The Least We Deserved

Sometimes you get what you deserve. Today we really didn't. Everyone at the ground knows how the script should have ended; and if Vetokele had put away the one-on-one with the last meaningful kick of the game - as we all believed he would - Cardiff could have had no complaints. They might say that they controlled the first half, which they did, and led quite comfortably at the break. But after we changed formation not long into the second there was only one team in it. Cardiff ended up paying for their total lack of ambition against 10 men, not winning a game that seemed to be theirs for the taking. They should be grateful for a point, one they did not deserve (even passing over their disgracefully unpunished timewasting and unlovely long-throw tactic).

The fact is that against 10 men in the second half they failed to fashion a decent attempt on goal and bizzarely seemed to sit back, content to defend their lead despite regularly giving up chances. If I was a Cardiff fan I would be furious with their second-half display. We hit the woodwork twice, had two cleared off the line, forced some decent saves from their keeper, were denied a levelling up of the numbers by a poor refereeing decision (in keeping with his general performance, which was lamentable), and then had that golden opportunity at the end. Peeters deserves plaudits for the change in formation, which basically transformed us from plodding to defeat to all but grabbing a famous win, as do the players for their character and commitment, with a display that veered between the adventurous and the totally gung-ho, with all three centre-halves getting forward. Sure, we had nothing to lose, but with a bit more daring in the play than usual we carved out enough opportunities to have won with something to spare.

Let's start at the beginning. The team news was surprising, with Pope dropped for the on-loan Etheridge, Fox left on the bench with Solly taking that place and Gomez the other full-back, Ben Haim and Bikey-Amougou of course in central defence, Jackson and Buyens holding down the central midfield spots, Cousins and Gudmundsson out wide, and Tucudean coming in to partner Harriott up front, with Vetokele dropping to the bench (whether for a rest or a knock I don't know). It was a basic 4-4-2 - and either side of Harriott's red card it didn't work.

Basically through the first half Cardiff won the battles in the key areas. They pretty much ran midfield while we struggled to get anything going down the flanks, while the front two were out-muscled and failed to provide an outlet. We could knock it around in our half but little more.

Cardiff took the lead with depressing simplicity, albeit with some controversy. A ball was played forward to a guy seemingly in an offside position; I can't be entirely sure as I was replying to a text at the time, but everyone around me (and we are more or less in line) was in no doubt and it was evident that the linesman had not kept up with play. No flag and the ball went out for a corner (or a throw-in near the flag; given their long-throw tactics it made no difference). The ball in was flicked on at the near post and their guy got first to the ball to head it back across Etheridge into the net. The same ploy almost worked again shortly afterwards but this time the loose ball was fired over the bar.

Cardiff seemed content to play at pretty much one-pace and to rely on loading it into the box. That threat seemed to fade, with Etheridge coming off his line to good effect, both to catch and punch clear well. But they were very comfortable, a sense of ease compounded by Harriott's dismissal. It was one of those loose balls and a perhaps rash, certainly impetuous, challenge. We know there's no malice in him and there was no intent, but it might have been a red - and when you see the ref sprinting towards him reaching for his pocket you pretty much know the outcome. At the time it seemed to make an already very difficult task all but impossible.

At the break all I remember of a threat from us was a decent turn in the box by Harriott but the low cross not finding anyone, a surprise shot from a tight angle from Tucudean which their keeper parried, and the one decent chance that probably should have got us level, with Ben Haim intercepting well and taking the ball all the way into their box, turning one defender and then instead of shooting opting to slide it to the left to Tucudean, only to put too much on the pass. And when the second half started in similar fashion you felt that a second for Cardiff and it would have been curtains. That they failed to really try to press home their advantage was, from their perspective, criminal.

The changes came around the hour. Gomez was sacrificed and Jackson went off with him, with Vetokele and Onyewu coming on. We switched to three at the back, with Solly and Cousins effectively becoming wing-backs, Gudmundsson going inside, and two up front, a sort of 3-4-2 or 5-2-2. After that, at times it was more like a 0-4-5. The change really worked like a treat. We controlled the ball and passed it better, Tucudean and Gudmundsson both came much more into the game, and Buyens stepped up. Cardiff seemed unable to deal with it, especially as the centre-backs were comfortable to advance with or without the ball. They seemed content to sit back and despite acres of space in our half rarely threatened to exploit it.

The chances started to come. Tucudean almost converted a corner, only for the ball to clip the outside of the post. The details of how two were cleared off the line and the saves their keeper made are beyond my powers of recollection, then Tucudean was sent clear only to be pulled back. There wasn't a great deal of contact but it was clearly a foul, there was another defender not far away but I doubt that he would have got to Tucudean before he was in a position to get a shot away. It denied a goal-scoring opportunity and should have been punished with a red, not the yellow shown. From the resulting free-kick Gudmundsson's effort cleared the wall and left their keeper stranded only to hit the same outside of the post that Tucudean's effort had.

As the clock ticked down, and the ref went through his pantomime act (occasionally talking to someone for timewasting but doing nothing when each throw-in for them saw them clean it religiously, giving fouls when players/fans appealed, sometimes applying an advantage then bringing things back etc) there was a building sense of injustice. But before the clock reached 90 Gudmunsson was allowed to turn with the ball and line up the shot. This time it proved to be a screamer into the top corner.

Going into four minutes of stoppage time suddenly we weren't sure whether now to take our own time or to go for the win. Whatever, the ball was played forward to I think Tucudean who played in Vetokele running on. He was in the clear and just the keeper to beat. But his first touch wasn't great and he didn't seemed to settle. While his decision to loft it over the advancing keeper may have been good, he really failed to control the ball and it sailed over the bar. Add in Tucudean not scoring the winner against Millwall, Ipswich's winner, Blackpool's equaliser, now this, stoppage time at The Valley has not been kind to us (collectively seven points gone begging). Igor was distraught, the fans quite rightly sang his name, and all that was left was to applaud the players off the pitch.

