Late late Scunny thread
 

:) First half thought we bossed the game and unlucky not to go in at half time at least 2 goals to the good,How the ref mist that hand ball i'll never know,nice to see jimmy back although not for long :rolleyes: young Guthrie played well as did the team as a whole,second half just could seem to get going and pinned back for most ,thought the ref and main stand liner were awful for almost the 90 mins

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

Agree with most of that mab; all except for the part about the referee and the liner. I thought the standard of officiating was good enough for the majority of the game. The penalty looked very dubious to me from my angle (just looked as if their player was out-muscled rather than fouled), but I'd have to see it again.

Positives from the game: Our first-half confidence, spirit and organisation. The partnership between Kevin Long and Kern 'the Colonel' Millar, Luke Joyce's midfield domination and Kurtis Guthrie's first half performance.

Negatives: Almost everything else. Kevin McIntyre is not a full-back. On the ball he is good, he tackles well, but his positioning is absolutely awful in that role; always drifting inside. The Iron's right winger could've built a car park in the amount of space he was given down that flank. Our attacking three playing behind the striker were completely ineffective. Barnett is a central player playing out of position; he is unwilling to track back on the flanks or interchange with the others in the three. Lindfield is still a novice at this system and manages to get himself isolated regularly but did work hard. Craney is a country mile off the pace and even failing in his distribution. Guthrie was knackered in the second half due to a) his lack of match fitness to league football standard and b) the failure of the aforementioned attacking players to give him service. Coley's subs were laughable.

We desperately need two attacking midfield players that can push for starts, not just cover. On that note, I believe it was a big mistake to let go of Parkinson.

Lots learned from that tie for the league campaign.

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

thought we took first half no question,scunny only really had that header, guthrie started ok but faded, has much to learn, but shows promise, thought Craney looked like he ate all the pies,very poor. second half scunny showed why they were in the championship, n bossed the game,Highlight for me Deano's tackle on Jimmy.:D Lowpoint, once again no subs until 2/3 mins to go, n then i reckon only cos scunny had scored.:( we needed freshning up much sooner. overall defence looked good, very lightweight up front, need another option, my thoughts won't break any pots this season,but certainly won't be in danger. if i'm right that'll do me.:)

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

Agreed with all that Cashy,which worries me a little bit!!!.
Although he grafted in the first half,Gutherie missed 3 great chances in the first 10 minutes,I hope he gets his first league goal soon as you cant expect to win games being so wasteful.Indeed he wasnt the only one,both craney and craig were the same.
The game changed when we stopped playing it from the back,and went long via the keepers boot(it wasnt the players who changed it ,all the main stand heard the instructions!).
Subs should of been made earlier,as at least 5 players"died" with 25 mins to go.
The left back just got more and more exposed as the midfield tired and struggled to help him.
Positives,we looked good when playing it from the back,we created enough chances to win 2 games,and once again defended ok.
PS anyone see Grant headbutt Deano and then shout the ref!!,big tough lad is our granty,knowing he had already been booked.
Will be interesting if they ever bump into each other socially outside football

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

Oh i can talk sense.................sometimes.:D

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

To be frank probably better off out of it wi such a small squad, no good hoping fer a big tie that might never come.

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

We had more of the play in the first half but unfortunately Lindfield and Guthrie couldnt capitalise on our chances. Both dont look ready for this just yet and its going to be a problem not having reserve games to get the practice in. We still need a striker that can do the job and hold his own. Defence is looking strong so there are some positives but without new signings for midfield/strikers I think it will be a long season.

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

You sure:confused::confused::confused::confused::D

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

Quote PS anyone see Grant headbutt Deano and then shout the ref!!,big tough lad is our granty,knowing he had already been booked.


I saw that as it happened right in front of me. There was a bit of a tussle between the two beforehand, which led to the head-butt.

Their pen was definitely correct - reckless challenge!

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

Considering the step up he's made I thought young Guthrie showed a lot of promise. He obviously lacks experience but that will come with time.Definatley need another forward or attacking midfield player to help him out or even replace him some games. Sometimes you need to learn from the bench . Scunthorpe definatley stepped it up in the second half.

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

Agree with that owd bob,and the young lad will learn from that,the striker was going away from goal and there was no need to try and win it.
It was one of them situations were sometimes you get them,sometimes you dont,he just showed his inexperience against a good forward,who upto that,played him well.
As for Grant,i have no time for him.Obviously thinks hes "big time" know(un-like ryan and symesy etc..),but his appearences/starts since leaving Acci suggests otherwise.Indeed when Ryan went off,he still wasnt brought on,and that says a lot.
For him to headbutt Deano and call the ref,hoping for a reaction,about sums him up.
One thing is for sure,there paths will cross again,and i doubt Grant will end up smiling

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

Well my two pence worth..................... Some positives and Some negatives for me personally last night.

We have to remember they where in THE CHAMPIONSHIP only last season, and will be challenging to go up again.

Thought we dominated in the 1st half and could easily have gone in 2-0 up.

Thought we looked pretty good at the back almost all game, Murdoch has been a great find in goal, his handling and all round game I cant fault him, no chance with either goal.

Miller and Long defy their years and looked steady up until the final 10 mins, We have to remember Kern has only played 1 game before joining us.

Midfield of Proccy and Joyce I have no problem with......... but Barnett is NOT a winger, we have seen it last season, especially in the first 20 games of the season, he is class in the center of the park, maybe we sacrifice 1 of him or Joycey????

Hopefully Coid is back for Saturday and can play a Midfield role as he really looked class in pre-season in that role.

Lindfield is looking far better than last season.......... but again for me he isnt a wide man........

Craney............ Seriously im not sure what position he is even supposed to be playing, but yet again for me last night he was VERY POOR, is he even fit?!?!?!?! If he isnt, then why play him?!? Obviously we are struggling for alternatives at the moment but surely that doesnt mean he HAS to play?!?!

As for Kurtis up front, yes he missed a couple of good chances, but I think he is doing a great job considering the circumstances. Only his 2nd ever pro-game....... but make no mistake, HE NEEDS help up there....... If this is what Craney is supposed to do then why isnt he doing it??!

A striker and a couple of wide men needed for me before the end of the month and the close of the transfer window.

The big test for me is Saturday.

Bring it on.

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

I agree with everything that Smudgie has said. I was pleased by the first half performance. Craney was simply awful - young Taylor should have been brought on much earlier to replace him.

Kevin McIntyre was left with an impossible task with no-one dropping back to help. It was a sign that we had simply run out of steam.

I thought Luke Joyce was absolutely immense, and I like the centre back pairing. As someone wrote in a previous thread, Phil who? I also think Kurtis Guthrie will be a real handful very soon.

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

Thought Joyce deserved his MoM.;)

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

Aside from the players performance, i was disapointed with the crowd turnout. Main stand only just looked half full, clayton end far from full... and this will have been most peoples first chance of seeing stanley this term after a successful last season

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

i was quite pleased, 1st round carling cup is never a big attraction imho.

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

I thought it was a good turnout last nught. 300 up on the last time Stanley played at home 1st round. Several Championship clubs with sub 5,000 gates. It's not a great competition for attracting crowds

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

:) Must addmit i was pleasantly surprised by the attendances, still think it was over priced thou:)

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

I was impressed with some of the new players especially first half, thought Craney was poor though. Seeing Ryan in opposition colours left me feeling a little flat and it all felt a bit like a hangover to me after the way last season ended. Hopefully Saturday will be a bit of a pick up!

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

Can't argue with that. The first couple of rounds at least should be no more than a tenner maximium. The sponsors should contribute more. I think the only prize money in the Carling Cup is for the finalists. Pretty poor sponsorship package by todays standards

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

Can't say that I have seen much of young Taylor so perhaps you can explain why he should have been brought on much earlier. How good is he and how many times have you seen him play ?

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

1. Craney needed to be replaced - he was slow in both thought and action. Guthrie received no support whatsoever from him, nor did Craney drop back sufficiently to help in defence. His contribution to the game was nil.

2. Given the playing positions of the subs available, Taylor seemed to be the only possibility. It could have been an ideal opportunity for a youngster to shine. Guthrie had proved that the Scunthorpe defenders could not cope with speed and, just by looking at him, I would guess that Taylor would be pretty quick. I have never seen him play; I have no idea how good he is. But .... there was no way he could have been worse than Craney.

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

Id rather have you put your boots on Jeff than Craney to be honest !

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

my reckoning guthrie would benefit big time if coley played 2 strikers, at least at home.

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

Ironically Scunthorpe home to Newcastle next round

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

Disagree about Craney.Thought he linked play well for 45 minutes,chances were created and on another day we could have been three up.
The problem is hes not 100% fit,he just has to put the effort in and the fitness will come.
Although he missed some good chances,I thought Gutherie worked hard,its just his running style that some may think hes going through the motions!!,I am beginning to think hes quicker that i first thought.
Question for lancs dave ---thought the young burnley lad (wes?) may have been available on loan,have you heard anything ???

