Burton Albion (A) - friendly - Saturday 4th August

[Bernie]

I agree with most of Sadders' comments.

Comparing the first team (as it is at present) with last season's:

Goalkeeper - unchanged.

Full backs - Taundry and James Chambers did OK, but in my opinion they are as good as Beevers rather than Sadler. So we are not as well off in that department as we were last season.

Centre backs - Holden looks pretty average. He made some good tackles, but has not great pace, nor special in the air, nor good with the ball. So not as good as either Smith or Lancashire

Central midfield - Cuvelier still a class above. Adam Chambers same as last year.

Wide midfield - Hemmings looks better than Hurst, Gnapka and Nicholls. Paterson seems to have grown a bit and was more confident than last season. So this is an improvement.

Strikers - Grigg still not good enough. Brandy showed some good skill and pace, - but it would be ridiculous to play him alongside a weak partner like Grigg or Bowerman. Still as a bad as last year.

[SadsMad]

I think there is far too much panic going on. I went today and whilst there is definitely things that need to be improved, our first 11 is not too bad. You have to be aware that we made 9 changes in the second half and that is when amid the rain things started to unravel slightly.

Holden had a decent game and covered butler on occasions well. Both Chambers brothers had a good game. I think Ashley Hemmings has great potential and he was central to some good passing. Brandy looks good as well. The only problem I have is both Hemmings and Brady make themselves a lot of space and too often the other players were not aware and did not pass to them quick enough to create a break.

I thought our first 11 fared quite well, i think we are a bit lightweight upfront and whilst I think Taundry is great at right back i do think he struggled at left back slightly. Simply because he did not look all that comfortable.

Agree with Sadders - our passing is a lot better and really it's all about improving on the striker situation.

[Ken Barlow]

As it is = relegation.

Because of a friendly? Oh behave.

No.

Based on what then? Just because the team isn't fantastic on paper does not mean we will go down, football is not played on paper.

[Aldridge_saddler]

As it is = relegation.

Because of a friendly? Oh behave.

No.

Based on what then? Just because the team isn't fantastic on paper does not mean we will go down, football is not played on paper.

It's okay kenny mate! Saarland thinks any player is sheite if his name isn't Percy van d**k w**k

[NigelFareastx]

Point confirmed. It's impossible to say anything negative on this board and express your opinion. U just receive a load of abuse

[WFC_Rob]

Its not all doom and gloom, but we need to rectify a few musts.
- A target man; the season rests on it.
- Tighten up at the back; the only reason we stayed up was because of our defence last year.
- A few larger players; we are a team full of midgets and it will come back to get us.

Thanks for the report, Sadders.

I'm not pressing the panic button as some are, but there are one or two things that are just beginning to make me a bit anxious - pretty much along the same lines as your list.

People assume having a big striker means playing route one football, but that doesn't have to be the case. And let's not forget, a target man can also help to defend set pieces at our own end, which can prove vital. The only way we seem likely to get the most from a very quick and skilful attacking midfield three (Hemmings, Paterson & Cuvelier) is to have a striker who can hold the ball in the opposition's half. Without that, we're relying heavily on the midfield running through teams, which won't happen.

What also worries me is that Smith is even entertaining the possibility of playing Taundry at left back. Surely if Benning is worth a pro contract, he's also worth a place ahead of an out of position Richard Taundry?

Finally, I'd assumed Holden was signed as a third choice centre half & second choice right back - not too dissimilar to Beevers' original role last year. Whilst I'm sure he's a decent player and a great pro for the younger players to learn from, I'm not sure we should be relying as heavily on him.

[Aldridge_saddler]

Point confirmed. It's impossible to say anything negative on this board and express your opinion. U just receive a load of abuse

Qualify my abuse?

[Welsh_Saddler]

Point confirmed. It's impossible to say anything negative on this board and express your opinion. U just receive a load of abuse

By all means express negative opinions, BUT...... don't expect much in the way of agreement if you're basing your posts on what you've seen on paper, rather than seeing actual matches/friendlies/training sessions etc. etc.

If certain players have a bad game you'll see plenty of negative opinions expressed on here, and with justification. Don't be so touchy. :wink:

[tinned]

To be honest, we were a bit better than I was expecting. We kept it quite well first half. It's just finishing it off that looks like letting us down. Sort it out Deano, a big lad that can hold it up is a must.

[PT]

Point confirmed. It's impossible to say anything negative on this board and express your opinion. U just receive a load of abuse

Negative and positive opinions are equal intruders and both should be backed up with cogent arguments based upon some sort of quanitifiable and verifiable evidence. So that can start with "I was at the match today and I thought Butler was clumsy" or "I listened to the match today and it sounds like Butler was clumsy" or "by most accounts of today's match Butler was clumsy". All absolutely valid. It's up to others to decide whether to agree or not or to decide whether your opinion is valid based upon its context.

But if you just assert "Butler's cack" then people have no context, no kind of verifiable view from where or why you have decided to arrive at this conclusion.

And to be honest mate, since you've started to post on here it's just been "this is cack, that is cack, he's cack, they're cack, WFC are cack, the manager's cack, the players are cack, the ticket office is cack, the shop is cack, the shitters are cack, the cack in the shitters is cack, it's all just cack" and to be honest your fifty shades of brown posts give us no idea where you're coming from or why you're coming from that place. So, as a Saddler I see someone just having a pop at my club with seemingly no just cause or reason.Such causes probably do exist, you just don't explain them so it just seems to be for the sake of having a pop. So as a Saddler,when someone has a pop at my club for apparantly no reason, I'll have a pop back and so will others. It's the way a lot of supporters (or happy clappers if you will) are built.

[bangsection]

There are more holes in the 'Nigelfareastx' persona than an Olympic torch.

Run us through the story again. You haven't seen Walsall for seven years? Presumably because you've been in the, er, Far East. Is that right?

So why so relentlessly negative? If I hadn't seen Walsall for seven years I'd be pretty excited about going to games, seeing old mates and hopefully cheering us on to a win.

Summat smells fishy. Tip: the key to establishing a successful proxy username is not to make it entirely black or white. Otherwise you quickly become little more than a cartoon character.

[Ken Barlow]

Point confirmed. It's impossible to say anything negative on this board and express your opinion. U just receive a load of abuse

Not at all. If you're negative and back it up with a respectable argument then you wont receive abuse. You will have someone argue with your opinion but is that not the point in a forum? If everyone agreed with one another then it would be boring.

By simply saying 'Holden is rubbish' and ending at that then sorry but your point is pretty invalid. If you say 'Holden is rubbish because blah blah blah' then I'm sure your opinion will get alot more respect.

[Neil Ravenscroft]

There are more holes in the 'Nigelfareastx' persona than an Olympic torch.

Run us through the story again. You haven't seen Walsall for seven years? Presumably because you've been in the, er, Far East. Is that right?

So why so relentlessly negative? If I hadn't seen Walsall for seven years I'd be pretty excited about going to games, seeing old mates and hopefully cheering us on to a win.

Summat smells fishy. Tip: the key to establishing a successful proxy username is not to make it entirely black or white. Otherwise you quickly become little more than a cartoon character.

I haven't quite decided who is responsible for this wind up. I agree he might be one suspect.

[Willenhall Saddler]

Walsall XI Vs Burton: Walker; J, Chambers, Butler, Holden, Taundry; A, Chambers, Cuvelier, Hemmings, Paterson; Grigg, Brandy

Subs: Grof; Purkiss, Downing, Benning, George; Featherstone, Baxendale, Jones; Bowerman, Morris, Williams

thanks to BescotBanter

No Taylor! Was he injured? Or did Deano just decide not to use him.

[Ancient Moaner]

Not a problem today. A bank of 5 subs and one of 4 subs are going to piece you around quickly.

Tried to knock the ball around nicely and into space but we do need more presence in the box.

Such sentiments preaching to the converted....only our 'management' seem utterly unaware that to win footy matches you need to score goals....how many years now have we struggled in that department, it just gets utterly infuriating..

Do you honestly believe they're 'utterly unaware' of what they need?!

I think a fair few posters on this board recognise the fact that whilst we do need a presence and more of a goal threat, these players are the ones every team wants. It isn't as simple as Dean Smith clicking his fingers and magically conjuring up a 20-goal striker.

I agree entirely about such players not being freely available, but why is it (apart from the fact that we are utterly skint)
that, unlike loads of other teams in our 'position', we seem unable to produce a 'target man' . We had Macken last season but he was nearly as old as me, with a turning circle of an oil tanker. The Cureton,Adebola,Akinfenwa type of 'pure goalscorer' are out there..as I have eluded many times, what do we employ our 'scout' for? (and can I have his job please! :lol: )

[IHTC.]

It was one yard out, not that I'm a Grigg hater.

1-1 now.

:lol:

Not even our International could miss from 1 yard

[Willenhall Saddler]

I bet he could! If you had seen him at Kidderminster when he did a "Ronnie Rosenthal" you would agree.

[IHTC.]

I bet he could! If you had seen him at Kidderminster when he did a "Ronnie Rosenthal" you would agree.

Fortunately I didn't go but im sure your right, how some people harp on about how good he is or could be is mind blowing. Yes the volley he scored was very good, yes the goal he scored at MK Dons was very good so thankyou Grigg for turning up for 2 games in the whole season, shame you wasn't bother'd for the rest of it. Get rid A.S.A.P.

[Ancient Moaner]

I bet he could! If you had seen him at Kidderminster when he did a "Ronnie Rosenthal" you would agree.

Fortunately I didn't go but im sure your right, how some people harp on about how good he is or could be is mind blowing. Yes the volley he scored was very good, yes the goal he scored at MK Dons was very good so thankyou Grigg for turning up for 2 games in the whole season, shame you wasn't bother'd for the rest of it. Get rid A.S.A.P.

Find it so hard to believe that some dow rate the mossive talent that is Mr. Grigg (sarcastic mode!)

[Aldridge_saddler]

I thought we were tidy and tried to play the right kind of football.

Grigg looked tidy and took his chance.

Brandy and Hemmings looked incredibly lively.

Paterson's decision making was quite poor, most notably in the second half should have crossed the ball but never did and got tackled.

Taundry looked jittery and got caught out far too often!

Holden looked pretty comfortable on the ball.

James Chambers looked solid and really comfortable.

My main worry is the lack of pace at the back, what we do have are defenders who are really good at recovering.

[Rob Harvey]

I thought we were tidy and tried to play the right kind of football.

Grigg looked tidy and took his chance.

Brandy and Hemmings looked incredibly lively.

Paterson's decision making was quite poor, most notably in the second half should have crossed the ball but never did and got tackled.

Taundry looked jittery and got caught out far too often!

Holden looked pretty comfortable on the ball.

James Chambers looked solid and really comfortable.

My main worry is the lack of pace at the back, what we do have are defenders who are really good at recovering.

Don't you 9/10 need pace to recover from a mistake in defence? :mrgreen: