I’ve never enjoyed listening to commentary on a Charlton game when not in attendance; somehow you can’t get a sense of perspective and every time the commentator’s voice rises you fear the worse (or at least I do). So for the past two games that’s meant whiling away the minutes pretending to work, with the BBC site for news and the radio on. It’s also meant pleading for the final whistle, unaware at the time that these entreaties coincided with Wright-Phillips and Hulse failing to convert the chances to give us what to the unenlightened might have appeared to be unlikely victories. I don’t think it’s just natural pessimism; it was just that, having both times come back from being behind at the break, taking something back with us from two very difficult away games seemed very important. And you always assume that it’s the home team going all out for the win.
Fact is we’ve managed to send Leeds and Wolves fans home feeling rather miserable. Perhaps not as miserable as us after Watford and Barnsley, but miserable nonetheless. The inconsistency and narrow margins of the season to date can be summed up in two ways. First, my mood following the game (once the feeling of having been cruelly robbed each time we haven’t won has subsided). In chronological order this has been satisfied, ecstatic, content , miserable, suicidal, miserable, delighted, content, miserable, ecstatic, distraught, happy and happy. That sort of record is probably matched by the supporters of nearly all the other teams in the division, with the possible exception of Leicester and Cardiff, plus Ipswich (and of course Palace, who cannot be other than miserable and, as these are human emotions, Millwall). Second, I realise it’s stretching a point (and does not gloss over poor performances at home), but with that bit of luck in stoppage time we could have come away with all three points from Birmingham, Leeds and Wolves, and even a point from Derby. Those extra points would see us on the fringe of the play-offs rather than a couple of points off a bottom-three place.
I’m not saying we necessarily deserved those points, or that we haven’t had some luck too (Leicester will have been disappointed not to have got at least a point against us, while Doyle’s block yesterday at 1-0 to them takes some beating). But the games cited all involved the final few moments when if things had gone for us there would have been no time for the opposition to respond.
Consequently, while not delighted by it, I’m not too bothered about the league table (yet). We’ve shown that we’re competitive against some of the best sides in the division and capable of beating them when we play well. Yes, we’ve also shown that we can lose against anyone if the standards drop. And I don’t think the disruption to the side from injuries should be overlooked. We all expected tinkering with the team rather than revolution. You’d have got long odds in the summer on us about a quarter into the season beginning a game without Wiggins, Taylor, Hollands, Stephens, Green, Wagstaff, Kermorgant and Wright-Phillips, plus a forward (Fuller) brought in and injuries for Cook and Haynes.
Of course, Hollands and BWP were available for the recent games and not selected. In Wright-Phillips’ case that’s as much down to formation and the availability of a suitable partner for him (and a replacement on the bench) as form, although on form alone he can’t really complain. It’s fair to say that at the start of the season thoughts of a top half finish were probably based on an assumption of BWP and Kermorgant between them scoring at least 20 goals, preferably more. Without Kermorgant, and now without Fuller, we’ve had to find another way.
That’s the tough away games behind us for a while, so thoughts have to turn back to what we do at home. After the failure to win in a pair of home games, Sir Chris went for a formation (4-5-1) that brought victory away at Blackpool. He stuck with it for a home game and it didn’t work, resulting in changes at the break (which also didn’t work). Having commented after the Barnsley game that among other things we don’t operate with an outright defensive central midfielder, Powell plonks Dervite in the role, in a 4-1-4-1 formation, for the Leeds game. It works and he scores. It worked well enough against Wolves too. But do we stick with it at home?
For me the answer has to be ‘yes’. The players in possession of the shirt deserve to keep it if they’ve performed (and it’s notable that in the two away games the substitutions came late on). Also, we are coming up against tough opposition. Middlesbrough come to The Valley on the back of four successive wins and then it’s Cardiff, top of the league and having won eight of their last 10. There shouldn’t be the kind of pressure on us to make the pace in these games as there was against Barnsley in particular. We – the crowd and the team - might need to be very patient.
On Saturday this may well mean Sir Chris and the team ignoring well-meaning shouts from a French person in the crowd to charge forward and score bucketloads of goals (of course if we do charge forward and score bucketloads of goals no-one will be happier than me). My partner Suzanne will be there for the Boro game. While she loves a trip to The Valley, and hasn't been for a while, she will be the first (perhaps the second) to admit that she doesn’t necessarily admire the beauty of a tactical, cagey and defensive 0-0, or a disjointed, ugly 1-0 win (for us). I’m ready to live with it and she just might have to.
