Really dire game, they were definitely up for it and we played far too many hoofs forward for Bradshaw. I don't know how Collins' shot stayed out, the whole ground, and most of the players all started celebrating. Wright had a very poor game, completely anonymous, but Nicky was the worst for me, his delivery was poor and he often seemed to ignore Taylor when he was in acres of space - something that seemed a theme throughout the game, in fact. I thought changes were badly needed, and it baffled me to see Turner wait until the 81st minute to make the first change, and then not follow it up with any more - but he knew what he was doing as we got the points, I suppose! Taylor was unlucky not to score early on, he had a shot (although it was possibly heading wide) cleared excellently off the line, and Bradshaw missed a good chance with a free header from 6 yards. The set pieces were diabolical. We too often worked it short, then failed to beat the first man with the cross or even just lost the ball. The one time we sent both CB's forward and put a free kick straight in there, we scored. Bizzarely, we reverted to short corners/free kicks after that and again failed to get anything from it. Their keeper had to make 2 good saves in the second half, one from a Wroe 25-yarder he tipped over, and one from a very good Richards free-kick. However, it was telling that Sharps and Hurst were our two best players, some phenomenal tackles in the last quarter of an hour and a very good defensive header from Hurst were what kept us the points. Still, making a host of changes, bringing in some youngsters, and winning - whilst playing poorly on top of all that - aren't they all signs of a good team?
Worst game i've ever seen. Missed the build up to the goal. I think it's a bit unfair to criticise Wrighty as he beat his man, just let us down with the final incisive ball. But didn't every single player anyway? Wright's problem was aiming too many low crosses at the near post, which Macc quickly wised up to and cleared every time. Taylor was energetic but made little, and our CM 'flair players' just passed it back continously. Although Collins held the ball up well (occasionally) he and Bradders hardly looked like scoring (until his goal which kind of rubbishes my point!) but the new strikeforce needs time to gel- i'd probably pick them again for Chelt. Continuity is they key as uncle Graham well knows. Saying that a win is a win and Macclesfield came with 10 men behind the ball- not a classic but UTS. We did what we had to. JUST
I cannot agree that we should pick the same front three for Cheltenham - I would keep Collins in but Taylor for me has gone backwards since last season and is not a patch on Ainsworth. Bradshaw has some neat touches but for me is nowhere near good enough at keeping the ball or in the air. I keep hearing about his pace but I do not think he is any quicker than Morgan and, even if he is not scoring at the moment, I would put Morgan back in for his workrate and his nuisance value in stopping the opposition building from the back. What an indictment of our strikers that Sharps and Cansdell-Sheriff looked our best two players in their box all afternoon and combined for the goal. We need to loan Bradshaw out so he can get some more game time and bring in a striker who can bang in a few goals in the January window - this is even more pressing than our need for a box to box midfielder as Rowe, Richards and Mcallister can more than hold their own in this league.
I disagree that it was a dire game. I have seen many worse including Wimbledon this season. I don't recall much hoofball. Wroe and Richards, particularly in the first half were finding short forward passes to our front players. I do agree that the threat too often did not come from our front 2 and I am beginning to think that Bradshaw is beginning to believe the hype without producing. (PS it was SCS that scored the goal-see above comment)
Fair enough, I missed the Wimbledon game this year as I was up north in Scarborough for the week, so this is the worst game I've seen since the Torquay play off game at home! There wasn't a great deal of hoofing, but there shouldn't be any at all if Bradshaw is up front imo. I beg to differ about Wroe, though - he found their defenders more than our forwards with his passes, sadly! As for the Cheltenham game, I would go for Morgan and Collins - it's a massive game and Bradders didn't quite look up to scratch yet. Still, GT has the benefit of watching the boys in training before choosing the strikers. I definitely agree with starting Ainsworth - I don't know why he keeps being dropped - is Turner accepting that he's likely to leave in January and trying to find alternatives?
We either need to stick with 442 or adopt 451 with an attacking central player behind a stiker. I get frustrated that the CM rarely venture forwards or seem to play a through ball to space for a striker to pick up and run with. Most balls seem to go to a winger and crossed in. I would agree with KDS that it was not a dire game, it was frustrating to see so many forward balls fluffed in some way but the team did cope with most of the attacks until the last 15 minutes. Bradshaw did do some nice turns with his back against a defender and quite often suceeded in beating the player, unfortunately this often got collected by another defender. I would really like to see Wroe making more effort to bring the ball forward as he seems to show some promise when he does, in order for him to do this then the wingers need to support the midfield.
from my devon armchair, if i was gt, i would play my strongest team against both bradford and cheltenham. try the youngsters again against cobblers. i still have an inkling the bantams are coming out of hibernation. floreat salopia. also we are having a whip round for uncle rolands christmas port supply. it is believed he lost his wallet on the slopes of cader idris during a squad bonding session. vultures, er sorry red kites were last spotted circling over llyn cae.
