vs Shrewsbury | Page 5 | Vital Football

vs Shrewsbury

After 17 games SE still doesn't know his preferred starting XI or formation. This division is average in quality and we're below average in it. Not convinced that this is what PS hired SE for, but doubt he can afford to change it even if he wanted to.
 
Last edited:
How's Roman doing on loan? Worth his being on the bench and putting on for 30 minutes perhaps?
 
Captainreblue said:
After 17 games SE still doesn't know his preferred starting XI or formation. This division is average in quality and we're below average in it. Not convinced that this is what PS hired SE for, but doubt he can afford to change it even if he wanted to.
Click to expand...

I hate being fair to SE but even if he is lying and he has a slightly higher budget than SL, we have lost two quality players in Eaves and Holy.

Bonham has 90% replaced Holy but we are very lightweight in attack where Eaves is badly missed.
 
Don't disagree ,GBN (although Holy was easier to replace than Eaves) but having brought in 15 players (?) since his arrival and to not have a preferred starting XI and preferred system after 17 games (plus pre season) is worrying IMO. It's not like he's even given players (other than the back 5) time to form partnerships and understanding and therefore a cohesive unit due to his constant chopping and changing of line ups and systems.

I don't have much sympathy, purely because (as SE said himself at the fans forum) its up too him to spend whatever budget he had wisely and make every penny count which he hasn't. He's brought in players that he now clearly feels are not better than we already have as half his normal starting line ups are made up of players already here, after stating he only wanted to bring in players better than we already had and to make the first XI stronger. IMO the whole set up just looks a bit 'throw the balls in the air and see where they land' type approach at the moment. There's seems to be no real game plan and continuity in what we're trying to do.

We're conceding an average of more than a goal a game, that in itself makes winning games difficult, without being poor/missing chances at the other end. Those two problems combined make it difficult to be anything other than strugglers.

Hanlon is a prime example, his work rate and attitude is brilliant, but he can't hit a barn door with a banjo at the moment (he's not and never will be a natural goalscorer) but he continues to get game time. Playing him is fine but SE then can't moan we keep missing chances because that's what he has proven to do.
 
Why do we decide that it's a bang average, or worse division every year. I looked at the teams for this year and it looked a tough league because there are teams with good budgets and resources and a few well run lesser clubs with decent squads. Who seriously believed/believes that we might comfortably gain as many points as Ipswich, Sunderland, Coventry, Peterborough, Burton, or Portsmouth. Oxford and Fleetwood have surprised a little but are good teams and Wycombe have really surprised. Doncaster may be slowly recovering from play off disappointment.

There are a few very poor sides and Bolton started minus 12. If those facts were not in play we might be more aware of how hard we need to compete to match the average standard. Disappointed not to hold on to a lead last night but for heavens sake we got a point. In my opinion the fault is not Hanlan, who can unsettle experienced defenders, that is the problem. Our real problem is that our other front men are woefully inexperienced at this level (Mandron), or at any level (Jakubiak & Ndjoli). We have taken an enforced gamble on these players and it remains to be seen how long they will be given.
 
We have won 3 games all season, two of which were against very poor sides. We have lost or drawn from winning positions 5 times in the league. We haven't won a single game away all season. We lost to a league 2 side at home in the league cup with their reserve side out v our first team. He is statistically at the moment worse than Lovell, Pennock and Taylor. And he doesn't have a clue what his best 11 is.

I don't care how anyone wants to dress it up: the above is very poor.

We may well have played well - but so did Stimson's team of 09, it counts for nothing if we can't get results.

Couple this with the fact that Evans thinks we deserved to win every game except Oxford, and his true to form antics on the touchline against Ipswich and Tranmere to name but a few and it wears very thin, very easily.

We all know nothing will change if we replace him, as the root problem is Penfold - but I still to this day do not understand why we brought in such a divisive figure if we were not going to give him the requisite tools to do a decent job.

But at the moment he isn't even doing an average job.
 
Last edited:
Wayne.Kerr said:
We've been blessed for some time with midfielders, who are reasonably competent but none could be described as either defensive, 'water carriers' or creative. For example, when De Bruyne is not scoring he's making passes for the strikers to latch on to either to feet or into space.
Click to expand...
Hopefully we will make a move for De Bruyne in January
 
I didn't go last night so can't comment on this particular performance.

