Re: Port Vale Thread
 

that was why i asked the corners question earlier, many these days seem short n get us nowhere,:rolleyes: to my mind to play short corners yeh gotta have better, more skillful lads than stanley got.! thats in no way knocking em, its just fact. imho.

Re: Port Vale Thread
 

Good point well made cashy!

I don't believe it's individual performances that need to be addressed (though it's clear McIntyre is not going to be of use to us as a starting player; perhaps his influence would be better felt on the training ground as John Mullin's was); it's Coley's tactics which leave much to be desired. By all accounts he's a great man-manager but in my opinion tactics have always been his downfall; whether it's sticking with something for far too long in the hope that it'll come good, having no second option when things are going wrong, or just the effective use of subs. I was proud of the way he admitted his error in not changing things sooner in the first two games and subsequently changed the formation to play Bradford. But yesterday he made a massive mistake in sticking with the system which we used to win that game. We played the wrong players in the wrong formation and we were punished by an effective side.
Someone in pre-season (I think it was Doug, apologies if it wasn't) noted that Coley displayed a hint of a defeatist attitude and though I disagreed at the time I've seen hints of it so far this season. Perhaps he is frustrated at the result of the club being run properly; that Eric and Dave aren't around to give him a massive squad that we can't afford. I don't know, maybe that's just negative conjecture after a negative (humiliating) result.
He has said himself that managers never stop learning and I hope that the lessons we've been given already this season will lead to change in the upcoming games. I know this is coming across as doom and gloom and attacking the gaffer but it isn't intended as such. In my view it's better to have glaring weaknesses made obvious in the first few games than to get a few results together and have everything fall apart in October. Perhaps this result will fire Coley into action and we'll have much more positive displays in the games to come. God knows he's got the ability to do that.

Re: Port Vale Thread
 

Dont get me wrong, we ALL need to be realists in this situation. We all know we over achieved MASSIVELY last season.

The target EVERY season is to avoid relegation, at least until we can move into a new stadium and attract a bigger fanbase.

Its just very annoying to spend my hard earned cash and seeing the blatant lack of effort which I saw after that 1st goal went in yesterday.

As for the alternatives........................ we havent got much. Taylor gives us a different dimension, and I was disappointed not to see him play yesterday, maybe he wasnt fit, who knows??

Moult had a shocker of a debut, but he wasnt helped by the complete lack of service.

As Coley said, "4-1 flattered us" which it did.

They have seven days to put it right, and at least work their BALLS off next Saturday.

Burton are no mugs.

Re: Port Vale Thread
 

Another positive from the game was pete murphys performance.
Defended ok,good on the ball,some great positive runs,hit the bar and scored!!,fair play to the lad,he never stopped trying

Re: Port Vale Thread
 

To be fair Murphy had a decent 2nd half.

Though he, along with rest was appalling in the 1st.

Re: Port Vale Thread
 

Right, now my two penn'orth.

I have to be honest and say that I am not as downbeat about yesterday as some other posters. I've not seen the stats but in the first half, I reckon we had at least 50% possession. As Coley has said, they had 4 attacks - and scored 4 goals.

I think the 4-4-2 idea was not a good one and that was one hurdle to be overcome. A second problem was that Charlie Barnett is wasted playing on the right. He needs a more central role. I was also interested to see that Guthrie was kitted out to play. I wonder if he failed an early fitness test.

Three of the four goals were down to lack of concentration. I happen to think that the free kick was unstoppable. Some free kicks are so good that they just cannot be stopped - and that was one. So I attach no blame to Murdoch for that one.

What seemed evident to me was that we still need time to gel as a team. But there are weaknesses. I was disappointed with Moult - too lightweight, I thought. I have an open mind on McIntyre - I'm not sure where he fits into the system. The Vale fans I talked to after the game were impressed by Murphy who certainly improved in the second half. In the first half, he was able to find touch with unerring accuracy.

Football19 has mentioned Long perhaps being unfit. In fact, he was caught very late by two attackers in the first 10 minutes and hobbled for several minutes afterwards.

I happened to think that Port Vale area well-balanced side with two big powerful and dominating central defenders and two strong centre forwards.

We could and should have done better - but I am not sharing the despair of others.

Re: Port Vale Thread
 

some good points made,but in reality we had four centre mids in midfield,an holding mid playing at right back,a right footer playing at left back and two forwards with one start between them !!.
It was always going to be difficult,but the system of 4-4-2 is always going to struggle against the system they played.
My moan was no attempt was made to counter act it by either tucking the wide men in field to stop them playing thro us (give them the width) or at least drop a forward back to allow an extra midfielder.
If people can see it from the terrace,surely the coaches can

Re: Port Vale Thread
 

after conceding 4, its time to put Dunbavin back in goal.

Re: Port Vale Thread
 

Not a chance dav.

Murdoch has been class.

Re: Port Vale Thread
 

Thats not as daft as it first sounds.
I think Murdoch has given us what Dunbavin didnt ie good hands,coming for crosses,physical presence,but my reservations are his shot stopping and getting down quickly.
Hes not had to make many saves,but the stats on saturday made me wonder,where as Dunbavin is a great shot stopper

Re: Port Vale Thread
 

whilst a fair shot stopper, problem as i see it is the fact 90% of goal kicks,put the opposition on the attack, that just aint acceptable to me.:(

Re: Port Vale Thread
 

Cashy,you may be right,but watching them warm up on saturday,you would have thought Dunbavin was the number one.
I do like the new keeper,but do we have a goalkeeping coach who could work on him?

Re: Port Vale Thread
 

aint sure,my bet is not, to me though its a big thing,attacking from defence, thought the reds kept the momentum fer 90mins against bradford n that factor was a major contribution to it.:)

Re: Port Vale Thread
 

You must have been watching a different Murphy than I was watching, when I could find him. He went missing too many times, Long had to cover for him leaving the centre of defence lacking. He is not a full back, he is not a defender, he is not a first team footballer. He was the same against Bradford, their winger walked past him on at least three occasions. OK, he may have never stopped trying, but he is just not good enough.

Re: Port Vale Thread
 

He watches a different game to us all every week jeff.