** Match thread ** Tue 7/7 19:15 WES2 Boardeaux Vs Roys Rover

helimachoptor

Massive massive game tomorrow lads. A win will put us 6 points ahead of RR, I would expect Ketamine to win so we need the 3 points here.

Can't take too much from out last game with this as the wind scored 2 goals for us and 1 for them.

Goalkeepers -

Daryl -
Clayton -

Defence -

Keith -
Martin -
Ed -
Dan -
Michael -
Cathal -
Geoff -
Mick Mc -

Midfield -

Gav -
Iain -
Lepo -
Dave -
Pat -
Conor -
Collie -

Strikers -

Ciaran -
Jules -
Eddie -
Art -

homerjay2005

im out for this one, having a work related thing on that i cant miss, if the game was on at 9, i would be able to be there, but i cant as its too early. massive game, good luck with it, pressure is on them and not us, they need to win and also, under pressure to not loose. a win for us, would be superb and put us in a fantastic position with 6 left.

_blank_

Goalkeepers -

Daryl - Yes
Clayton - Yes

Defence -

Keith - Yes
Martin - Sick
Ed - Work
Dan - Yes
Michael -
Cathal -
Geoff - Yes
Mick Mc - Yes

Midfield -

Gav - Yes
Iain - Yes
Lepo - Yes
Dave - Yes
Pat - Yes
Conor -
Collie - Yes

Strikers -

Ciaran - Yes
Jules - Yes
Eddie -
Art - Yes

Idu

I'll be there but doubt I'd be of any use unless we're 6-0 up with 10 minutes left. Still havent kicked a ball since the injury so we'll see how it goes

LeixlipRed

Wont make it guys. Dying with a cold and barring a miracle recovery tomorrow I'm in no shape to be playing tbh. If I'm feeling alright I might pop over to watch. Huge game so good luck

Nunu

Goalkeepers -

Daryl - Yes
Clayton - Yes

Defence -

Keith - Yes
Martin - Sick
Ed - Work
Dan - Yes
Michael -
Cathal -
Geoff - Yes
Mick Mc - Yes

Midfield -

Gav - Yes
Iain - Yes
Lepo - Yes
Dave - Yes
Pat - Yes
Conor -
Collie - Yes

Strikers -

Ciaran - Yes
Jules - Yes
Eddie - Yes
Art - Yes

helimachoptor

Swine Flu

Its crap your missing it Martin,it's a massive game.

_blank_

Goalkeepers -

Daryl - Yes
Clayton - Yes

Defence -

Keith - Yes
Martin - Sick
Ed - Work
Dan - Yes
Michael - Injured
Cathal - Injured
Geoff - Yes
Mick Mc - Can't make it

Midfield -

Gav - Yes
Iain - Yes
Lepo - Yes
Dave - Yes
Pat - Yes
Conor -
Collie - Yes

Strikers -

Ciaran - Yes
Jules - Yes
Eddie - Yes
Art - Yes

LeixlipRed

Lost 3-1

helimachoptor

Gutted absolutely gutted, missed Clay though Carl made some really terrific saves. They dominated for the first 10-15 we came back strong but they really took control from there on.

Thought it was a bad decision from the ref to give that penalty.

We pushed hard to get an equaliser but the got a third.

homerjay2005

disappointing result and leaves the league slightly out of our hands now. the goal difference is 11 after last nite. we just need to win every game now and no more about it.

from speaking to des/keith/art and ciaran, they were the better team and we have no complaints, were well beaten and only played for 5 mins. in all fairness though, with the exception of the 5-1, we have not been playing well for weeks now, so this result was coming. it could have happened last week and maybe in 1 or 2 other games. we need to get back to form, need a little freshning up or our chances of winning the league will go quickly as we have some tough games coming up.

still a long way to go and all to play for, but we seem to have hit a brick wall in terms of creativity and maybe des/mikie have something up their sleave to get things running again:cool:.

FrankGrimes

Yep, the better team won, no doubt about that. On one hand it could've been by more if it wasn't for their pretty woeful finishing, on the other hand the goals they actually scored were from a comedy of errors in a mix-up between an unfamiliar keeper and the defence, a 50-50 penalty (can't really complain about it) from a scramble there wouldn't have been had Pat still had confidence in his keeper when he called it, and then the third was right at the death when we were chasing the draw.

