Cheltenham town (H) league 1 Saturday 3/11/07

[Salford_Saddler]

Bernie - im sorry mate but u seem to be trying to put some darkness on the performance bit of a doom monger gone wrong liven up my friend 3 points are in the bag for the saddlers and thats al you need to think about!!!

it wasnt a great performance by the lads!! but i thought we never had to get out of 2nd gear after we scored the pen early on so i feel we were easily in control and they never stood a chance!!!!

Ricketts showed promise hes big and strong and made cheltenham think about the pair of them rather than just mooney! which in turn allowed mooney more time and space to finish his second!!!

i remember thinking when walking away from the oldham game thinking how much we needed a player like ricketts! now we have got him he is only going to be an assett for us!!

come on you saddlers!!!! a point in Brighton would be great!!!!!!

[Whitti Steve]

Just you then Bernie.... until phil and tinned turn up :wink: :lol:

[Bernie]

As a true Walsall fan I am of course delighted with the win yesterday. Winning is the most important thing every time we play.

As a result it was great. If this thread is going to be about us winning three points then it is going to be pretty repetitive with everyone coming on saying how happy they are.

If on the other hand people are going to talk about the performance then there could well be a variety of opinions. It is quite possible that not everyone will agree about who played well and who did not. My opinion is that Cheltenham were an extremely poor side, on a par with many of the teams we played last season. In short they were total rubbish. Their fans, who had started out noisily in support, booed them off at half-time, and let their opinions of the performance be known throughout the rest of the match.

I have praised Tommy Mooney often this season. In many matches he did not look like scoring, but carried the burden of the attack well, won possession and used it well. Yesterday he was up against poor defenders but did not win the ball as much as usual and did not do much with it when he had it. I am delighted that he scored two goals - and can understand that he was made man of the match because of them. That does not mean that I thought his all round play was any where near as good as usual.

I welcomed Ricketts back to the club. I hope that he can do very well for us, but I was really disappointed with his performance. Given time he will probably settle in and do well. There was one bright moment when he turned and shot from the edge of the box, but mostly watching him made me wish Carlos Carneiro was fit. :?

[Geordiesaddler]

Report now online.

I'm not even going to enter in to any sort of debate about "how good, not that good" etc. It would ruin a so far perfect weekend. I think we have some supporters who have reached the stage where they need pofessional help to lift them out of their depressive state and it's probably a bit unfair of them to expect that lift to come from a third division football club.

http://www.upthesaddlers.com/wp/

[Plastic Hawk]

A good result, but only a fair performance.

Cheltenham were very poor. Their defence was very weak, so I am not sure how people can say that Ricketts played well. He will not be given the same amount of space by many other sides in this division. Mooney put the penalty away and took his other goal well, but apart from that it was one of his worst performances - generally he looked pretty ineffective against a terrible defence.

There were some good points for us. Ince commanded his area well, the defence were fine, apart from Weston who had another poor game when it came to his distribution. In midfield I thought that Bradley and Sonko both showed promise.

The gate of 4,810 was about as many as could be expected after only one win in six home matches. Despite the very welcome win, it is unlikely that all that many new fans will be gained by performances like this.

Unbelievable comments about Mooney and Ricketts. We could have scored six today and it would NOT have flattered us in the slightest. These two made a massive contribution to that.

One simple rule in football - you can only beat what is put in front of you - and we did that at a canter, allowing Cheltenham virtually zero chances.

A very complete performance for me today, we did everything we had to do, and I left Banks's Stadium totally delighted that everyone played their part in completely dominating this game from start to finish. What more can you ask?

I'd add that Tommy Mooney is already well on his way to becoming a Saddlers legend, the guy is pure class, no doubt about it. If you can't see that Bernie, you surprise me.

I agree that a bigger win wouldn't have flattered us, but I don't think it's right to say they had virtually zero chances. There were enough lapses at the back that it could also have been 2-2 or even 3-2 to them on another day. Their striker fired over from very close range at 1-0 just after half time (diverting a mis-hit shot) when we seemed to be asleep for the first couple of minutes, there was a free header that also missed the target with about five minutes to go that would have led to a very tense finish and then they hit the post with the last kick of the game. Against a better side those defensive lapses could easily have cost us at least two points - and they have on other days this season already.

I don't understand Bernie's comments at all. Mooney won fewer headers than usual because he left it to Ricketts (who is much taller and stronger) to challenge for the long high balls. Mooney then picked up the second balls and tried to link things up. I think both of them did a good job in those respects. For the penalty, Ricketts won the first ball on the edge of the box, Mooney picked up the second ball and laid it into Bradley's path leaving the ndefender (who could have seen red) no option but to pull him back. For Ricketts' effort that hit the bar, he won the first ball, held off a defender with his strength (despite being fouled) and laid the ball wide for Bradley to play Sonko in, he then got himself into the box to win the header and very nearly score.

Did you really not see either of those two passages of play Bernie? Or the second Mooney goal, which was as good a finish as you'll see anywhere in the country this weekend? Frankly, it's ridiculous to say that you think Mooney and Ricketts were average yesterday because you're excluding the pasages of play that led to the two goals that won the game and another fantastic chance.

[OldPenkSaddler]

I welcomed Ricketts back to the club. I hope that he can do very well for us, but I was really disappointed with his performance. Given time he will probably settle in and do well. There was one bright moment when he turned and shot from the edge of the box, but mostly watching him made me wish Carlos Carneiro was fit. :?

I agree with most of that except Carneiro, obviously. :D

Ricketts missed two sitters, one easy header and one when clean through when he should have placed it past the keeper. If it had been Martin Butler missing those chances we'd never have heard the last of it on this board. For me Ricketts did nothing more than Troy Deeney would have done and I personally would rather youth be given a chance. I'd rather DD use his wages kitty finding the box to box player we need. Hopefully we have have someone by Saturday.

Thought Fox, Bradley and Mooney were immense though.

Average performance against a poor side. If we play like that again in front of goal on tuesday, it will be a different outcome.

[sid swifty]

Just you then Bernie.... until phil and tinned turn up :wink: :lol:

Why dont you just accept it Steve....there are people on the UTS forum that have different views to yours and just be glad that a lot of the time the differences spark some of the best debates on here....or would you rather just have a thread where Geordie 0r MMF write a report and the rest of UTS just say "I agree" underneath?

[Ned_Kelly]

Just you then Bernie.... until phil and tinned turn up :wink: :lol:

Why dont you just accept it Steve....there are people on the UTS forum that have different views to yours and just be glad that a lot of the time the differences spark some of the best debates on here....or would you rather just have a thread where Geordie 0r MMF write a report and the rest of UTS just say "I agree" underneath?

I agree :D

[Duke]

just saw the goals on the championship, the second was a real gem super finish.

[Purple Toucan Saddler]

just saw the goals on the championship, the second was a real gem super finish.

I do not agree - surely it was an "ineffective" real gem super finish

[Geordiesaddler]

Just you then Bernie.... until phil and tinned turn up :wink: :lol:

Why dont you just accept it Steve....there are people on the UTS forum that have different views to yours and just be glad that a lot of the time the differences spark some of the best debates on here....or would you rather just have a thread where Geordie 0r MMF write a report and the rest of UTS just say "I agree" underneath?

Did you make it to the game Sid?

This is after all the match thread and therefore your opportunity to pass comment on yesterday's action rather than repeat ad-infinitum the same post you make on virtually every thread on every topic. Why don't you just start a thread on that subject so that people who want to debate whether or not there is a "prevailing view" on UTS can emerse themselves in that all important subject, leaving others to use the match thread to talk about er....the match for example.

[Geordiesaddler]

I welcomed Ricketts back to the club. I hope that he can do very well for us, but I was really disappointed with his performance. Given time he will probably settle in and do well. There was one bright moment when he turned and shot from the edge of the box, but mostly watching him made me wish Carlos Carneiro was fit. :?

I agree with most of that except Carneiro, obviously. :D

Ricketts missed two sitters, one easy header and one when clean through when he should have placed it past the keeper. If it had been Martin Butler missing those chances we'd never have heard the last of it on this board. For me Ricketts did nothing more than Troy Deeney would have done and I personally would rather youth be given a chance. I'd rather DD use his wages kitty finding the box to box player we need. Hopefully we have have someone by Saturday.