It's a concern that we can't hang on to a lead, particularly when we are't scoring enough goals. Pulis and Martin Allen were masters in grinding out results even if the style wasn't so easy on the eye.

Are we too (mentally) fragile?

The Evens blame game has started- touchline row with Ipswich and blaming the ref in our last two games. Still, at least he's not mentioned the budget.

Looking at the forwards we've signed- Ndjoli, Jakubiak, Mandrom and none of them are natural goal scorers and neither is Hanlon regardless of the effort he puts in. Personally I'd have rather kept List (and not signed Ndjoli) though he wasn't without his faults and I'm not saying he would be our saviour.
 
jogills said:
Why do we decide that it's a bang average, or worse division every year. I looked at the teams for this year and it looked a tough league because there are teams with good budgets and resources and a few well run lesser clubs with decent squads. Who seriously believed/believes that we might comfortably gain as many points as Ipswich, Sunderland, Coventry, Peterborough, Burton, or Portsmouth. Oxford and Fleetwood have surprised a little but are good teams and Wycombe have really surprised. Doncaster may be slowly recovering from play off disappointment.

There are a few very poor sides and Bolton started minus 12. If those facts were not in play we might be more aware of how hard we need to compete to match the average standard. Disappointed not to hold on to a lead last night but for heavens sake we got a point. In my opinion the fault is not Hanlan, who can unsettle experienced defenders, that is the problem. Our real problem is that our other front men are woefully inexperienced at this level (Mandron), or at any level (Jakubiak & Ndjoli). We have taken an enforced gamble on these players and it remains to be seen how long they will be given.
Click to expand...

Personally I have based my assessment that it's a poor division on what I've seen with my own eyes - obviously this is just one of those teams matches, but they can't have all been off days.

I've now seen all of the top three and I've not been impressed with any of them - we beat Wycombe comfortably; Ipswich and Peterborough were lucky to come away with wins from Priestfield with wins - were it not for our toothless attack, we'd have at least surely at least drawn with them, without playing that well ourselves. Blackpool, who were top at the time and are still going well, admittedly played some good stuff after they went 2-0 down, but we should have buried them prior to that. Cov, who were also top or thereabouts when we played them and still going well, played some pretty stuff, but created even less clear cut chances than us in our match v them, which is saying something. Bristol Rovers are only a point outside the playoffs and were terrible. At the bottom, Bury have gone, Bolton, besides their deduction, are a mess as are Southend. I guess there is an argument to make that bar the bottom two, there is not a lot between top and bottom, but for me that is more to do with the standard of those teams at the top - I've seen nothing like Sunderland, Luton, Barnsley and Peterborough (from last season) who played us off of the park last season. at Priestfield
 
You talk a lot of football sense Steve but you call it an average, or poor division every season. You did so last season though you now acknowledge four good teams from last year. Peterborough look to be better than last year too.
 
SteveTreacle said:
Personally I have based my assessment that it's a poor division on what I've seen with my own eyes - obviously this is just one of those teams matches, but they can't have all been off days.

I've now seen all of the top three and I've not been impressed with any of them - we beat Wycombe comfortably; Ipswich and Peterborough were lucky to come away with wins from Priestfield with wins - were it not for our toothless attack, we'd have at least surely at least drawn with them, without playing that well ourselves. Blackpool, who were top at the time and are still going well, admittedly played some good stuff after they went 2-0 down, but we should have buried them prior to that. Cov, who were also top or thereabouts when we played them and still going well, played some pretty stuff, but created even less clear cut chances than us in our match v them, which is saying something. Bristol Rovers are only a point outside the playoffs and were terrible. At the bottom, Bury have gone, Bolton, besides their deduction, are a mess as are Southend. I guess there is an argument to make that bar the bottom two, there is not a lot between top and bottom, but for me that is more to do with the standard of those teams at the top - I've seen nothing like Sunderland, Luton, Barnsley and Peterborough (from last season) who played us off of the park last season. at Priestfield
Click to expand...

I also can’t really comment on the individual games. But could the fact we were hammered by the top sides last year but not this year be because we are better, not them worse?

