It was disappointing to see Craig leave the pitch, but I'm not a huge fan of his.
I did overhear someone say 'It's not Craig's fault he's a bad footballer, but he does work hard' as a justification for him playing. Surely him being a bad footballer, means he shouldn't actually...be a footballer?
@prufrock_91 If you were disappointed to see Steve Craig substituted a mere 15 minutes from the end of the game, I'm guessing you thought he'd been playing well. I certainly did - one of his best games in a Wycombe shirt, in fact. More game time has clearly had a beneficial effect and his work rate was phenomenal.
Oh noes, it's scapegoat time. Personally I thought Steve Craig had a good game. We have midfielders playing in defence and a few still carrying injuries. We lacked the quality and we had no end product. The guys have given us there all. Playoffs it is, with the smallest budget and squad in the league, excellent stuff.
My only gripe is playing Fred upfront to tussle with 6' defenders "Why" the high balls as they were hitting him in his throat or thwarted by the defender. Fred had no chance to be effective and even I could see Fred was despondent and fed up. Fred is a winger needs ball to feet or through the gaps of the opposition, play to his strengths love him.
Yup - Craig had a very good game. But we were still more effective with Holloway up front, I think.
Anyway - I think we missed Saunders the most today - which can't be helped. Max played really well and did what was asked of him, but nothing makes up for game time, which he hasn't had of late. But that said, he probably did better than Ephraim did. Like I said elsewhere, Ephraim looked really promising when he first signed for us, but lately, not so much.
I think the game changed when Ephraim came on for Max. Max was putting himself about a bit and breaking up play and we missed that terribly when Ephraim came on.
I was extremely impressed with Bean at full back but cannot understand why Hayes stays most of the time on the wing when we have a natural winger in Fred.
I suspect that the thinking is that Paul Hayes is best able to execute his clever control and link-up play from a wide position - as he has done for many seasons. As a Charlton fan (my guest yesterday) remarked, Hayes has never had great pace but he plays very intelligently to his strengths. I agree that Fred is best employed in a wide role but I guess the thinking here is that, with his pace and goalscoring record and in the absence of our "Natural Born Goalscorer" - NBG, anyone? - he is the one most likely to get goals.
@PBo , Fred is my natural choice to play out wide on the wing, ball to feet, running at defenders with his pace and causing mayhem. Not running into blind alleys with a 6' dude breathing down his neckk. When Fred did get it, it was in crap positions near the corner flag and touchline. Whereby it was easy to shepard Fred out for inpending throwings and everybody back defending.
Hence we got no change from that, which we pursed all through the gane.
Fred should be on the wing unless he gets a straight run on goal he is crowded out in the middle...Hayes and Craig...or Holloway up top. I must be missing something as I have no idea what Hogan brings when he comes on.
Having said that...by the time Matty was making his fifth save in about fifteen minutes I would have been happy for a point!
You are not missing anything about Ephraim...I see nothing in him at all except fancy flicks and the odd good free kick delivery, he looks half interested most of the time....perhaps he's just too good for us.
Hogan is a talented footballer. Just not suited to league 2 . And yes his goal at cambridge was fantastic. Short memories. As I mentioned before on here there are a few that have more skill and pass well and the way we have been playing is not for them. I wouldn't say that they are not good footballers, just that hoofing is not there style.
Comments
It was disappointing to see Craig leave the pitch, but I'm not a huge fan of his.
I did overhear someone say 'It's not Craig's fault he's a bad footballer, but he does work hard' as a justification for him playing. Surely him being a bad footballer, means he shouldn't actually...be a footballer?
@prufrock_91 If you were disappointed to see Steve Craig substituted a mere 15 minutes from the end of the game, I'm guessing you thought he'd been playing well. I certainly did - one of his best games in a Wycombe shirt, in fact. More game time has clearly had a beneficial effect and his work rate was phenomenal.
Oh noes, it's scapegoat time. Personally I thought Steve Craig had a good game. We have midfielders playing in defence and a few still carrying injuries. We lacked the quality and we had no end product. The guys have given us there all. Playoffs it is, with the smallest budget and squad in the league, excellent stuff.
My only gripe is playing Fred upfront to tussle with 6' defenders "Why" the high balls as they were hitting him in his throat or thwarted by the defender. Fred had no chance to be effective and even I could see Fred was despondent and fed up. Fred is a winger needs ball to feet or through the gaps of the opposition, play to his strengths love him.
Yup - Craig had a very good game. But we were still more effective with Holloway up front, I think.
Anyway - I think we missed Saunders the most today - which can't be helped. Max played really well and did what was asked of him, but nothing makes up for game time, which he hasn't had of late. But that said, he probably did better than Ephraim did. Like I said elsewhere, Ephraim looked really promising when he first signed for us, but lately, not so much.
and yeah, Fred is never your choice to receive long balls - why would he be, he hasn't got the height.
I think the game changed when Ephraim came on for Max. Max was putting himself about a bit and breaking up play and we missed that terribly when Ephraim came on.
I was extremely impressed with Bean at full back but cannot understand why Hayes stays most of the time on the wing when we have a natural winger in Fred.
I suspect that the thinking is that Paul Hayes is best able to execute his clever control and link-up play from a wide position - as he has done for many seasons. As a Charlton fan (my guest yesterday) remarked, Hayes has never had great pace but he plays very intelligently to his strengths. I agree that Fred is best employed in a wide role but I guess the thinking here is that, with his pace and goalscoring record and in the absence of our "Natural Born Goalscorer" - NBG, anyone? - he is the one most likely to get goals.
@PBo , Fred is my natural choice to play out wide on the wing, ball to feet, running at defenders with his pace and causing mayhem. Not running into blind alleys with a 6' dude breathing down his neckk. When Fred did get it, it was in crap positions near the corner flag and touchline. Whereby it was easy to shepard Fred out for inpending throwings and everybody back defending.
Hence we got no change from that, which we pursed all through the gane.
Fred should be on the wing unless he gets a straight run on goal he is crowded out in the middle...Hayes and Craig...or Holloway up top. I must be missing something as I have no idea what Hogan brings when he comes on.
Having said that...by the time Matty was making his fifth save in about fifteen minutes I would have been happy for a point!
You are not missing anything about Ephraim...I see nothing in him at all except fancy flicks and the odd good free kick delivery, he looks half interested most of the time....perhaps he's just too good for us.
I also thought Craig had an excellent game and deserved the applause.
What about Hogan's wonder goal at Cambridge?
Hogan is a talented footballer. Just not suited to league 2 . And yes his goal at cambridge was fantastic. Short memories. As I mentioned before on here there are a few that have more skill and pass well and the way we have been playing is not for them. I wouldn't say that they are not good footballers, just that hoofing is not there style.