booster cogburn wrote: not at all happy with the way we dished it out.
It's allowed against Port Vale.
See Football League Rules and Laws of the Game. Section 4 . Sub- section 3 (2a).
booster cogburn wrote: not at all happy with the way we dished it out.
SaigonSaddler wrote:Ho-Ho-Ho!
Merry Christmas Port Failures......anyone else listen to Sinnot on Radio Stoke 94.6 on the way home......90 seconds.......kick the cat........if only........90 seconds.........professional.........annoyed........90 seconds.
Actually, more like 20 seconds!!! :lol:
Eat my late, late goal!
Asps wrote:SaigonSaddler wrote:Ho-Ho-Ho!
Merry Christmas Port Failures......anyone else listen to Sinnot on Radio Stoke 94.6 on the way home......90 seconds.......kick the cat........if only........90 seconds.........professional.........annoyed........90 seconds.
Actually, more like 20 seconds!!! :lol:
Eat my late, late goal!
It was just like the good old days - Your flat cap thrown in the air, then running down the aisle to retrieve it :lol:
Pedagogue wrote:yoda wrote:According to Vale we took 1,800 fans. Rubbish. Absolute rubbish. I'm sure clubs are playing with the figures (Notts County also springs to mind), to make their home crowd seem bigger.
That stand held 4,500 and there weren't many gaps
Actually, yoda, there were a LOT of empty seats - apart from the sizeable block, cordoned off, as a barrier to keep our lot well away from their lot! 1800 seems about reasonable to me - only Leeds (and, possibly, Forest) are likely to beat that, at Fail Park, this season.
WFC_Rob wrote:Win when playing poorly - the sign of a good side?
We certainly weren't at our best today and proved how important Mooney is to us because when he went off, the ball simply wouldn't stick in the final third.
Ricketts proved again that he is in a class of his own. Controlled the ball on the edge of the box, turned, picked out Weston in the clear when no-one else seemed to have even noticed he was there, made his move to the back post and converted the type of crosses strikers dream of. Brilliant.
I actually thoight Weston was man of the match today. He was good defensively considering he had to cope with Sonko's defensive ineptitude in front of him and put a few decent crosses over. In truth, the rest of the back four played alright again but Weston was my pick of the bunch.
Sweeney also looked excellent until he was taken off (couldn't see why). He ran at defenders and generally looked to keep hold of the ball which we were having trouble doing generally.
Sonko needs taking out of the side and out of the 16 immediately. I think he's a good player when he performs to his best, but we haven't seen that from him for a good couple of months now and the stick he gets is doing his confidence no good at all. Give him a spell in the reserves to prove to himself as much as anyone that he has what it takes to make it as a Walsall player.
Wrack was good again. In the first half, the number of loose balls he was picking up was unbelievable. He's playing like a 22 year old rather than a 32 year old at the moment and long may it continue.
I thought Bradley had another one of his 'in and out' games today. In general, I thought he was quiet but he did show glimpses of quality and sharpness around the ball.
A word on the referee. That bloke was an absloute joke. Referees like him are the reason why players lose control. To use an example, as Bradley tracks the Vale player on the ball, he swings an arm and elbows Bradley in the face. Bradley turns to the ref who blows his whistle and calls the player in question over. A quiet word in the ear and he's back on his way. If the ref has seen an elbow to the face, as he must have done, how has he let the player continue without a card? Fortunately, Bradley isn't a dirty player because on another day, he could have sought his revenge.
The ref then went about booking any player who caused his opponent to fall to the ground.
I have no complaints about the Fox red card. I just hope a couple of his team-mates have apologised to him for putting him in a position where he had little choice. The absentees in midfield who allowed them to catch us on the break put him in a position where only an immaculate challenge would have resulted in anything less.
Port Vale were poor, let's not forget it. They'll struggle because main striker Luke 'Firework' Rodgers plays like a headless chicken and doesn't look like he could hit a barn door with a banjo. When we went down to 10 men, we left the back door slightly ajar, so to speak, and let them play a bit of football. They'll come away thinking that if they play like that every week, they'll be alright. The reality was that they had fewer clear cut chances in the game than we had after we went down to 10 men.
All in all, a good day. Miles going off on a stretcher was satisfying to say the least. I was just glad we came away with a point despite not playing anywhere near our best and having to cope with a completely stupid referee.
Mozza_saddler wrote:Brum wrote:couple of points..
lost our heads a bit at the end, foxy needs to learn to tackle without jumping into players. ricketts needs to learn not to lean back when shooting.
to be fair to fox, he is one of the stronger tacklers we have, and the vale attacker was through on goal and would have probably buried it if fox didnt do something, so i disagree with you on that one..
Walsall11 wrote:port vale are trying to rip our stand and staduim etc.
anybody fancy helping me putting these knobs in there place.
link: http://www.onevalefan.co.uk/forums/show ... 86&page=10
we hate vale!!
big baz 1 wrote:Sonko was wack.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests