That was an awful game of football which we happened to have won. Awful in terms of quality, but it was abundantly clear that our players were fighting and scrapping for everything. The win was totally deserved and it was fairly comfortable. There was a lot of direct play and most of it was not easy on the eye. The first half was largely unimaginative and lacking in tempo and the second half offered little improvement. The only moments of quality were Cureton's goal and Brown's initial save for their equaliser. We are still a shadow of the team we were two seasons ago.
Brown made a couple of superb stops but was largely unthreatened. I would like to see him try to become a sweeper keeper however, as we seem to be a little weak when dealing with balls over the top. Jombati is not the player he once was, but he was largely solid today if unspectacular (apart from a couple of Brazilian tricks which got him out of trouble). The central pairing worked well - Brown won most aerial battles, as did Lowe, although the latter was content to belt the ball forward rather than play a more obvious pass forward or sideways. This game was my second viewing of Braham-Barrett and he showed a much improved performance from his first against Plymouth. He is not the finished article by any stretch but his pace was useful both offensively and defensively.
The midfield was set up in the shape of a diamond, with Taylor as the anchor and McGlashan as the advanced midfield. It felt like square pegs in round holes but it worked surprisingly well. It meant the midfield had pace throughout which allowed us to press higher up the pitch and bully them off the ball. McGlashan was far more impressive defensively, as it is clear he still possesses no end product. Taylor added some tenacity and steel, as did Penn. Richards was well protected which afforded him time on the ball and allowed him to spray some nice passes out wide. Our positioning was narrow however, which meant that some of our build-up play was slow.
The forwards had a quiet game, and were mostly troubled in the air. In fact, I don't remember seeing Harrison touch the ball with his feet apart from his defensive duties. There was one interesting point in the second half where Kevan came out of his perimeter area and barked at Harrison to up his work rate and press higher up the pitch. Harrison responded well and worked hard for the rest of the game. He won a few flick ons, but apart from one shot on goal, he was kept quiet. Cureton was similar, although he made an impact with a stunning 30 yard half volley.
On a separate point, and perhaps worthy of its own thread, although I don't wish to dampen a positive day by drawing too much attention to the actions of a halfwit who released a flare after the first goal. The last two away games I have been to, I have been embarrassed by the actions of the mindless minority. We are better than this.
On another separate note, it was nice to see Taxidave, and if you are reading this, I hope you had a pleasant journey home.
Dagenham review
Moderators: Admin, Ralph, asl, Robin
-
RegencyCheltenhamSpa
- Posts: 29813
- Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 03:27
Win ugly. Has to be done by any side with promotion hopes.
Here is a link to the goals only
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GErmnC6A1NE" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GErmnC6A1NE" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Radio Glos were full of praise for the team performance describing it as at our best, also praising of the travelling support and pyro technics in the away end. According to Mark H and Pete Matthews MotM was a tight call between Harrison (who they said had his best game in a CTFC shirt) and Matt Richards.
Very interesting to read your contrasting view though HP, a good read.
Very interesting to read your contrasting view though HP, a good read.
I thought that I should add my comments here, rather than start a new thread.
With a view to the best cliches, I would say the question is "where do we go from here"
I like the view that we win the next two "winnable" home games and launch an attack on the top of the league with Nesty leading the clamour for Yates to be offered a new contract. I cannot believe it will be that easy. For a start our next two opponents are currently fourth and fifth in the league, and hence must have something going for them.
The job for Monday morning is to look at the video, see what went right amd what went wrong and decide whether or not the team needs tweaking next Saturday. Yates' history says we stick to the same XI and formation unless injury intervenes and then make a change (plausibly to both) if things do not go right Saturday.
