Football: Poker forum/Grosvenor Lane III - March 8th

ditpoker · 08-03-2009 2:46pm

could one or two of the poker lads bring up and extra red jersey. carfax has none!

shoutman · 08-03-2009 3:23pm

An extra one for me too if anyone has one, I'll bring along my villa jersey just in case (its claret coloured so not far off red....

tonc76 · 08-03-2009 3:27pm

Sorry for late notice but something has come up and I can't make it today.

Best of luck

Thomas

The_Chopper · 08-03-2009 8:04pm

Final score was 5-3 to Jeff's team. I'll write something up in a while.

Everyone put in 100% and I was really proud of the performance

Theresalwaysone · 08-03-2009 8:23pm

Yeah 5-3. Im disappointed tbh.

aodea · 08-03-2009 8:40pm

good game lads. You all played very well. Was a competive game with some good football at times, mostly not great but we can be kind and put that down to the weather. Dont think we really showed up to be fair but we were lucky to win think our finishing was maybe a little better.

Can someone teach luke the rules of football

The_Chopper · 08-03-2009 10:23pm

For effort and commitment I could not have asked more of team – thanks guys.

RE: Match

Before the match we lost both our first choice RB (last minute pullout) and our first choice keeper (no show). Llyod stepped up to the mark and said he’d fill the void in goal. We started as follows

GK Llyod
RB Luke
LB Kev
CB Neil
CB Keith
RW Brian
LW Sam
CM Steve
CM Kevin
ST Daragh
ST Ricky

Defensively our game plan was to get stuck into them and not give them a chance to settle on the ball.

Attacking our game plan was to get the ball forward to the strikers and build from there.

There was a strong wind which we were playing into in the first third and for the first 20 minutes we were dominated. We battled really well with Steve, Neil and Keith getting stuck in. While our opponents had about 70% of the possession in this period they didn’t really create many chances. At the first third developed we started to get the ball down and play it a little and created the best chance when Sam played a great ball along the ground from left the right which I put wide from the edge of the box.

We had the wind in the second third and dominated for the opening 20 minutes, despite the dominance we weren’t able to get the break through and found ourselves 2 nil down. We were awarded a penalty shortly before the end of the period to make it 2-1. Towards the end of the period I had a chance to make it 2-2, but their keeper managed to recover and save it on the line. I really should have scored – and to make it worse they went straight down our end and made it 3-1. IMO the least we should have had at the end of this period was a draw and really we should have been ahead.

The third period is a real hard one to summarise. They did start to get on top, albeit really close, and there were plenty of chances at both ends. We came back in and made it 3-2 when Llyod played a good ball up to me, I flicked it on to Kevin and he finished brilliantly. Sam then played a great ball to me and once again I was unable to equalize as the keeper made a great save with his ear. They scored 2 quickly to make it 5-2 and the scoring was rounded off by Steve from the penalty spot.

It honestly could have been any score today, but I don’t think we deserved to lose by 2.

I am happy about how we defended. We really threw our bodies in, especially Steve and Luke. We kept it tight and won most things that came in around the box. We defended from the front line and tried to cut down the amount of ball Jeff got.

I was disappointed that we didn’t move the ball from back to front quicker. Every time we did we looked like we were going to score and with Brian especially, playing on the right wing, terrorising them. There were times when we (inc me) held on to it a couple of touches to much instead of playing someone in.

Llyod
Played really well and it was his best performance thus far.

Luke
Really got stuck into them and never let them away with much

Kev
Played his usual faultless game. Gave almost nothing and his distribution was good.

Neil & Keith
Both excellent – they stood up to everything as a unit. Balls in the air, on the floor, people trying to run at them. As a partnership they were the best on the field and play excellent together.

Brian
Gave them a torrid time, every time he got the ball they didn’t know what to do and he was unlucky to hit the bar in second period.

Sam
Battled well in the middle and when he had the chance gave some great balls.

