Peterborough United (H) League 1 Saturday 11/10/08.

[Pedagogue]

Palmer has always claimed that he is a right-winger first and a midfielder second. It was only because Mullen was desperate for a right-back, at the start of the season, because of injuries to Weston and Taundry, that he has played there. Not surprisingly, and to his credit, he was happy to play anywhere, just to hold down a first-team place.

[Neil Ravenscroft]

I take the points on his substitutions being "odd". I also wonder about his changing of the game, my problem Neil was with you wondering what Dicky Dull would do with this team... the answer is make it more defensive, which was, as most will admit, Dull. I am yet to be convinced of JM and as others have said, only time will tell - but thus far, the style of play has been much more entertaining (especially when you have seen the game I am eluding to :wink: you didn;t answer my question Mr R!)

Entertaining because there are goals? Don't buy it. There is nothing entertaining about watching us defend like 11 year olds. Even some of the games we've won, our defending has been shambolic. Southend was the perfect example - the team that won wasn't going to be the one that scored the most goals, it was more a case of the one that let the least in.

[Whitti Steve]

I take the points on his substitutions being "odd". I also wonder about his changing of the game, my problem Neil was with you wondering what Dicky Dull would do with this team... the answer is make it more defensive, which was, as most will admit, Dull. I am yet to be convinced of JM and as others have said, only time will tell - but thus far, the style of play has been much more entertaining (especially when you have seen the game I am eluding to :wink: you didn;t answer my question Mr R!)

Entertaining because there are goals? Don't buy it. There is nothing entertaining about watching us defend like 11 year olds. Even some of the games we've won, our defending has been shambolic. Southend was the perfect example - the team that won wasn't going to be the one that scored the most goals, it was more a case of the one that let the least in.

Still not answered the question which forms the crux of the validity of your judgement. Ask anyone who was there last home game if they enjoyed the football (I think I am right in saying you missed it). Ask those who went to Cheltenham, ask those who went to Bristol Rovers. How many games have you seen again???????? :mrgreen:

[philthesaddler]

Combination of poor performance from us, and them being an excellent team. A great example of what a little investment in your team can do. Boyd, Makail-Smith, Hyde, Mclean all cost money, but not anything earth shattering.

Agree with what others have said, our squad is still painfully thin. With our first choice 11 on song we will play well, but its unreasonable to expect everyone to be performing excellently week in week out, and we've got little room to change things around when players do play poorly. Ricketts for example was very poor at Hereford, and again, very poor against Pboro, but who have we got to drop him for? No one.

Pboro were a good side, faster than us, stronger than us and more clinical.

We need a striker to put pressure on the two we've already got, a proven winger and an experienced defender. 3 players of that ilk would make us so much more consistent.

[Stu]

He Mullen could try and get the ball down and play use the width of the pitch as we did against Carlisle instead of the constant hopeful hoof forward football we witnessed yesterday. We have a first team coach what input is he having .

Agree entirely, but with a team selection that consisted of a ponderous and slow midfield (Mattis excepted), we were never going to be able to do that. But I think we're agreeing now anyway, so I'll stop.

[Magic Man Fan]

Tat compared to recent performances. Let's hope we react like we did after last below par peformance, the Orient defeat.

[Neil Ravenscroft]

I take the points on his substitutions being "odd". I also wonder about his changing of the game, my problem Neil was with you wondering what Dicky Dull would do with this team... the answer is make it more defensive, which was, as most will admit, Dull. I am yet to be convinced of JM and as others have said, only time will tell - but thus far, the style of play has been much more entertaining (especially when you have seen the game I am eluding to :wink: you didn;t answer my question Mr R!)

Entertaining because there are goals? Don't buy it. There is nothing entertaining about watching us defend like 11 year olds. Even some of the games we've won, our defending has been shambolic. Southend was the perfect example - the team that won wasn't going to be the one that scored the most goals, it was more a case of the one that let the least in.

Still not answered the question which forms the crux of the validity of your judgement. Ask anyone who was there last home game if they enjoyed the football (I think I am right in saying you missed it). Ask those who went to Cheltenham, ask those who went to Bristol Rovers. How many games have you seen again???????? :mrgreen:

Not that I think it's valid at all, but the only home game I've missed was Carlisle and I have seen us defend well once and have seen us play well once (Scunny).

I'll make one other pertinent observation. Our wins have come against Scunthorpe (1st), Southend (9th), Bristol Rovers (11th), Carlisle (12th), and Brighton (17th) - only two teams in the top ten. At the same time, we have lost to Crewe (23rd), Orient (20th)and Peterboro (7th) and got draws at Hereford (24th) and Yeovil (22nd). In fact we've only got two points from 3 games against the bottom four and, if you chuck Orient in, two from 4 games against the bottom 5. That's mid table mediocrity form and the starting eleven should be much better than that.

[Magic Man Fan]

Not that I think it's valid at all, but the only home game I've missed was Carlisle and I have seen us defend well once and have seen us play well once (Scunny).

Can you not attend the game this Saturday Neil? :D

[Neil Ravenscroft]

Not that I think it's valid at all, but the only home game I've missed was Carlisle and I have seen us defend well once and have seen us play well once (Scunny).

Can you not attend the game this Saturday Neil? :D

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't we playing Hartlepool at home this Saturday? I don't get what the point is you are trying to make. Mind you, it's also the grand daughter's 2nd birthday and that's likely to be more entertaining . . . .

[Magic Man Fan]

Oi crabby bum. The point I was making was that you didn't attend Carlisle, by far our best performance, so if you could not attend this forthcoming Saturday it would be much appreciated.

[Plastic Hawk]

Our wins have come against Scunthorpe (1st), Southend (9th), Bristol Rovers (11th), Carlisle (12th), and Brighton (17th) - only two teams in the top ten.

But four (out of five wins) against teams in the top half. So, once again, it depends which stats you choose to use (or how you choose to phrase them anyway).

To me, our results indicate complacency. We've beaten some decent sides - and can compete with anyone on our day. But, we seem to drop our level 10% or so against teams that we feel that we "should" beat - and because we're at our best playing a high-energy, pressing game we can't get away with coming off our maximum level against anyone. That's the lesson that we need to learn.

[aaaae]

Our wins have come against Scunthorpe (1st), Southend (9th), Bristol Rovers (11th), Carlisle (12th), and Brighton (17th) - only two teams in the top ten.

But four (out of five wins) against teams in the top half. So, once again, it depends which stats you choose to use (or how you choose to phrase them anyway).

To me, our results indicate complacency. We've beaten some decent sides - and can compete with anyone on our day. But, we seem to drop our level 10% or so against teams that we feel that we "should" beat - and because we're at our best playing a high-energy, pressing game we can't get away with coming off our maximum level against anyone. That's the lesson that we need to learn.

Or perhaps Doffer was right and we should have played the reserves on Tuesday and rested the 1st team? Maybe they would have been fresher?

[leics_saddler]

Not going to games this season is a bit like reading a novel when everyone else has seen a film. I'm reliant on reports and other people's insights and opinion and then my imagination to fill in the gaps.

Before this game, I read that Peterborough were extremely short handed, particularly in defence. I remarked in another thread how this reminded me of the situation in the 1990s when a ponderous Barry Fry team were torn apart by Donowa and Houghton. I also suggested that with two burly centre forwards, it was essential that we played with dedicated wide players and I suggested that Demontagnac and Nicholls were best suited to this with their pace. Palmer may be suited to the right wing also, but I'm reliant on the judgement of others there.

If I can say this before a game, not having been to a single game this season, then it should be immediately apparent to the club's management.

Whether a supporter or another has been to a given game is an irrelevence. Jimmy Mullen has been to every game this season and Saturday's display was an unacceptable display of tactical ineptitude by a professional manager, made worse because it was against Peterborough.

[Neil Ravenscroft]

Our wins have come against Scunthorpe (1st), Southend (9th), Bristol Rovers (11th), Carlisle (12th), and Brighton (17th) - only two teams in the top ten.

But four (out of five wins) against teams in the top half. So, once again, it depends which stats you choose to use (or how you choose to phrase them anyway).

To me, our results indicate complacency. We've beaten some decent sides - and can compete with anyone on our day. But, we seem to drop our level 10% or so against teams that we feel that we "should" beat - and because we're at our best playing a high-energy, pressing game we can't get away with coming off our maximum level against anyone. That's the lesson that we need to learn.

It all depends on how good you think the wins were against the teams 9th, 11th and 12th were. Considering Carlisle have now lost six on the bounce suggests that it wasn't as good a win as it first appears and the game against Southend could, quite frankly, have gone either way, especially if the ref had seen Ishy kick that player in the first half. What we both agree with, though, is that there is something wrong. Like Stu, I think that's the complete lack of any Plan B, C, D, or anything else.

[aaaae]

Not going to games this season is a bit like reading a novel when everyone else has seen a film. I'm reliant on reports and other people's insights and opinion and then my imagination to fill in the gaps.

Before this game, I read that Peterborough were extremely short handed, particularly in defence. I remarked in another thread how this reminded me of the situation in the 1990s when a ponderous Barry Fry team were torn apart by Donowa and Houghton. I also suggested that with two burly centre forwards, it was essential that we played with dedicated wide players and I suggested that Demontagnac and Nicholls were best suited to this with their pace. Palmer may be suited to the right wing also, but I'm reliant on the judgement of others there.

If I can say this before a game, not having been to a single game this season, then it should be immediately apparent to the club's management.

Whether a supporter or another has been to a given game is an irrelevence. Jimmy Mullen has been to every game this season and Saturday's display was an unacceptable display of tactical ineptitude by a professional manager, made worse because it was against Peterborough.

If you'd been to the match on Tuesday you wouldn't have had any difficulty choosing which of them to play! :D

[Neil Ravenscroft]

Oi crabby bum. The point I was making was that you didn't attend Carlisle, by far our best performance, so if you could not attend this forthcoming Saturday it would be much appreciated.

Consider me suitably whooshed.

[Duke]

He Mullen could try and get the ball down and play use the width of the pitch as we did against Carlisle instead of the constant hopeful hoof forward football we witnessed yesterday. We have a first team coach what input is he having .

Agree entirely, but with a team selection that consisted of a ponderous and slow midfield (Mattis excepted), we were never going to be able to do that. But I think we're agreeing now anyway, so I'll stop.

Stu do you think a 5th man in midfield would have helped on saturday ? Maybe at the expense of Ricketts

[tinned]

Why are all these people saying we didn't play well in the second half? We won it 1 - 0 :P

First half an hour (early goal apart) I thought it was a cracking game of football oplayed by two fairly matched teams. Second half we were cack! End of detailed report :wink:

Stevo, loving your Dicky Dull posts :D

[Stu]

He Mullen could try and get the ball down and play use the width of the pitch as we did against Carlisle instead of the constant hopeful hoof forward football we witnessed yesterday. We have a first team coach what input is he having .

Agree entirely, but with a team selection that consisted of a ponderous and slow midfield (Mattis excepted), we were never going to be able to do that. But I think we're agreeing now anyway, so I'll stop.

Stu do you think a 5th man in midfield would have helped on saturday ? Maybe at the expense of Ricketts

I think the biggest problem to be honest was the lack of pace and movement in our team. A 5th man would have made no difference in my view as we had our fair share of possession at times, but just did nowt with it. In my view, we defended deep to counter their pace, but that just played into their hands as they were happy to keep going sideways and backwards until the gap appeared.

Pre-season, and early season, Mullen said he was a man who liked his teams to play with wingers and pace if my memory serves me correctly, Saturday was the anti-thesis of that. It was one very slow wide man and one very narrow midfield player. Saturday we tried to counter their strengths instead of playing to ours, in my view, that was the problem.

I'd love to see a midfield quartet of Palmer, Mattis, Hughes and Ishmel and us playing with proper wingers.

[Bernie]

I'd love to see a midfield quartet of Palmer, Mattis, Hughes and Ishmel and us playing with proper wingers.

So would I.

[latviancheese]

I agree, at home we need to play proper wingers, and bang the balls in the box. We got two big hefty strikers, USE EM!

[King Crimson]

I'd love to see a midfield quartet of Palmer, Mattis, Hughes and Ishmel and us playing with proper wingers.

So would I.

Yup. Me too.

[Neil Ravenscroft]

I'd love to see a midfield quartet of Palmer, Mattis, Hughes and Ishmel and us playing with proper wingers.

So would I.

Yup. Me too.

It certainly should have been the answer on Saturday.

[aaaae]

I'd love to see a midfield quartet of Palmer, Mattis, Hughes and Ishmel and us playing with proper wingers.

So would I.

Yup. Me too.

It certainly should have been the answer on Saturday.

It was the answer on Tuesday night for both of our goals - one crossed from the left, the other from the right, both nodded in at the far post by our strikers. Is it rocket science?

[Duke]

He Mullen could try and get the ball down and play use the width of the pitch as we did against Carlisle instead of the constant hopeful hoof forward football we witnessed yesterday. We have a first team coach what input is he having .

Agree entirely, but with a team selection that consisted of a ponderous and slow midfield (Mattis excepted), we were never going to be able to do that. But I think we're agreeing now anyway, so I'll stop.

Stu do you think a 5th man in midfield would have helped on saturday ? Maybe at the expense of Ricketts

I think the biggest problem to be honest was the lack of pace and movement in our team. A 5th man would have made no difference in my view as we had our fair share of possession at times, but just did nowt with it. In my view, we defended deep to counter their pace, but that just played into their hands as they were happy to keep going sideways and backwards until the gap appeared.

Pre-season, and early season, Mullen said he was a man who liked his teams to play with wingers and pace if my memory serves me correctly, Saturday was the anti-thesis of that. It was one very slow wide man and one very narrow midfield player. Saturday we tried to counter their strengths instead of playing to ours, in my view, that was the problem.

I'd love to see a midfield quartet of Palmer, Mattis, Hughes and Ishmel and us playing with proper wingers.

fair comments Stu.

[philthesaddler]

Movement was the biggest problem against peteborough. We just stand still when in possession.