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

Not heard anything from Stanley end, just info from somebody else that it's not altogether ruled out. :)

No idea what the issues are though.

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

I suspect you will be in a minority in thinking that Craney linked play well for 45 minutes.

But the quote above is part true and part nonsense. It is true he is not 100% fit - but he was not 100% fit when he arrived. Nothing has changed. If he is to put the effort in before the fitness comes, then please let that effort be on the training ground or in the gym. Not while he is taking up a place in the first team for 90 minutes.

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

Revived red,i did mean on the training paddock,although theres no substitue for match fitness.He would still be in my starting eleven,based on the sub bench.
You cant deny the amount of chances created and football played in the first period.
I still think when we go long from the keeper it doesnt suit our style(unlike stevenage) and thats what happened and the wheels fell off

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

My view is perhaps they went long cos they were knackered? n no fresh legs didn't help.

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

I also think that Craney linked play well, he put some good passed through to Guthrie who then wasted them - was that Craney's fault. At Northampton he put a brilliant reverse pass through to Charlie Barnett who then wasted the opportunity - was that Craney's fault. Everybody on the Clayton end around me seems to be picking on Craney. Even when he is nowhere near the ball it is his fault if something goes wrong. I don't hear anybody criticising Proccy when his passes go astray and his arm goes up in the air to apologise. His arm must be aching after every game. I don't hear anybody criticising Guthrie after he wased chances. Stop picking on Craney and give your Stanley players the support that they need.

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

Can u honestly say craney has been playing well jeff? You must be watching a different game to me and 99% of everybody else.

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

And everybody in the main stand around me seems to be picking on Craney. How very strange.:confused:

What a very strange comparison. How can you possibly compare a player who covers just about every blade of grass during a game and never shirks a tackle to one who chases nothing and ensures he is just too late to tackle.

Guthrie's effort and non-stop running was tremendous. Certainly no criticism from me.

I reserve the right to comment on any performance which I (and many others) consider to be below standard.

Why do you think I have a season ticket and travel from Bristol?

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

I am not saying that he is playing as well as he could do, but he is doing some good things. What I am trying to say is that people are singling him out to criticise and not criticising other players who are making mistakes. When anything goes wrong it is always Craney's name that is shouted, even if he is at the other end of the field.

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

I aint anti craney as anyone i stand wi will tell yeh, honestly thought he looked overweight,unfit n was crap on tuesday, fer whatever reason is irrelevant! perhaps some expect too much from him,cos of his pedigree? whereas most of the others aint got one,so in the main leave em alone, in my view he is one who can change/win a game n players of that calibre are few n far between, but if a player aint fit, should not be on the field imho or what message does that send to the fringe players?:confused:

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

I thought that when we were at our most dangerous in the first 15-20 minutes, a lot of the link-up play involved good touches from Craney. When he started to disappear from the gameplay, we looked much less effective going forward, if effective at all. It was when we were under pressure in the second half that he virtually became a passenger.

I agree with everyone else that defensively we look very good despite the lack of cover in front of the defence in the second half. Could we be starting this season the same as last year with very few goals conceded and plenty of 0-0 draws away from home?

I wasn't at the match last Saturday, but the problem on Tuesday for me was that, apart from the first 15-20 minutes when we totally dominated the game, there was no outlet for Joyce when he received the ball from the keeper. The movement of the midfield in front of him was very poor IMO and with their forwards closing down on our full-backs, there were many times when he found himself under pressure and had to get rid of the ball, sometimes with passes that put our full-backs under even more pressure.

We were clearly playing against a very good League 1 side, but this is one area that will need to be improved against Southend.

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

It wasnt a coincidence that when the keeper was told to ignore the fullbacks and punt the ball down field that the game changed.
I presume, because of the good start we got,the gaffer thought we would get a bit of joy picking up the second balls,but they didnt.
I think we had more joy down the channels and the fullbacks joining in getting crosses in,and picking up the second balls from there clearences.
When your struggling to get your second wind,you start to play within yourself,and a few on the night stopped tracking or making runs.
If you play from the back,the opposion have to press you,giving you the opportunity to shape the balls down the channels or clip it into the forwards feet,or get joycy on the ball.
When you go long via the keeper its really a game of luck,and playing one up front doesnt help the cause.

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

Put simply they were sodding knackered n yet again ****** all was done about it.

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

not a very technical answer cashy,but it made me laugh coz you are spot on !!!:)

Re: Late late Scunny thread
 

Technical n cashy are not really good bedfellows, always believed in cutting the crap n saying how i see it.:);)