We would have had them.

Malabus · 30 Dec 2016, 21:54

If we played like we did in the 2nd half from the start.
Thought Wycombe were shockingly poor.

darreno · 30 Dec 2016, 22:08

Whether Wycombe were poor or not completely misses the point. We couldn't score, so we lost, and we're still in the bottom 2 having played a game more.

solihullkev · 30 Dec 2016, 22:08

They were sound enough defensively ; we would have no concerns if we had a defence like that

I-Love-CTFC · 30 Dec 2016, 22:10

Boy could we do with a defender like Aaron Pierre. Let's hope the lad from Brentford is the answer.

30 Dec 2016, 22:20

Thought Wycombe very good first half and they defended well in the second half, our defence was very good today after playing poorly recently. Only low point was Wright who looked well short of standard, everyone else can hold their heads high.

Nham68 · 30 Dec 2016, 22:28

Wright lacked pace and timing ... Dickie made a fantastic through ball, he should have taken one touch and let fire ... but overrun it. Almost identical situation 5 mins alter and was offside . In all fairness, the crossing tonight paws woeful ...

Reliant Robin · 30 Dec 2016, 22:39

I agree with Malabus, I was surprised to find that Wycombe were distinctly average. Hard to believe they are riding so high in the League. We didn't get any luck in or around their penalty area, or the run of the ball going forward at times, and perhaps that is down to the lack of quality that is constantly mentioned, but the effort was there and hopefully the tweaks that are going to be made to the Team will make the difference.

30 Dec 2016, 22:42

Wycombe were light years better than Barnet and Exeter in my opinion, not seen many better sides than them on their first half showing.

London Exile · 30 Dec 2016, 22:45

I thought we looked a lot better once we made the 3 changes. Without Wright we seemed to look to get it down and play a bit more through the midfield rather than pumping it long all the time.

I-Love-CTFC · 30 Dec 2016, 22:46

London Exile wrote:I thought we looked a lot better once we made the 3 changes. Without Wright we seemed to look to get it down and play a bit more through the midfield rather than pumping it long all the time.

Agreed. We look a much better team without Wright. I think he still has a part to play, but he'd be better off used as an impact sub.

Hubert Parry · 30 Dec 2016, 22:51

I thought Wycombe were tactically superb. They were often two steps ahead in their thinking and cleverly predicted where the second balls were likely to fall. Their number 5 was my man of the match and what I would give for a CB like that. Their experience showed all over the pitch.

I think our good play in the second half was due, in part, by Wycombe dropping deeper which provided more space in the middle of the pitch.

Nesty · 31 Dec 2016, 12:13

darreno wrote:Whether Wycombe were poor or not completely misses the point. We couldn't score, so we lost, and we're still in the bottom 2 having played a game more.

we need a striker !!

31 Dec 2016, 12:31

The frustrating thing for me was that it was immediately that Wright may well struggle with the step up we needed an experienced target man and centre half in the summer rather than 5-6 young kids as squad players. I rate GJ very highly but he got that horribly wrong in the summer.

Reliant Robin · 31 Dec 2016, 12:40

To clarify why I felt Wycombe were average: yes, they were well organised and their experience certainly helped them get a lot of the 50/50 balls in the first half, but they created very little throughout the game, and in our barnstorming second half, they resorted to hoofing the ball anywhere. Had we have just got that little bit more "quality" in the final third and made a few more accurate passes during our attacking phases, we could have easily won that game. For example Scotty had a decent enough game in goal for Wycombe, but the stuff he saved was pretty much straight at him. That's the lack of "quality" in our finishing, but the effort by our Lads was overpowering Wycombe in that second half. Tactically, in that second half, Wycombe knew that we struggle to get the ball in the net, and so they resorted to just getting men behind the ball and crowding us out. It worked, but I didn't think they looked like a promotion chasing side at all.

31 Dec 2016, 13:23

I'd argue they created little simply because we defended extremely well through out, it was our best defensive performance for months in my eyes. No surprise that we had some pace at the back and there were few mistakes either.

RegencyCheltenhamSpa · 31 Dec 2016, 14:16

Robin wrote:I'd argue they created little simply because we defended extremely well through out, it was our best defensive performance for months in my eyes. No surprise that we had some pace at the back and there were few mistakes either.

Agree with that Robin. Apart from when given too much space by Downes to set up the goal that was the most anonymous I have seen Akinfenwa look against us. After Akinde's mauling I though AA would humiliate us last night, but all of the five defenders who played dealt with him. Even Cranston and Barts stood up against him and kept him from getting on the ball in the second half. And when DOS and RD were alongside each other it was a pleasant shock to the system to have two centre backs who put their foot on the ball and carried or passed it forward with interest rather than the usual hoof/misplaced pass/miscontrol.

Those two at the heart of defence with Downes providing mentoring and experience on the training ground, and on the pitch when needed, would be nice to see.

paperboy · 31 Dec 2016, 14:29

Yes agree that Wycombe were great at the back. Perhaps they didn't need to show too much up front once they'd got their early goal. Good finish from my position.

The only team that has impressed me has been Doncaster-of course they did have a lad called John Marquis up front along with some very intelligent footballers.
This is what is so frustrating for me - there really isn't too much to choose between most of the teams so fingers crossed the Johnson brothers come up with the goods.
If they do we could even flirt with the play-offs.

31 Dec 2016, 16:13

I'd go as far as to say Wycombe (based on first half) and Doncaster are the the two best teams I've seen so far, so many very average teams with a bit more quality we could easily have been in or around the play offs. Worst teams Stevenage, Accrington, Notts County and Crewe.

London Exile · 31 Dec 2016, 16:23

There's been so many games where I've walked home thinking the opposition didn't offer much yet they still beat us!
Colchester, Exeter and Barnet being just some of those games.

Hopefully Monday sees a few new (or old returning) faces in the team and we can get our 5th victory of the season.

longmover · 31 Dec 2016, 17:05

London Exile wrote:There's been so many games where I've walked home thinking the opposition didn't offer much yet they still beat us!
Colchester, Exeter and Barnet being just some of those games.

because we gifted them goals and some of those teams had one player that could do things that none of our players can and that's the difference. Though saying that we've still yet to be played off the park by any team in this league which annoyingly makes you think, what if?

RegencyCheltenhamSpa · 31 Dec 2016, 18:18

longmover wrote:
London Exile wrote:There's been so many games where I've walked home thinking the opposition didn't offer much yet they still beat us!
Colchester, Exeter and Barnet being just some of those games.

because we gifted them goals and some of those teams had one player that could do things that none of our players can and that's the difference. Though saying that we've still yet to be played off the park by any team in this league which annoyingly makes you think, what if?

Or, makes one think, once signings are made: what will be?