Thought Fox, Bradley and Mooney were immense though.

Average performance against a poor side. If we play like that again in front of goal on tuesday, it will be a different outcome.

I agree that Ricketts should have scored one and quite probably two goals.

However, let's not forget its a team game. Ricketts quite obviously brought an added dimension to our play yesterday that has been sadly missing whenever we have played 4-4-2 this season.

As for the Deeney and Butler comparisons, I'm sorry but I really must take issue with this. Troy Deeney has done a very good job for the team this season, however it was clear from the highlights of the reserve game that in terms of finishing he is not at the top of his game at present. It would be totally unfair to ask him to lead the line alongside Mooney when he is firing blanks for the reserves, that's where young players need to be managed properly and DD knows what he's doing.

As for Butler, he has been a disaster this season in a 4-4-2.

[sid swifty]

Just you then Bernie.... until phil and tinned turn up :wink: :lol:

Why dont you just accept it Steve....there are people on the UTS forum that have different views to yours and just be glad that a lot of the time the differences spark some of the best debates on here....or would you rather just have a thread where Geordie 0r MMF write a report and the rest of UTS just say "I agree" underneath?

Did you make it to the game Sid?

This is after all the match thread and therefore your opportunity to pass comment on yesterday's action rather than repeat ad-infinitum the same post you make on virtually every thread on every topic. Why don't you just start a thread on that subject so that people who want to debate whether or not there is a "prevailing viw" on UTS can emerse themselves in that all important subject, leaving others to use the match thread to talk about er....the match for example.

"Did you make it to the game Sid?"
No I didn't Geordie...I chose not to mate....my choice....and I didn't comment on the game either....because I wasn't there...my choice again....since when did you decide which thread I can or can't post on...or what i can say on any thread i post on?....I think you should just concentrate on saving your pennies so you can pay a fortune to travel to every home game mate...... :D

[Whitti Steve]

Just you then Bernie.... until phil and tinned turn up :wink: :lol:

Why dont you just accept it Steve....there are people on the UTS forum that have different views to yours and just be glad that a lot of the time the differences spark some of the best debates on here....or would you rather just have a thread where Geordie 0r MMF write a report and the rest of UTS just say "I agree" underneath?

Did you make it to the game Sid?

This is after all the match thread and therefore your opportunity to pass comment on yesterday's action rather than repeat ad-infinitum the same post you make on virtually every thread on every topic. Why don't you just start a thread on that subject so that people who want to debate whether or not there is a "prevailing viw" on UTS can emerse themselves in that all important subject, leaving others to use the match thread to talk about er....the match for example.

"Did you make it to the game Sid?"
No I didn't Geordie...I chose not to mate....my choice....and I didn't comment on the game either....because I wasn't there...my choice again....since when did you decide which thread I can or can't post on...or what i can say on any thread i post on?....I think you should just concentrate on saving your pennies so you can pay a fortune to travel to every home game mate...... :D

Sid - I was pointing out that at that time it was just Bernie who had an opposing view on Mooney and Rickets (I know there are now others). I also pointed out that I usually can respect his point of view even if I dont agree - but on this occassion I can't as it seems way off the mark - where did I suggest that he shouldn't have a point of view that is different to mine? Glad you managed to find something to post about on the "match" thread :?

[Geordiesaddler]

I think that says it all Sid to be honest.

The team win, play reasonably well and are doing reasonably well at the higher level.

You choose not to go and support the team, which is of course your perogative, but find the energy and enthusiasm to crop up on myriad threads on here, including the match-thread to make the same point over and over about the merits of this messagboard and certain posters on it.

Why I don't know, is it some kind of personal obsession?

As for Bernie's view of Mooney and Ricketts, absolutely fine that he posts what he believes and what he sees. Personally in Mooney's case I see a striker that having been derided on here, has turned in performances week in week out that should have had his detractors eating their words.

Footballing pensioner? Dad's army? Inept siginig? Oh yes we read it all before a ball was kicked.