If there's something deeper to take from the game it's perhaps that when we became less cautious in the second half we were a real threat. Getting that balance right is a task for Peeters. And if there's any real justice tonight the ref will have a very dodgy ruby that might convince him that his contribution to the game was well below par.

Player Ratings (which would have been very different at half-time):

Etheridge - 8/10. No chance with the goal and otherwise was very instrumental in negating their threat from set-pieces; Pope may well have a great future but I suspect he would have struggled today with their threat in the air.

Gomez - 7/10. No complaints, he had to be sacrificed to change the formation and can't shoulder much of the blame for our first-half impotence.

Solly - 8/10. Filled in well enough at left-back then played his part getting forward down the right to good effect.

Ben-Haim - 8/10. He and Bikey dealt very well with the threat of Jones, read the game to intercept, and proved adept at carrying the ball forward.

Bikey-Amougou: 8/10.  One or two rather clumsy challenges but generally commanding and an inspiration; have to mention some superb passes to spread the play.

Cousins - 7/10. Ineffective first half like many others, but played his part in the turnaround. No decisive contribution but kept the left side working.

Jackson - 6/10. Perhaps an unfair mark as he was unable to benefit from our change of formation, but in the first half he and Buyens struggled.

Buyens - 7/10. He too would have had a poor mark at the break, but he stepped up thereafter.

Gudmundsson - 7/10. Almost an 8 given the goal, but he too was below par through the first half.

Tucudean - 7/10. Much more effective when not having to try to win balls in the air against stronger centre-backs. On another day might have scored a couple.

Harriott - 6/10. I'm not going to give him a very poor rating for one rash tackle. He had caused a problem or two in that flat first half.

Subs - Onyewu (8/10 - slotted in very well); Vetokele (7/10 - but he and the rest of us know it was almost a 9).

That Time Of The Year

'Tis that time of the day and the year that all sensible people have all the cards written, prezzies bought and wrapped, and are breaking into the port. I'm just going straight to the last, there's still time enough for the rest. Christmas morning was made for scrubbing the kitchen floor before heading off for the family lunch, and despite a 1pm kick-off there will be time early on Boxing Day to do the final fumigation of my place to make it as tickety-boo as I can (which ain't saying much) and to get in the bucket-load of lemons (don't ask) that she requires before my French partner Suzanne arrives.

Silly girl knows nothing about planning ahead. She may have all her UK trips for the first half of next year already booked and have done all the necessary for a jolly to Iceland for new year, but she overlooked the need to get here in time for the Cardiff game's early kick-off. Hopefully by the time I make it back from The Valley she will have arrived at my gaff (despite the absence of trains), corrected any minor cleaning imperfections, laid out my cheap(er) cigars from France, and uncorked a decent St Joseph, having lugged both from Lyon (along with other necessities such as a saucisson or two and the good chocolates she gets given each year which j'adore and she doesn't like) with no help from yours truly. Relationships as they say are all about give and take.

Anyway, serves her right, she failed to help me get out of my Xmas present dilemma. The Blackheath charity shops are a source of endless bargains for me - and having gone in one to purchase something for an office Secret Santa thing (happy to say that the teetotaller who received my snakes and ladders drinking game took it in good spirit) I noticed a very good corkscrew (for the record it's called rather immodestly The Perfect Corkscrew). Thought it might make a decent gift and before thinking about the consequences mentioned the possibility to my sister, who seemed delighted to be the beneficiary. It was only after that I took a good look at it. It really is very good, perfect for my use, or to leave in Lyon for when I'm around there. I then came up with a way out: find another corkscrew to give to my sister/brother-in-law and keep the other, they won't know. Only for Suzanne to act as my conscience: "it is not acceptable". Perhaps because of her I do indeed (try to) walk the line, even if one present will tonight be wrapped with gritted teeth.

There ought to be a decent link now to something about football, just to pretend there's some point to the post. But for the life of me I can't think of one, especially as new year is the time for reflection, not now. Other than perhaps to, rather late in the day, wish a Merry Christmas to all Addicks around the globe. Blimey, I must be getting into the spirit(s) of the thing, let's even include fans of other clubs too, just this once.

Points Dropped For Sure

We went home after the Millwall game thinking we might not have deserved a win but had the chance at the death to take all the points, after the Ipswich game thinking we didn't deserve to lose but had, and today we left knowing that this was a case of points dropped. Not that simple for sure. Blackpool took the lead in the first half and the way we were playing another goal for them and it would have been very difficult. But not long into the second half we were 2-1 up and the game was there for the taking. Sure, we didn't actually win because Bikey-Amougou blazed the stoppage time open goal over the bar; for me the bigger question was why we failed to go on and win the game well from a position of strength, against very limited opposition. We made no chances of note in that period and ended up dropping the points that should have been in the bag.

The line-up reflected injuries and the late departure of Coquelin. It was a sort of 4-5-1/4-3-3 with in front of Pope Gomez coming in at right-back, Fox on the left either side of Ben Haim and Bikey, Buyens returning with Solly and Cousins either side of him (and swapping over from time to time), Gudmundsson sort of in the hole, and Vetokele and Harriott up front. The emphasis seemed to be on fluidity but also filling holes with what we have. The notable absentees from the starting X1 were Tucudean, Bulot, Ahearne-Grant/Pigott and Wilson, all of whom were on the bench. Given the unavailability of Jackson, Wiggins, Moussa and now Coquelin, it wasn't far off all available starting or on the bench.

The opening exchanges were mundane, the only features for me being how well Gomez slotted in, the fact that Buyens was head and shoulders above anyone else on the pitch, and how well Solly and Cousins tried to do the jobs asked of them. Blackpool offered nothing of note (one shot parried well enough by Pope and a couple of free kicks from possibly dangerous positions not exploited), but quite frankly neither did we. After 20 minutes I think we had a tame shot. Now even if the game goes on for 100 minutes that's 20% of the match. Sure it takes time for a new formation to settle into a game, but we seemed too comfortable to pass the ball with no serious intent - and sometimes poorly (Bikey's first pass going out and then somehow he escaped getting a yellow after ploughing through their guy from behind). There wasn't the space to get Gudmundsson really involved in his position (and a free kick from him on the edge of the box was too close for him to get it over the wall and under the bar), to get Harriott in behind them, or to get Igor on the end of anything.

A poor start was then compounded by conceding a poor goal. A corner saw Pope come for it only to flick it on rather than get a decisive clearance in. Their guy at the far post headed it back and either it went straight in or was converted from near range, I don't really remember or care. If Blackpool had been a better side they could have gone on to press home the advantage. Instead they competed but no more, while we tried to work our way back into it.

Indeed, with one of our best moves we did draw level. For once the ball was moved with more purpose down the left, which stretched their defence, and when the cross came in Vetokele seemed to be getting on the end of it only to be up-ended by a defender's challenge which came nowhere near to getting the ball. A reasonably clear penalty. Buyens stepped up and there's an air about him that left you in little doubt that he would score, which he did by putting it in the corner of the left side.

The remainder of the half passed without real incident (at least none that I remember) and at the break it seemed a case of, OK we should have the weapons to go on and win this, can't see Blackpool really troubling a good defence, let's go out and do it.

We were to find ourselves in front only 10 minutes into the second half. A ball squared from the right found Cousins advancing towards goal. He looked left and right for a possible pass but wasn't closed down and when nothing was on tried his luck. It was a sweet strike that found the bottom corner of the net, although there had to be a question over their keeper getting beaten from that range from a shot that, while well-placed, wasn't struck with that much venom. It was a decent goal, but really one out of the blue, not the outcome of any sustained pressure.

So be it. We're now ahead but with plenty of the game to go, against a team that had already made two substitutions and which had given no indication of being able to really hurt us. Surely a case for upping the tempo and killing off the game. That we failed to do. We continued in the same fashion, probing but not stretching them. A couple of shots went just wide of the post, but I don't recall their keeper being called into serious action.

With 20 minutes or so left Tucudean replaced Harriott. I made a point of watching him, as it's still unclear whether he's the player who so impressed against Derby or the one who missed the chance against Millwall. I wasn't impressed today. When a forward comes on to provide fresh legs and a different threat with enough of the game to go and the outcome still in the balance, you expect (or at least I do) to see someone who wants to prove why he should be starting. Instead he drifted and gave, as far as I could see, no great desire to get the ball or do much with it when it came his way. Harsh possibly, but this was a change made to go on and win the game and that didn't happen.

We were nevertheless still feeling pretty confident of seeing the game out and moving on, with Blackpool not exactly going for broke and Ben Haim and Bikey seemingly in control. But with the clock close to going into stoppage time they won a free kick. The ball was floated to the far post and for some reason our defenders were AWOL. Pope came out to claim it but was beaten to the ball badly and their guy might have picked up an injury but the ball was in the net.

Four minutes of stoppage time to do something about it. Even then we should have done. Bikey was up front by now and after a corner the ball dropped to him around the penalty spot with nobody making a challenge. He had all the time he wanted, perhaps too much time as he seemed to get distracted by prostrate bodies between him and the goal and ended up shooting over the bar. I'll never slate a centre-back for missing a good chance, but this was as good as they come and for the second time in three home games we'd failed to convert the chance at the death to win the game (of course in the third we conceded in stoppage time).

We know Blackpool have had a revival of late and that we are missing key players. But the way the game panned out no question it was two points dropped, points that would have been more than useful with a string of tough (on paper) coming up. The impact is compounded by the fact that the previous two home games had also seen us fail to win/draw games we could/should have done. That raises the question whether we have the devil, the drive and desire, to go out and beat teams convincingly. I saw no real signs today that the players were actually enjoying themselves. Undoubtedly they competed, no shortage of effort, perhaps not enough of a winning mentality.

Player Ratings:

Pope - 5/10. Culpable for both goals, both a failure to come off his line to decisive effect.

Gomez - 7/10. Not perfect but slotted in well after a long period of absence.

Fox - 6/10. Distribution often fell down but did get forward and can't recall any bad errors in defence.

Ben Haim - 7/10. Decent game but where did he - and the rest of the defence - go for their second?

Bikey-Amougou - 6/10. Did most of his stuff well enough, but it was a bad miss and we conceded two goals.

Solly - 7/10. Obviously a different role for him today, born I assume out of necessity, but took it on well enough.

Buyens - 7/10. Dominant in the first half, perhaps less so in the second when we needed to go on and put the game to bed.

Cousins - 7/10. Good goal, decent effort through the game.

Gudmundsson - 6/10. Good touches but not a decisive contribution from someone capable of that.

Harriott - 6/10. Couldn't get in behind them today, couple of shots just wide.

Vetokele - 6/10. They dealt with him quite well but may well have scored from the cross which produced the penalty.

Subs - Tucudean (5/10: has to do more to justify a start or coming off the bench). 

Too Many Chances Go Begging

It’s impossible to lose a game to a stoppage-time goal and not feel hard done by. But some go your way and some don’t. Nobody would deny that a draw would have been a fair result on the balance of play and chances created, with really nothing to choose between the two sides in a decent game. Fact is the game is about putting the round white thing into the net and today two teams spent 94 minutes failing to do that, despite creating enough possibilities (had to check the BBC stats and according to them we had 21 attempts and five on target, Ipswich 19 and six respectively; at the end of the day only one mattered). If it had been us taking the points in stoppage time by actually scoring Ipswich could have had no complaints; by the same token neither can we (especially as we’ve won games this season by scoring the only goal late on).

With Henderson and Wiggins still unavailable, the defence picked itself. But whereas we started with a 4-5-1 against Millwall including Buyens, his absence was countered by bringing in Harriott to partner Vetokele up front in a 4-4-2, with Jackson and Coquelin in central midfield and Cousins and Gudmundsson either side of them. The plan seemed to be to exploit Harriott’s pace to get in behind them. Like so much through the game, for both sides, it nearly worked.

I remember the game at The Valley against Ipswich last season, when they flew out of the traps, scored early, and effectively had the game won before we started. Almost a repeat this time around as a corner in the first minute found two Ipswich players effectively unmarked, only for them to get in each other’s way, resulting in a tame header wide. But in a decidedly open start we responded with a move ending with Gudmundsson being played in well but stretching to get the shot away and the ball flying over the bar. Their front two were causing problems in the early stages, winning more than their fair share of aerial challenges (that McCarthy influence as they made sure with shoves and pulls if they weren’t going to win the ball against Bikey-Amougou and Ben Haim there would be enough interference to ensure no decisive clearance), while Solly had his hands full with the experienced Hunt, a task he was to prove well up to. Equally the ploy of using Harriott was causing them problems, especially when Vetokele was able to find him with some deft touches into space to exploit his pace.

I don’t take notes and listing each move and shot is beyond me. Suffice to say both teams through the first half continued to exchange almost decisive blows. A fierce shot from Solly was parried, as were efforts from Harriott and Gudmundsson, while a superb run from Coquelin into the box was well spotted only for their keeper to smother the effort from close range. At the other end Pope was required to make saves of a higher standard than those against Millwall to keep them out, while a couple of free kicks whipped in by Hunt only needed someone to get on the end of them.

At the break, for all the effort it was scoreless and the game was still there for either side to win. They had the edge when it came to set pieces, while a couple of tall and effective forwards meant they were happy enough to play it longer. We had crafted decent openings and had enough attempts on goal and as against Millwall seemed to have the weapons to possibly win the game, with Cousins and Gudmundsson getting joy down the flanks, Vetokele always a threat, and Harriott having the pace to trouble them. But as against Millwall we hadn’t scored.

The early stages of the first half were rather scrapier than before, with both sides giving away possession rather too cheaply. But after a while we settled into the same sort of pattern. Chances came and went at both ends, more frustratingly for us than them. A ball played across their box was fed on to Gudmundsson in space on the right. He chose not to shoot first time and cut inside onto his left foot, only for a defender to get a block in, and finally when one seemed to fall to Vetokele he was unable to get his shot away. They had a fierce drive from a full-back that flashed wide, plus a free-kick which proved dangerous as the ref failed to spot a blatant shove on Jackson who was all set to clear. I remember remarking with about 20 minutes left that it increasingly looked as though both teams could play until midnight, even allowing for the horribly early start, and not score.

The time for changes approached and as they rejigged we brought on Wilson for Jackson, with Cousins switching inside and Gudmundsson moving from the right to the left side. And with about five minutes left Tucudean came on for Harriott to provide a different sort of threat, although in truth it worked against us as we seemed unable to change the approach to different personnel and abilities. As the clock ticked down it did start to look as though if anyone was going to pinch it the odds were shifting to Ipswich.

Into five minutes of stoppage time and – after the curious decision to bring on Bulot (for Gudmundsson) for a full couple of minutes - the chance for them that we had feared arose, with their guy seemingly in on goal to shoot only for Bikey-Amougou to get in what at the time seemed to be a point-saving challenge. Then Bikey climbed to nod the ball into touch only to collide with their guy, who seemed to take a bad knock in the face. But instead of him being taken off, their trainer produced a spare shirt from his back pocket and after the break he was waved back on, we lost the ball, he ran onto it inside the box and shot into the net. A bit more crimson, or no spare shirt, and he wouldn’t have been on the pitch. There was barely time to restart and it was all over.

There’s no point dwelling on it. We deserved a point, could easily have taken all three, but lost, for an obvious reason. Today Gudmundsson, Harriott, Cousins, Vetokele, even Solly, failed to ensure that they found the back of the net. Nothing to be done about it other than to work against not scoring becoming a mental block. If we create as many chances in each game we play we will win more than we lose.

Player Ratings:

Pope – 8/10. A few very good saves, no chance with the goal.   

Solly – 8/10. Excellent game, saw off Hunt, got forward to good effect, all very good.

Fox – 7/10. Also pretty decent, more of a presence going forward sometimes.

Bikey-Amougou – 7/10. Gets an extra mark for the challenge that seemed at the time to have preserved our point; otherwise against a troublesome front two wasn’t entirely comfortable.

Ben Haim – 6/10. They did have more chances than we’re used to seeing against us, perhaps not as assured as we’ve come to expect.

Gudmundsson – 6/10. Excellent work except for converting the chances that came his way, of which there were a few.

Jackson – 6/10. Generally effective without standing out, really neither side controlled midfield.

Coquelin – 7/10. Decent game, almost made the breakthrough with an excellent run into the box only for the effort to be smothered.

Cousins – 7/10. Also decent, provided an outlet, worked hard as ever.

Vetokele – 7/10. Some excellent touches to play in Harriott, but for once when the good chance came his way in the second half failed to get the shot away.

Harriott – 7/10. Thought he had his best game as a second forward that I’ve seen. Couple of decent shots, caused them problems. But as with everyone else not the goal we craved.

Subs:  Wilson (6/10 – not much time to impact on the game and if anything we tailed off towards the finish); Tucudean (6/10 – no impact when he came on and that contributed to our uninspiring finish); Bulot (no mark, just why bring on a player you hope will do something going forward with just a couple of minutes left?).

Almost Nicked It At The Death

When we come to write our favourite moments from these encounters I guess we’ll struggle to remember much about this one, except for the chance at the death that would have put the world to rights and sent us home happy. At the end neither side could complain about the draw; equally, neither could have complained if the opposition had nicked one and taken the points. On balance we created the better openings/situations without making their keeper work until stoppage time; but they had their moments too in a tight game of few chances. Nothing quite fell right for us in front of goal and we didn’t get the breaks from the ref, who turned down a decent claim for a penalty (if you jump to block a shot with your arms in the air and it hits them …) and failed to wait for a possible advantage late on when Vetokele was clattered and the loose ball seemed to be there for Wilson to have a run on goal.

With Henderson presumably injured Pope was in goal, with Fox continuing to deputise for Wiggins and the rest of the defence picking itself. Peeters opted for a 4-5-1, with Cousins and Gudmundsson occupying the wide positions and Jackson, Buyens and Coquelin the central trio, with Vetokele operating as a lone striker. It was a set-up not designed for an open game, putting the premium on one of the midfielders, most obviously Jackson, getting into the box to provide support – or perhaps just getting Igor in a decent place to continue his scoring form.

The early phases were pretty cagey. Despite our five-man midfield Millwall had more of the possession without looking threatening, but Cousins was finding a good deal of space down the left and it was from there that the first chance came. Vetokele played it out wide and kept going into the box, Cousins curled in one of the better crosses of the day, and Igor met it well but fired the header wide of the post. That was to prove our best chance of the half, not least as the flow was disrupted before half-an-hour as Buyens pulled up with what looked like a hamstring. He was replaced by Harriott, keeping the same formation with Coquelin dropping deeper but with it taking a while to work out who was playing on the left side, with Cousins operating there (until he switched over), Harriott wanting to occupy that space, and Jackson naturally left-sided. It left us a bit unbalanced, even though Gudmundsson, assisted by Solly, was getting some joy down the right.

Millwall had one header at the far post which forced a smart stop from Pope, who was tested by a corner or two. But their best moments came just before the break. First, they ‘won’ a free kick in a dangerous position, courtesy of one of those ‘there was contact, he was entitled to do a dying swan dive’, which the officials fell for. That was cleared but shortly after Harriott was just beaten to a loose ball and that left a lot of space for their guy to run into and send in a low cross that Pope couldn’t claim and the players sliding in at the far post were unable to convert. For the most part they’d been contained quite comfortably, but that was a close one.

At the break any neutral would have been crying out for a goal, while everyone knew that – barring something out of the blue – the game might have a fair way more to run before one side or the other might make changes to go for it.

We started the second half with better tempo and caused them problems, again without being able to fashion a clear-cut chance. I remember excellent work by Gudmundsson to create space and possibilities, effective work from Coquelin, some threat from Harriott when given the opportunity to run past defenders, and Vetokele always looking a threat, but with all this interspersed with a number of poor crosses (including corners) headed away and some strangely iffy distribution from the back, with Bikey-Amougou doing his defensive stuff very well but looking a bit out of sorts when bringing the ball out and guilty of some misplaced passes. Millwall had an occasional shot blocked or saved, with nothing that you felt was more than a routine stop by Pope. And there was our penalty appeal, which I think was more than a 50-50 shout; not deliberate handball to block the shot but again, when you jump in the air with your arms up you can’t complain if they’re given.

The changes came as the game progressed, with Millwall replacing their forwards, including bringing on Fuller. With about 10 minutes left on the clock Tucudean came on for Jackson, with us reverting to 4-4-2, and later Wilson came on for Gudmundsson. Vetokele received the ball just inside their half and it seemed something might be on, only for him to be taken out (really worthy of something between a yellow and a red) and the ref to react to the foul rather than looking up to see whether there might be an advantage. Wilson was still a fair way from goal but just might have had a clear run.

That was it as we went into five minutes of stoppage time. And finally the chance came. Vetokele (I think) played in Tucudean nicely. He had a defender on his shoulder but it was effectively a one-on-one with the keeper. Tuducean opted for a chip over the advancing keeper and to run onto it; the first part was completed but he wasn’t able to prevent the defender just getting to the ball and scrambling it behind for a corner. George’s chance to write his name in the history books had gone; if he’d gone for the full-blown chip over the keeper and into the net The Valley would have erupted. Not to be this time around and when the corner produced a blocked shot from Vetokele it was game over.

No doubt they will be happier with the point than us and overall we didn’t create the chances to claim with justification that we were robbed. So be it, we move on, and look forward to April at their place.

Player Ratings:

Pope – 7/10. Dealt with all that he had to, some smart saves but ones he would have expected to make. Still exudes an air of vulnerability when it comes to clearances and didn’t seem to get properly behind one or two shots, but no problems.

Solly – 8/10. Excellent defensively, decent support going forward; overall I thought he looked more assured than in some previous games, hopefully now getting back to his best.

Fox – 7/10. No problems here either, decent game. Doesn’t yet have Wiggins’ attacking threat but that may come.

Bikey-Amougou – 7/10. Solid in our box as ever, saw off their first two forwards and their replacements, but the distribution was iffy.

Ben Haim – 8/10. Impressive again.

Gudmundsson – 8/10. Thought he was going to prove the match-winner as he had the ability to make space and beat his man, sometimes in unpredictable fashion. Just didn’t quite manage to make the killer contribution.

Jackson – 7/10. Quietly effective in defence, made those ghosting runs into the box but today nothing came his way.

Buyens – 7/10. His injury disrupted our rhythm for a while, hopefully nothing serious.

Coquelin – 8/10. First I’ve seen of him and I’d make him our man of the match. Knows how to hit a pass accurately and equally important crisply, covered well when Buyens had to go off.

Cousins – 7/10. Good work around the pitch, just still not the precision with crosses and passes in the final third.

Vetokele – 7/10. Always a threat, even without support, just that today nothing dropped into his path.

Subs - Harriott (6/10 - the good/threatening moments were there but also some loose passing and he was caught out late in the first half in a fashion that almost cost us); Tucudean (6/10 - well, it was so nearly a 10); Wilson (no mark, only on for a few minutes). 

No Moral High Ground

Just in case there’s a danger of too great an outbreak of pro-Roland sentiment …. What to make of the club’s response to the “bitterly disappointing” (according to CFO David Joyes) Financial Fair Play regulations changes, outlined in a statement on the club site and subsequently repeated in a radio interview reported on the BBC site (and apparently to be elaborated upon in tomorrow’s programme)?

