wing-backs in their own half.

I used to post on the old Football Forums site and there were a couple of (incredibly obnoxious) Chesgterfield fans who didn't like Sheridan and thought he was too conservative, which might explain things.

I'm not sure if its totally caution on Sheridan's behalf, certainly reverting back to the 3-5-2 suggests a cautious approach to the second leg though. However, I feel its partly down to the limitations of our wingbacks. THD has all the ability, but little of the mental strength - excusable as he is 19, but our dependence on him a criticism of the figures in charge. Mellor is just fairly typical of the division, limited capability and totally inconsistent. Like you say, attacking wide players could have exploited space, but we didn't have any attacking wide players. Reuben or Lewi often drift out wide to compensate, but without a midfield that wants to approach the box it leaves options for the ball player limited and our attacks stale.

"Mental strength". There you have it. That's why we didn't win automatic promotion, that's why we bottled it in the play-offs.

Let's just consider the full backs Mellor and THD. There's no shortage of abiity in either (lovely first touch, able to run with the ball, sensible passing etc) but would you have either in place of Lee Hodges or David Worrell? I wouldn't - and I'd argue that the modern pair had loads more ability than the old pair.

Partly this comes down to experience, which in time will come to Mellor and THD, but mentally Hodges and Worrell were miles ahead.

And so it goes throughout the team. I'd argue RReid is a much better footballer, and certainly goal scorer, than Trigger but I'd have Trigger every time. Hartley is a leader of men and a winner? In context he probably is but give me Coughlan every time. O'Connor or Wotton? Wotton.

And in nearly every case I'd say the modern player was the more skilled and in nearly every case I'd take the Sturrock boy in preference.

Mental strength. That's the difference.

Or the modern day loan system whereby you are giving very young but talented academy boys an opportunity against solid good pro's with more limited ability but know their way around the block.

I remember in our promotion season getting battered by Southend and Trigger winning three free kicks in a row on the half way line following clearance punts out of our defence. Took the pressure off straight away.

We won 1-0 away from home midweek in winter.