A diamond midfield seems to suit many of our players, and I think we should try to stick to it for enough games to prove or disprove this. The diamond may be the way to shoehorn Richards, Taylor and Penn into the same quartet, and it encourages the full backs to act as wing backs and push forward. This does cause a problem in covering back, which has to come from the midfield trio. As the base player in the diamond, Richards should be expected to provide cover for the centre halves and drop back when they are pulled out of position. Whether the centre halves move wider to provide cover and assistance to our wings, or whether Taylor and Penn are more involved in this is down to the manager's selection. The occasional problems we faced at the back seemed to be down to the fact that we were not sure of this ourselves, with gaps forming between the midfield and defence and leaving a space to break into.
As the person at the front of the diamond, McGlashan had a degree of freedom that he does not usually enjoy as a winger, and I did not think he enjoyed this much. He has a tendancy to run into wider positions (which the freedom of the role allows for, without specifying right or left), but his delivery left much to be desired. Most crosses I felt did not end up where they were intended, but very late in the game, McG found space on the left, and delivered a perfact cross ...to the space Gornell had just left.
More needs to be done in training on this, McG needs to be able to know where he is delivering the ball, but also needs to know whether Gornell is going to vacate the space or wait for the cross.
Cureton, Harrison and Gornell all had good games. Cureton is the man who is going to score the wonder goals. I have been priviledged to see all three of his for us so far, and there is not an "ordinary" goal among them. For all his years, Cureton still runs around with the enthusiasm of a much younger player and hates not being involved. By contrast, Harrison's lanquid style is always going to attract critics, especially when things are going wrong, and I admit I am not his greatest fan, preferring the hard work that Gornell puts in. I really like this player who creates so much for others, and also gets a fair few shots in himself.
So, for the next two games, I think we should persist with the diamond, whatever the result is in the first of the pair. The diamond insists on Jombati and CBB starting, and unless injury or suspension threatens, Penn, Taylor and Richards should all play (Noble is the cover, as he is not as good as any of the other three). This means there are three areas that can be varied. Elliott and Wilson (if re-signed) are both in contention for centre half, although lets face it - Lowe and Brown did not do anything wrong, Lowe scoring and making the most important tackle in the game. Jombati, Troy Brown and CBB all need to be given longer runs in the team to prove what they can cannot do. They should not be slaughtered on the board or used as Yates' scapegoat when we lose a game.
At the front of the diamond, McGlashan should be facing competition from both Deering and Vincent, and even after the win this should clearly be a position that is up for grabs. Of the trio though, McG is the one most likely to achieve something when the marking is tight - he goes on runs that encourage fouls, and in themselves give us something to work from. Deering can all too easily be manouevred off the ball.
Up front, I prefer Gornell and Cureton, but in most games, we expect, Gornell, Cureton and Harrison to all play a part. Again Yates needs to realise he can make a change after a win, and he does not have to make a change in defeat.
As for Yates, he is safer in his position for the moment, but not if we were to lose both of the forthcoming home games. As has been clear from all my postings, I am not for removing Yates from his post - but he is on a contract that runs out in the summer, and I am not in favour of reconsidering that at the moment. Most football managers, including all of ours as a league side, either resign or get sacked, (mutual consent being a mixture of the two, normally a sacking by any other name). I actually like the idea of having a contract, and working until the contract ends.
With a view to the best cliches, I would say the question is "where do we go from here"
I like the view that we win the next two "winnable" home games and launch an attack on the top of the league with Nesty leading the clamour for Yates to be offered a new contract. I cannot believe it will be that easy. For a start our next two opponents are currently fourth and fifth in the league, and hence must have something going for them.
The job for Monday morning is to look at the video, see what went right amd what went wrong and decide whether or not the team needs tweaking next Saturday. Yates' history says we stick to the same XI and formation unless injury intervenes and then make a change (plausibly to both) if things do not go right Saturday.
A diamond midfield seems to suit many of our players, and I think we should try to stick to it for enough games to prove or disprove this. The diamond may be the way to shoehorn Richards, Taylor and Penn into the same quartet, and it encourages the full backs to act as wing backs and push forward. This does cause a problem in covering back, which has to come from the midfield trio. As the base player in the diamond, Richards should be expected to provide cover for the centre halves and drop back when they are pulled out of position. Whether the centre halves move wider to provide cover and assistance to our wings, or whether Taylor and Penn are more involved in this is down to the manager's selection. The occasional problems we faced at the back seemed to be down to the fact that we were not sure of this ourselves, with gaps forming between the midfield and defence and leaving a space to break into.
As the person at the front of the diamond, McGlashan had a degree of freedom that he does not usually enjoy as a winger, and I did not think he enjoyed this much. He has a tendancy to run into wider positions (which the freedom of the role allows for, without specifying right or left), but his delivery left much to be desired. Most crosses I felt did not end up where they were intended, but very late in the game, McG found space on the left, and delivered a perfact cross ...to the space Gornell had just left.
More needs to be done in training on this, McG needs to be able to know where he is delivering the ball, but also needs to know whether Gornell is going to vacate the space or wait for the cross.
Cureton, Harrison and Gornell all had good games. Cureton is the man who is going to score the wonder goals. I have been priviledged to see all three of his for us so far, and there is not an "ordinary" goal among them. For all his years, Cureton still runs around with the enthusiasm of a much younger player and hates not being involved. By contrast, Harrison's lanquid style is always going to attract critics, especially when things are going wrong, and I admit I am not his greatest fan, preferring the hard work that Gornell puts in. I really like this player who creates so much for others, and also gets a fair few shots in himself.
So, for the next two games, I think we should persist with the diamond, whatever the result is in the first of the pair. The diamond insists on Jombati and CBB starting, and unless injury or suspension threatens, Penn, Taylor and Richards should all play (Noble is the cover, as he is not as good as any of the other three). This means there are three areas that can be varied. Elliott and Wilson (if re-signed) are both in contention for centre half, although lets face it - Lowe and Brown did not do anything wrong, Lowe scoring and making the most important tackle in the game. Jombati, Troy Brown and CBB all need to be given longer runs in the team to prove what they can cannot do. They should not be slaughtered on the board or used as Yates' scapegoat when we lose a game.
At the front of the diamond, McGlashan should be facing competition from both Deering and Vincent, and even after the win this should clearly be a position that is up for grabs. Of the trio though, McG is the one most likely to achieve something when the marking is tight - he goes on runs that encourage fouls, and in themselves give us something to work from. Deering can all too easily be manouevred off the ball.
Up front, I prefer Gornell and Cureton, but in most games, we expect, Gornell, Cureton and Harrison to all play a part. Again Yates needs to realise he can make a change after a win, and he does not have to make a change in defeat.
As for Yates, he is safer in his position for the moment, but not if we were to lose both of the forthcoming home games. As has been clear from all my postings, I am not for removing Yates from his post - but he is on a contract that runs out in the summer, and I am not in favour of reconsidering that at the moment. Most football managers, including all of ours as a league side, either resign or get sacked, (mutual consent being a mixture of the two, normally a sacking by any other name). I actually like the idea of having a contract, and working until the contract ends.
-
solihullkev
- Posts: 1178
- Joined: 24 Aug 2013, 19:53
For me a lot of positives from yesterday :
1 I really like the trio of strikers and the ability to interchange ; Gornell on for Cureton (who I suspect will not do too many 90 mins) and we lost nothing. Gornell is more than a work horse - he has some class and holds the ball up well. Cureton will score the goals most in this league can't (in addition, think he flicked on Sido's cross that led to the winner) and I like Harrison a lot - didn't win as much in the air yesterday as in previous games for me, but he works well with the other two strikers. That is a strong trio.
2 CBB - started off rusty (first touch of the ball yesterday was shocking) but he grew in confidence and in last twenty minutes provided some real width and threat down the left. A bit of confidence and he will be an asset.