                    

It does of course depend on your starting point. If you regard the size of losses being run up by some Championship (and other) clubs as unsustainable and consequently seriously destabilising, or if you’ve bought a network of clubs across Europe with a view to using a consortium model to potentially exploit the FFP changes – if they were implemented as envisaged – I would imagine that ‘bitterly disappointing’ is a fair response. Alternatively if you believe that FFP changes are unnecessary and unwanted, or that a pan-European consortium model is at best the exploiting of a loophole that should be closed sooner or later and at worst nothing more than cheating, the reaction would be somewhat different. And if I were writing the headline for a piece on the vote in favour of the FFP changes, it might have been along the lines of ‘shock, horror, Championship clubs vote in their own best interests’.

So let’s not go claiming that there’s any moral high ground to be claimed, whichever side of the argument you’re on. The idea that football clubs ‘should’ be run at a profit, or at breakeven, or at modest losses can’t be grounded in the idea that all successful businesses follow those guidelines. They don’t, neither ‘should’ they. There is no virtue involved (OK, I had neither a Catholic nor a Calvinist upbringing). Of course for investment in any business to be justified on purely commercial grounds there has to be reason to believe that the investment will show an attractive enough return in an acceptable (for the investor) timeframe (and if for other reasons an individual/group wishes to pour money into a football club good luck to them). Given that running a Premiership club at a profit is no small challenge, that potential return has to come in the form of the value of the asset, ie the value of your club in the Premiership against that in the Championship. As long as there are owners – and potential purchasers who would pass the ‘fit and proper person’ test (which seems to encompass just about everyone who ever lived) – prepared to fund losses of whatever size (and for whatever reason) to pursue the Premiership goal, where does unsustainability and/or unfairness, let alone morality, come into it?

It can only be on the grounds that either football clubs should be run in a fashion that retains at least the appearance of a level playing field, much as there are rules governing the design/speed of a Formula One car, or that football is a special industry, given its importance in the community (ie the supporters). The former seems at best a pipe dream as long as the Premiership lure is there, at worse unnecessary interference. The latter may have more merit, with football clubs in that sense having more in common with banks, given the consequences of failure. Only problem then is that if football has shown itself to be adept at anything in my lifetime it’s been ensuring that clubs very, very seldom actually go out of existence (and even more rarely relocated to another part of the country). Supporters may suffer from owners’ excesses in the form of relegation after administration and points deductions, but at least in all but a few cases the next week they still have a team to support. Also, in my opinion, FFP is about as misguided in its thinking and as likely to prove ultimately useless and current bank regulation reform.

I have no problems whatsoever in the footballing authorities having the powers to investigate a club’s finances in order to assess if there is excessive risk being taken, with the powers to take punitative action if the conclusion is that there is (not without problems admittedly as docking points from/fining clubs in an exposed position would have obvious consequences; these can be circumvented by a warnings procedure to give the owners time to correct the situation, like bank stress tests if you like). This is after all the job of any company’s auditors. But if the owner of Bolton Wanderers wishes to pour money into his club and to end up with a large amount of debt to himself on the books, what exactly is the problem as in no way is this unsustainable? It’s just a figure in the books. Perhaps clubs in that situation could be asked to provide something akin to the banks’ ‘living wills’, to outline how the club would survive in the event of their demise/they run out of money/they run out of enthusiasm.

I would see such things as desirable. I actually also favour phasing out parachute payments, which encourage distortions. As a short-term fix to allow clubs time to adjust to the widening of the financial gulf between the Premiership and the Championship they had a time and a place. Now all clubs are aware of the risks and have had the time to incorporate changes in players’ contracts to alter remuneration in the event of relegation (parachute payments have worked against this). Of course that means that it would be more difficult for Premiership teams, especially the newly promoted, to sign some players. So what? Instead oblige clubs in the Premiership (and the Championship) to outline how they would cope in the event of relegation.

What is not desirable (in my opinion) is some poorly drafted, stupidly rigid, and easily circumvented formula for what is and what is not sustainable. And that’s to overlook the possibility that FFP ends up getting challenged in the courts. As with the banks I actually favour regulation that is geared around ensuring that risk-takers end up personally carrying the can if those risks end badly, ie convergence of interest. How on earth can an individual involved with a club that goes into administration be later considered a fit and proper person to get involved with another? (Of course the answer comes in the form of a chequebook.)

So back to Joyes’ statement and comments. He outlined that the clubs which voted in favour of the easing of FFP rules fell into three main groups. If I was one of the clubs in one of those groups, I would have voted for the changes. Doesn’t make them (or me, I hope) ‘immoral’. Perhaps the clue came in the radio interview. He said (reportedly) that “one of the reasons why our owner bought the club in January was because FFP was in place” and that “we do have an advantage as we are in a network of clubs around Europe …” To have viewed view FFP as a done deal as written can be considered somewhat naïve, or more kindly that a business plan based on an assumption that it was should have been seen as involving an element of risk, which may not pay off.

Let’s take another line. To date, no Championship club has benefited to the extent of securing promotion to the Premiership from a consortium model. So the issue is not on the radar. What could happen if and when one does, or for some reason a club/authority brings the issue to the fore? Could other clubs call for the current restrictions on ownership of more than one club in England be applied at a European level, on the grounds that an ability to move players around between clubs – and potentially to buy players for the consortium with that in mind – constitutes an unfair advantage and the exploitation of a loophole not yet closed? Clearly doing this is within the rules as they stand, but as we’ve seen rules can change. Whether or not a consortium approach is fine, the future of football, questionable but within the rules, or ’immoral’ is another matter of opinion. Just let’s not try to pretend that the stance of our club is anything more than promoting its best interests, to try to defend a perceived advantage, just as others have done by the way they voted.

A Point Won

Have to view it overall as a point won rather than two dropped as at the break we were behind and looking a bit ragged, especially as their No 11 seemed capable of running through us at will. No question we’d have taken the draw then. A better second half, the almost scripted equaliser from Igor just five minutes after he came off the bench, and we could have gone on to win. Equally, while Wednesday caused us fewer problems in the second half, they had a fair shout for a penalty late on (it was their lump of a centre-forward and the ref was closer to it than me) and may feel that but for one defensive lapse in concentration they would have left with all three points. So probably a fair result and a competitive, decent game played for the most part in good spirit.

