Did we get what we deserved?

[Viking Don]

For me yes. I'm fed up of seeing us dominate, take the lead then crawl back into our shells and try to hold on for the win. I've always hated sides that do that so early on in games. Fine if we take the lead with ten minutes to go but today we should have kept up the presuure and gone for the third hell for leather, we were battering them at that point and looked like we could score four or five.

Just my opinion, don't cry anyone.

[Dare to dream!]

Ever thought it might not be deliberate? It's sort of an unwritten law in football when a team goes in front. It's just a mentality shift in the players mind. You will see it every week, at any level, without a doubt. When a team go in front the other press and the knew in front sit back.

[Sammy Chung was King]

We didn't get far enough in front,and it just got dodgy at the end,you could sense a goal coming listening to the radio,we seemed to dominate,but for fifteen minute periods,Barnsley ''Rode the Storm'',and capitalised on a bit of tiredness at the end,we were slightly better than them most of the game,but superior only in short spells,i'd say the result was just about right,but i didn't see it,i only heard it,which sounds like a statement out of that cracker of a film ''See no Evil,Hear no Evil

[Viking Don]

I didn't see Liverpool doing that when they destroyed Arsenal the other week.

Teams low on confidence do it, teams needing points do it, so yes I think it's deliberate, we do it every bloody time, no matter how long is left.

[Surrey Rover]

I didn't see Liverpool doing that when they destroyed Arsenal the other week.

Teams low on confidence do it, teams needing points do it, so yes I think it's deliberate, we do it every bloody time, no matter how long is left.

Not quite sure how that theory fits into the 3-0 wins over Charlton and Wigan, that said I agree with you on yesterdays match we sat too deep. I also thought we were negative at Brighton and should have been prepared to commit more players forward now we have a solid defence in place.

[dickos1]

I didn't see Liverpool doing that when they destroyed Arsenal the other week.

Teams low on confidence do it, teams needing points do it, so yes I think it's deliberate, we do it every bloody time, no matter how long is left.

A bit of a nonsense to say we do it every time,
When a side is 2-1 down its obvious that they're going to be on top for the last 10-15 mins.
It's not deliberate , you could see Dickov was screaming at them to get up the pitch,

[Bentley Bullet]

Barnsley played like a team possessed fighting for their Championship lives. It literally WAS their cup final.

[hoolahoop]

I listened to the Barnsley commentary on Player and they didn't give their side a prayer in that 2nd. half and seemed amazed that we dropped back and allowed them to play after going 2-1 up.
We should have gone on and destroyed them from there on in ......fact is we went safety first hen it was obvious from the conditions, the type of play that produced both their goals that there wasa damn good chance that there would be a further opportunity.
Fact is Barnsley should have been 'dead and buried' before their substitutions !
Incidentally I have to praise the excellent commentary supplied by Barnsley Player ; I couldn't stand any more of that incessant prattling on and abuse of the English language supplied by our commentators.

[steve@dcfd]

It changed when they brought on the number seven. He ran the midfield when he came on and our midfield players could not get near him. Wrong decision yet again by PD bringing on Cotterill we should have brought on DeVal and put Furman on the number seven. We were winning and should have shut out the game. PD's tactic nous comes into question if it's not 442 then he struggles to change it.

[mrfrostsdad]

To be honest, I think you're doing the Dingles a disservice.
They could have been 2 goals up (SHOULD have been 2 goals up - game over) and after they went behind I thought they played really well.
Proswiczh looked decent and O'Brien looked really good when he came on. In the end I was happy with a point and we deserved no more. Yes, we should have had a penalty, but having seen it in telly, D'Arso didn't see it.
Funnily enough, there were a lot of Dingles fans sat near me who said it was the worst they'd played all season

[hoolahoop]

I take it that neither of the 2 linesman saw it either then !! Were they all looking the wrong way/wearing blindfolds that was an obvious penalty....as obvious as they get and all the officials missed it/didn't give a feck/had headphone problems. Time some of these linesmen did their job!
I agree that Barnsley deserved their draw but it should never have been that way the game should have been won before the substitutions were both made by them.
As inspired as those sub's by Barnsley undoubtedly were , they would have proved ineffective against a team capable of delivering the hammer blow.

[Donnywolf]

To be honest, I think you're doing the Dingles a disservice.
They could have been 2 goals up (SHOULD have been 2 goals up - game over) and after they went behind I thought they played really well.
Proswiczh looked decent and O'Brien looked really good when he came on. In the end I was happy with a point and we deserved no more. Yes, we should have had a penalty, but having seen it in telly, D'Arso didn't see it.
Funnily enough, there were a lot of Dingles fans sat near me who said it was the worst they'd played all season

I do too ... they should really have gone 2 up. True we could (should) have had a Pen but it still has to be converted ... remember Martin Woods SJP ?