If she wants flowing football and goals she can walk the couple of hundred yards from her flat to watch Lyon Duchere. They have won six and drawn three of their first nine, scoring 17 in the process, to top CFA Groupe B with a five-points lead, having beaten Moulins last time out in the top-of-the-table clash (this weekend was the cup). I hope to be there with her before too long, but I’m afraid more important things need to be dealt with first.
Sunday, 28 October 2012
Sunday, 21 October 2012
Home And Away - Any Lessons?
Sir Chris commented after yesterday’s game that “we haven’t done ourselves justice at home and clearly that’s something we need to arrest”. Can’t argue with that as a record of 1-2-3 and four goals in six games (the figures are of course even worse if the first of the six is stripped out) speaks for itself – or does it? To put it another way, is our poor home record to date something which requires a fundamental change in approach (and/or players) or just a reflection of the nature of the league, our relative strengths, even luck? If there is an answer, for me it’s that there are good reasons for the contrast between our home and away records (with the latter standing comparison with virtually all others in the league and better than those of the top two). Whether this leads onto the possibility of changing things for the better is another matter.
You have to start (I believe) with knowing your strengths (and weaknesses) as a team. We are not blessed with great pace, don’t play an out-and-out passing game (nor have an overt long-ball approach), we don’t operate with an outright defensive midfielder, and we’ve suffered disruptions through injuries. More positively, even without Wiggins we have a solid defence (six conceded in six at home is reasonable, as is seven from five away), which is also credit to the midfield doing the necessary covering, we are a threat from set pieces, especially with Cort (although losing Kermorgant doesn’t help there – and when both Kermorgant and Jackson are out the first-choice options for shooting also go), are still in the process of integrating new players, and there remains a good team ethic, with no shortage of effort and commitment.
For me, this suggests it’s always going to be a fine line between playing well or badly as a team (and the result), with the margin down to the tempo, movement and precision. It’s also where the element of luck comes in as nicking a first goal makes a big difference. In each of the away games that turned out well (Ipswich, Blackpool and Birmingham, even if we didn’t quite win that one) it was 0-0 at half-time. When you are the away team, there’s a feeling that that’s fine; don’t have to change anything, keep it tight and with a bit of luck we’ll score one or two. The two that didn’t (Forest and Derby) saw us (I think, but wasn’t there) have the same approach but these times we made mistakes and conceded goals.
Of the home games, Leicester was very much the exception to the rule. They went for it from the start, probably believing that in an open contest they were more likely to come out on top (and their record since supports the approach). That gave us space to exploit and in the first half of that game we used it well. Contrast that with Barnsley. They play their style of football but for me most tellingly had that blond guy plonked in front of their defence. That largely negated the strengths of having Razak in the hole behind Fuller. He blotted out the space that the formation might have exploited. Not many teams (if any) are going to come to The Valley with Leicester’s approach, especially as any half-decent scout would be able to suggest ways to play against us based on the evidence to date. All the other five to date have been much tighter – and all went away with points.
When playing at home against teams that, like us away, are reasonably happy at 0-0 (and happier at 0-1) it is inevitable that the space going forward will be restricted. That of course makes it more difficult to pick out a telling pass and, with teams seldom getting caught out by a gung ho attacking approach breaking down, can result in too slow a tempo, and easily give the impression (which transmits to the crowd) that we are playing badly (which in relative terms is true as nothing much gets created). Again, away from home there’s no real problem; at home the pressure can mount.
Powell opted for a formation for an away game which worked well. Indeed, I took a look at the Blackpool site match report and it concluded with the following: “Blackpool continued to toil away for a way back into the game, but found attacking inspiration strangely hard to come by on this occasion, as they struggled to find any way through the Addicks’ defence”. That could have been written for us about a number of home games, including yesterday. Sir Chris opted to keep the formation for a home game but whereas as against Blackpool 0-0 at the break was fine, this time he felt the need to make changes (to be fair it seems that there was no shortage of chances created in the first half against Blackpool). Would he have done the same if we had been the away team?
So, what’s to be done? Powell added that for coming home games “even if it’s an ugly performance and we kick a 1-0 win, I, like many of our supporters, would settle for that at the moment”. I’d count myself among them. It means being ready to be very patient. That may be less of a problem in the next two home games, against Middlesbrough and Cardiff, as with no disrespect to Barnsley intended there will be less thought of them being games that we should win (there should have been no such thoughts ahead of yesterday as Barnsley showed they are a good side). The reality is that unlike last season we don’t have a settled side (the surprise a year ago was how well and quickly a new team gelled; let's not forget that we started yesterday with four players new to the team) and are up against materially better opposition; we simply aren't going to be able to overpower teams in the fashion that we so often did last season.
That said, I do think there are areas we can improve on. I often feel during games that we are an extremely hard-working side when not in possession but lack movement when we have the ball. Every player with the ball has to have an easy pass as an option and that’s down to players doing more of the thankless task of moving to make themselves available. Too often it seems to me that a player looks up and too many are standing still. The counterpart to this is simply doing things better, being braver with the passing and expecting to have to make decisions faster in this league. That's part of the stepping-up process.
All of this may not mean much when it comes to the reality of two tough away games and Fuller joining Kermorgant and others on the injury list. BWP can’t play a lone striker role – unless we pack midfield and play through it, effectively ignoring a ball up to the striker. I guess the options are to bring in Hulse to either play alone in a 4-5-1 or with Wright-Phillips. Whatever the options chosen for the two games, we are in the weeks ahead going to have to work out the new Plan A in difficult circumstances. In pre-season Sir Chris was talking about having different options and did do some tinkering. But as long as the midfield shapes up and plays the same they are minor variations on a theme. Injuries have limited the options in any event, putting the emphasis on character and resolution in the week ahead. The team showed those qualities in spades last season.
Finally, I’m not close to the club, don’t have contacts there, so have no real idea what is going on behind the scenes and what the departures might really mean. Suffice to say that when a guy like Rick Everitt is sacked by the club and – whatever the reasons for him leaving – doesn’t merit even the briefest official appreciation of his contribution to Charlton over many years it reflects poorly on those in charge. That it seems Wendy Perfect is following him out of the door, apparently of her own volition, only compounds the effect. Silence in this context risks being interpreted as indifference to, if not contempt for, the feelings and opinions of the fans.
You have to start (I believe) with knowing your strengths (and weaknesses) as a team. We are not blessed with great pace, don’t play an out-and-out passing game (nor have an overt long-ball approach), we don’t operate with an outright defensive midfielder, and we’ve suffered disruptions through injuries. More positively, even without Wiggins we have a solid defence (six conceded in six at home is reasonable, as is seven from five away), which is also credit to the midfield doing the necessary covering, we are a threat from set pieces, especially with Cort (although losing Kermorgant doesn’t help there – and when both Kermorgant and Jackson are out the first-choice options for shooting also go), are still in the process of integrating new players, and there remains a good team ethic, with no shortage of effort and commitment.
For me, this suggests it’s always going to be a fine line between playing well or badly as a team (and the result), with the margin down to the tempo, movement and precision. It’s also where the element of luck comes in as nicking a first goal makes a big difference. In each of the away games that turned out well (Ipswich, Blackpool and Birmingham, even if we didn’t quite win that one) it was 0-0 at half-time. When you are the away team, there’s a feeling that that’s fine; don’t have to change anything, keep it tight and with a bit of luck we’ll score one or two. The two that didn’t (Forest and Derby) saw us (I think, but wasn’t there) have the same approach but these times we made mistakes and conceded goals.
Of the home games, Leicester was very much the exception to the rule. They went for it from the start, probably believing that in an open contest they were more likely to come out on top (and their record since supports the approach). That gave us space to exploit and in the first half of that game we used it well. Contrast that with Barnsley. They play their style of football but for me most tellingly had that blond guy plonked in front of their defence. That largely negated the strengths of having Razak in the hole behind Fuller. He blotted out the space that the formation might have exploited. Not many teams (if any) are going to come to The Valley with Leicester’s approach, especially as any half-decent scout would be able to suggest ways to play against us based on the evidence to date. All the other five to date have been much tighter – and all went away with points.
When playing at home against teams that, like us away, are reasonably happy at 0-0 (and happier at 0-1) it is inevitable that the space going forward will be restricted. That of course makes it more difficult to pick out a telling pass and, with teams seldom getting caught out by a gung ho attacking approach breaking down, can result in too slow a tempo, and easily give the impression (which transmits to the crowd) that we are playing badly (which in relative terms is true as nothing much gets created). Again, away from home there’s no real problem; at home the pressure can mount.
Powell opted for a formation for an away game which worked well. Indeed, I took a look at the Blackpool site match report and it concluded with the following: “Blackpool continued to toil away for a way back into the game, but found attacking inspiration strangely hard to come by on this occasion, as they struggled to find any way through the Addicks’ defence”. That could have been written for us about a number of home games, including yesterday. Sir Chris opted to keep the formation for a home game but whereas as against Blackpool 0-0 at the break was fine, this time he felt the need to make changes (to be fair it seems that there was no shortage of chances created in the first half against Blackpool). Would he have done the same if we had been the away team?
So, what’s to be done? Powell added that for coming home games “even if it’s an ugly performance and we kick a 1-0 win, I, like many of our supporters, would settle for that at the moment”. I’d count myself among them. It means being ready to be very patient. That may be less of a problem in the next two home games, against Middlesbrough and Cardiff, as with no disrespect to Barnsley intended there will be less thought of them being games that we should win (there should have been no such thoughts ahead of yesterday as Barnsley showed they are a good side). The reality is that unlike last season we don’t have a settled side (the surprise a year ago was how well and quickly a new team gelled; let's not forget that we started yesterday with four players new to the team) and are up against materially better opposition; we simply aren't going to be able to overpower teams in the fashion that we so often did last season.
That said, I do think there are areas we can improve on. I often feel during games that we are an extremely hard-working side when not in possession but lack movement when we have the ball. Every player with the ball has to have an easy pass as an option and that’s down to players doing more of the thankless task of moving to make themselves available. Too often it seems to me that a player looks up and too many are standing still. The counterpart to this is simply doing things better, being braver with the passing and expecting to have to make decisions faster in this league. That's part of the stepping-up process.
All of this may not mean much when it comes to the reality of two tough away games and Fuller joining Kermorgant and others on the injury list. BWP can’t play a lone striker role – unless we pack midfield and play through it, effectively ignoring a ball up to the striker. I guess the options are to bring in Hulse to either play alone in a 4-5-1 or with Wright-Phillips. Whatever the options chosen for the two games, we are in the weeks ahead going to have to work out the new Plan A in difficult circumstances. In pre-season Sir Chris was talking about having different options and did do some tinkering. But as long as the midfield shapes up and plays the same they are minor variations on a theme. Injuries have limited the options in any event, putting the emphasis on character and resolution in the week ahead. The team showed those qualities in spades last season.
Finally, I’m not close to the club, don’t have contacts there, so have no real idea what is going on behind the scenes and what the departures might really mean. Suffice to say that when a guy like Rick Everitt is sacked by the club and – whatever the reasons for him leaving – doesn’t merit even the briefest official appreciation of his contribution to Charlton over many years it reflects poorly on those in charge. That it seems Wendy Perfect is following him out of the door, apparently of her own volition, only compounds the effect. Silence in this context risks being interpreted as indifference to, if not contempt for, the feelings and opinions of the fans.
Saturday, 20 October 2012
Not A Day To Remember Fondly
Merde. Not a lot, if anything, went right today. It began at sparrow’s fart French time, with a mouth like the proverbial bottom of a canarie’s cage (well, it was my last night in Lyon for a while and a lot needed to be finished off). At St Exupery the doubts surfaced with the announcement of a 20-minute delay to the flight, which was soon updated to 45 minutes. What became an hour became two as we didn’t have a slot to take off. That meant the dash from Gatwick had to involve going straight to the pub, where there was just enough time to sling one glass of wine down my throat. No matter, a victory and all would be well (enough). Just wasn’t to be, due to two factors: first, we didn’t play well enough; second, the ref doesn’t give a stonewall penalty.
Sir Chris opted to keep the 4-4-1-1 formation that had secured the splendid win away at Blackpool, with Razak supporting Fuller up front, Kerkar and Green out wide, and Hollands and Stephens in the centre, with no changes either in defence. No real problems there, but I don’t know if my own sense of lethargy extended to the rest of the crowd and onto the pitch as the first half proved to be something of a stalemate. The tone for first-half shooting was set by Razak, whose ambitious shot from closer to the half-way line than the goal drifted harmlessly wide, as were just about all of Barnsley’s efforts. They seemed to have a propensity to shoot from not especially dangerous positions – and to send them wide in any event.
Our play was steady but lacked zip and too often foundered on their blonde-haired guy, who spent all the afternoon sweeping up effectively in front of their defence. There were flashes, not least from Razak and Fuller, and a splendid run and cross from Kerkar. And a couple of free-kicks, the first (from Green) being blocked and the second (Razak) turned round the post. But if you’re summing up 45 minutes and that’s it, it’s a fair indication that the game didn’t have the bumper crowd on the edge of its seats. Aside from their poor shooting Barnsley did create one decent chance, as a cross from the left saw their guy and Hamer engage in a game of spot the ball, before it ended up in Hamer’s arms.
0-0 at the break was a fair reflection of the game. Barnsley had moved the ball around well enough but didn’t look threatening; we hadn’t moved it with enough precision or pace to disrupt them. What had been notable was the ref’s apparent desire to let the game flow, which is fine in principle but meant that one or two late challenges by them went unpunished and in general we weren’t getting the better of the physical contest.
Changes came at the break, with Wright-Phillips coming on for Razak and Jackson for Hollands. The former, basically a change in formation (back to 4-4-2), was reasonable and in itself no real reflection on Razak’s display, which was promising even if he didn’t seem to exploit the space between midfield and defence (perhaps due to that blonde git). The latter was a little curious as it seemed to involve like-for-like in terms of position. Perhaps Sir Chris was thinking in terms of set-pieces. Fact is the second change came back to hurt us later on.
The formation change didn’t seem to disrupt Barnsley, as they went about their business. And in a 15-minute spell they took the initiative and grabbed the goal that was to prove decisive. They first squandered the best chance of the game to date, as a guy arriving at the far post unmarked opted not to head the ball in but rather to try to get his foot on the ball, sending it over the bar. Seemed par for the course, but as the announcer confirmed the crowd and we were all looking at the big screen number suddenly one of theirs had made inroads on our right side. Instead of the expected cross he moved away from the byline and curled one into the far corner of the net. It was a finish out of keeping with the rest of the game.
That should have stinged us into action, but not a lot changed. Until the other decisive moment of the game. Solly advanced into the box to get onto a ball inside and seemed (no, was) upended from behind. It looked to me a stonewall penalty. Whether or not their guy touched the ball (as the ref seemed to be indicating) he had gone through Solly to get there. One big decision to make and he bottled it. Final judgement has to await the TV highlights, but I think he just screwed it up. Irrespective of the balance of play, his indecision cost us dear.
Pritchard came on for Green, with not a great deal coming down the flanks, and Barnsley continued to frustrate most of our efforts to make something happen. One or two balls into the box, always the threat of Cort at a set-piece, but nothing much else, with Fuller looking less effective as the game wore on and BWP not getting a sniff in or around the area. If we were getting downhearted, the mood got worse as Fuller pulled up and quickly departed, presumably with a hamstring.
All that was left was the final hurrah, with Cort moving up front. In fact in the final five minutes or so, down to 10 men and with nothing to lose, we did start to cause them problems, with Wilson seemingly able to move down the right and past their guys with impunity. One late scramble in the box, but in truth Barnsley saw out the game (I think they made three substitutions in stoppage time) relatively untroubled, even when Hamer came up for the last corner.
We should have had a penalty and that could have changed the game. It wouldn’t have hidden the fact that we didn’t play well enough, with not enough verve, adventure or accuracy. But we might well have taken a point and moved on. Instead we have to reflect on what is becoming a dire home record. Four goals in six at home speaks for itself. Fuller will presumably be out for a few weeks, all of which leaves Sir Chris with some serious thinking. The first-half wasn’t great but was even, the change in formation at the break didn’t make things better, and the use of a second substitute then cost us when Fuller had to depart. Suddenly Hulse and Smith move up the ranks of available choices and we are left with the feeling that the team has to show more daring in games, especially at home.