With Vetokele and Gudmundsson unable to start, and Bulot in the treatment room, Peeters went for a sort of 4-3-3, with Tucudean playing alongside Moussa and Ahearne-Grant, Cousins, Jackson and the returning Buyens in midfield, while the defence picked itself as Solly and Wiggins were available. It was a set-up that put the emphasis on fluidity and precision going forward, against defenders who were always going to win the physical battles. That precision mostly eluded us, with passes in decent positions often not quite coming off.

The early phases seemed to be more about us having come out with the wrong studs on as players stumbled with the ball, creating danger. And we had an early warning of where the danger might come from as their winger flicked the ball beyond Wiggins and showed him a clean pair of heels. The cross was cleared but the writing was on the wall. To be fair to Wiggins, their guy had no problem going past any others that came up against him. Their lump had a header from a corner that might have been converted, we had a couple of reasonable shots from around the edge of the box. The first clear opening came our way as from a corner Cousins found himself unmarked around the far post with time to line up the header, but he failed to keep it below the bar.

With Semedo as competitive in midfield as we remember him the balance of play gradually swung Wednesday’s way, largely because we were unable to really string things together in the final third and as their winger just kept causing us problems. From one run he let loose a venomous shot that went just wide, but the next time he advanced with the ball and brushed aside challenges he struck the shot into the bottom corner, giving Henderson no chance, and we were behind.

The final 15 minutes or so of the first half (which was extended by a lengthy injury break as one of their guys was stretchered off) saw Wednesday more likely to extend their lead than us get a leveller. The lump was dealt with well enough by Ben-Haim and Bikey-Amougou (to the extent that when he realised the latter was challenging him in the air he focused more on trying to give Bikey an elbow than winning the ball) but the wingers were another matter. And on the stroke of half-time they nearly extended their lead in possibly controversial circumstances. Cousins seemed to be upended around their box but nothing was given (to be fair to the ref it was right in front of the linesman and he didn’t flag), they broke and with the ball played on their guy was through on Henderson, only to put the shot wide. If that one had gone in it would have been a long road back, whenever Vetekole came on.

Peeters did make a change at the break, bringing on Gudmundsson for Ahearne-Grant. He had been threatening but like the other two alongside him had struggled to retain possession. The change seemed more about giving us better ball retention, which Gudmundsson was to manage, although there was no real change of formation with the Icelander operating centrally. And after one glancing header from their centre-forward early in the second period we generally kept them under better control, with their wingers increasingly less effective. Perhaps Wednesday sat back a bit to protect the lead. Either way we began to have more and better possession and to push them back.

The change we were all waiting for came with about 20 minutes to go, with Vetokele replacing Moussa. He didn’t score with his first touch, but it wasn’t far off. The goal was really laid on a plate by outstanding work down the left by Wiggins. He wriggled his way through their defenders and as their others around seemed frozen Igor moved into position to convert the squared ball from around the penalty spot. It was the sort of chance that we had failed to create in the first half; Moussa and Ahearne-Grant must have looked on in disbelief. But there’s a knack to being in the right place at the right time and it’s no accident that he was there to score.

Then it was a case of whether either side could get the winner. Wednesday, despite replacing their No 11 for greater solidity (in the form of a rather lardy substitute), did cause some problems, but so did we. Jackson made a superb run on the blind side and was picked out by Buyens, only for this cut-back to find nobody. Solly hit one rasping effort just over the bar and Tucudean made a bit of a hash of a bicycle kick, only for the ball to bounce up and almost catch out their keeper, who turned it over the bar. After Wilson had replaced Jackson he put the ball in the net, but from a position that even hardened Addicks might have accepted was a tad offside. And the real chance to win the game fell to Vetekole who was played in but for once the first touch was a bit heavy and he ended up toe-poking the ball past the keeper but wide of the post.

As the clock ran down there was the Wednesday penalty appeal. Their centre-forward turned inside in the box and Bikey took a swing at the ball and missed it, going on to make contact with the lump. Whether it was a case of him seeing the leg and going over it or genuine contact made and a foul I couldn’t say, but it looked iffy. Again, the ref was a good deal closer and saw nothing amiss, so fine by me.

In the end neither side could make the breakthrough. We deserved something out of the game for the second half improvement; we dominated possession (helped by Ben Haim and Bikey taking it forward) and had the better chances. Wednesday will probably look back on a failure to kill the game off at the end of the first half, and the penalty appeal. So be it, we move on.

Player Ratings:

Henderson – 7/10. No chance with the goal and otherwise can’t remember him having to make a serious save.

Solly – 6/10. Still looked to me like the body language isn’t great, seemed a bit hangdog. Played his part in defence but we’re still waiting to see the previous assurance.

Wiggins – 7/10. Has to get an extra mark for the goal, which he laid on a plate for Vetekole. To say he was troubled by their winger is, however, an understatement; I suspect most full-backs would have been.

Ben Haim – 8/10. A couple of misplaced passes coming out of defence, but solid at the back and was instrumental in us keeping the pressure on them after the break with some astute runs forward.

Bikey-Amougou – 7/10. Still just have to love this guy, but it was a rash challenge in the box which might have resulted in a penalty.

Cousins – 7/10. Decent enough game, almost got through a couple of times, but really should have got that first-half header on target.

Buyens – 7/10. Effective, peach of a pass to pick out Jackson in the second half.

Jackson – 7/10. Consistent workrate as ever in a competitive game.

Moussa – 6/10. Plenty of effort, but an afternoon when he struggled to make a decisive contribution.

Ahearne-Grant – 6/10. Did look dangerous but collectively the front three in the first half didn’t gel as well as they might have.

Tucudean – 6/10. As with the other two. If only his mishit bicycle kick had gone in.

