Aylesbury Football Club
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.
Aylesbury Football Club

The Moles


You are not connected. Please login or register

St Neots........

+2
DB
mikefarquharson
6 posters

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

1St Neots........ Empty St Neots........ Sat Aug 20, 2011 6:21 pm

mikefarquharson

mikefarquharson

Back from the game and not really that disappointed as I think big spending St Neots will be challenging for the title this year BUT am disappointed that the squad looked really thin today. Not happy that Jamie decided the V Festival was a better option that playing, I know Denilson had other commitments and so did ricky but Bertie as a replacement is just not good enough, simple as that and where is Flood? We actually had an opportunity today at only one down and with their keeper off but we didn't really seem to know how to put his replacement under pressure.... anyway onto Tuesday

2St Neots........ Empty Re: St Neots........ Sat Aug 20, 2011 6:32 pm

Guest


Guest

On about 88 mins and at 2-0 down their keeper fluffed a ball when challenged by our atttackers but why hadn't we challenged him earlier? There were perhaps half a dozen corners and free kicks when we should have bullied, pushed and panicked him.

I wasn't expecting a great deal from today but typing now, I'm a little disappointed we didn't fight in the last 3rd because if we had, we may even have sneaked a point!

Agree with much of Mike's opinion that we were light up front but it doesn't take the world's most skilful forward to worry a nervous stand-in keeper and force him into mistakes.


Just as an edited add on: in the same way we are not happy that key players are missing, I am not sure if the club would be very happy if the attendance for a game was down cos me, Mike, Mr Fish and Wolves Bloke had gone to V Festival (avec flasks) to watch Eminem and the Arctic Monkeys. Works both ways, guys.



Last edited by trimmtrab on Sat Aug 20, 2011 10:55 pm; edited 2 times in total

3St Neots........ Empty Re: St Neots........ Sat Aug 20, 2011 7:26 pm

DB

DB

We've just played what is meant to be the best team in this league by a country mile with probably the weakest team that we will field(in the league) we all know we should have done better & we get beat 2-0 is that good or bad? Ricky must be due back soon chomping on elbows, now that really is a good thing. cheers

4St Neots........ Empty Re: St Neots........ Sun Aug 21, 2011 9:02 am

MH



Actually I am a bit more frustrated than you guys, and possibly a bit angrier as well, as today, whilst showing the huge chasm that exists between the NL haves and have nots I thought it was hugely disappointing performance and not because we had several players missing which we did, but both by the teams performance and as bad by the tactics employed which nine times out of ten will result in one thing...... defeat!

Before I sound off though lets give some credit where it's due first as I thought defensively we were relly good.
Lets be honest here their first goal was a real corker and whilst Mr Moores movement for the finish was truly first class-as to be fair it was all afternoon-and so it bloody should be-his second was a mistimed fluke that I think came off his nose and increddibly then bounced past and over our stranded keeper, that apart I thought the defence marshalled their forwards very well indeed, I truly did

Let's not forget who we were playing though, according to the bookmakers St Neots are 6/5 favourites to win the league and for one good reason, at this level they have shitloads of money, money that us and others can only dream of having!

Depending on who one listens to, Moore is the guy who was tranferred for anything between £10 & £15,000 and is reputedly on £1,000 a week wages!

This is the club one assumes because of the money they have at it's disposal,who managed to acquire on loan for the last couple of months last season and from Peterborough who are what, 5 maybe 6 steps up in footballs pyramid a winger who the year before was purchsed for a six figure sum from the conference and who one again assumes they would pay a lot of his wages to do. Could you ever see us doing that from say a club like Reading?

Obviously not everyone is on that sort of wonga but it wouldn't surprise me if their lowest paid player was on at least, in fact, thinking about it on more than our best paid player. So whilst perhaps on paper we might not have expected to win, we most certainly had the right to expect them collectively and to effectively compete...surely?

Offensively we were impotent, and I don't mean to be either critical of the manager or rude to Greg himself but what the f*** is he doing playing up front, he cant run anymore (and I dont mean literally I mean in closing down,working the channels etc) he cant dribble and he hasn't got the guile needed to create chances for himsel or for his fellow forward whose levels of ability were perhaps equally exposed????

Surely he would have better served the teams cause playing in the centre of midfield where his tackling,unquestioned commitment and wealth of experience would have at least had some effect and which would then have also allowed someone with more pace to move forward where they would have at least had half a sniff of unsettling the St Neots back four...or am I being illogical here?

That said I dont blame the two up front, in fact I have a lot of sympathy for them as the service they got all day was truly shocking. Some more cynical would perhaps even suggest non existent, and worse I am assuming it was in the main down to the shape of play and worse still I am assuming to instructions given?

If it wasn't why the hell did management not change things?

If we are to play a 4-4-2 formation which is absolutely fine then the midfield two have to get up and support. If pressing down one of the channels one of them can most certainly sit, but where in any tactic book does it mention having two holding players in a 4-4-2 who must not cross the half way line?