Steve
Was like a possessed man in there – never gave their guys a chance to settle and distributed the ball well.

Kevin
Done a good job in there, despite not knowing anyone. As the game went on he grew more into the role and rounded off a great performance with arguably the goal of the game.

Daragh
Held up the ball well, and never gave their defenders any time to settle. He made some great off the ball runs and was very unlucky not to get in

Ricky
Guys I tried my hardest up there. Unfortunately it wasn’t one of my better days in front of goal. If I had taken my chances (of which I had 2 or 3 of the best chances) we would probably have won the game.

Personally I was very proud of the commitment we showed and honestly I couldn’t have asked for more effort. I think while we’re all extremely disappointed to lose we can hold our heads up as it would have been easy to throw the towel in. I’m gutted for the chances that I missed and my hamstring is in bits. Hearing it pop as I stretched for that ball was a little scary.

Thanks everyone.

aodea · 08-03-2009 10:47pm

The_Chopper wrote: »

Kevin
Done a good job in there, despite not knowing anyone. As the game went on he grew more into the role and rounded off a great performance with arguably the goal of the game.

QUOTE]

We will call it the second best goal of the game? Yeah thats about right.

Theresalwaysone · 08-03-2009 11:11pm

Obviously I am bitterly disappointed with the result but I do think we need to look at this through non rose tinted glasses. We are getting closer to beating them and saying everyone gave 100% or performer to their best, or that we should have won just isnt true.

It allows us to be happy with what was, by any league standard, a pretty average to bad performance. We conceded 5, missed more than a hatful of chances, dominated periods while not scoring and we defended poorly in spots too.

All of us here know that in order to improve our game we need to be honest, so lets transfer that life lesson to this match and see where we were weak, where we can improve and how we can do it. I know we are only a ragtag bunch of misfits thrown together for a laugh but we play well together and should be doing better.

I know myself what my weaknesses were, I know I was getting tired towards the end of the second 3rd. Very tired. Thats a fitness problem. I know that I was caught in possession twice and that I need to work harder on my long range shots. I also was a little bit lazy with the tracking back and getting up to support the attacks, preferring to sit in the middle and hold.

I am also playing football long enough now to know that all these problems here arent just my own and that they are all directly linked to other members of the team. I felt somewhat unsupported by Kevin (not Maloney) for most of the game, unlike I was with Donal. I also felt that our off the ball running was pretty poor, this made me have to think longer on the ball and so get caught on it. Im not saying these are soley the reasons for my flaws... Im just saying its a dynamic process and everyones performance directly effects your own.

I really did enjoy it though. Immensely. Thought it was great craic altogether.

jbravado · 08-03-2009 11:12pm

I honeslty think we could very easily of won the game-its dissapointing to be always saying the same things though.

We had chances and on another day Hj and Ricky would have bagged a couple each.
Much as it pains me to say it Steve had a terrific match-really is a ferocious tackler.
Brian is a great addition-hopefully he will play again.
I felt we really missed Donal to be honest-and felt the ball could have been realised quicker from midfield.
Personally felt I drifted out of the game at stages but put in a lot of tracking back and felt pretty sprightly even in the last few minutes.
Enjoyable game but sucks to be on the losing side again.

Breifne · 09-03-2009 12:30am

Lads,

sorry about today, was away with work for the weekend, for some reason i had this game down for next weekend, was only when Kayroo called this evening that realised it was today. Sorry to hear you lost, should be around in future.

shoutman · 09-03-2009 1:12am

First off I thought I ref'd the third segment of the game fairly and knew the majority of rules (the one where you cant play the ball when you are on the ground was a new one to me but bar that I don't think I missed anything).

As for the football I still have a shockingly bad touch, having never played football I'm more used to having the ball in my hand then at my feet and probably just try to think to far ahead besides thinking well I gotta control the ball first then look up then try and pass.

Still had fun though, would be great to play a match on real grass though.