Subs – Gudmundsson (7/10 – instrumental in our better second-half showing, although not surprisingly a bit rusty); Vetekole (8/10 – we know what a difference he makes to us); Wilson (7/10 – only on for about 10 minutes).

Reward For Hard Graft

Have to be fair to Bolton, on the night they did make us struggle. But at the end they’ve become another side leaving The Valley wondering how they didn’t get something from the game and it isn’t coincidence. For all the pressure and succession of corners, aside from their goal and one clearance from just under the bar, they failed to create clear goalscoring opportunities and conceded twice. The credit for that has to go to our defence, which kept its shape under serious pressure. Another case of effort and commitment getting its reward and possession (including apparently a corners count of 14-1 in their favour) ending up counting for little.

We all knew before the game that this was going to be tough, with respective league positions meaning little as they seemed to be getting the new manager boost and we were going to be missing Vetokele, Solly, Gomez and Gudmundsson, as well as coming off the back of our first defeat and playing the second of three games in six days in blustery conditions. The defence was as expected, with Wilson dropping back, as was the midfield given availability, with Bulot returning on the right side. Up front Tucudean and Moussa paired up, with Ahearne-Grant on the bench, along with Ansah and just about all available bodies.

We’ve started games this season with an object lesson in how to keep the ball, but tonight Bolton gave us a taste of it, with Lee Chung-yong in particular giving an early indication of his ability to drift around the pitch and link up play. Once that was over the game settled down, with plenty of probing by both sides but nothing decisive. A couple of shots from distance from Bolton dealt with by Henderson, some neat enough stuff from us but with Tucudean generally getting outmuscled and failing in his attempts to persuade the ref that the challenges were more than robust. There was one superbly weighted pass from Buyens which put Wilson in the clear down the right but his cross came at an awkward height for Cousins at the far post and by the time Jackson was lining up the shot from the knock-down the bodies were in the way.

It was pretty even, with Bolton’s formation causing us problems outside our box but not in it, save for the rather ominous presence of Dervite from set pieces, and our forwards seemingly well contained. Until on the half-hour Tucudean was more alert than their defenders to steal a yard and latch onto a ball played into the box. The control was excellent and nobody could get close enough to him as he drilled the shot low under the keeper and into the net. You could almost see Dervite et al scratching their heads as having seemingly had him (and Moussa) well under control a lapse in their concentration had been well and truly punished.

Bolton came close to levelling matters shortly after but a dangerous cross wasn’t converted. But Tucudean, who picked up a yellow for the celebrations (which was later to almost prove costly as some dissent almost gave the ref the opportunity to produce a second), then seemed to raise his game as the confidence level was upped and it was game on. At the break it had been an even affair but we had the goal.

The second half began much as had the first, with Bolton dominating possession without fashioning any real openings, and as that spell faded we extended the lead. The ball was won back and played down the left and with a quick ball into the box suddenly we had numbers over. Tucudean touched it on and Jackson drilled it low and sure.

You felt then that if we could keep it tight for say 10 minutes Bolton would be forced into changing their shape to chase the game and that might create more space for us going forward. It wasn’t to be as we were pegged back only a few minutes later. A corner wasn’t cleared convincingly and their guy ran onto it and from the edge of the box sent in it has to be said a peach of a strike through bodies that gave Henderson no chance.

Goals as they say change games and we were left in that betwixt and between situation while Bolton had the momentum. Increasingly our play became ragged as there was no effective outlet to relieve the pressure, with Moussa and Bulot struggling to make an impact, leading to an inability to retain possession. The final 20 minutes or so were never going to be pretty from our perspective, it was a case of keeping the shape at the back and trying to hold what we had.

There were moments of minor panic, hardly surprising as the defence was by now under pretty constant pressure and the corners just kept coming. Henderson dealt with most of what he had to but did miss one he came for and then another sat up for Dervite (I think) to loop in the header to just under the bar, only for Wiggins to stretch and get enough on it to prevent it going in, with Henderson mopping up.

It was a fair sign of our needs that Bulot was replaced by Fox, who played in front of Wiggins with Cousins switching to the right. Later Ahearne-Grant came on for the ineffective Moussa. But through it all Ben Haim effectively marshalled those around him and kept his calm, while Bikey Amougou was, well, immense. He even gave a fair demonstration of how to deal with Lee Chung-yong by running the ball forward down the left and simply brushing aside the challenges. Five minutes of stoppage time, Harriott on for Tucudean, and just a case of getting across the finish line. That was just about done.

Some games you win with a sublime display of attacking intent and some you find yourselves having to fall back on endurance and resilience. There was no shortage of those qualities tonight.

Player Ratings:

Henderson – 8/10. One missed cross but otherwise a reassuring presence. No chance with the goal and plenty of occasions which called for decisive decisions when coming off his line.

Wilson – 8/10. Filled in very effectively, stretched once or twice by a tricky winger but kept the shape.

Wiggins – 9/10. Excellent tonight, saw off his first opponent and stopped the one under the bar from going in.

Ben Haim – 8/10. Didn’t see him put a foot wrong.

Bikey-Amougou – 9/10. Got to give him man of the match tonight, even when he decided that it wasn’t a game for playing it out from the back.

Cousins – 7/10. Excellent work rate. Not great in the final third and some poor choices in possession, but put in a real shift.

Jackson – 7/10. Popped up in the box to score what proved to be the winner and plenty of hard graft in front of the defence.

Buyens – 7/10. Couldn’t manage to control the game tonight but helped keep them at bay and that beautifully weighted pass to Wilson in the first half.

Bulot – 5/10. Struggled to make an impact going forward (he may have played a part in our second) and increasingly peripheral before being subbed.

Moussa – 5/10. Effectively shut out by their defence.

Tucudean – 7/10. Has to get an extra mark for the goal, otherwise well marshalled.

Subs – Fox (6/10, not a game to come on and have a dramatic impact); Ahearne-Grant (6/10, much the same); Harriott (not on long enough for a mark).