-
Welcome to PASOTI. Sponsored by Lang & Potter
Brief Synopsis (Lincoln)
- Thread starter Tugboat
- Start date
So most teams have defenders 6ft and under? Don't think so. The corners are so predictable and hardly ever produce anything. Time to go for a drink when we get one.
Disagree.
A goalkeeper (even a comparatively short goalkeeper) can jump and use his arms to catch a floated ball, thus making himself higher than any potential header of the ball. Most CBs of opposition teams are also 6 footers.
Interestingly the Sports Quotes and Facts website details;
'Despite often being the bane of many supporters’ lives, stats suggest in the ‘big five’, that short corners are actually more effective – leading to roughly four per cent more goals and almost ten per cent more attempts on goal.'
A game of two halves, which was more down to Lincoln being very poor and then stepping it up in my opinion.
They were shocking first half. We really should have punished them. Got into some great crossing opportunities and just didn’t do enough with the final ball. Eventually it took one of our two forwards to show that bit of quality on the final ball and a neat finish from Jephcott.
Second half they pressed us, more of our passes went astray and they began to use the pace of Whittaker and Scully to really hurt us. Had they of been more composed in the final third they could well of had 3 or 4. Scully in particular missed a great chance when he cut inside and shanked it wide.
We did have some chances ourselves, Randell’s free kick was a good save and Jephcott had a chance which looked in from where I was sat for a brief moment.
Agree with the comments on wingbacks. Edwards and Grant are centre mids evolved into wingbacks and it shows. They aren’t athletic enough. I think about the good sides that got out of L1 a few years ago with the likes of Nathan Byrne and Elliot Bennett bombing it up and down the right hand side. Of course a player of that quality is expensive, but we need players in the same mould to be able to play how we want most effectively. Garrick instead of Edwards would be a good start.
Thought Randell had a great game, and Critchlow played well on his debut. Mike Cooper was unusually poor in his distribution. Lots of effort from the front two but I don’t think Ennis had a shot. Broom was poor although busy, and lacked that bit of quality to hit the target when it mattered.
Two big games coming up this week, hopefully we can get a minimum of 4 points.
They were shocking first half. We really should have punished them. Got into some great crossing opportunities and just didn’t do enough with the final ball. Eventually it took one of our two forwards to show that bit of quality on the final ball and a neat finish from Jephcott.
Second half they pressed us, more of our passes went astray and they began to use the pace of Whittaker and Scully to really hurt us. Had they of been more composed in the final third they could well of had 3 or 4. Scully in particular missed a great chance when he cut inside and shanked it wide.
We did have some chances ourselves, Randell’s free kick was a good save and Jephcott had a chance which looked in from where I was sat for a brief moment.
Agree with the comments on wingbacks. Edwards and Grant are centre mids evolved into wingbacks and it shows. They aren’t athletic enough. I think about the good sides that got out of L1 a few years ago with the likes of Nathan Byrne and Elliot Bennett bombing it up and down the right hand side. Of course a player of that quality is expensive, but we need players in the same mould to be able to play how we want most effectively. Garrick instead of Edwards would be a good start.
Thought Randell had a great game, and Critchlow played well on his debut. Mike Cooper was unusually poor in his distribution. Lots of effort from the front two but I don’t think Ennis had a shot. Broom was poor although busy, and lacked that bit of quality to hit the target when it mattered.
Two big games coming up this week, hopefully we can get a minimum of 4 points.
Agree re staff. Appleton changed to 4 up front , our 3 were out numbered and nobody picked up scully. We could all see that but nothing was done to address this on the pitch. Bizarre.
- Oct 31, 2010
- 24,356
- 1
- 10,639
Hindsight is great but Lincoln were obviously expected to come at us for the start of the second half so our two wing-backs should have just sat deep to ride out the early storm.
Edwards was too gung-ho all game.
Edwards was too gung-ho all game.
Should work but rarely does.Why don't we hit it hard and low sometimes and hope to deflect it into the goal?
Agreed. Some of them remind me of the "floaty" corners produced for an entire season by Bobby Reid (or whatever he calls himself now).
Or do something completely different. How long do they have on the training pitch?
They also created two more or less open goals in the first half from quick breaks into acres of space down the left wing. We were lucky they fluffed both chances and it was surely obvious that it was something we needed to address at half time.
Instead, exactly the same thing happened again and this time they scored.
Together with some poor substitutions & confusing positional changes, it wasn’t a good advert for the tactical acumen of our coaching team.
Absolutely 100%. Isnt that one of the functions of this new defence coach?. Early days but at the moment things seem to be getting worse. I thought we were lucky to still be in the game.
Like he was last week at Wednesday ! Bolton carried the can for the skipper in my opinion at Hillsborough
They had only won 2 of their previous 10 games before us. I wouldn't call that "in form"
I felt we were just as good as them. But lost it to naive tactics by the manager. We don't have poor defenders like last season. We just needed to keep it tight for a bit whilst they had their tails up. Scarr and Wilson are too slow to play such a high line against pacey attackers. They needed support which the manager neglected to give them.
Have a look at the highlights. , most of Lincolns best moments involve Critchlow being out of position, or not strong enough. He was completely at fault for the second goal . A centre back who fails to get off the ground in that situation is pathetic. Camara looks at him in disbelief. In the first half Houghton had to speak to him about his positioning. Now to be clear I am not saying he is a poor player, what I am saying is that he clearly had not idea where he should be positioned in a back three. He did not receive the ball once from Cooper and our whole system is based on the Centre backs going wide, he had no idea what to do. He defended narrow which caused major problems. It just looked to me like another young defender not used to our system being thrown under the bus. Rather like Watts last year who almost gave up, he found it so difficult and yet he is a really good player. How Critchlow can be some peoples MOM when his failure caused the oppositions winning goal is beyond me.
He was at fault for the goal as was Camara for not picking up the finisher. Overall he played well as most agree. Will take time to get used to the system. The problem was more the wing backs out of position leaving the back 3 exposed.