Trippie · 09-03-2009 2:07am

Myself and Keith's conversation from earlier.

"Where was Breifne?"
"He's in Leitrim"
"Whats he doing there?"
"His sister"
"oh right"

careca · 09-03-2009 9:31am

My take on it.

Agree it was disappointing not to get a result as I sincerely thought we were the better team for large periods. Fifteen mins into the second third (sounds weird saying that) we were all over them and peppered the goal. However you have to take your chances when they come along. A couple of occasions I thought we just took a min too long on the ball and weren't willing to have a shot when we got the chance. Agree with Steve that our defending for some of the goals was poor. No way should a long ball be beating us (and its not the first time). We def tired for the third period but I suppose thats to be expected. I know its the same for both sides but not being able to play offside is -ev. When you're used to it,you subconsciously drift out the field, not worrying about strikers being left behind you.

They were very good down the spine of the team but we absolutely destroyed them down both flanks.

I thought our 14 gave a very good effort. Sam and Brian on the wings were fantastic. Great close control by both and Sam worked his socks off. Brian was a joy to watch, very very good footballer. I was actually laughing away to myself watching him drift by the defenders with ease. How many nutmegs had he?

Lloyd did very well despite the five goals as I can honestly say none of them were his fault. Keith had the best game I've seen from him, solid as usual. Brian in the middle played his way into the game and got better as it went on but, as you would expect, there wasn't much of a partnership with Steve.

For the second time running (his anyway) my MOTM award goes to Steve. Very critical of himself up above (^^^) but he gave a great performance, displaying all the attributes of a good player. Tackled hard, good control, tireless in tracking back and contested every ball in the air whether he thought he would win it or not. If I was back in the school yard and had first pick he would be the choice from the 30 (approx) on show. Well played.

Theresalwaysone · 09-03-2009 11:15am

Can we play the Soccer forum next Sunday?

09-03-2009 1:03pm

Couldn't agree with Neil more in his assessment. We got caught over the top and it was unforgivable. I was actually shouting for the defensive line to come up with me out of habit but given the lack of an offside rule that was not a good tactic; it just came from doing it thousands of times and I couldn't help myself really.

Thanks everyone for a great game. Hope your leg is feeling better Ricky.

The_Chopper · 09-03-2009 1:31pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Hope your leg is feeling better Ricky.

6-8 weeks before I kick a ball again I'm afraid

Theresalwaysone · 09-03-2009 1:45pm

The_Chopper wrote: »

6-8 weeks before I kick a ball again I'm afraid

ugh, the frustration. Sorry to hear that Ricky.

09-03-2009 1:46pm

The_Chopper wrote: »

6-8 weeks before I kick a ball again I'm afraid

Man that sucks. Unlucky.

Hectorjelly · 09-03-2009 1:51pm

It was a bit disappointing, I didn't play well; but I don't think we played very well as a team either. Off the ball we were good, but on the ball we didn't create much. There were a few good balls (from steve I think) that I nearly got onto, esp in the 1st third, but they dried up as the game went on. I ended up dropping deeper and deeper to try and get the ball and get it up to ricky, but that meant that I was often 60 yards away from the goal.

careca · 09-03-2009 2:58pm

The_Chopper wrote: »

6-8 weeks before I kick a ball again I'm afraid

Sorry to hear that Ricky.

ditpoker · 09-03-2009 3:19pm

definately the most even game we've had yet. steve was a huge bonus for you in the middle... and he's quicker than i gave him credit for, got a quality challenge in on me down the left flank, had to laugh when a few mins later i was still nursing my wounds (somehow i ended up with a very swollen finger from it, must have fallen funny) and he asked me if i was ok, somehow i dont think he'd have let up in the next tackle had i said i wasnt! :P AND it was a brilliant tackle, so..

also, no-one has mentioned my GOAL from the corner that i headed over the line only for a combo of lloyd/kev to claw it back out...

i also think that a few people i've spoken to and things i've read on here, believe that more possession and shots from distance against a quality keeper = better side. I think our backline isn't being given any credit for ability to soak up pressure. we've won 4 games this season 1-0 when the shot count is easily 15-5 to the opposition.

