Brief Synopsis sponsored by Bromleigh House

[mutley marvel]

Just watched the whole game back - Burtons 2nd half tweaking certainly took the wind out of our sails & when they scored they probably thought they had a chance to get a equaliser

What the 2nd half showing from the boys has shown me is that they are so in sync with each other, they are totally comfortable with each other , they all know each others games , they are so well drilled & they are totally comfortable with the drilled down game plan- i have not seen any hint of headless chicken- rush of blood to the head or total panic when we concede

Maybe the bonus of having recruited mature, seasoned pros is our game management seems alot more controlled- last season we would have crumbled & a winning position in a game could have panned out in a draw & possibly a loss

Some one has mentioned RLs plan B- maybe he is totally comfortable with all of the squad being on the same hymn sheet, being totally in sync with the game plan that he only needs an occasion tweak & he now has the players that are more than capable of achieving the objective of his game plan

We are turning into an extremely well oiled machine that teams will find extremely hard to beat as shown by our current unbeaten run

We can only play what is put in front of us- yes we have yet to play teams all around us & Oxford on Saturday will be a good marker as to how far we have developed into being a strong cohesive team that could be in the mix come the business end of the season

 

[Graham Clark]

Another couple of points to make and they both stem from listening to Luggy last night. Firstly, everyone knows their job in the team They are well coached in that regard. James Wilson alluded to it in his post match interview.

Secondly, the collective team spirit. That was the hallmark of Luggy mark one’s teams. It seems to be the hallmark of this team too. It will help us to dig deep and grind out results when adversity raises its head. Coming back to get a result when conceding first is evidence of that. A long way to go but we ARE on the right track.

 

[Mannamead Green]

Pretty much in agreement with that, though I felt Agard deserved more than a 5, he worked extremely hard and contributed a fair amount.

Fair one Cobi, maybe I am being a little harsh. While he wasn't quite at the pace of the game you certainly couldn't question his work ethic.

 

[Duncanrice1]

Yep, he had obviously been watching the L1 highlights show!!!

 

[rongreenblood]

Just a quick point. The second Argyle goal was sheer class, and should satisfy even the more ardent sceptic that the Argyle data-analytical approach to the game is the way to go. Doncaster surprised Argyle from a failed Argyle corner to score their goal from a long throw-out by the goalie. The stats say that you are incredibly vulnerable after a failed corner (as likely to concede after your own corner as score), and I said at the time on this very forum to boot that I hoped that the data boys had put 2 and 2 together here. The answer came loud and clear in the space of just two weeks. Bet Coops had been practicing that overhand throw ever since the Donny match! Well done to all concerned!

Agree with this post,and it probably supports the idea of leaving someone,or two up when defending a corner,i don't like to see everyone back when defending a corner.

 

[Gary S]

Laid low with toothache yesterday, so a couple of very belated thoughts..

The first half was truly excellent, with everyone contributing to the show.

Hasselbank did a bit of a job on Lowe with his change of formation in the
second half, and we didn't really deal with it too well. Hope other teams don't
look at that as a way to nullify us.

And what was that last substitution about ? This is a serious question. I realize
there must be some logic behind this recent trend for exceedingly late changes,
but it escapes me. I'd be genuinely grateful if someone could explain.

Bring on Oxford.

 

[Andy70]

I think it's fairly common for teams that are trying to run down the clock to make late substitutions. I believe the thinking behind it is to break up the momentum of the opposition's attacking play and give the defense a chance to reset and reorganise. I'm not saying that I think it's a good idea, just attempting to explain it.

 

[Pogleswoody]

I think it's fairly common for teams that are trying to run down the clock to make late substitutions. I believe the thinking behind it is to break up the momentum of the opposition's attacking play and give the defense a chance to reset and reorganise. I'm not saying that I think it's a good idea, just attempting to explain it.

As far as i could see he was stood on the touchline for 3/4 minutes but the ball didn't go out of play or they were deep in our half. The sub came on at the first opportunity but that was later than Lowey thought it would be.

 

[Green guile]

Laid low with toothache yesterday, so a couple of very belated thoughts..

