Re: Port Vale Match Thread.
 

Do you not understand what summariser means? Do you want me to explain?

Re: Port Vale Match Thread.
 

Did you not understand the question i asked? Hardly a shock.:rolleyes:

Re: Port Vale Match Thread.
 

Thought there were a few positives from the game,and despite going down to ten men after five minutes,we frustrated them and could have easily scored in the first half.
They had two good centre forwards in Pope and Hughes,together with two fast and direct wingers.
We limited there chances by disciplined defending,forcing them to play around us.
Indeed,there first and only corner in the first half was in the 40 min.
The second half was different,and they moved us around,trying to pull the centre backs out of position,and getting runners in.
Also they started to get crosses in,by the fullbacks joining in and we started to tire.
It was a decent effort against the top of the league,and with ten men.
Only real moan was we need a defensive midfielder to plug gaps and be a "ratter",and someone who can make chances/score goals.
Plus points,murph was up against a very fast and direct lad,and he stayed on his feet,and generally controlled him.
If we played that badly,why did there crowd boo them off at half time?,there is a lot to build on IMHO

Re: Port Vale Match Thread.
 

"Only real moan was we need a defensive midfielder to plug gaps and be a "ratter",and someone who can make chances/score goals"

Sounds like you are describing Proccy ?

Re: Port Vale Match Thread.
 

or Hopper

Or Murphy.

Re: Port Vale Match Thread.
 

Said that for a long time Sam,4-1-3-2,it would screen the defence and allow the fullbacks to bomb on.The more I see murph,the more I think he would be comfortable there

He's a good CB but with the new arrivals he could be struggling for a starting place. He's the best defensive mid we've got.

Re: Port Vale Match Thread.
 

we can't say what would or would not have happened without the red card. It was certainly a reckless challenge, but the vale player went down dramatically and his team mates all surrounded the ref who went straight for his red card.
for the rest of the 1st half, we were well disciplined, by which i mean we kept a good shape, tackled when we had to tackle, stood back when we had to stand back. i thought Hughes was impressive in the first half but he wasn't alone. keeper made a couple of good saves but apart from that not much else to do. How many times did we catch Lee Hughes offside? that is not down to him being a fat dopy lump, we defended it well.

At half time, we knew we had to keep up the concentration but alas, it wasn't to be and 2 quick goals added to growing fatigue from the 10 men meant the game was lost.

I think there is definitely room for hope, but we desparately need some feelgood to lift the spirits. Unfortunately, defeats sap the confidence and give voice to the negativity.

Re: Port Vale Match Thread.
 

Are you sure you know what it means yourself? You can't make your mind up how to spell it.:rolleyes:

Re: Port Vale Match Thread.
 

I wouldn't worry too much. Somewhere there is a bell missing it's end :D

Re: Port Vale Match Thread.
 

For what its worth I thought we did well in the first 45, Hughes and Rachubka in particular had excellent first halves...... Following the sending off. What on earth was Barnett thinking???! Absolute idiot, GET RID. HE has contributed nothing for a year, have no idea why he was starting anyway.

Second half it was obvious we where going to get battered. Not sure how many more chances people want to give Leam. It's 90% HIS team with HIS tactics, just look at his record since he took charge........ Like Ive said I havent called for a manager to go since the days of Leighton James and Rodaway, but for me ive lost confidence massively in the current management.

Make no mistake the 3 home games in a week coming up soon WILL make or break or season.