The notion of "better side" gets thrown around very easily. In my opinion i don't see how a backline that concedes 5 can be considered to have played better than a backline that conceded 3 that included 2 controversial penalties. Same said about the keepers. And i dont think the poker front line can be said to have performed better than our front line that scored 5 from fewer chances. I think the poker midfield may have battled better and won more ball and had more possession, but our midfield produced 2 goals, and 2 assists. i'd score the midfield as a draw. if a team I play for gets lucky and jams a 1-0 win or a 2-1 win i'll hold my hands up and say the opposition were a better team, i just simply dont believe that was the case yesterday.

finally... next one will be on grass!!!! it has to be!!!

LuckyLloyd · 09-03-2009 3:24pm

This post has been deleted.

ditpoker · 09-03-2009 3:36pm

Theresalwaysone · 09-03-2009 3:36pm

ditpoker wrote: »

definately the most even game we've had yet.

I also think that a few people i've spoken to and things i've read on here, believe that more possession and shots from distance against a quality keeper = better side. I think our backline isn't being given any credit for ability to soak up pressure. we've won 4 games this season 1-0 when the shot count is easily 15-5 to the opposition.

The notion of "better side" gets thrown around very easily. In my opinion i don't see how a backline that concedes 5 can be considered to have played better than a backline that conceded 3 that included 2 controversial penalties. Same said about the keepers. And i dont think the poker front line can be said to have performed better than our front line that scored 5 from fewer chances. I think the poker midfield may have battled better and won more ball and had more possession, but our midfield produced 2 goals, and 2 assists. i'd score the midfield as a draw. if a team I play for gets lucky and jams a 1-0 win or a 2-1 win i'll hold my hands up and say the opposition were a better team, i just simply dont believe that was the case yesterday.

finally... next one will be on grass!!!! it has to be!!!

I have to agree with most of this except that both penalties were stonewall penalties Jeff. He dragged him down for the first one, and the second one could not have been more of a push in the back. Your Centre half cannot justify having his hands on a players back in the box, when the player has his back to goal. Its pure stupidity.

Anto's goal was very lucky. Wind held it up, Lloyd could prob have done better and that was the ONE time I didnt track back*, I figured Kev would have had me covered in the middle but it didnt work out that way and I shouldnt have let Anto have so much space.

I thought your backline was quite good. I also think we didnt play at it the way we should have. We should have tried to target Duck and your fullbacks, especially Micks side. Instead it seemed we pinged balls in your direction allowing you to soak them up pretty easily.

I think your side were a "cleverer" side. You used the width superbly, Al is a very intelligent player, he brings the support runnners into the game very very well.

I dont think we deserved to win tbh, but we are getting closer, thats all we can do.

*(ONE time I didnt track back may be a lie.)

Trippie · 09-03-2009 4:23pm

We were far too one dimensional in our attack which made it much easier for jeff's lads. Sammy and Brian ended up doing the same tricks and going in the same direction over and over again due to a lack of creative options. Admittedly it did take quite a while for the lads to cop on but they did eventually. The ball was always shifted forward, rarely sideways and never backwards and while attacking the lack of pace in the defense when jeff was off trying to beat lloyd from 65 yards and stuff it wasnt a good strategy when he waas there and one or two of their midfield is tracking back.

The difference between the sides was that when they attacked they were willing to check back, turn around and maintain possession until an opening made itself clear where as when we attacked we got the ball and went forward we put the head down and ran regardless of how many people there were there. Then when we gave up possession we didnt put pressure on their defence and they had an easier time getting the ball from the back than we did even though we were roughly playing the same 4-5-1 formation near the end. The presence of their 3 men in central midfield made it a lot tougher for our two lads and we ended up forcing the play and trying either long balls int he hope that someone would get on them or relying on sammy and brian to beat four people. When they did manage to beat 2 or 3 of them there was no real support around them for them to offload to, it was just lump it in the box and hope something happens.