To round things off, and with a couple of additional friends down for the game, we retired to the Oak. But like many others simply gave up waiting to be served by an indifferent and poorly organised bar staff. The way the day’s gone I’ll probably find that Khans has run out of food. I just hope that the ref has as miserable day tomorrow as I did today.
Player Ratings (I don’t think about these in advance, but that they all turned out, for me, similar, was a fair reflection of the fact the fact that nobody really did enough to hurt them, while nobody was especially bad):
Hamer – 7/10. Once again, what mark do you give a keeper who had no chance with the goal and otherwise no serious shot to save?
Wilson – 7/10. Can’t be sure whether he was culpable for their goal as I was watching the screen at the time. Got forward to good effect late on, although the balls in failed to find a target.
Solly – 6/10. A bit harsh as he should have been getting the plaudits for a run into the box which produced a goal from the spot. But he did seem to lose his rag after that, perhaps not surprisingly, and with a yellow card came close to getting a second.
Cort – 7/10. Distribution occasionally naff, but that’s not really his game. We failed to find his head with set pieces but defensively nothing wrong.
Morrison – 7/10. No complaints here, defended effectively and a game of very few chances means both back fours cannot be blamed.
Kerkar – 7/10. Was involved in most of our brighter moments and clearly had the capacity to cause them problems. Still a plus for me and hopefully will become increasingly effective in turning the threat into goals.
Hollands – 6/10. Not exactly a dramatic first half, but can’t really see why he was taken off at the break. The change didn’t exactly turn the game.
Stephens – 6/10. Equally unexceptional. Fact is throughout the game we failed to control midfield, even with the first-half formation.
Green – 6/10. Not effective enough. I can’t remember him getting past their defender, or delivering a telling cross. Perhaps symptomatic of a very tight game.
Razak – 7/10. Showed promise in the first half and nearly made a couple of things happen, although instead of his introduction creating a more fluid midfield the others seemed to rely on him alone to support Fuller, while their blond git closed out the space.
Fuller – 6/10. Bright enough in the first half, but seemed to get more shackled as the game progressed before his early departure.
Subs – Wright-Phillips (6/10 – worked well enough away from the box but nothing came his way in it); Jackson (6/10 – nothing of note in the second half, when we failed to create a single decent chance aside from the penalty); Pritchard (6/10 – no real chance to shine but perhaps helped create the space for Wilson to get forward late on).
Sir Chris opted to keep the 4-4-1-1 formation that had secured the splendid win away at Blackpool, with Razak supporting Fuller up front, Kerkar and Green out wide, and Hollands and Stephens in the centre, with no changes either in defence. No real problems there, but I don’t know if my own sense of lethargy extended to the rest of the crowd and onto the pitch as the first half proved to be something of a stalemate. The tone for first-half shooting was set by Razak, whose ambitious shot from closer to the half-way line than the goal drifted harmlessly wide, as were just about all of Barnsley’s efforts. They seemed to have a propensity to shoot from not especially dangerous positions – and to send them wide in any event.
Our play was steady but lacked zip and too often foundered on their blonde-haired guy, who spent all the afternoon sweeping up effectively in front of their defence. There were flashes, not least from Razak and Fuller, and a splendid run and cross from Kerkar. And a couple of free-kicks, the first (from Green) being blocked and the second (Razak) turned round the post. But if you’re summing up 45 minutes and that’s it, it’s a fair indication that the game didn’t have the bumper crowd on the edge of its seats. Aside from their poor shooting Barnsley did create one decent chance, as a cross from the left saw their guy and Hamer engage in a game of spot the ball, before it ended up in Hamer’s arms.
0-0 at the break was a fair reflection of the game. Barnsley had moved the ball around well enough but didn’t look threatening; we hadn’t moved it with enough precision or pace to disrupt them. What had been notable was the ref’s apparent desire to let the game flow, which is fine in principle but meant that one or two late challenges by them went unpunished and in general we weren’t getting the better of the physical contest.
Changes came at the break, with Wright-Phillips coming on for Razak and Jackson for Hollands. The former, basically a change in formation (back to 4-4-2), was reasonable and in itself no real reflection on Razak’s display, which was promising even if he didn’t seem to exploit the space between midfield and defence (perhaps due to that blonde git). The latter was a little curious as it seemed to involve like-for-like in terms of position. Perhaps Sir Chris was thinking in terms of set-pieces. Fact is the second change came back to hurt us later on.
The formation change didn’t seem to disrupt Barnsley, as they went about their business. And in a 15-minute spell they took the initiative and grabbed the goal that was to prove decisive. They first squandered the best chance of the game to date, as a guy arriving at the far post unmarked opted not to head the ball in but rather to try to get his foot on the ball, sending it over the bar. Seemed par for the course, but as the announcer confirmed the crowd and we were all looking at the big screen number suddenly one of theirs had made inroads on our right side. Instead of the expected cross he moved away from the byline and curled one into the far corner of the net. It was a finish out of keeping with the rest of the game.
That should have stinged us into action, but not a lot changed. Until the other decisive moment of the game. Solly advanced into the box to get onto a ball inside and seemed (no, was) upended from behind. It looked to me a stonewall penalty. Whether or not their guy touched the ball (as the ref seemed to be indicating) he had gone through Solly to get there. One big decision to make and he bottled it. Final judgement has to await the TV highlights, but I think he just screwed it up. Irrespective of the balance of play, his indecision cost us dear.
Pritchard came on for Green, with not a great deal coming down the flanks, and Barnsley continued to frustrate most of our efforts to make something happen. One or two balls into the box, always the threat of Cort at a set-piece, but nothing much else, with Fuller looking less effective as the game wore on and BWP not getting a sniff in or around the area. If we were getting downhearted, the mood got worse as Fuller pulled up and quickly departed, presumably with a hamstring.
All that was left was the final hurrah, with Cort moving up front. In fact in the final five minutes or so, down to 10 men and with nothing to lose, we did start to cause them problems, with Wilson seemingly able to move down the right and past their guys with impunity. One late scramble in the box, but in truth Barnsley saw out the game (I think they made three substitutions in stoppage time) relatively untroubled, even when Hamer came up for the last corner.
We should have had a penalty and that could have changed the game. It wouldn’t have hidden the fact that we didn’t play well enough, with not enough verve, adventure or accuracy. But we might well have taken a point and moved on. Instead we have to reflect on what is becoming a dire home record. Four goals in six at home speaks for itself. Fuller will presumably be out for a few weeks, all of which leaves Sir Chris with some serious thinking. The first-half wasn’t great but was even, the change in formation at the break didn’t make things better, and the use of a second substitute then cost us when Fuller had to depart. Suddenly Hulse and Smith move up the ranks of available choices and we are left with the feeling that the team has to show more daring in games, especially at home.
To round things off, and with a couple of additional friends down for the game, we retired to the Oak. But like many others simply gave up waiting to be served by an indifferent and poorly organised bar staff. The way the day’s gone I’ll probably find that Khans has run out of food. I just hope that the ref has as miserable day tomorrow as I did today.
Player Ratings (I don’t think about these in advance, but that they all turned out, for me, similar, was a fair reflection of the fact the fact that nobody really did enough to hurt them, while nobody was especially bad):
Hamer – 7/10. Once again, what mark do you give a keeper who had no chance with the goal and otherwise no serious shot to save?
Wilson – 7/10. Can’t be sure whether he was culpable for their goal as I was watching the screen at the time. Got forward to good effect late on, although the balls in failed to find a target.
Solly – 6/10. A bit harsh as he should have been getting the plaudits for a run into the box which produced a goal from the spot. But he did seem to lose his rag after that, perhaps not surprisingly, and with a yellow card came close to getting a second.
Cort – 7/10. Distribution occasionally naff, but that’s not really his game. We failed to find his head with set pieces but defensively nothing wrong.
Morrison – 7/10. No complaints here, defended effectively and a game of very few chances means both back fours cannot be blamed.
Kerkar – 7/10. Was involved in most of our brighter moments and clearly had the capacity to cause them problems. Still a plus for me and hopefully will become increasingly effective in turning the threat into goals.
Hollands – 6/10. Not exactly a dramatic first half, but can’t really see why he was taken off at the break. The change didn’t exactly turn the game.
Stephens – 6/10. Equally unexceptional. Fact is throughout the game we failed to control midfield, even with the first-half formation.
Green – 6/10. Not effective enough. I can’t remember him getting past their defender, or delivering a telling cross. Perhaps symptomatic of a very tight game.
