Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 21, 2024, 10:05:24 am

Login with username, password and session length

Links


FSA logo

Author Topic: The case for the defence  (Read 3320 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

big fat yorkshire pudding

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 13552
The case for the defence
« on September 15, 2012, 09:18:12 pm by big fat yorkshire pudding »
Very good today I thought. We had to defend a lot of high stuff late on and did it superbly. Massive difference to last year and a huge factor in our win today.

Still much to work on attack wise and on the ball but an improvement today defensively.



(want to hide these ads? Join the VSC today!)

Red wizard

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 2076
Re: The case for the defence
« Reply #1 on September 15, 2012, 09:33:48 pm by Red wizard »
Tbf i think we have defended well all season. 4-3-3 suited us better today imo. M Woods looked better in a 3. Keegan played well although a few bad passes but he breaks up play and gets stuck in.

hoolahoop

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 10269
Re: The case for the defence
« Reply #2 on September 15, 2012, 09:42:04 pm by hoolahoop »
Tbf i think we have defended well all season. 4-3-3 suited us better today imo. M Woods looked better in a 3. Keegan played well although a few bad passes but he breaks up play and gets stuck in.

Do you think DS will employ a  4-3-3 on Tuesday Wizzie ? Sounds to me as if it could work against a fairly toothless Blunts attack .

dickos1

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 16912
Re: The case for the defence
« Reply #3 on September 15, 2012, 10:08:30 pm by dickos1 »
Today, probably because we were away we looked more like a 4-5-1 especially when they had the ball. I felt we sat back after we scored the first which caused us a lot of problems, if we'd have stayed on the front foot we could have got 2 or 3 more because they were all over the place.
Sheff u will be a different proposition with Gallagher, kitson etc, they will be dangerous going forward and I fear we will sit too deep.
Special mention for brown today he was outstanding up front holding the ball up and bringing people into play.
Concerned at Bennett struggled last 2 games, cotterill was good today

Red wizard

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 2076
Re: The case for the defence
« Reply #4 on September 15, 2012, 10:16:07 pm by Red wizard »
Tbf i think we have defended well all season. 4-3-3 suited us better today imo. M Woods looked better in a 3. Keegan played well although a few bad passes but he breaks up play and gets stuck in.

Do you think DS will employ a  4-3-3 on Tuesday Wizzie ? Sounds to me as if it could work against a fairly toothless Blunts attack .
I think 4-5-1,4-3-3 is the way forward for us. We lack pace at the back so we have to defend deeper. 3 cm with 1 sitting helps that as Keegan did today. There was 3 lads in front of me slating Keegan, they must be seeing somthing i don't as i thought he was superb. Cotts had is best game and Hubby came on for Bennett and did well. I do think this team fight for each other and Deano will only bring in players of that attitude. We never had that last year.

dickos1

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 16912
Re: The case for the defence
« Reply #5 on September 15, 2012, 10:29:20 pm by dickos1 »
Agreed Keegan was good today, husband loves a tackle doesn't he.
Also the number of headers jones/Mccombe won today was frightening

roverstillidie91

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 2121
Re: The case for the defence
« Reply #6 on September 15, 2012, 10:52:38 pm by roverstillidie91 »
Happy to hear saunders has changed to a 4-3-3

Hope he sticks with it, we never look right playing 4-4-2 to be honest

Retdon1

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 3212
Re: The case for the defence
« Reply #7 on September 15, 2012, 11:20:31 pm by Retdon1 »
Keegan is pants he carnt pass simple as that we need better quality in centre mid I think idd give harper a start on Tuesday night

Chrisd_123

  • Newbie
Re: The case for the defence
« Reply #8 on September 15, 2012, 11:31:03 pm by Chrisd_123 »
I also thought Keegan did well in there today. He's never gonna be hitting 40 yard passes like Stock used to but he's a worker and does the simple things right.

While we're mentioning how well we defended today can I just give a mention to Gary Woods. Today he played like we've been looking for him to perform for ages. He came and caught everything today including a fantastic punch near the end and judging by Rob Jones' comments after the game, the defence noticed this too! Well played Gary!

jonnydog

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 5003
Re: The case for the defence
« Reply #9 on September 15, 2012, 11:58:55 pm by jonnydog »
I think G. Woods' last few performances have been much improved. Hopefully he'll keep it up, continue to develop and get better, then hopefully some fans may lay off him a bit.

RoversAlias

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 11889
Re: The case for the defence
« Reply #10 on September 16, 2012, 12:30:14 am by RoversAlias »
Aye if this is him coming on and developing into the keeper we need then it's great news. I did have a go at him a fair few times last season but so far this season, excusing friendlies I have had nothing but praise for him and the way he has played.

Sammy Chung was King

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 9676
Re: The case for the defence
« Reply #11 on September 16, 2012, 01:27:31 am by Sammy Chung was King »
Keegan has limitations,though most holding midfielder's do,fans never appreciate the fella ,who wins the ball and plays a two yard pass,away from home if we play with that extra man in midfield,there's plenty of solidity,and with the two wingers supporting the lone front man,we should be okay going forward,he's maybe found his formula for away,against Yeovil the side was set up too open,we'v e beat a very decent side today,who will be hard to break down,i'd say a middle of the table team Colchester,to be fair though i've got Walsall as a struggling team,but the bits i've seen of them,they look a decent side,so our result look's better and better,well done lad's let's climb up that table :scarf:

pubteam

  • Newbie
Re: The case for the defence
« Reply #12 on September 16, 2012, 02:19:32 am by pubteam »
Thought Saunders got it right today. We were overrun in midfield in the second half at Yeovil until Harper was introduced. We found it much easier to control the middle of the park with Keegan in there today, who did a very impressive job of breaking up their attacks.