Also this isnt a criticism as i said the same to steve and keith last night but we will never be able to beat them or play to a higher standard if all everyone focuses on is the one dimensional play that we are playing with now. I think i compared Keith to Rio ferdinand in saying that everyone has to be willing to try other things as well, while our defensive partnership was solid and it dealt with crosses, got stuck in etc etc it will have to do more in future. I am sure even one of them taking the ball out from the defense like what jeff was doing will free up space for steve etc as he wont have the normal 3 guys marking him trying (in vein obviously steve) to stop him running the show. The same counts for the midfield, wingers and forwards. It is clear that despite trying to do the basics right it is not good enough. We need stop thinking about the pairings and units on the field and rather start thinking as a collective team. The play between certain partnerships is very good but that makes it harder to link up with the rest of the team and we wont win or play better unless we start playing like a team. I do know its a lot easier to say that we need to play like a team after only a few outings together but that was the difference between jeff's lads and us.

aodea · 09-03-2009 5:32pm

my goal was awsome and you all know it. Also jeffs shot was over the line. Was a good game think the Lane were a bit lazy with the fact we have a game tonight. The movement on the lane is a bit better than the poker team have a few lads who play a pass then dont offer an option or play a pass and admire how nice it was instead of looking for a return. The fact that you had the wind for two thirds made it easier for you to attack but a lot of half efforts from long range aint really going to trouble Tom. Can only really remember him making two or three saves so not really that much of a threat.
The poker lads midfield unit was very good and in fairness problem had the better of us in battling terms but maybe we shaded it with moving the ball a bit quicker. Couple of the poker teams lads take a lot out of the ball, which disrupts the movement. Also not as good going forward as a unit.
Defo closer from what i have heard from the last games. Was fun.

09-03-2009 11:13pm

OK, wasn't going to do this but I suppose it kind of needs doing. I am gonna give Jeff and Anto some feedback too fwiw I hope they take it as well as we have taken their comments.

Grosvenor Lane:

Strengths:
1. You are very well organised and this is by far and away your greatest strength. Everyone seems to know their job and they stick rigidly to it. This breeds a calm even under pressure which is admirable and more than likely contributed to the close wins Jeff alluded to above.

2. You are very fit for the most part. In most positions on the pitch your players seem very fit and this allows you to play at the same level for longer than your opponents. Obviously this is a serious advantage.

3. Tactically astute. The ball is recycled very well among your team and you attack as a complete unit, incorporating the CB's and full-backs in your attacking play as often as you use quick breaks. This makes you much more difficult to play against as you can adjust to the strengths of your opponents to minimise them and attack their weaknesses.

Weaknesses

1. Defence: Jeff. He is your best player in my opinion, and yesterday was a huge plus for you. However; I am reasonably certain from the 2 games I have played against you that when he moves out of CB that your team does not function at anywhere close to the level it does when he is there. Were I managing a team against you I would sacrifice a striker to mark Jeff. Taking him out of the game reduces your options significantly. The few times Jeff wandered out of CB you guys were a shambles at the back and Ricky got 1-on-1 with your (excellent) goalkeeper both times we moved it forward before Jeff returned. He is a massive liability if you continue to rely on him. You need another option to take that responsibility away from Jeff when teams apply pressure to him or you will find yourselves greatly limited by it.

2. Midfield: Playing the formation you did yesterday you never got on top in midfield as much as you should. Steve was essentially playing midfield on his own and completely occupied the three Grosvenor players. I cannot comment too specifically but I did see a problem with your midfield. They are far too close together and got in each others way quite often. They clearly were not comfortable with their starting positions when attacking although they defended very well through the centre. I would make a caveat to this though in that they were, again, too close together and it was easy enough to take them out of the game when the play was switched. Our total inability to do this meant it was not exploited but there was acres of room available to a team who does utilise their full backs.