After all, in their other games, Ipswich, Donny, Wycombe, Peterboro, Oxford (recently) etc have all been pretty dominant. And both Pompey and Sunderland will probably “come good” because I think their squads look pretty similar and as strong as last season?
 
jogills said:
You talk a lot of football sense Steve but you call it an average, or poor division every season. You did so last season though you now acknowledge four good teams from last year. Peterborough look to be better than last year too.
Click to expand...

I didn't think it was a great division last season, but I've seen even less to impress me this season. To be fair, Peterborough on Saturday looked better than the team who fortuitously beat us at their place late in the season, but I was far more impressed with their team who came to Priestfield before Christmas who beat us (I think 4-2). We made a game of it in the second half, but were well beaten and (I think) a certain Mr Evans was still in charge of them then!
 
Bromley_GFC said:
Just listened to Evans post match comments and he's reverted to type blaming the ref as he did on Saturday, too.

Apparently Evans felt we should have had 2 more penalties and was quite patronising about a young ref 'learning his trade' so to speak. SE also went on to say the away fans last night would have been scratching their hands how we didn't win the match.

Can anyone who was there clarify if SE is correct with his comments or telling porkies like his previous history might suggest?
Click to expand...

I saw it on IFollow, although didn't see every second of it, so may have missed the two other penalty incidents, but I didn't miss much, so would be surprised if I missed both! I didn't see them, but I did see what looked like a clear sending off for one of their defenders in a "last man"/"preventing a goal scoring opportunity" scenario. Even Lloydie thought it was nailed one.... I didn't think the ref on Saturday was great - was far too easily conned and didn't stamp down on Peterborouugh''s diving and play acting and was inconcisent with his use of the advantage on one occasion, correctly allowing Peterborough to play on and pulling it back when it fizzled out but not applying the same to us (for a foul on Lee, I think) - but I can't recall any majorly bad decisions either way.
 
SteveTreacle said:
Even Lloydie thought it was nailed one....
Click to expand...

Yes, but if I remember rightly, Peter Lloyd and the other commentator were also convinced that it was Beckles (who had already been booked) who committed the foul, despite the fact Beckles is black and the player who committed the foul (Giles) is white.

You've seen red cards given for incidents like that, but there was a defender coming across, Beckles, I think it was, so I reckon the yellow was about right.
 
Ok we definitely need a finisher and personally I would like for Mandron to be given a go, but even so thought we should have won last night, the ref wasn’t strong, and that foul was more red than yellow, are we ever going to get a ref biased in our favour.
 
Captainreblue said:
Don't disagree ,GBN (although Holy was easier to replace than Eaves) but having brought in 15 players (?) since his arrival and to not have a preferred starting XI and preferred system after 17 games (plus pre season) is worrying IMO. It's not like he's even given players (other than the back 5) time to form partnerships and understanding and therefore a cohesive unit due to his constant chopping and changing of line ups and systems.

I don't have much sympathy, purely because (as SE said himself at the fans forum) its up too him to spend whatever budget he had wisely and make every penny count which he hasn't. He's brought in players that he now clearly feels are not better than we already have as half his normal starting line ups are made up of players already here, after stating he only wanted to bring in players better than we already had and to make the first XI stronger. IMO the whole set up just looks a bit 'throw the balls in the air and see where they land' type approach at the moment. There's seems to be no real game plan and continuity in what we're trying to do.

We're conceding an average of more than a goal a game, that in itself makes winning games difficult, without being poor/missing chances at the other end. Those two problems combined make it difficult to be anything other than strugglers.

Hanlon is a prime example, his work rate and attitude is brilliant, but he can't hit a barn door with a banjo at the moment (he's not and never will be a natural goalscorer) but he continues to get game time. Playing him is fine but SE then can't moan we keep missing chances because that's what he has proven to do.
Click to expand...
The same could be said of Sterling, he also lashed at everything, Hanlan will come good.
 
sunnyinkent said:
Ok we definitely need a finisher and personally I would like for Mandron to be given a go, but even so thought we should have won last night, the ref wasn’t strong, and that foul was more red than yellow, are we ever going to get a ref biased in our favour.
Click to expand...
Why should a referee be biased in our favour?Given he is not biased anyway. And the simple fact that he has a jock yelling abuse at him for 90 minutes is really going to help him favour us.
 
Nobby Taking aside any abuse. Am I more or less likely to get a policeman to make a decision in my favour if I yell abuse?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.