Who now thinks that a fit Semedo and Racon would have kept us up last season?

ColinTat

These two players are far from the worst we've had over the last few seasons, but equally their un-willingness to impose themselves on matches is very much the 'Charlton midfield way' of recent years. At least Semedo is always around attempting to get involved. It just makes you wonder why Parky hasn't played 4-5-1 through the dogged winter months. Still I think our winter months clearly prove we were doomed last season and Parky has done a tremendous job up to now.

ShootersHillGuru

Not unless they took up bricklaying as a hobby and blocked in the goals.

BigRedEvil

Semedo was probably our best player today and Racon made a few good chances for people and did the pass for Mooneys goal.

It's our woeful defending which is damaging us

creepyaddick

Racon will prob be out injured with a broken hand after the way he was punching the dugout walls and roof

cafcdan18

Thought Racon was out of order the way we went off without shaking Reids hand!

buckshee

was probably a bit gutted at having been taken off despite having a decent game again whilst lazy bastards like Sam get to stay on the pitch

northstandsteve

thats a personal insult against Sam please refrain

Ross

Personally I feel we should go back to a 4-5-1 and play Racon and Semedo in the middle, with Bailey behind a lone frontman, with Reid and Sam giving the width.

Exiled_Addick

Thought they both had decent games yesterday, particularly second half. Semedo was putting his weight around in the last half hour. Bailey however was jank and should have been subbed instead of Racon imo.

Kap10

[quote][cite]Posted By: Exiled_Addick[/cite]Thought they both had decent games yesterday, particularly second half. Semedo was putting his weight around in the last half hour. Bailey however was jank and should have been subbed instead of Racon imo.[/quote]

I thought that Bailey was coming off and did not notice racon go off till it was all done and dusted. On 2nd half performances I would have prefered Bailey off than racon but on overall performances I would keep Bailey in the team and run 4-5-1, something akin to:-

Elliot
Solly, Dailly, Sodje, Borrowdale

Sam, Bailey, Semedo, Reid

Shelvey

Burton (or if injured - Sodje)

If any of Bailey Semedo or Shelvey were injured my 1st replacement would be spring, before racon

Scoham

No they wouldn't have kept us up. I agree we were doomed, for the bits of talent we had we were lacking in so many areas. I've not really been impressed with Racon since last season. Semedo does his job without ever really standing out, as a central midfielder he's very limited going forward.

I have to agree about 451, it's got the best out of them in the past. They find it hard in this league playing in a 442, nevermind the Championship. With Burton injured though do we play Akpo up front on his own or is that too much for him to handle?

Like BRE said, our defence is the bigger problem. We don't look capable of clean sheets against anyone half decent.

Exiled_Addick

If we can get him playing like he did yesterday, then Mooney can be the lone striker as long as he gets the right kind of service - i.e. accurate balls to chest and feet, like Burton was getting in August. If we want to lump it forward then 4-5-1 is a non starter anyway, but that aside Akpo is the only option if we want to go super direct.

Like I say though, if we play accurate balls forward then Mooney showed yesterday he can hold the ball up and bring others into play, as well as work space for shots with his back to goal. See no reason why he, Shelvey and the wingers couldn't link up well in the way Burton was doing back at the start of the season, even if Burton is better at it.

Chris_from_Sidcup

[cite]Posted By: ColinTat[/cite]These two players are far from the worst we've had over the last few seasons, but equally their un-willingness to impose themselves on matches is very much the 'Charlton midfield way' of recent years.

I'm pretty sure if most of us compiled a list of the worst players to play for us in recent seasons these 2 wouldn't feature anywhere. Semedo actually had a decent game on saturday i thought and Racon was our best player at Millwall before he was taken off. I also thought he was performing (marginally) better than Bailey on saturday so i can see why he was upset to be subbed.

adamtheaddick

Taking so long to get rid of pards and the fannying about with parky didn't help, I think the rot had set in to be honest.

Dazzler21

I honestly think they imposed as much as possible yesterday so Colin what did you think of that performance obviously ignoring the fact we all want to see that regularly!

thenewbie

If they both play to the best of their abilities consistently, I don't think there can be many better midfield partnerships, however that is a very, very BIG 'if'.

Bexley Dan

Don't want to put a downer on things but we were hanging on badly towards the end of the second half and had gradually lost control of the game throughout the second half. I stand by my assertion that that midfield pairing are not gifted enough footballers (SEMEDO being the main culprit even though i like him and his attitude and tackling) to be able to dominate a game. We very rarely push on at home when we go a goal up and gradually surrender more and more possession as the game goes on because those two do not use the ball well when in possession once the game opens up and there is more time to craft attacks / periods of play. They are great when its bang crash, wallop in the first half but a bit lost when they have time on the ball - particularly Semedo.

Vinnie V.

Believe their job was made alot easier by Anyinsah (along with Bennos flicks) pulling the centre backs out of position so much that the midfield had to play deeper then they would have liked to cover. Which is why when he went off we were not as in control as we had been.

Stone

If you combine the best of them you have one very good player.

That was their second decent performance this season (as a pair). The other being MK Dons at home.