3. Forwards: Alan (I think was his name) much as he seemed to dislike me (ah well) plays your system very well. He creates space well and brings his midfield into the game equally well. I can't really fault the way he played given, as a CB, we shifted 5. However, as I will address below, the 1st and 2nd goals should never have gone in, the 3rd one would never happen if offsides were played, the 4th was excellent and the 5th could also have been cleared quite easily but can't take away from the finish. There was a real lack of creativity from your team which I was surprised by. Your system should facilitate a greater degree of attacking potential but you lack someone in the centre to really unlock a defence. The way Alan plays up front certainly allows for a more formulaic approach to attacking play which works quite well but you may struggle for goals against better organised teams within this system.

I would make one or two further comments. You are WAY too hung up on your "training ground routines". The kick off routines never worked and were the cheapest way you gave the ball away.

Your players dive in all over the park. They are way way too eager to get the ball rather than just pressuring the player and our technically better players (Sam, Steve, Kev, Brian) skinned your players regularly. Hell, I am in no way a quick player and I fleeced one of your midfielders because he just dived straight in. This should never ever have happened and cutting this out would give you much more joy. Also, I know you dispute the penalties but they were nailed on and the 2nd one in particular underlines a real naivety at the back. You cannot put your hands on someones back like that. I genuinely cannot believe you think that one was controversial Jeff. You should take that guy out and shake him till he gets that putting your hands on someones back that blatantly in the box is just madness. Disciplined defending in those spots is just vital.

FWIW: I think the scoreline was not really indicative of the game. I think you should have won and deserved it on balance but I think 2-1 or 3-1 would have been a better reflection.
Poker Team:

Lloyd: You played well Lloyd but, and I am sure you can appreciate this, you are not a goalkeeper. You have, in the last 2 matches, got lobbed pretty much on your line twice in 2 games. That is unacceptable. You don't come off your line nearly quick enough and your box is, as a result, a pain in the arse to defend. To be fair, given you'd been lobbed before and it was clear Jeff in particular was mad to do it again I can hardly blame you for not rushing off your line too quickly but Anto should not have scored that goal and the first one was your ball. Regardless of if I called it or not, and that was my mistake, you should have killed Neil and taken the ball. I don't want to seem like I am harping on at you man, you had a solid game otherwise, but there were weaknesses that need to be looked at for next time. By the way, and I apologise if this seems disingenuous given what's gone before, you were immense in the first third and overall you played very well.

Kweeveen: I can't really comment too extensively Kev. You were very good for the most part. You were solid and linked up with Sam as well as you always do. It's always a compliment to a full back if the team keeps the ball away from your side and they attacked down the right hand side with far greater frequency than the left. This may have a little to do with their left midfielder being far better than their right but when Steve came in at LB they targeted him when they saw he wasn't as comfortable on the ball as you so I would take the compliment that you locked your side down well. Didn't have as much of a chance to affect the game and move forward as in other games but defensively very solid.

Neil: Took a horrible knock early on when their midfielder (Ryaner I think) made an abysmal attempt at a header and basically assaulted you, albeit unintentionally. As ever you were solid and a joy to play with. Quick to everything and didn't make a mistake. Can't really pick any holes in your game.

Me: I was poor yesterday. Some of my passes were wayward and I got caught positionally for the 3rd goal (even though the fact that they had 2 players camping in the box made it kind of irrelevant). I shoulder a lot of the responsibility for what happened yesterday. We genuinely did not deserve to ship 5 but what we deserve is just talk; we got what we got and that was, in no small part, down to me. Defenders are usually the thankless crew. When we won 8-0 v the poker forum Neil and I got a cursory nod but we take a beating when we lose 5-3. I am not saying this as a defence. I think this is how it should be but I won't have it put on Neil, the mistakes at the back were mostly mine and I take that on the chin.

Brian/Luke: Luke had a very good game in the first third. Solid and always talking and letting me know who was behind me. Kept his man at bay almost the whole time and was impeccable with his decision making. Very impressed. Brian, when he came on, was very obviously a midfielder. He drifted forward too much and, particularly when Gordon was out there with him, left me absolutely hanging and having to cover in for him. Could clearly see he is a very good midfielder but just a bit naive in defence.

Steve: Ran the show (ugh). Tireless effort and covered every inch of the pitch occupying 3 midfielders more or less on your own. Brilliant stuff. MoTM performance. You know the rest. I spoke to you about it already.

Kev: Very able footballer but was far too selfish, took way too much out of the ball and plays with his head down most of the time. Great touch and very quick feet. Perhaps I am judging him harshly because he didn't really know anyone and perhaps this lead to a reluctance to pass but he didn't offer any protection to Steve or Neil and I.

Sam: You played as well as ever Sam. Suffered by a lack of support and movement around you but coped with your isolation out there very well. The start of so much of what we did that was good. Always a threat. I'd like to see you smash one or two goal-ward but can't really pick too much out of your game. Maybe tend to play with your head down when you have the ball a bit too much but your willingness to make space for others and receive the ball is just invaluable.

Brian: Could not get over how good you were man. Super display. A small tendency to run down blind alleys but this was as much a lack of anywhere else to run as anything bad on your part. Lack of support, same as Sam, limited your effectiveness, but your first touch was top class and you were always a willing runner. Thankless effort in both directions you were always a threat. Really hope you play with us again.

Ricky: Held onto the ball way too much. Your strength and powerful running make you invaluable but you suck in defenders without releasing the ball. You create acres of room around you by sucking them into you but if you don't let go of it quicker then it's unexploitable. Not your best day at the office, as you said yourself, and you could have had 3 or 4 on another day. Put this one behind you imo and focus on getting that leg better.

Darragh: Got very little joy as you were playing on Jeff's side and he is an excellent defender. You seemed a little shot shy again but lack of opportunity had as much to do with that as anything. Having to drop deep limited your effectiveness but I can totally sympathise with why you did it. Same as Ricky I'd just put it behind you and put it down to one of those days.

Gordon: Not a wide player. Your limited experience means you really should be played up front where your work-rate and constant hassling would be far more effective. Positionally naive out on the right but that's because, and I don't think you'd argue with this, you don't know how to balance your offensive and defensive duties. Create space very well because you release the ball quickly and accurately. Don't get disheartened mate, it was a horrible game to have to come into cold.

Steve (Carfax): Bit shaky on the ball and for such a solid unit you need to be more confident in really attacking the ball. When you go for a clearance you need to kick it with the intention that if their player gets a toe on it you'll break it. Otherwise you were quite good. Passed well and held a good line. Same as Gordon I don't envy you having to come into that game, particularly as they were finally feeling comfortable. Got caught positionally once or twice and even had me covering over for you at one stage. Just a lack of experience at 11-a-side I'd imagine.

Apologies to anyone who thinks that is a little harsh but I just tried to be as honest as possible. I think we are a better team than we showed yesterday but our biggest weakness is that we were 11 players playing against one team. They were organised and were focused. We were sloppy at times and didn't use the ball nearly as well as they did. This cannot really be addressed without regular training but the fact we pushed them as hard as we did really speaks more about their weaknesses than ours. We should be proud of how well we acquitted ourselves considering we were missing tonc76, Breifne, semibluff, and R4AD. I think with all our players back we could really really push them hard but in the end unless we start using the ball far better than we have we won't get past such a well organised team.

The_Chopper · 10-03-2009 1:14am

Guys Keith is taking over football operations for now.

After reading a lot of what has being posted above I want to make a few comments.
1. I don't agree with all the negativity or the way in which it's expressed. Yes people didn't play as good as they have etc etc - but everyone worked their socks off and put in 150% in effort. Everyone of us could walk off the field with our heads held high. This is only our 5th match together and we haven't put out the same team twice yet. Defensively we were good yesterday and only for a couple of laps in concentration and a few individual mistakes they would have found it hard to score.

2. Gordon I disagree with your post. I effectively wanted to play a long ball game yesterday and we didn't play that way at all. I wanted the ball played from back to front quickly and the one goal we scored from open play was when Llyod kicked it long to me from a goal kick and Kev ran beyond me in support and he scored.

3. Both Daragh and I worked our asses off upfront, in general the quality of ball we got bad at best and when we did get it we had little to no support most of the time. Apart from Kev a couple of times and Daragh (of course) I never got 1 call of man on, pass it right, left etc.

4. Steve was our man of the match yesterday, no question. He was a rock in the middle and not much got passed him, he battled well and broke up their play beautifully. However I don't recall Steve completing 1 pass to either Daragh or I. Also I disagreed with your attitude, you didn't partake in the warm up, and you walked away during the pre match chat. On the field you lash in to your own players when they make a mistake which decreases morale. Last thing - while I appreciate you calling for the ball please stop calling for the ball when there are 2+ people around you. I know when I hear you calling for the ball now I have to double check you're actually free as I don't want to look stupid by passing to the other team.

5. Defensively they were ok, but not as good as everyone makes out. My finishing was a disaster yesterday and I still should have had anywhere between 2-5 goals. Brian hit the bar and Daragh found himself in acres 2-3 times only for the final ball to be poorly played. They are extremely organised and when you give them a chance to settle and 'organise', then yes they are a tough team to break through. We played right into this yesterday by not playing the ball forward quicker.

6. I agree that Sam and Brian destroyed their full backs - however (and no offense guys) for the amount of possession you had, their was really little end product. Yes Brian hit the bar once, and yes Sam gave me 2 fantastic balls that I should have scored at least 1 from. But there was nothing else I can remember apart from that.

I'm sure Daragh will agree with me about the lack of passes and support that came our way in the match

Lastly guys, if you insist in critising at least call a spade a spade.

10-03-2009 1:48am

The_Chopper wrote: »

Lastly guys, if you insist in critising at least call a spade a spade.

I don't think anyone here has sugar coated anything Ricky. We were weak in attack because we didn't work as well as a unit as we have before and we left everyone isolated. Honestly I think the lack of Donal was significant here as he and Steve act as the connection between the two wide men and yourself and Darragh. Without him the midfield 2 were over-run trying to contain their mid-3 and didn't offer that support.

The reason the long ball worked that once is because Jeff was at the other end of the pitch. Any long ball when he was there, as Steve pointed out, was just punted straight back at us. Nobody, not a single coach in the entire world, advocates the long ball as a serious strategy in anything other than as a last ditch "stick the big man up front" fall back plan. Even when it is, rarely, deployed as a strategy it requires the midfield to flood up after the ball to support the front man. The goal we scored was not a "long ball" goal. It was a counter-attack goal. There is a serious difference.

We were second best in no individual position (bar maybe CB -v- CB) which leaves only one conclusion, we were second best as a team. That's nothing to be ashamed of as, in truth, we are not a team. We are a collection of individuals who play together. A real team takes a long time to mature and develop and being beaten by a team with an equal if not slightly inferior general skill level than our 13-14 players is nothing to be ashamed of. They play to a plan and execute it perfectly, their coach should be proud. It would be totally ridiculous for us to attempt to stick too closely to a plan as we could not possibly expect to utilise one without training to work out the kinks.

I think we did ourselves proud yesterday and a team that plays together 2-3 times a week and obviously go to great lengths to prepare found it very tough to turn over 14 individuals who have played together 5 times ever. That's not nothing.

Football: Poker forum/Grosvenor Lane III - March 8th

Comments