All afternoon both Keiran and Jack played ten yards in front of the back four and whilst one cant argue it gave the defence extra protection the decision to do so completely isolated the front two.
As a consequence when the guys up front did get the ball there was invariably no one to give it to. The wingers could have been an outlet but for some reason we starved the right wing and opted instead to channel moves down the left where in truth the lad. Bernie was it simply wasn't up to the task.

There was a huge midfield void all afternoon, worryingly the same void that appeared so many times last year where offensively no support was given, worse still again like so many times last year, when we did bring the ball forward, especially through the centre we always seemed to choose the wrong option, invariably we didn't even see the options!

Granted that can obviously happen to anyone, but in countering that acceptance, the ability to choose the correct ball is what makes players stand out, the ability to choose wisely, to create with vision, to pass with accuracy and to a bloody team mate are all attributes that were unfortunately not in evidence yesterday.

More frustrating still was that whilst certinly commanding in the air, St Neots were there to be got at, I really feel that, especially their two centre halves.

Oh yeah one other thing the midfield have to learn very quickly is to keep the ball moving. Time and time again we lost posession far too cheaply,resorted to far too many long balls particularly in the second half, hung on to the ball far to long and took ages to find a pass which in Jacks case was seemingly always over hit!
Whats wrong with a short pass, whats happened to the old cliched adage of play the way you're facing or playing the simple ball both are two really important ingredients our young lads have to learn, and quickly

As everyone in the ground knew, except it would appear those on the pitch, they had no substitute goalkeeper and yet in ninety minutes I cant remember one attempt of consequence on their goal, which to me just about summed the afternoon up

A really disapointing afternoon, a really frustrating afternoon and whilst yeah ,most out there were youngsters, they are playing against men and have to learn very quickly indeed that on the pitch no allowance whatsoever will be given because of their tender ages and no excuses allowed for that fact

But hey rant over, on to Tuesday where hopefully some of the absentees will be back and the boys can leave the pitch with a smile on their face....lets hope so anyway



Last edited by MH on Sun Aug 21, 2011 9:17 am; edited 1 time in total

5St Neots........ Empty Re: St Neots........ Sun Aug 21, 2011 9:16 am

mikefarquharson

mikefarquharson

The major positives so far so far this season though are the new keeper, far more assured than Smith last year and the back four/five, Parsons, Prosper, Stevens,Mealor and Meady have all been excellent and Kieran in the centre has found his ideal position . As has been said Its the strikers where the issue is.

6St Neots........ Empty Re: St Neots........ Sun Aug 21, 2011 9:23 am

MH



See my long puffed out summary Mike, it's easy to bemoan the forwards but at times like yesterday they also have to be given the ball into areas where they can then do some damage, too many times they aren't and yesterday was one of those times

As I also pointed out though and Ireally agree with you about the back four and keeper that collectively really do look solid which provides a real foundation to move forward from

7St Neots........ Empty Re: St Neots........ Sun Aug 21, 2011 9:29 am

mikefarquharson

mikefarquharson

Noted your comments on the forwards and you maybe proved right but I don't see Simon scoring many at all, Denilson on the other hand may

8St Neots........ Empty Re: St Neots........ Sun Aug 21, 2011 1:00 pm

Guest


Guest

mikefarquharson wrote:big spending St Neots

Game plans, tactical nouse and the bleedin obvious of sticking someone close to their stand in keeper cost nowt as they say oop North.

9St Neots........ Empty Re: St Neots........ Sun Aug 21, 2011 4:34 pm

DB

DB

http://www.stneotsfc.com/news

Some photos & piece on our place

10St Neots........ Empty Re: St Neots........ Sun Aug 21, 2011 6:15 pm

mrfish



Thought we could have taken bertie off earlier Scott in at the back and moved kev up front! Thats if Scott was in the squad as Jamie was supposed to have been at 11 if we can believe whats called out on the tannoy :scratch:Ps. say it plain Trimmtrab

11St Neots........ Empty Re: St Neots........ Sun Aug 21, 2011 6:38 pm

Imp



DB wrote:http://www.stneotsfc.com/news

Some photos & piece on our place



Conduct of Home Fans:
Very quiet. Haywood 18 (their mascot) who I actually thought was a rat, had to be corrected later to a mole. Shouldn’t it be a duck? Apparently these troublesome creatures undermine the pitch.
Surprised Rolling Eyes

12St Neots........ Empty Re: St Neots........ Mon Aug 22, 2011 11:57 am

DB

DB

Imp wrote:
DB wrote:http://www.stneotsfc.com/news

Some photos & piece on our place



Conduct of Home Fans:
Very quiet. Haywood 18 (their mascot) who I actually thought was a rat, had to be corrected later to a mole. Shouldn’t it be a duck? Apparently these troublesome creatures undermine the pitch.
Surprised Rolling Eyes

Nice bit of research,
Looking forward to seeing their St Neots mascot, shouldn't it be a giant arse?Apparently St Neots is filled with them !

