I swear someone could make a shed load of money if they collated all of Viewfinder's postings and published them in one book. It would be a bestseller.
I swear someone could make a shed load of money if they collated all of Viewfinder's postings and published them in one book. It would be a bestseller.
I swear someone could make a shed load of money if they collated all of Viewfinder's postings and published them in one book. It would be a bestseller.
In fairness, after the sad loss of @PL54 and the apparent exile of @colin1961 it's good there is still room for guys like @Viewfinder to inject utter bollocks into discussions
In fairness, after the sad loss of @PL54 and the apparent exile of @colin1961 it's good there is still room for guys like @Viewfinder to inject utter bollocks into discussions
Don't think it's fair to lump Viewfinder into that group. Colin and PL54 spouted nonsense to either wind people up, to make themselves feel big, or both. I think Viewfinder is genuinely giving his take on a situation, and there's something refreshing in that.
In fairness, after the sad loss of @PL54 and the apparent exile of @colin1961 it's good there is still room for guys like @Viewfinder to inject utter bollocks into discussions
Don't think it's fair to lump Viewfinder into that group. Colin and PL54 spouted nonsense to either wind people up, to make themselves feel big, or both. I think Viewfinder is genuinely giving his take on a situation, and there's something refreshing in that.
Fair enough, but I miss the unity that those two brought to the forum
To be fair he is right, Bury never really looked dangerous despite all the possession and we was taking control of the game when the pen was given.
"We knew coming away to Bury that they would be quite direct with the lad Pope up front"
“It was clear that they had a gameplan to get it up to him and then feed off the seconds. They did that a lot in the first half without really threatening us."
To be even fairer, what was our game plan in response, knowing what Bury would be doing?
Johnson and Pearce handled Pope, Johnson makes good use of a brainless cranium. But did we accept we would lose all second balls coming back off these two and choose not to contest? Because that's what it looked like.
Playing out of defence through our static midfield unable to string a pass together didn't work. Only forays down the right from Holmes gave us any momentum, shame our other players just watched him instead of joining in.
If Slade thought long high balls to an advanced Fox would be an effective outlet, it only took 30 minutes of Fox losing out on every single challenge for Rudd to go against orders and pump it down the middle. Straight to our non-existent arial power which stood and watched Bury's defenders hammer the ball back again.
It was sheer dross, just that Bury's dross was more effective.
The real worry is that the cupboard looks even barer this season that last. The bench looked like it was assembled for an Under-20 match. So once Lookman goes and the inevitable injuries start to take their toll (Quite a few were prepared to blame them for our plight last season) you have to fear who will be thrown in at the deep end. Not even network rejects seem to appeal any more.
0.5% Top two ......... 12.5% 3rd-6th ......... 50% 7th-12th ......... 34% 13th-20th ........ 3% Unchartered footballing territory for Charlton as the apologists continue to lap up the freaks experiment
Get out of our club
Can't be many apologists left, surely ?
I seem to encounter a lot of them - the friends I sat with at the Valley are all renewing (and not grudgingly but because they can't see why I'm protesting)
I also met a few at Bury - which did surprise me. However, I was pleased when Roland Out chants started 2 mins after kick off.
Never ever a lack of desire but a lack of quality in terms how to deal with a team like that at this level. We need to use it a positive learning curve.
Wait - you don't think we showed a lack of desire ?
I meant the disire could not be faulted too much. But quality wasn't consistant enough for long enough periods. But that happens.
"Nothing moves faster than the ball on the pitch, you don't need eleven quickies on the pitch. Jackson has never been blessed with pace. True, he's not getting any faster but he remains one of the few players who have ability to make things happen. The game will pass most players by when you have no other tactics than lump forward or play in front of the opposition"
Can make things happen with given an extra yard or 2. Id be tempted to play him holding midfield in a 5 just to try and get him on the ball but imo his place is on the bench.
Never ever a lack of desire but a lack of quality in terms how to deal with a team like that at this level. We need to use it a positive learning curve.
Wait - you don't think we showed a lack of desire ?
I meant the disire could not be faulted too much. But quality wasn't consistant enough for long enough periods. But that happens.
We'll have to agree to disagree on that point. I was astonished at how little fight we showed.
Tbh before the first goal as the second half was going on I could see the game just petering out to a 0-0. Tbf it still would not have been a great result for us though.
Tbh before the first goal as the second half was going on I could see the game just petering out to a 0-0. Tbf it still would not have been a great result for us though.
Agree - it had 0-0 written all over it until the pen
"Nothing moves faster than the ball on the pitch, you don't need eleven quickies on the pitch. Jackson has never been blessed with pace. True, he's not getting any faster but he remains one of the few players who have ability to make things happen. The game will pass most players by when you have no other tactics than lump forward or play in front of the opposition"
Can make things happen with given an extra yard or 2. Id be tempted to play him holding midfield in a 5 just to try and get him on the ball but imo his place is on the bench.
I've long said this, that if he is going to prolong his career, or at least his effectiveness, he needs to shift his position to a more holding role. He started that under Riga last year, but was eventually forced out of the team through injury and the man mountain footballing genius that is Alou Diarra. I'm not entirely convinced he's tactically disciplined, or if he reads the game well enough for the role. Also would have some worries about his ability to keep distribution simple. The most important rule in possession in that position is to not give the ball away. He is a smart footballer, with some coaching help I think he *could* do it.
The other option, since we now have a litany of one-paced holding players, is to try him as a #10. Still not ideal, he's not great with his back to goal, but if we had wingers...oh wait. Well, if we ever get wingerS (more than one), I could see him playing in the middle of an attacking 3 in a 4-2-3-1. He could do what Lampard did well for so many years, timing those runs into the box, getting on the ends of crosses, and in possession working the ball out wide. That said, Slade is a flat 4-4-2 man so I won't hold me breath.
Whatever his next step is, it's not left midfield.
0.5% Top two ......... 12.5% 3rd-6th ......... 50% 7th-12th ......... 34% 13th-20th ........ 3% Unchartered footballing territory for Charlton as the apologists continue to lap up the freaks experiment
Get out of our club
Can't be many apologists left, surely ?
I seem to encounter a lot of them - the friends I sat with at the Valley are all renewing (and not grudgingly but because they can't see why I'm protesting)
I also met a few at Bury - which did surprise me. However, I was pleased when Roland Out chants started 2 mins after kick off.
Words fail me. At what point will these numpties notice something is wrong?
Comments
http://www.cafc.co.uk/news/article/2016-17/charlton-athletic-match-reaction-andrew-crofts-bury-3233137.aspx
“It was clear that they had a gameplan to get it up to him and then feed off the seconds. They did that a lot in the first half without really threatening us."
To be even fairer, what was our game plan in response, knowing what Bury would be doing?
Johnson and Pearce handled Pope, Johnson makes good use of a brainless cranium. But did we accept we would lose all second balls coming back off these two and choose not to contest? Because that's what it looked like.
Playing out of defence through our static midfield unable to string a pass together didn't work. Only forays down the right from Holmes gave us any momentum, shame our other players just watched him instead of joining in.
If Slade thought long high balls to an advanced Fox would be an effective outlet, it only took 30 minutes of Fox losing out on every single challenge for Rudd to go against orders and pump it down the middle. Straight to our non-existent arial power which stood and watched Bury's defenders hammer the ball back again.
It was sheer dross, just that Bury's dross was more effective.
The game will pass most players by when you have no other tactics than lump forward or play in front of the opposition"
Can make things happen with given an extra yard or 2. Id be tempted to play him holding midfield in a 5 just to try and get him on the ball but imo his place is on the bench.
For me, the club as I know it and love it, no longer exists.
The whole thing will change just the minute these scum leave OUR club.
The other option, since we now have a litany of one-paced holding players, is to try him as a #10. Still not ideal, he's not great with his back to goal, but if we had wingers...oh wait. Well, if we ever get wingerS (more than one), I could see him playing in the middle of an attacking 3 in a 4-2-3-1. He could do what Lampard did well for so many years, timing those runs into the box, getting on the ends of crosses, and in possession working the ball out wide. That said, Slade is a flat 4-4-2 man so I won't hold me breath.
Whatever his next step is, it's not left midfield.