The first half was truly excellent, with everyone contributing to the show.

Hasselbank did a bit of a job on Lowe with his change of formation in the
second half, and we didn't really deal with it too well. Hope other teams don't
look at that as a way to nullify us.

And what was that last substitution about ? This is a serious question. I realize
there must be some logic behind this recent trend for exceedingly late changes,
but it escapes me. I'd be genuinely grateful if someone could explain.

Bring on Oxford.

I might be wrong, but doesn't Randell now qualify for the Pizza Cup as a player who played in the last league game?

 

[Green guile]

As far as i could see he was stood on the touchline for 3/4 minutes but the ball didn't go out of play or they were deep in our half. The sub came on at the first opportunity but that was later than Lowey thought it would be.

That was exactly what happened. From memory the ball went out twice in the 4/5 mins Randell was waiting to come on; both times for Burton corners. Quite correctly, the opportunites to make a substitution on these occasions were turned down. It became very touch and go if he would get on at all.

 

[Knibbsworth]

Laid low with toothache yesterday, so a couple of very belated thoughts..

The first half was truly excellent, with everyone contributing to the show.

Hasselbank did a bit of a job on Lowe with his change of formation in the
second half, and we didn't really deal with it too well. Hope other teams don't
look at that as a way to nullify us.

And what was that last substitution about ? This is a serious question. I realize
there must be some logic behind this recent trend for exceedingly late changes,
but it escapes me. I'd be genuinely grateful if someone could explain.

Bring on Oxford.

Subs made in injury time often waste time and it never gets added back on.
Secondly it disrupts opposition momentum.
When they are building up pressure, having continual attacks and gaining confidence, any kind of delay interferes with that momentum.
As for not going on, it is an understood rule that you don’t make a sub when defending a corner. When everyone knows their roles, the worst thing that can happen is a confused sub marking the wrong man or not knowing exactly what they should be doing.
Lastly, managers often put on players they like, especially younger ones, so they can pick up appearance bonuses in their pay packet.

 

[jerryatricjanner]

The time is added on if a substitution is made in added time unless the referee isn't doing his job correctly.
I didn't realise non playing subs missed out on appearance bonuses whilst those that came on received them.

 

[JannerinCardiff]

I might be wrong, but doesn't Randell now qualify for the Pizza Cup as a player who played in the last league game?

That’s absolutely true. A good sub to make with the papa John’s trophy in mind so we can give more 1st teamers a rest.

 

[Knibbsworth]

The time is added on if a substitution is made in added time unless the referee isn't doing his job correctly.
I didn't realise non playing subs missed out on appearance bonuses whilst those that came on received them.

The time very often doesn't get added on. And if it does, it will be a regulation 30 seconds. A slow walk off from Jordan Houghton, who knows the game, clapping all four ends of the ground as he goes off, whispers an instruction to Panutche Camara on his way off, is greeted by a pat on the back from Lowe and a handshake from Schuey, before Randell does some knee jumps, loosens his neck muscles, pulls his socks down and then back up, and slowly jogs on.
It's all to drain time.
Next time you are watching a game, see what time is added on, check if subs are made after that and see whether the ref adds on any time for that sub. As I say, they very often don't bother from what I've noticed.
As for appearance fees for non-playing subs? If you haven't come off the bench you haven't made an appearance.
You won't win an England cap if you sit the whole game on the bench.
Not sure I am with you there.

 

[davie nine]

Agree with this post,and it probably supports the idea of leaving someone,or two up when defending a corner,i don't like to see everyone back when defending a corner.

I think it is, perhaps, worth pointing out that our second goal did not come following a Burton corner.
Burton had a long throw in that was headed out by an Argyle defender (Wilson, I think), it was then crossed back in from open play, Coops caught it comfortably and released the fantastic throw out that Hardie latched on to and outpaced the full back to the byline, waited briefly for Broom to arrive and convert the team goal initiated by Cooper, continued by Hardie and converted by the tireless Broom.
I wasn’t there, unfortunately, but it was a pleasure to watch the extended highlights and see this move developed from the coaching manual and brilliantly executed by 3 switched on team players.