Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Players Marks: Ipswich v Charlton

Those of you who saw the match tonight, your marks please

Etheridge
Gomez
Ben Haim
Bikey
Solly
Buyens
Gudmundsson
Jackson
Cousins
Tucudean
Vetokele

Bulot n/a
«1

Comments

  • Etheridge 5
    Gomez 6
    Ben Haim 6.5
    Bikey 5
    Solly 5.5
    Buyens 6
    Gudmundsson 7
    Jackson 6.5
    Cousins 6
    Tucudean 4
    Vetokele 5

    Bulot n/a
  • Etheridge 5
    Gomez 4
    Ben Haim 6
    Bikey 5
    Solly 6
    Buyens 6
    Gudmundsson 7.5
    Jackson 5
    Cousins 4
    Tucadean 3
    Vetokele 3


  • We really weren't that bad, guys!
  • Etheridge - 6
    Gomez - 4.5
    Ben Haim - 7
    Bikey - 5
    Solly - 6
    Buyens - 6
    Gudmundsson - 7.5
    Jackson - 6.5
    Cousins - 5
    Tucudean - 4
    Vetokele - 5
  • Etheridge - 4
    Gomez - 5 (better second half)
    Ben Haim - 6
    Bikey - 4 (awful distribution)
    Solly - 5
    Buyens - 4
    Gudmundsson - 7 (Charlton's most creative player)
    Jackson - 4
    Cousins - 4
    Tucadean 2 (just woeful! Rightly booked for a second dive. Charlton's Billy Bendtner)
    Vetokele - 5
  • purdis said:

    We really weren't that bad, guys!

    Yes we fucking was
  • Etheridge 5
    Gomez 6
    Ben Haim 6.5
    Bikey 5.5
    Solly 6.5
    Buyens 6.5
    Gudmundsson 6.5
    Jackson 6
    Cousins 6
    Tucudean 1.5
    Vetokele 4

    (I know the 1.5 might seem ridiculous but I genuinely don't see how this guy is a pro footballer especially on tonight's performance. Has no first touch, no ball control, no strength, trips over his own feet and spends half the game on the floor.)
  • Forg
    Nicholas said:

    Etheridge 5
    Gomez 4
    Ben Haim 5
    Bikey 4
    Solly 5
    Buyens 4
    Gudmundsson 4
    Jackson 3
    Cousins 3 not a left wing back/winger waker up peeters you penis when will you learn
    Tucudean 2 as strong as a little girl.
    Vetokele 4

    Bob 2. Grow a pair or do one.

    forgot to mention George's pathetic dive. Pathetic anus
  • Just got back, powder puff in attack as per usual.

    Etheridge - 6
    Gomez - 2.5
    Ben Haim - 7
    Bikey - 6
    Solly - 6
    Buyens - 5
    Gudmundsson - 6.5
    Jackson - 5
    Cousins - 4
    Tucudean - 2
    Vetokele - 4

    We couldn't score in a Brothel.
  • Sponsored links:


  • purdis said:

    We really weren't that bad, guys!

    We were shit. What are you saying.

  • Etheridge 2 no saves but let in 3
    Gomez 3
    Ben Haim 5
    Bikey 4
    Solly 4
    Buyens 4
    Gudmundsson 4
    Jackson 3
    Cousins 2 haha
    Tucudean 3
    Vetokele 3

    And yes I was at the game, deal with it.
  • Etheridge 5.5
    Gomez 5 awful 1st half. better 2nd
    Ben Haim 6
    Bikey 5.5
    Solly 6
    Buyens 7
    Gudmundsson 7
    Jackson 5
    Cousins 5.5
    Tucudean 5.5
    Vetokele 6

    At the game and looking at the performance not just the result!!!!
  • Etheridge 5.5
    Gomez 3
    Ben Haim 5
    Bikey 6
    Solly 6
    Buyens 6
    Gudmundsson 6
    Jackson 5
    Cousins 4
    Tucudean 2
    Vetokele 6



  • Wasn't there but low marks for Etheridge. Many corners were consequitive and you'd hope a keeper would claim a few. Comments from anyone at game?
  • Wasn't there but low marks for Etheridge. Many corners were consequitive and you'd hope a keeper would claim a few. Comments from anyone at game?

    Their corners were all out swingers. I don't think he done a lot wrong although his kicking technique looks poor.
  • Etheridge 5.5
    Gomez 5.5
    Ben Haim 6
    Bikey 6
    Solly 6
    Buyens 5.5
    Gudmundsson 7
    Jackson 6
    Cousins 5
    Tucudean 5
    Vetokele 5.5
  • Etheridge 4 - shaky all game
    Gomez 4 - poor start to the match
    Ben Haim 5 - won nothing in the air
    Bikey 5
    Solly 6 - got forward well
    Buyens 5 - poor distribution
    Gudmundsson 9 - his best showing
    Jackson 6 - got in the box well
    Cousins 4 - non existent
    Tucadean 5
    Vetokele 5


  • Was going to post last night but I thought I'd sleep on it but I still think it was a pretty abysmal performance, one of the worst this season.

    Etheridge 5
    Gomez 6
    Ben Haim 6
    Bikey 4
    Solly 5
    Buyens 5.5
    Gudmundsson 7.5
    Jackson 6
    Cousins 5
    Tucudean 4
    Vetokele 5
  • Etheridge 6.5
    Gomez 6
    Ben Haim 6
    Bikey 7
    Solly 6
    Buyens 6
    Gudmundsson 7.5
    Jackson 5
    Cousins 5
    Tucudean 5
    Vetokele 5
  • Sponsored links:


  • Etheridge 6 Didn't feel he was to blame for any of the goals.
    Gomez 5 Looked out of his depth, although he did improve in the second half.
    Ben Haim 6 Despite the result, he had a reasonable game.
    Bikey 6 Effectively played at full back and was heavily relied upon to feed ball to forwards. Unfair criticism from others
    Solly 7 Got into some good positions and was keen to get forward.
    Buyens 6 Reasonable game
    Gudmundsson 7 Always looking to get a shot in.
    Jackson 6 Reasonable game
    Cousins 5 Anonymous for much of the game
    Tucudean 4 Weak and ineffectual. He's becoming as big a joke as Leaburn!
    Vetokele 5 Not much better than Tucudean!

    The main difference between the sides was the forwards. They had two who were always a threat and looked likely to score. We had two who were never going to score in a million years!
  • Bring back Fox
  • George may not have had the best of games but their defender had his arms round him.
  • Haven't posted marks for a couple of games.


    Etheridge 5 Don't like marking younger players below 'par' but felt he could have done better with a couple of the goals. After watching again on TV I feel he wasn't quick enough for the first and left his goal exposed for the second after his dive for the attempt which crashed the crossbar . Like Pope he is inexperienced at this level although I do think he has tremendous potential.
    Gomez 5 Like Etheridge I do not like marking youngsters down
    Ben Haim 6 Our best defender
    Bikey 6 Certainly he is no left back
    Solly 6 Kept going.
    Buyens 6 Average
    Gudmundsson 7 Our only creative spark
    Jackson 6 Played well . Can't play 2 full games in a week anymore.
    Cousins 5 Still don't like him playing wide left
    Tucudean 5 Ineffectual.
    Vetokele 5 Is he unfit? Looks a shadow of the player from earlier in the season
  • edited December 2014
    Etheridge - 6. Not at fault for the goals from where i was sitting, though poor distribution at times.
    Gomez - 5. Extremely shaky first half, but sort of grew into the game slowly. Though his inexperience is apparent (not his fault though).
    Ben Haim - 7. Solid performance.
    Bikey - 4. Get nervous whenever he's on the ball. Heavy touch and ridiculous cross field balls.
    Solly - 6. Tried hard and got forward.
    Buyens - 7. One of our better perfomers.
    Gudmundsson - 7. Offered some creativity, our only threat for most of the game.
    Jackson - 7. Thought he was playing well, only player who was making forward runs and trying to get on the end of the ball. Didn't deserve to come off imo.
    Cousins - 6. Kept going and running until the end.
    Tucudean - 2. Seems harsh but he was so so so bad. Would've been a 3 if it weren't for that pathetic embarrassing dive at the end. Terrible performance which is a shame as i thought he had a blinder against Cardiff.
    Vetokele - 6. Tried hard but his body language suggests he's lacking some confidence atm.

    Peeters - 3. No animation on the touch line and when he did get up, it was just to tell the team to pump it forward which was playing into the hands of a typical Mick McCarthy side. When we ran at them, we caused problems, but for most of the game it was just route 1. Also, how Tucudean was on the pitch for the whole 90 minutes is beyond me. Piggot or Grant deserved at least a 5 minute cameo imo as it clearly wasn't Tucudean's game (which it rarely is anyway).

    Oh well. They're second in the league for a reason. Keep the faith. COYR
  • Richard J said:

    Haven't posted marks for a couple of games.


    Etheridge 5 Don't like marking younger players below 'par' but felt he could have done better with a couple of the goals. After watching again on TV I feel he wasn't quick enough for the first and left his goal exposed for the second after his dive for the attempt which crashed the crossbar . Like Pope he is inexperienced at this level although I do think he has tremendous potential.
    Gomez 5 Like Etheridge I do not like marking youngsters down
    Ben Haim 6 Our best defender
    Bikey 6 Certainly he is no left back
    Solly 6 Kept going.
    Buyens 6 Average
    Gudmundsson 7 Our only creative spark
    Jackson 6 Played well . Can't play 2 full games in a week anymore.
    Cousins 5 Still don't like him playing wide left
    Tucudean 5 Ineffectual.
    Vetokele 5 Is he unfit? Looks a shadow of the player from earlier in the season

    Etheridge is 24. He's older than Igor, Solly, Gomez, Cousins, Gudmundson and Tucudean. Quite shocking that really.
  • Etheridge - 6
    Gomez - 6
    Ben Haim - 6.5
    Bikey - 6.5
    Solly - 7.5
    Buyens - 8
    Gudmundsson - 7.5
    Jackson - 6
    Cousins - 6
    Tucudean - 6
    Vetokele - 6
  • Etheridge 5.5
    Gomez 6
    Ben Haim 6.5
    Bikey 6
    Solly 6
    Buyens 6.5
    Gudmundsson 7
    Jackson 5
    Cousins 5
    Tucudean 4.5
    Vetokele 5

    Bulot n/a
  • Etheridge 6 Came well for crosses, good save at end
    Gomez 4 Very poor first half, out of position
    Ben Haim 7, a cut above
    Bikey 6 Bit shaky at times
    Solly 6 Not a right winger Bob!
    Buyens 6 OK
    Gudmundsson 7.5 Very good second half when moved into middle
    Jackson 4 Hardly noticed him
    Cousins 5 Poor by his standards
    Tucudean 5 Bullied out of it. Not the player he was on Saturday
    Vetokele 6 Tried hard, feeding off scraps

    Tactics all wrong. Three across the back? Gomez left back ? Continuous high crosses, gobbled up by Ipswich defence?
  • CAFCOlly said:

    Etheridge - 6. Not at fault for the goals from where i was sitting, though poor distribution at times.
    Gomez - 5. Extremely shaky first half, but sort of grew into the game slowly. Though his inexperience is apparent (not his fault though).
    Ben Haim - 7. Solid performance.
    Bikey - 4. Get nervous whenever he's on the ball. Heavy touch and ridiculous cross field balls.
    Solly - 6. Tried hard and got forward.
    Buyens - 7. One of our better perfomers.
    Gudmundsson - 7. Offered some creativity, our only threat for most of the game.
    Jackson - 7. Thought he was playing well, only player who was making forward runs and trying to get on the end of the ball. Didn't deserve to come off imo.
    Cousins - 6. Kept going and running until the end.
    Tucudean - 2. Seems harsh but he was so so so bad. Would've been a 3 if it weren't for that pathetic embarrassing dive at the end. Terrible performance which is a shame as i thought he had a blinder against Cardiff.
    Vetokele - 6. Tried hard but his body language suggests he's lacking some confidence atm.

    Peeters - 3. No animation on the touch line and when he did get up, it was just to tell the team to pump it forward which was playing into the hands of a typical Mick McCarthy side. When we ran at them, we caused problems, but for most of the game it was just route 1. Also, how Tucudean was on the pitch for the whole 90 minutes is beyond me. Piggot or Grant deserved at least a 5 minute cameo imo as it clearly wasn't Tucudean's game (which it rarely is anyway).

    Oh well. They're second in the league for a reason. Keep the faith. COYR

    Tucadean should be fined for that dive
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!