3 Scott Brown - class.
4 Spirit and fight - I am not really into conspiracy theories, losing the dressing room, open wounds re what has happened before. Yesterday was 11 players playing for CTFC - epitomised by Keith being where he was to score, the celebrations by the players after the goal and the celebrations at the end
5 Professionalism - we played well in the last 10 mins to hold on to the win - kept the ball, played it into corners, invited the challenge. Cureton took longer than a tortoise to come off the field when subbed which took 40 secs off the clock - not everyone's cup of tea, but other teams (notably Portsmouth and Wimbledon this season) do the same.
6 Great support - 160 folk getting behind the team. With 15 times more fans at home, why can't we reproduce something similar at home ?
Let's not set limits on Yates in terms of "next two games are crucial" etc. Every game is important, but it is plain that we are on an upward curve - unrecognisable from the Plymouth, Accrington and Bury performances. We are getting better with time.
Keep the faith.
1 I really like the trio of strikers and the ability to interchange ; Gornell on for Cureton (who I suspect will not do too many 90 mins) and we lost nothing. Gornell is more than a work horse - he has some class and holds the ball up well. Cureton will score the goals most in this league can't (in addition, think he flicked on Sido's cross that led to the winner) and I like Harrison a lot - didn't win as much in the air yesterday as in previous games for me, but he works well with the other two strikers. That is a strong trio.
2 CBB - started off rusty (first touch of the ball yesterday was shocking) but he grew in confidence and in last twenty minutes provided some real width and threat down the left. A bit of confidence and he will be an asset.
3 Scott Brown - class.
4 Spirit and fight - I am not really into conspiracy theories, losing the dressing room, open wounds re what has happened before. Yesterday was 11 players playing for CTFC - epitomised by Keith being where he was to score, the celebrations by the players after the goal and the celebrations at the end
5 Professionalism - we played well in the last 10 mins to hold on to the win - kept the ball, played it into corners, invited the challenge. Cureton took longer than a tortoise to come off the field when subbed which took 40 secs off the clock - not everyone's cup of tea, but other teams (notably Portsmouth and Wimbledon this season) do the same.
6 Great support - 160 folk getting behind the team. With 15 times more fans at home, why can't we reproduce something similar at home ?
Let's not set limits on Yates in terms of "next two games are crucial" etc. Every game is important, but it is plain that we are on an upward curve - unrecognisable from the Plymouth, Accrington and Bury performances. We are getting better with time.
Keep the faith.
-
Hubert Parry
- Posts: 2443
- Joined: 22 Jul 2011, 09:09
It was much better than the Plymouth performance, and we controlled the game - it just wasn't a great spectacle.Robin wrote:Radio Glos were full of praise for the team performance describing it as at our best, also praising of the travelling support and pyro technics in the away end. According to Mark H and Pete Matthews MotM was a tight call between Harrison (who they said had his best game in a CTFC shirt) and Matt Richards.
Very interesting to read your contrasting view though HP, a good read.
It seems wrong for the BBC to condone the use of prohibited items. I was very near where it was set off and it was not a pleasant experience. When it reached the ground, it caught on fire. It seems like an utterly pointless and stupid risk.
-
taxidave
- Posts: 3510
- Joined: 20 Nov 2009, 09:56
- Location: Crewe station buffet, wish I'd stayed there!
It was very funny to watch 4 members of the Met and 12 stewards trying to work out who had thrown it, I hate to think what they would have done if there had been a major incident ! I think they spent most of the half time break studying the cctv footage.asl wrote:Hush: they're essential for "atmosphere," we've been told.
One of the stewards even asked me at half time if I had seen who threw it and I replied "no, I was watching the game, it is your job to watch the crowd"
I dont mind the odd flare but they can be dangerous and a drunk yob throwing one has all the makings
Having had a dropped match on my trainers a few years ago was enough and if there is a wooden stand who knows
Also it must not interfere with my view
In addition must not be thrown on pitch at WR - you can still see the marks at WR from the cardiff flares
Having had a dropped match on my trainers a few years ago was enough and if there is a wooden stand who knows
Also it must not interfere with my view
In addition must not be thrown on pitch at WR - you can still see the marks at WR from the cardiff flares
-
taxidave
- Posts: 3510
- Joined: 20 Nov 2009, 09:56
- Location: Crewe station buffet, wish I'd stayed there!
I really hate a "grass".TheRaven wrote:I don't really understand why hiding/harbouring people who break clearly stated rules is a positive attribute, the loss of which is to be lamented.Robin wrote:there was a time when football fans stuck together and felt a sense of unity
i can't believe our fan base get all worked up over one flare quite pathetic some won't be happy until all our fans sit their in silence as bbc glos said at least it shows some passion something that has been missing in recent weeks by players and fans a like lets hope for a similar performance against Rochdale and get a winning run going
Exactly, we are not a united fan base! Like I say there was a time when fans stuck together, if you believe someone is attacking inappropriately tell them don't write letters to the chairman, Echo, moan to a steward its pathetic.CS85 wrote:I think more cheltenham fans would rather grass than keep quiet,unfortunately
By the way this is not ignoring bad behaviour I am talking about the lack of unity within our fan base and how it's driven many away.
Is it acceptable to throw coins or a lighter or a bottle.
The same rule applies to flares
We then move onto was the thrower aware it was illegal
then
sober , drunk or in between
Then there will be how dare the club ban me
They are their own worse enemy.
Spurs stewards have headcams for a reason, I do not want to see headcams on our stewards but until flares are allowed then you throw them at your own risk minimum and if one comes near me I will personally insert it where light will be needed
Fireworks on the pitch please from the players
It is not one rule for a little CTFC supporter, or it depends on what you are throwing - end of
The same rule applies to flares
We then move onto was the thrower aware it was illegal
then
sober , drunk or in between
Then there will be how dare the club ban me
They are their own worse enemy.
Spurs stewards have headcams for a reason, I do not want to see headcams on our stewards but until flares are allowed then you throw them at your own risk minimum and if one comes near me I will personally insert it where light will be needed
Fireworks on the pitch please from the players
It is not one rule for a little CTFC supporter, or it depends on what you are throwing - end of
-
RegencyCheltenhamSpa
- Posts: 29813
- Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 03:27
I think more than ever the majority of fans are united against unacceptable behaviour and the growth in attendances in the English game reflect that more fans enjoy going to football. The only time fans have been put off was the 70s and 80s when hooligans ruined it for everyone, same way in recent years the most extreme Ultras in Italy led to declining gates as normal fans were not comfortable going. I knew someone who went to an Italian game as a tourist when studying there for a year. Most of the second half hiding in the toilets as riots went on meant they never went back.Robin wrote:Exactly, we are not a united fan base! Like I say there was a time when fans stuck together, if you believe someone is attacking inappropriately tell them don't write letters to the chairman, Echo, moan to a steward its pathetic.CS85 wrote:I think more cheltenham fans would rather grass than keep quiet,unfortunately
By the way this is not ignoring bad behaviour I am talking about the lack of unity within our fan base and how it's driven many away.
If I thought a CTFC fan was out of order I would applaud if they were evicted.
Last edited by RegencyCheltenhamSpa on 13 Oct 2013, 16:10, edited 1 time in total.
like at the MUFC v Liverpool game this season i think it was when someone threw a flare from the stand above into where the away fans were. Any one that thinks thats acceptable needs to take a long hard look at themselves
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footba ... VIDEO.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
They reach temps of 2000 degrees so it says in this article.. watch the video, if you think thats funny, your pretty warped
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footba ... VIDEO.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
They reach temps of 2000 degrees so it says in this article.. watch the video, if you think thats funny, your pretty warped
-
taxidave
- Posts: 3510
- Joined: 20 Nov 2009, 09:56
- Location: Crewe station buffet, wish I'd stayed there!
I didn't watch the video because I have been told many times, especially by people on this forum, that anything in the Daily Mail is a load of b@llox and not to be believed; so is this the exception to the rule.Ralph wrote:like at the MUFC v Liverpool game this season i think it was when someone threw a flare from the stand above into where the away fans were. Any one that thinks thats acceptable needs to take a long hard look at themselves
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footba ... VIDEO.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
They reach temps of 2000 degrees so it says in this article.. watch the video, if you think thats funny, your pretty warped
I think you're being a little disingenuous there Dave. You've inserted the words 'harmless', 'which caused no damage to anyone or anything', you cheeky little monkey! On this occasion, and maybe even most, no damage was done. However, they are banned, and they are banned for good reason:taxidave wrote:Are you saying that you would actually grass up a fellow fan for throwing a harmless flare which caused no damage to anyone or anything.TheRaven wrote:I have nothing against accountability.
http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/lo ... es-5744642
'Grass up' are your words, not mine. If I was approached by a steward or the police asking for information about who had broken the ground regulations, potentially endangering my fellow fans, I might very well give them information. I would do the same regarding the use of foul and abusive language, including racism, homophobia and so on. I don't see covering up other people's potentially dangerous indiscretions as a key part of my own code of honour. If you can't accept the consequences of your actions, don't take them. If you consider that 'grassing up' and something to discourage then perhaps you should look at your own moral code.
Those bemoaning a lack of unity in our fan base may wish to consider that the unity is perhaps being shown by the people who would prefer to uphold the law, rather than break it.
I have no trouble sleeping at night with my own personal ethics, and have no real interest in debating them any further.
No, but I would hope we ban those people who choose to use them as a weapon. They have a clear safe and legal purpose - buying stuff. Flares and smoke-bombs do not and their use is illegal in public places, so that's another fairly weak argument dispatched.
-
RegencyCheltenhamSpa
- Posts: 29813
- Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 03:27
Why do you need a flare to show passion? I am sure players would be inspired more by good passionate singing and encouragement all match than by a few minutes of smelly smoke wafting into their faces.
If they are harmless, why are they banned under The Sporting Events (Control of Alcohol, etc.) Act 1985? I would have assumed as a self-confessed Daily Mail reader you'd be all for law and order.taxidave wrote:Are you saying that you would actually grass up a fellow fan for throwing a harmless flare which caused no damage to anyone or anything.TheRaven wrote:I have nothing against accountability.
I agree the stewards were pretty useless though.
-
Circa 1887
- Posts: 842
- Joined: 04 Mar 2013, 12:39
Thanks for the comprehensive review, HP - again, another fan has painted a different picture to BBC Glos...Let's see if this time we really have turned a corner, or whether it's just another false dawn.
As for the rest of this thread; flares are so 1970s.
As for the rest of this thread; flares are so 1970s.
-
cheltsaxon
- Posts: 573
- Joined: 10 Nov 2010, 21:51
- Location: Cheltenhamshire
Looked like a smoke bomb to me complety differen to a flare.
I'm with what RCS is saying - what is passionate about lighting a flare or smoke bomb? They're only used by chavs who want to play the rebel and look "hard" to their equally chavvy mates.
The only thing that came out of the flare/smoke bomb at Northampton in last season's play-offs was a load of annoyed stewards & police, coughing fits left right and centre and stinking clothes all the way home.
The only thing that came out of the flare/smoke bomb at Northampton in last season's play-offs was a load of annoyed stewards & police, coughing fits left right and centre and stinking clothes all the way home.
Shade wrote:I'm with what RCS is saying - what is passionate about lighting a flare or smoke bomb? They're only used by chavs who want to play the rebel and look "hard" to their equally chavvy mates.
The only thing that came out of the flare/smoke bomb at Northampton in last season's play-offs was a load of annoyed stewards & police, coughing fits left right and centre and stinking clothes all the way home.
When the smoke bombs and flares went off in the LMI it was the loudest and best atmosphere I have ever heard in there Shade.