Agree on the defence as well. The whole back four, plus the goalkeeper, played impeccably for the vast majority of the game. Jones didn't miss anything in the air or on the floor, and McCombe was much better than last time out. Thought Quinn had his best game for us as well.

big fat yorkshire pudding

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 13552
Re: The case for the defence
« Reply #13 on September 16, 2012, 06:55:13 am by big fat yorkshire pudding »
I should have mentioned woods too. Solid again and he's done very well this season. He's learning now and we should stick with him. he'll make mistakes a few times all keepers do, but he has confidence in his defence and they seem to have confidence in him now. Thought his stature when Sears got though was good made himself big and hard to beat.

Donnywolf

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 20431
Re: The case for the defence
« Reply #14 on September 16, 2012, 07:36:08 am by Donnywolf »
My only criticism of G Woods was that he was still "daft" to get a stupid yellow Card with 10 seconds to go

He had witnessed a pompous performance by a Referee applying the letter of the law (for more see Rate the Ref) for over 92 minutes and yet when the Ref ran towards him and gestured for him to speed things at a goal kick (and a clear NO MORE sign) he simply picked up the ball and moved it to the other side of the goal

Result a needless Yellow

Tazemma

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 103
Re: The case for the defence
« Reply #15 on September 16, 2012, 07:53:28 am by Tazemma »
Poor Gary Woods, not the biggest fan but to have a go at him for getting booked is harsh. He was after all trying t run te clock down.

He is never going to serve a suspension is he?

Not Now Kato

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 3087
Re: The case for the defence
« Reply #16 on September 16, 2012, 08:45:55 am by Not Now Kato »
Poor Gary Woods, not the biggest fan but to have a go at him for getting booked is harsh. He was after all trying t run te clock down.

He is never going to serve a suspension is he?

Had a great game for us, his positioning was excellent nd certainly kept us in the game when they were pressing hard after pulling level.
 
The booking was stupid though, and completely pointless.  He must surely have known that in addition to the booking the ref would simply add more time on to compensate - which indeed he did.

donnybel

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 129
Re: The case for the defence
« Reply #17 on September 16, 2012, 09:08:50 am by donnybel »
Nice to see Gary getting better with an experienced, keen to win and encouraging defense in front of him.  I think he will come good now.  Rob Jones amazes me, when you listen to him talk it's like he's been here for ever. He's just what we've needed for a couple seasons, a proper leader.

DRFCSouth

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 804
Re: The case for the defence
« Reply #18 on September 16, 2012, 09:15:00 am by DRFCSouth »
I think we should remember his age as well, only 21. Keepers get better over time, many to me being better towards their latter years.

Donnywolf

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 20431
Re: The case for the defence
« Reply #19 on September 16, 2012, 09:22:52 am by Donnywolf »
Poor Gary Woods, not the biggest fan but to have a go at him for getting booked is harsh. He was after all trying t run te clock down.

He is never going to serve a suspension is he?

Who knows ?

I do stand by what I said whether it is judged as harsh or not. Anyone at the game could have predicted what the Ref would do though once he said enough to Woods

He also did an imitation of Sulli when catching a routine cross and then diving to the floor to kill time. That looked amusing but did run down the Clock in a more legitamate and non "bookable" way so that should be his way to do so in future when we have a Ref like yesterday


Colin C No.3

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 4264
Re: The case for the defence
« Reply #20 on September 16, 2012, 09:54:55 am by Colin C No.3 »
Keegan is pants he carnt pass simple as that we need better quality in centre mid I think idd give harper a start on Tuesday night
Translations on a postcard please.

Red wizard

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 2076
Re: The case for the defence
« Reply #21 on September 16, 2012, 11:10:41 am by Red wizard »
Keegan is pants he carnt pass simple as that we need better quality in centre mid I think idd give harper a start on Tuesday night
Pants my backside.. If we had him in the team last year we may have had a better chance. He is no Brain Stock and never will be nor will Brain Stock ever do the job Keegan does. He was there every time for the easy ball to keep possesion. Granted he gave it away a few times but he also won it  and broke up the counter attacks a few times. Had a great game imo as he did against Hull.

pubteam

  • Newbie
Re: The case for the defence
« Reply #22 on September 16, 2012, 12:39:35 pm by pubteam »
Keegan is pants he carnt pass simple as that we need better quality in centre mid I think idd give harper a start on Tuesday night

Not sure what game you were watching yesterday. Keegan was excellent and arguably Man of the Match in my eyes. He broke up play brilliantly just in front of the back four, and his distribution was much better than what we've seen in the past. Of the three central midfielders, Keegan was probably the one who was the most successful in picking out a team mate with his passes.

It worked a treat having Keegan in there for me. I was surprised to see him start, as I had expected Harper to play in there, but in the end he made all the difference. We got overrun in the middle of the park against Yeovil, but Keegan stopped that from happening yesterday.

Sammy Chung was King

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 9676
Re: The case for the defence
« Reply #23 on September 17, 2012, 12:49:59 am by Sammy Chung was King »
With the attacking players we have,it is essential to have the breaking up players in the team,like Keegan and the two centre-halfs no frills,give the ball to a better player,very simple.

 

TinyPortal © 2005-2012