You could also look at the couple of chances we had to go 2-0 or 2-1 up and that an excellent header from Ciaran came off the bar and then they went straight down the other end and scored. But in reality, though we came close to snatching a draw, it would have been larceny.

They were an excellent and well balanced side and had at least 4 quality ball carriers prepared to take a man on. Concede territory like we did and players like that will cut you apart by building movements from the uncontested space around the halfway line. Playing a deep defensive line just gives them an opportunity to gain more momentum before reaching that line and to pull defenders out of position with decoy runs that open space for those midfield runners. We've given plenty of teams the opportunity to do that to us but Roys Rovers were the only ones with the players to really capitalise on the sheer amount of space our deep position afforded them.

On the flip side, it also meant that when we did get playing some decent football (and we did so very nicely in a few spells), we were starting those movements from very deep and even after a few nice touches the move would often break down before we even got to the final third due to the positioning of the Roys players. Net result was the game was primarily played in our two-thirds of the pitch, which explains why so many of the loose balls they picked up led to a chance whereas the loose balls we picked up were too far from their goal to threaten.

Both before and after going 1-0 up, we were lined up with effectively a siege mentality with 6 of our players camped very close to our goal. Des had drawn the defensive line at that marker 10 yards outside our box, but we were deeper than that more often than not. It is a pity that we were missing 3 regulars, but our recent approach suggests to me that we would have had a broadly similar approach regardless of availability.

This is not about strikers vs. defenders, it is more fundamental than that - it is about the overall success of the team: I feel that will give ourselves a better chance of success by taking a reasonably positive approach and playing the game in the opponents' two-thirds and focusing more on giving them something to worry about rather than worrying about what they are doing all the time. We don't seem to play our own game at the moment.

True, this is the zillionth time I've said something along those lines on here but last night was just such an absolute classic example of how defending deep actually puts you more at risk I can't let it go: we need to address this and we need to do so now - noone that understands the game of football could look at the match last night and say that our approach didn't increase their chances and we wouldn't have been better served by pushing up and taking the game to them. True, they may have been better man for man and approach mightn't change that, but it would have been tighter (scoreline does not reveal the sheer number of chances they had).

I really think if we play with that positive approach we have the players to take 15 points from the remaining five games and maybe even get close to catching up on the goal difference. This ain't over and Roys will now be feeling the pressure in every game and may drop points. We are better than each of the teams we have yet to play, why not play like it?

On the plus side, the spirit and committment of every single one of our players last night cannot be questioned and I wouldn't point to anyone in particular as having a bad game. That's to the credit of all and particulalry those lads stepping in for the absentees, and our fitness and belief did come through in those last 10 when we were really pushing for an equaliser.

It's a long way from over....

helimachoptor

I'll have to agree with Jules on this, we were very deep but not because we wanted to, they really did lay siege to our goal. Collie and Pat dropped deep to try and pick up the ball and as Jules says most of the passing broke down in the final third of the pitch.

We need to take some lessons from this. The few times we did attack we looked good, A goal from a corner and we could have had a couple more in the first half. But they took control and as Jules said we worked hard and ran for the 60 mins, but they had some very good players who kep the ball and made it hard for us to get it back.

In all honesty their first goal was lucky. One of their players was called Keith, he called it and Pat left it as he thought it was me and then with the scramble in the box they bundled it over the line.

Long way to go, 15 points up for grabs with both ourselves and RR having to play Ket.


TUE JUL 14 19:15 WES2 Bareassalona Roys Rovers
TUE JUL 14 20:15 WES2 Boardeaux Ravenhill

TUE JUL 21 19:15 WES2 Roys Rovers Fabulous Benedictine Monks
TUE JUL 21 21:15 WES1 Boardeaux Perrem Design Hardware

TUE JUL 28 19:15 WES2 Roys Rovers Ravenhill
TUE JUL 28 21:15 WES1 Glenwood Rovers Boardeaux

TUE AUG 4 19:15 WES2 Roys Rovers Perrem Design Hardware
TUE AUG 4 20:15 WES2 Ketamine Rovers Boardeaux

TUE AUG 11 19:15 WES1 Roys Rovers Ketamine Rovers
TUE AUG 11 20:15 WES1 Shackthar Senseless Boardeaux

These are our fixtures. All very very winable and the chance to start scoring goals.
We'll ahve a tough game against Ket, but hopefully they can do us a favour on the last fame of the season.

FrankGrimes

helimachoptor wrote: »

In all honesty their first goal was lucky. One of their players was called Keith, he called it and Pat left it as he thought it was me and then with the scramble in the box they bundled it over the line.

Wow, didn't know about that, that's pretty jammy alright....me and Ciaran were looking at each other going 'what the f**k just happened there?' but that makes sense now...one of those things I guess.

Yeh, agree that it's not necessarily a conscious decision to sit deep as it can be a natural response to an continued pressure, though addressing it will require consciously thinking about our positioning and pushing up when we notice it happening. Very valid point that Roys have the players to cause us trouble regardless of our setup, but the setup point will become very important in our final 5 games.

Agree there's still a very real possibility we can win this league - plenty of teams have slipped up in far more advantageous positions than Roys are in right now.

homerjay2005

in all fairness lads, theres no excuse for a mix up like that!:o

_blank_

I thought that fella's name was Quiche.

helimachoptor

That was how it sounded with his bogger accent

dfx-

I thought we were defending pretty well in the first half. They got through in behind and in front, but Karl and the defenders were handling it. In the second half, a conscious attempt was to push up and in particular get Pat and Colly out. In my opinion, it is no coincidence as soon as this happened, they got at us...they had numerous chances with some scrambling from Karl and others. A quick free-kick, Karl missed the ball and it was a tap-in. And more chances, then the non-penalty and more chances.

Having said that, we've played worse and won, especially in recent weeks.

FrankGrimes

dfx- wrote: »

I thought we were defending pretty well in the first half. They got through in behind and in front, but Karl and the defenders were handling it. In the second half, a conscious attempt was to push up and in particular get Pat and Colly out. In my opinion, it is no coincidence as soon as this happened, they got at us...they had numerous chances with some scrambling from Karl and others. A quick free-kick, Karl missed the ball and it was a tap-in. And more chances, then the non-penalty and more chances.

Having said that, we've played worse and won, especially in recent weeks.

No, I think you're off the mark there Daryl. The first half was absolute backs-to-the-walls stuff and they had at least 3 clear opportunities they should have scored before we went 1-0 up which was a set-piece goal against the run of play.

Each of the defenders did a great job and all 4 made at least one critical intervention. The problem was that we were so deep those interventions were last gasp by their nature.

I really don't see how you could look at it objectively and decide that us conceding was in anyway related to pushing up a bit in the second-half (though I'd argue we didn't really push up at all until we did concede) as that would be to ignore the fact that they had a crazy number of clearcut chances long before then so that deep line was not working as they were getting chances. That their strikers's finishing was truly shocking (I counted at least 8 shots over the bar) is irrelevant as it does not reverse the fact that the system in the first half was giving up chances.

I fully agree that we have played worse and won recently (again - inidividually I thought everyone did at least ok last night) but I really think taking the view that things were going well before we finally conceded would be like sticking our heads in the sands and failing to take the opportunity to address a systematic problem that we really need to resolve ASAP. The solution is not to go even more defensive. The solution is to push up by 15-20 yards and play the game in the opposition's territory more with our defence playing a much higher line regardless of the positioning of the opposition strikers. You'll find the strikers quickly realise they are out of the game when going beyond that line and will generally come back to it. I have absolute confidence that our defenders have the ability to snuff out the vast majority of moves that do reach that higher line.

Spoke to one of the Roy's centre-halves that I work with today and he really couldn't believe just how deep we played. They clocked it quite early and consciously pushed more men forward 'as there was noone for us to mark'.

dfx-

In the first half Jules, it was back-to-the-wall stuff, but if you look at the chances they created in that first half and you look at the second half, you see why they scored in the second half and not the first.

In the first half, we made interventions and gave away lots of corners, but they never threatened from them. Their best chance was when they got in behind early on when Karl saved and when they pulled the ball back from the sideline and had a shot from the edge of the box which Karl pulled off a great save. In the first half Pat and Colly were very deep, almost extra-centre-halves. but we were defending well, if deep. At half-time the talk was of pushing Colly and Pat up and getting Dan to do it if he noticed and thats what happened. And as with previous weeks, this meant a huge gap between midfielders and defenders that they exploited.

If you look at the goals and the chances they had in the second half, they were 3-4 yards out than the edge of the box as in the first half. The first goal was from 3 yards out, the penalty was given for 'a foul' about 5 yards out and the third goal was scored from a 2 yard tap-in and that's not including the times where Karl was scrambling to clear the ball and when we went 3-4-3 and pushed out even further, they got in behind at will. They got a lot closer to our goal in the second half with less defensive bodies in there and they took the chances. They could just push on and play right through us because we didn't have the bodies to make the challenges...they could've walked the ball in whereas in the first half they couldn't because Geoff, Dan, Keith, Karl, Lepo, Pat, Colly would've been there to get in the way. At times in the second half, we had half the players back and it's no coincidence that that is when they scored 3 goals from close range.

Furthermore if you remember the 1-0 win a few weeks ago with Martin's goal - we went into that game thinking of how many to win by and started out way too positive and they killed us upfront and in midfield. It was only poor finishing and man-marking by Martin and Colly at the end that we got away with it and finished comfortably. As soon as we come out against a side going at us, we have trouble. It has happened more than once.

FrankGrimes

dfx- wrote: »

In the first half Jules, it was back-to-the-wall stuff, but if you look at the chances they created in that first half and you look at the second half, you see why they scored in the second half and not the first.

In the first half, we made interventions and gave away lots of corners, but they never threatened from them. Their best chance was when they got in behind early on when Karl saved and when they pulled the ball back from the sideline and had a shot from the edge of the box which Karl pulled off a great save. In the first half Pat and Colly were very deep, almost extra-centre-halves. but we were defending well, if deep. At half-time the talk was of pushing Colly and Pat up and getting Dan to do it if he noticed and thats what happened. And as with previous weeks, this meant a huge gap between midfielders and defenders that they exploited.

If you look at the goals and the chances they had in the second half, they were 3-4 yards out than the edge of the box as in the first half. The first goal was from 3 yards out, the penalty was given for 'a foul' about 5 yards out and the third goal was scored from a 2 yard tap-in and that's not including the times where Karl was scrambling to clear the ball and when we went 3-4-3 and pushed out even further, they got in behind at will. They got a lot closer to our goal in the second half with less defensive bodies in there and they took the chances. They could just push on and play right through us because we didn't have the bodies to make the challenges...they could've walked the ball in whereas in the first half they couldn't because Geoff, Dan, Keith, Karl, Lepo, Pat, Colly would've been there to get in the way. At times in the second half, we had half the players back and it's no coincidence that that is when they scored 3 goals from close range.

Furthermore if you remember the 1-0 win a few weeks ago with Martin's goal - we went into that game thinking of how many to win by and started out way too positive and they killed us upfront and in midfield. It was only poor finishing and man-marking by Martin and Colly at the end that we got away with it and finished comfortably. As soon as we come out against a side going at us, we have trouble. It has happened more than once.

I disagree with most of that. It seems you're effectively advocating playing a deep line all the time (even against weaker teams) and playing with 4 centre-halves.

I think you're only looking at consequences without looking at the root cause, which is that by sitting so deep we are not positioned to effectively fight for possession and breaking balls in the middle third of the pitch. As any manager or coach will tell you, whoever wins the middle third will generally control the game. Dig a trench in your own final third and you'll never win that middle third.

Several outstanding interventions aside, if their strikers had been even half-decent finishers (in addition to being excellent ball carriers), they would definitely have scored in the first half.