13St Neots........ Empty Re: St Neots........ Mon Aug 22, 2011 12:06 pm

MH



DB wrote:
Imp wrote:
DB wrote:http://www.stneotsfc.com/news

Some photos & piece on our place



Conduct of Home Fans:
Very quiet. Haywood 18 (their mascot) who I actually thought was a rat, had to be corrected later to a mole. Shouldn’t it be a duck? Apparently these troublesome creatures undermine the pitch.
Surprised Rolling Eyes

Nice bit of research,
Looking forward to seeing their St Neots mascot, shouldn't it be a giant arse?Apparently St Neots is filled with them !

Spot on, it is staggering that when people or is this instance football supporters come into money how they change, both in attitude, memory and manners

Graceless and pompous spring readily to mind. Its probably why Man City supporters and Chelsea before them are, I wouldn't say reviled but universally unpopular

Sure they have got a very good set up, and yes, if they dont win the league by ten points then especially with their resources I guess most would viewed it as an embarassment, but perhaps their supporters who in the main I hve lways found to be really decent people could do well to remember where they were four five years ago, and appreciate that unlike them, other much smaller clubs will never be as fortunate and as such have to cut their cloth accordingly

Manners cost nothing do they

14St Neots........ Empty Re: St Neots........ Mon Aug 22, 2011 5:51 pm

Guest


Guest

MH wrote:

Graceless and pompous spring readily to mind. Its probably why Man City supporters ............. are, I wouldn't say reviled but universally unpopular



As a big City fan, I would say that the recent performances against Swansea and Bolton have produced flowing and at times beautiful football reflecting the amount of cash spent on the team. Sadly same could not be said for St Neots.

15St Neots........ Empty Re: St Neots........ Mon Aug 22, 2011 6:33 pm

Old Plumb

Old Plumb

Well said you two above, I decided to delete my post as I think I would have got banned, what a liberty he has taken when you look at their past history, c. u. down there, Bas.

16St Neots........ Empty Re: St Neots........ Mon Aug 22, 2011 6:51 pm

MH



trimmtrab wrote:
MH wrote:

Graceless and pompous spring readily to mind. Its probably why Man City supporters ............. are, I wouldn't say reviled but universally unpopular



As a big City fan, I would say that the recent performances against Swansea and Bolton have produced flowing and at times beautiful football reflecting the amount of cash spent on the team. Sadly same could not be said for St Neots.

Nothing could accurately reflect the amount of cash Man City has spent, and if it did they should be winning every game 6-0

As for them trying to cheat there way around UEFA's financial fair play rules by suggesting anyone would sponsor them for £400M shows how much class they still have, anyone other than a twenty year long inmate of the Colney Hatch home for the mentally impaired would try and suggest such a thing Smile

Class less they are just like the once friendly and once magnanamous St Neots supporters. Its almost certain they will win the league but with that attitude they wont win many friends doing so

17St Neots........ Empty Re: St Neots........ Mon Aug 22, 2011 6:57 pm

Guest


Guest

MH wrote:
trimmtrab wrote:
MH wrote:

Graceless and pompous spring readily to mind. Its probably why Man City supporters ............. are, I wouldn't say reviled but universally unpopular



As a big City fan, I would say that the recent performances against Swansea and Bolton have produced flowing and at times beautiful football reflecting the amount of cash spent on the team. Sadly same could not be said for St Neots.

Nothing could accurately reflect the amount of cash Man City has spent, and if it did they should be winning every game 6-0

As for them trying to cheat there way around UEFA's financial fair play rules by suggesting anyone would sponsor them for £400M shows how much class they still have, anyone other than a twenty year long inmate of the Colney Hatch home for the mentally impaired would try and suggest such a thing Smile

Class less they are just like the once friendly and once magnanamous St Neots supporters. Its almost certain they will win the league but with that attitude they wont win many friends doing so

.......and Liverpool, United, Chelsea have never spent over the odds to win titles and cups? Course they have, just that City have done it with a bigger wallet than all of them put together. Rant over. CTID.

18St Neots........ Empty Re: St Neots........ Mon Aug 22, 2011 6:59 pm

MH



trimmtrab wrote:
MH wrote:
trimmtrab wrote:
MH wrote:

Graceless and pompous spring readily to mind. Its probably why Man City supporters ............. are, I wouldn't say reviled but universally unpopular



As a big City fan, I would say that the recent performances against Swansea and Bolton have produced flowing and at times beautiful football reflecting the amount of cash spent on the team. Sadly same could not be said for St Neots.

Nothing could accurately reflect the amount of cash Man City has spent, and if it did they should be winning every game 6-0

As for them trying to cheat there way around UEFA's financial fair play rules by suggesting anyone would sponsor them for £400M shows how much class they still have, anyone other than a twenty year long inmate of the Colney Hatch home for the mentally impaired would try and suggest such a thing Smile

Class less they are just like the once friendly and once magnanamous St Neots supporters. Its almost certain they will win the league but with that attitude they wont win many friends doing so

.......and Liverpool, United, Chelsea have never spent over the odds to win titles and cups? Course they have, just that City have done it with a bigger wallet than all of them put together. Rant over. CTID.

Yeah buit whatever you do, under no circumstances bite!!!! lol!

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum