Nope...I just don't think we are set up properly for home games..Looked to me as a "just trying to get a job done" thinking Luton would be 3 pts in the bag rather than how we should be playing at home long term....with high press and intensity.....was utter powderpuff IMO... Just looking at the highlights ROD has put up, there were some more chances I forgot about from Luton.....we could have had a thumping!! We actually looked more like a traditional away team nearly getting away with 3pts undeservedly...
You may be right on the Massengo front ROD but the chances of me ever seeing a game at Ashton Gate are fast disappearing down the toilet. Age and coronavirus have taken their toll and frankly the reasons for a visit back to blighty are no longer on the table and that's a shame.
Not sure from your post whether you actually watched the game but I am guessing not. The highlights put up fail to show a header missed by Scott and a shot by Weimann that hit the first defender that with a little composure should have been a goal, all of this before all of the Luton chances shown on the one side 1minute 40 odd seconds of that clip, but maybe our misses were down to the 'team' and not individuals? Criticise the performance and I am with you 100%, it was generally poor but we set up with 2 strikers playing down the middle AT HOME, my memory isn't good enough to recall when the previous 2 managers tried that home or away. You are right about the lack of high press but I cannot imagine that was part of the plan, it was just poor execution by the initial 11 players. I even agree with you about the first substitution, he should perhaps have put on Palmer or Semenyo, however in his post match interview he said players coming on need to grab their opportunities and neither have so far, that is why they are not playing and that includes Wells.
For your information I did watch the whole game and gave comments on here along the way!! Scott looked as if he shut his eyes as the brilliant delivery by Pring, managed to hit him on the neck and Weimanns attempt was easily defended....apart from that we had nothing in the locker apart from the odd set piece all game....Luton looked by far more dangerous going forward and should have put the game out of sight within the first half. I'm with you, maybe it wasn't part of the plan and to be honest, what ever plan was instructed wasn't working after the first 15 mins....We needed to switch it up and we didn't.... Scott was out of sorts for me last night even before he got injured.. Martin was also quiet although worked hard...We needed someone to move off Massengo, which IMO would have been Semenyo....
So as you dismiss our 2 early chances and talk about woulda, shoulda, coulda, our 2 good chances wouldn't have changed the game but their missed chances could and should have? Again what I am happy to agree that Semenyo might have been a better choice to replace Scott, but I would like to see him as a number 10 and not out wide or maybe even as a striker with his power and pace he will scare the **** out defences at this level and get a lot of free kicks and defenders being cautioned.
Their chances hit the post and bar and required our keeper to make really good saves, plus another chance was a terrible miss in front of goal.. quite clear cut chances compared to ours.. don’t really know what your getting at tbh.not even an argument
What I am getting at is what I said earlier the chances I described were before their flurry of chances, but you seem to be saying that had one had been put away as they should have been, it wouldn't have changed the game? but any of theirs going in after would have changed the game.
Maybe had the crowd sneezed and coughed at the same time on the 20th minute, that would have changed the game too ... I'm sure you must argue with the mirror first thing in the morning...... Our chances weren't even close, not even on target!! where there's were requiring our keeper to make two good saves, twice the woodwork and a glaring miss, which could have been 5 before half time.......Even on Robins TV, they had the score on the screen as Luton being 1-0 up, 10 mins before HT.......so even the producers thought at least one of them went in...
Over the 95 minutes Luton were the better side and should have won. However, the footballing gods gifted us 3 points that we didn't truly deserve - all we had to do was hold out for 90 seconds more. We failed. At the time I felt utterly frustrated and p1553d off, but later on reflection I refer to my first statement and a point doesn't seem that bad after all. It could have - and probably should have - been zero.
Don't be a twat. You cannot apply your own idea to what is a chance and what isn't a chance, we had 2 chances and both were fluffed because of individual errors, just because they never hit the post or bar or were close, they are still chances that you would expect PROFESSIONAL footballers to do much better with and might have changed the complexion of the game, because both chances came before the Luton onslaught and in the same way that had Luton taken one of their chances after our 2 chances, that might have changed the complexion of the game in their favour. We can all agree it was overall a ****ty performance and for the first time this season the midfield looked ineffective. I reserve the right to argue my point in the same that Supcon claimed
OK every goal kick or corner or free kick's a chance, every cross, every forward move is a chance that PROFESSIONAL footballers should do better with!! As if I were a coach on the sidelines, I would be a lot more disappointed with the attempts not going in from Lutons perspective than the 1/4 chances that we had.. The fact is, their attempts were at least on target....ours at best were hopeful!! We view football differently it appears........I'm happy with how I view it....let's leave it at that!!
FFS these were 2 presentable chances and before their chances, myself my friends who I sit and everybody around us was saying, we will pay as USUAL if we do not take one of these chances. The talk at half time '**** we got away with that 'IN THE END" but we missed 2 good chances'. Your first sentence is complete and utter nonsense but you are right about ours not being on target and that makes it even worse because both should have at least been, but because of lack of composure, the closing of the eyes or other individual errors they were not, but they were chances in anybody's language, who had the better chances is immaterial, chances are chances and they are professional footballers many of whom have been coached from the age of 8 years old they learn to kick the ball, head the ball, tackle, defend and or catch, punch or parry the ball and at times that never happened with either team, especially with our team and it cost us as it has all season long.
£2m player sold to a bottom of the ligue 1 club nimes left winger with zing and play on right as well! ….. currently plyd 7 . … 2 goals 1 assist playing left mid field ….. our squad is valued at less then Nimes! …………. 52 points is the must!
Just want to jump in, if a ball hits the woodwork it doesn't count as being on target. It may as well hit the corner flag because it's not going in
Ok you know best Jiffie.. all my years coaching from 7s right through to seniors, Sunday and Saturdays was all a waste as I don’t know the difference between chances that were clear cut and on target making the keeper work or smashing the woodwork and half hopeful easily defended chances which could or should have changed the game..
Very True, but I’d rather have players able to hit the woodwork than the corner flag.. it shows that their not as s..t at shooting!! If we talk about the Luton game, they had at least 4 attempts that were far closer than we had and that was just in the first half.. their defenders or keeper hardly broke into a sweat keeping us out.. we were that bad….IMO
All that experience and you have never heard the sayings "how did he miss that?", "easier to score than miss", "should have at least hit the target", "should have at least made the keeper make a save". The quality of chances count for feck all if they are being missed, which is exactly what happened, my point is our 2 chances came before all of their FAR BETTER chances and may have changed the game. A header missed because as you were the first to mention Scott looked like he closed his eyes (was that in your coaching manual?) and shot from barely 7/8 yards out that because of lack of composure hit the first defender, half hopeful from 7/8 yards out? if true he needs a change of profession.
Ok let’s leave it that we should have been 2 up in the first 20 minutes but for having sh*t players that couldn’t hit a barn door with a banjo!! Luton’s chances were just as bad as they didn’t go in.. it’s been an education & great debate!!
Now you are making it up. I never said we should have been 2 up. I said and I maintain we had 2 good chances, which we missed. I never said we had **** players, you were the one who claimed Scott closed his eyes for the missed header not me. And I said Weimann should have had more composure. Both are mistakes. And I never said the last bit about Luton's chances, 2 of Luton's chances that weren't scored were both bad misses = mistakes.