5 goals in 10 league starts, assist for the winner at Hartlepool, numerous man of the match awards, captain, etc. etc. Yesterday scorer of both goals in a 2-0 win, man of the match again, and all this despite playing with an injury, and yet critisised on here?

Of course the critics can have their say, they paid their money and are entitled to their opinion, so too are those who wanted to see how Mooney did before judging him and whose opinions are therefore are not laced with the need to constantly nit-pick in the name of saving face rather than just admitting they have been made fools of by the bald old man playing out of his skin as centre-forward for Walsall.

[Joe90]

I think that says it all Sid to be honest.

The team win, play reasonably well and are doing reasonably well at the higher level.

You choose not to and support the team, which is of course your perogative, but find the energy and enthusiasm to crop up on myriad threads on here, including the match-thread to make the same point over and over about the merits of this messagboard and certain posters on it.

Why I don't know, is it some kind of personal obsession?

To be fair Geordie, you could put me in the same boat - I've not seen a game since Orient, but my passion for UTS hasn't waned. I listed to SadWorld (more fool me) and give an opinion based on that. Am I wrong for doing this? I don't think I am.

[philthesaddler]

Excellent performance, workman like and efficient.

Cheltenham were very very poor, so don't get too excited about our performance.

I thought Gerrard, Dann, Mooney and Fox were outstanding for Walsall, Gerrard especially had a very good game.

Sonko, Ricketts and Bradley played well, but could have done better.

Weston was poor in the first half but improved a lot in the 2nd.

Wrack, I thought was poor, I dont think he brings much to the team, especially not ahead of Ish, at home.

Dobson, poorest of the Walsall team. Against what was a poor Cheltenham team, he got showed up time and time again. Our next priority should be to replace him with a proper midfielder, preferably someone who can run faster than a milk float and pass the ball on the floor with the inside of his boot, not in the air with the outside of his boot.

Overall a very good performance, albeit against a poor side. A cup run will help the coffers, and with a replacement for Dobson, Boertien still to return, Ish, Dann, Gerrard, Fox, Bradley all coming of age, we have the making of a solid League 1 team which we can build on.

[philthesaddler]

Reading the comments about Ricketts, I though he did ok.

In fairness to him, his header was saved by the keeper [you could say he shouldn't have given the keeper a chance...]

He'll be good for us.

One thing that did disappoint me about him was his lack of pace, I thought he was quicker, but the Cheltenham defence had no trouble keeping up with him.

[philthesaddler]

Just did what we needed to do.

Ricketts and Mooney played very well together and its very encouraging.

Both full backs played veey well today, Dann and Gerrard especially were a bit iffy.
Wrack was anonymous first half but was better when in the centre. Bradley is going to be a star, His forward runs are so important to us.

Sonko did well, put in some sublime crosses.

Deeney isnt ready yet, still need another striker unless Caneiro comes back invigorated.

This is what I dont understand about you Daz, you say Gerrard was iffy?

He was a contender for MoM, if Mooney hadn't scored two goals, he'd have got my vote. He was a tower of strength, won every single header, was positive with no hesitation.

Fox had a decent game but Weston still looks very iffy, to use your wording. He looks like he can make a mistake at any time, and rarely finds a team mate with his passes. He improved 2nd half though.

[Evo Boozy Saddler]

I've not seen a game since Orient,

Hope that it wasn't chatting to me at said match which has put you off :lol: . How you doing anyway? Hope the recovery is going well.

Onto Mooney, well when we signed him my thoughts were "Decent signing, but three years too late", but he has been superb.

Clearly loves playing for us, is doing a great job as captain, his gee-ing up of other players is great to see, and excatly what a captain should be.

I respect other posters views, but I'm loving watching Mooney, and I'm going to appreciate all his eforts this season.

[Geordiesaddler]

I don't critisise people for not going Joe, i barely get to half the games myself.

What I don't like is the boring, repetitive, hobby horse shagging posts about non-footballing topics.

Whether Sid likes it or not UTS is a diverse site with many different types of posters and uses and there are plenty of places for him to indulge his fantasy about how Me, MMF, etc. arn't in fact real people that travel the country watching Walsall but rather a bunch of snides that all live in some big comedy house in UTSland.

Its becoming impossible for me personally to indulge in any banter about the game without attracting posts of this nature from the usual suspects.

The likes of Bernie and myself, Tinned, I suppose even Phil argue like cat and dog on here, and although at times it gets a bit near the knuckle it is nevertheless genuine debate. Do we really need little promptings stage-left on the match thread from people who are basically more interested in what goes on on here than on the pitch at Bescot?

I'm sure Bernie or anyone else is quite capable of arguing with me, Aldridge Steve or anyone without uncalled for and unecessary mantra chanting from the likes of Sid. It just slows the debate and clogs up the threads.

[Purple Toucan Saddler]

Am I alone in thinking that Wrack had a good game.

He seemed to cover a lot of ground in both halves, and seemed to always be looking for the ball to be played to him, followed by direct attacking runs.

This was not only my view, but most around me, so I am a little confused by all of the negative views on his play.

[Kiansmom]

I think that says it all Sid to be honest.

The team win, play reasonably well and are doing reasonably well at the higher level.

You choose not to and support the team, which is of course your perogative, but find the energy and enthusiasm to crop up on myriad threads on here, including the match-thread to make the same point over and over about the merits of this messagboard and certain posters on it.

Why I don't know, is it some kind of personal obsession?

As for Bernie's view of Mooney and Ricketts, absolutely fine that he posts what he believes and what he sees. Personally in Mooney's case I see a striker that having been derided on here, has turned in performances week in week out that should have had his detractors eating their words.

Footballing pensioner? Dad's army? Inept siginig? Oh yes we read it all before a ball was kicked.

5 goals in 10 league starts, assist for the winnet at Hartlepool, numerous man of the match awards, captain, etc. etc. Yesterday scorer of both goals in a 2-0 win, man of the match again, and all this despite playing with an injury, and yet critisised on here?

Of course the critics can have their say, they paid their money and are entitled to their opinion, so too are those who wanted to see how Mooney did before judging him and whose opinions are therefore are not laced with the need to constantly nit-pick in the name of saving face rather than just admitting they have been made fools of by the bald old man playing out of his skin as centre-forward for Walsall.

Top post Geordie.

I love watching Mooney play, he actually looks like he is enjoying what he is doing.At 36 he shows the stamina and drive of a man half his age.I'm so pleased I chose to sponsor his kit he's made every penny worthwhile already this season

[Geordiesaddler]

Am I alone in thinking that Wrack had a good game.

He seemed to cover a lot of ground in both halves, and seemed to always be looking for the ball to be played to him, followed by direct attacking runs.

This was not only my view, but most around me, so I am a little confused by all of the negative views on his play.

Not at all, I thought Wrack did pretty well and as certainly an improvement on the Ishmel of recent weeks. He had two or three decent strikes on goal and like Bradley covered a lot of ground and linked up well with the forwards.

Collectively that was possibly the best we've seen from a midfield 4 this season IMO and wait for it.....I thought Paul Hall did ok also when he came on, apart from a miss that cost me nigh on 40 quid.

[King Crimson]

Am I alone in thinking that Wrack had a good game.

He seemed to cover a lot of ground in both halves, and seemed to always be looking for the ball to be played to him, followed by direct attacking runs.

This was not only my view, but most around me, so I am a little confused by all of the negative views on his play.

Not at all, I thought Wrack did pretty well and as certainly an improvement on the Ishmel of recent weeks. He had two or three decent strikes on goal and like Bradley covered a lot of ground and linked up well with the forwards.

Collectively that was possibly the best we've seen from a midfield 4 this season IMO and wait for it.....I thought Paul Hall did ok also when he came on, apart from a miss that cost me nigh on 40 quid.

I too wish to join the 'Wrack had a good game' clique please. Two lazy passes aside, I thought he read the game, either from the wing or (particularly) the centre magnificently.

[Geordiesaddler]

Am I alone in thinking that Wrack had a good game.

He seemed to cover a lot of ground in both halves, and seemed to always be looking for the ball to be played to him, followed by direct attacking runs.

This was not only my view, but most around me, so I am a little confused by all of the negative views on his play.

Not at all, I thought Wrack did pretty well and as certainly an improvement on the Ishmel of recent weeks. He had two or three decent strikes on goal and like Bradley covered a lot of ground and linked up well with the forwards.

Collectively that was possibly the best we've seen from a midfield 4 this season IMO and wait for it.....I thought Paul Hall did ok also when he came on, apart from a miss that cost me nigh on 40 quid.

I too wish to join the 'Wrack had a good game' clique please. Two lazy passes aside, I thought he read the game, either from the wing or (particularly) the centre magnificently.

If you want full-blown membership that includes tab-sharing and rotational dibs on his matchday compos then I'm afraid you'll have to wait for an existing member to die, but you could speak to a member of his testimonial committee regarding associate membership.

[King Crimson]

If you want full-blown membership that includes tab-sharing and rotational dibs on his matchday compos then I'm afraid you'll have to wait for an existing member to die, but you could speak to a member of his testimonial committee regarding associate membership.

Its Wrack's testimonial year! :shock:

Why has nobody on Up The Saddlers mentioned this? More importantly, why have no events or merchandise been organised? :?



:D

[Plastic Hawk]

Am I alone in thinking that Wrack had a good game.

He seemed to cover a lot of ground in both halves, and seemed to always be looking for the ball to be played to him, followed by direct attacking runs.

This was not only my view, but most around me, so I am a little confused by all of the negative views on his play.

I'm not a Wrack fan at all, but I thought he played as well as I've seen all season yesterday, especially on the wing. He actually stayed wide, gave us some shape and allowed us to stretch their defence, which is something that McDermott and Fox haven't been so good at when they've played there this season (Ishmel has, Fox has offered other strengths there so that's not a criticism of him). I did think Wrack faded badly when he was switched inside though. I'm not sure if that's because he was asked to do Dobson's role (which he's not at all suited to) or whether it means he couldn't play alongside Dobson either.

In any case, we need another central midfielder as we currently don't have the players to play 451 (which I think DD will try to do on Tuesday) and we're going to be left exposed whenever Dobson or Bradley have to go off. I know DD's talking about only getting the right player in, but it's getting to the point where he realy should think about compromising and maybe taking a gamble on bringing in someone he's not sure of in midfield - we need the extra body.

[Purple Toucan Saddler]

Am I alone in thinking that Wrack had a good game.

He seemed to cover a lot of ground in both halves, and seemed to always be looking for the ball to be played to him, followed by direct attacking runs.

This was not only my view, but most around me, so I am a little confused by all of the negative views on his play.

Not at all, I thought Wrack did pretty well and as certainly an improvement on the Ishmel of recent weeks. He had two or three decent strikes on goal and like Bradley covered a lot of ground and linked up well with the forwards.

Collectively that was possibly the best we've seen from a midfield 4 this season IMO and wait for it.....I thought Paul Hall did ok also when he came on, apart from a miss that cost me nigh on 40 quid.

I too wish to join the 'Wrack had a good game' clique please. Two lazy passes aside, I thought he read the game, either from the wing or (particularly) the centre magnificently.

If you make a donation to our clique, you will be granted access to our secret forum which no-one else knows about. PM me for info on where to send the donation :lol:

[King Crimson]

Am I alone in thinking that Wrack had a good game.

He seemed to cover a lot of ground in both halves, and seemed to always be looking for the ball to be played to him, followed by direct attacking runs.

This was not only my view, but most around me, so I am a little confused by all of the negative views on his play.

Not at all, I thought Wrack did pretty well and as certainly an improvement on the Ishmel of recent weeks. He had two or three decent strikes on goal and like Bradley covered a lot of ground and linked up well with the forwards.

Collectively that was possibly the best we've seen from a midfield 4 this season IMO and wait for it.....I thought Paul Hall did ok also when he came on, apart from a miss that cost me nigh on 40 quid.

I too wish to join the 'Wrack had a good game' clique please. Two lazy passes aside, I thought he read the game, either from the wing or (particularly) the centre magnificently.

If you make a donation to our clique, you will be granted access to our secret forum which no-one else knows about. PM me for info on where to send the donation :lol:

Are you a Nigerian toucan, by any chance? :?