We defend as a unit very effectively, starting with strikers chasing down every ball and midfielders getting behind the ball very early when we lose it and then with an excellent back 4 unit winning a high % of tussles. What we don't do well is attack as a unit: our midfield pushes up when we're in possession but the defence (with the regular exception of Keith at right full) generally does not. Our defensive line is generally dictated by the position of the furthest forward opposition player rather than the other way around like most teams in this league do it regardless of there being no offside.

That gap between the midfield and defence is why when our attacks broke down they picked up far more breaking ball than we did - our defence won nowehere near as many of those balls as Roys defence did because when we attacked our defence was still very deep whereas when Roys attacked their defence was positioned almost on the halfway line.

I would argue that the same thing happened against Shacktar the other week - even when we were trying to be attacking, we still had our defence far too deep and that very same gap between midfield and defence was evident and is why we looked so vulnerable every time they countered. It is a lot easier to prevent an attack in the first place by winning the breaking ball than it is to deal with an attacker who has momentum built up before he reaches our deep defensive line.

How we ended up conceding the goals (and the miracle that Shacktar failed to score) is almost irrelevant - the lesson that needs to be learned is that believing that a deep defensive line limits our vulnerability is a misconception as it gives the opposition the edge in that middle third and once a team uses that platform effectively (like Roys did but few other teams have done), it just becomes a matter of time before that defensive line is breached, no matter how well the individuals play.

If anyone can't see the problems I've outlined above, I really think the only way they are going to get it is if we had a video of the match to demonstrate it - it'd be blatantly clear then. I think it's high time this approach was at least given a chance to prove its merits as the downsides of the current approach have been clear quite often recently. That's the last I'll say on the matter.

mrgavo

Lads, this bickering between us cant be good for the team! ok we lost and we played **** and i thought the scoreline was flattering really-they bossed the game from start to finish and could have scored 6! I partly take some of the blame because i should have put us 2-0 up, i wasn't expecting the ball to come to me and then i was off balance. In my opinion and what i've learned over the years is that THE BEST FORM OF DEFENSE IS TO ATTACK!!!!

Anyway i'm off to Espana so best of luck next week we owe Ravenhill a beating!

helimachoptor

Jules some good points there.

From the fixtures we have RR play before in each of the remaining games so we will know exactly what is expected of us.

TBH I would expect RR to win all of their remaining games. They are going to have a tough tough game against Ket but if as expected they win them all bar that one, we will need to win each of our games and we will need to start scoring more and obviously not conceding.

We have the players to do it, we have the fitness to do it and after coming so close last year I know we have the will and desire to win it.

Lets forget about the game, we've 5 games left to show what we can do.

FrankGrimes

mrgavo wrote: »

Lads, this bickering between us cant be good for the team! ok we lost and we played **** and i thought the scoreline was flattering really-they bossed the game from start to finish and could have scored 6! I partly take some of the blame because i should have put us 2-0 up, i wasn't expecting the ball to come to me and then i was off balance. In my opinion and what i've learned over the years is that THE BEST FORM OF DEFENSE IS TO ATTACK!!!!

Anyway i'm off to Espana so best of luck next week we owe Ravenhill a beating!

Ah yeh I know what you're saying Gav though I don't regard this as bickering - different lads have different views on things and I think the more we understand where each other is coming from the more likely we'll be to get a consensus on what to do.

We're still in with a good shout and yeh attacking each team from the off will give us our best chance of winning those games and narrowing the goal difference gap.

dfx-

Jules, of all the games I've watched (I've missed Ketamine) I can remember once where the opposition played a high line through the game where you were in behind (and I remember solely because of its unusual-ness) and certainly not when we were pushing forward. When the pressure is on defences in this league, they don't try to come out, because the more bodies in the way the better. They had two good chances in the first half, they had 6 or 7 sitters in the second half. It could've been over with 20 minutes left.

The Shacktar game happened because we started thinking lots of goals and underestimated them. I remember very clearly - there was to be no dm and the full backs were given the instruction to push on leaving 2-on-2 at the back who destroyed us and it was only when we dropped in and man-marked the midfield that we stopped the threat. We don't play well when we attack when under pressure be it Shacktar or Roys. We will have to agree to disagree

Alternatively, we can just play Clay and win