They fell back more and more in first half and a howler allowed a Copps Tap Inn

When we went 2 - 1 up I thought we would get 3 or even 4 (ps did you see "them" sneaking out when it went 2-1 - why bother going to a game and leaving with more than a third of it left)

I was wrong and their Number 7 was everywhere and in my neck of the woods we were saying an equaliser was on the cards because we were not going forwards and asking the questions but dropping back more and more and inviting pressure

It gave no pleasure at all to be proved right - and especially the poor defending that ultimately cost us a goal. Amazingly they speeded up even more as they knew 5 minutes extra time were coming up and "fancied it"

The only thing that mitigated my disappointment was the fact that hundreds of Tykes missed to equaliser as they were probably already at home   

[mrfrostsdad]

Hoola,
According to Dickov, the 4th official immediately told D'Arso it was a penalty on his voice link but he chose to ignore it/did not hear him.

I've seen the highlights now, and they are 4 of the scrappiest/poorest goals I've even seen. Absolute shambolic defending for all 4. We could have cleared the ball for their second so many times. We had 3 players on the scorer and mot one got a challenge in. Awful

[hoolahoop]

Hoola,
According to Dickov, the 4th official immediately told D'Arso it was a penalty on his voice link but he chose to ignore it/did not hear him.

I've seen the highlights now, and they are 4 of the scrappiest/poorest goals I've even seen. Absolute shambolic defending for all 4. We could have cleared the ball for their second so many times. We had 3 players on the scorer and mot one got a challenge in. Awful

Why would D'Arsole choose to ignore it or talk to his linos ?
I agree that all 4 goals were shambolic and that is exact
ly why both teams are in a relegation battle. Even by non- league level standards you would be extremely disappointed if your side gifted the opponents any of them.
Both teams need to wake up , practise the basics if either of them wants another season at this level. Rovers have no excuse given the combined experience of their back four especially !

[BigH]

It changed when they brought on the number seven. He ran the midfield when he came on and our midfield players could not get near him. Wrong decision yet again by PD bringing on Cotterill we should have brought on DeVal and put Furman on the number seven. We were winning and should have shut out the game. PD's tactic nous comes into question if it's not 442 then he struggles to change it.

Agree. I thought that the decision to bring on Cotterill was bizarre. I can only think that PD thought that Barnsley chasing the game would open things up and give us more space upfront. Some would say it was a bold move. I'd call it naive. It left us with a team of 3 wide men, 1 target man, 2 defensive midfielders and a back 4. No wonder we were caught playing too deep. Surely, if ever there was a time to try and beef up midfield while keeping the attacking outlets open this was it. I can only presume that there is something badly wrong with De Val, but what it is I don't know.

[hoolahoop]

It changed when they brought on the number seven. He ran the midfield when he came on and our midfield players could not get near him. Wrong decision yet again by PD bringing on Cotterill we should have brought on DeVal and put Furman on the number seven. We were winning and should have shut out the game. PD's tactic nous comes into question if it's not 442 then he struggles to change it.

Agree. I thought that the decision to bring on Cotterill was bizarre. I can only think that PD thought that Barnsley chasing the game would open things up and give us more space upfront. Some would say it was a bold move. I'd call it naive. It left us with a team of 3 wide men, 1 target man, 2 defensive midfielders and a back 4. No wonder we were caught playing too deep. Surely, if ever there was a time to try and beef up midfield while keeping the attacking outlets open this was it. I can only presume that there is something badly wrong with De Val, but what it is I don't know.

Great post and I have to agree entirely. They were there for the taking and De Val would also imo been the better substitution. I can only think that our manager was hoping for a Cotterill " special" ?

[Tokyos Boot]

I was incredibly disappointed walking away from the ground, theres no way in hell we should have allowed a team as crap as that get a point out of us...

But then in hindsight i felt like it is another point gained, and another game undefeated at the KMS - i suppose it is all about where our priorities lie this season.

We absolutely approached the final third with a negative attitude, i don't know why PD or any of the players think it is a good approach at all - how many times have we tried (and failed) to shut out games. Both Wigan games we sacrificed more points to try to play safe and i felt just as frustrated then!

Granted they had a few more unlucky moment, and as crap as they were - we weren't much better but is it really our ambitions now to wheeze out as many points as possible instead of going for broke when the momentums with us?

As for De Val - i don't understand why people can't just let it lie... he obviously isn't deemed good enough by the manager and coaching staff, he must be a dud with an exotic name. I trust the staff know more about who is first team quality than i do!

[BigColSutherland]

We absolutely approached the final third with a negative attitude, i don't know why PD or any of the players think it is a good approach at all - how many times have we tried (and failed) to shut out games. Both Wigan games we sacrificed more points to try to play safe and i felt just as frustrated then!

Didn't we beat Wigan 3-0?

[Tokyos Boot]

Sorry i meant both the Wigan (away) and Brighton... there are loads of other games this season we've done the same though.

Just listened to PD's interview and at least he's quick to wash his hands of this approach, but how can he get the players to stop trying to consolidate on victories!

[steve@dcfd]

Sorry i meant both the Wigan (away) and Brighton... there are loads of other games this season we've done the same though.

Just listened to PD's interview and at least he's quick to wash his hands of this approach, but how can he get the players to stop trying to consolidate on victories!

We were forced back because Barnsley brought on O'Brien (7) and he changed the game at that point and they then brought on McCourt who was more direct than Woods.