Razak – 7/10. Showed promise in the first half and nearly made a couple of things happen, although instead of his introduction creating a more fluid midfield the others seemed to rely on him alone to support Fuller, while their blond git closed out the space.
Fuller – 6/10. Bright enough in the first half, but seemed to get more shackled as the game progressed before his early departure.
Subs – Wright-Phillips (6/10 – worked well enough away from the box but nothing came his way in it); Jackson (6/10 – nothing of note in the second half, when we failed to create a single decent chance aside from the penalty); Pritchard (6/10 – no real chance to shine but perhaps helped create the space for Wilson to get forward late on).
Monday, 8 October 2012
Disjointed - But Not So Bad
There is I suppose something odd about doing a post when in essence I’m doubtful that I have anything to say; belatedly expressing delight at the Blackpool result doesn’t seem to cut it. But popular consensus is that’s never stopped me before, so perhaps it’s best to scribble and see where the path leads.
If there is a theme it’s that through no fault of my own the season seems to be passing me by. I’ve managed just three of the 10 games so far, having had to forego home games against Hull (wedding in Lille) and Watford (work-related Amsterdam trip). Work doesn’t make midweek away trips especially easy and while Forest was in retrospect possible Ipswich was ruled out (my partner Suzanne chose that weekend for a London visit and when faced with the option of a day’s outing or a slow-cooked leg of lamb ... well, she is French). Any thoughts of Blackpool were ruled out by returning from Amsterdam with the office bug.
The way things are looking it’s not going to get any easier. I’m off to Lyon for the week ahead and, easyjet permitting, will fly back in time on Saturday morning to get across town for Barnsley. But the next Amsterdam trip could rule out the home game against Cardiff and to round things off Suzanne’s penchant for forward planning meant that we booked to go to Brussels for new year, only to discover when the fixture list came out that we head off the day Ipswich come to town. I’m still pondering whether it’s possible to watch the game and still make the last Eurostar, or just hoping that for some reason they bring forward the kick-off, but my prevarication is starting to cause concern in Lyon as the prices tick up with each passing day.
It all makes things rather disjointed, which is a fair assessment of the season to date (you see, there’s always a link). Three games witnessed to date and the season almost a quarter gone. I’ve seen a win, a draw and, according to the record books, one defeat (albeit one that is blessedly fading from my memory; give me another couple of weeks and it just won’t have happened). Add in the loss of Kermorgant and Wiggins, as well as Taylor, Jackson and Wagstaff, plus the new guys who’ve come in, and it’s given rise to an air of uncertainty that we learnt to live without last season. And it’s a fine line at the moment between uncertainty when we hover around the drop zone and opportunity/excitement when a win sees us looking upwards. Any team which includes three consecutive defeats in the first 10 games isn’t going to be among the early pace-setters and we’ve yet to manage back-to-back wins; it’s Barnsley’s role to get rid of that unwanted statistic.
The decision to drop Wright-Phillips for Blackpool will have been a tough one, but another Addick who attended the Ipswich match commented that he had a poor game there – and the result speaks for itself. Wilson seems to be taking his opportunity, however tough it is on Evina, and the little I’ve seen so far of Kerkar was positive. I can’t comment at all on Razak (or Dervite for that matter), but it’s an exciting move, especially if this works well for Fuller (and signing him was nothing less than a master-stroke). It remains to be seen whether Sir Chris will keep the formation for a home game, but you have to say why not? If there is a figure which stands out from the table it’s four goals in five home games.
I have rambled on before about the contrast with last season, but a fellow Addick pointed out that it’s actually been a number of seasons since we began a campaign without a clear idea of what would constitute success (and failure). At this stage we can only rank the priorities (starting with the blindingly obvious), especially as each time the media tags us as ‘struggling’ Charlton we respond with an away win. Progress is good enough for me as we have time to think about our own ‘next level’ (which is a spurious link to allow some criticism of the normally sensible Mick McCarthy who recently on Radio 5 trotted out the silly line that somehow it was Charlton fans demanding more that led to Curbs’ departure).
And it seems we are not alone in making progress. My adopted French team, Lyon Duchere, has made an explosive start to their CFA Groupe B campaign. With five wins and three draws from the first eight games – including a 4-3 victory over PSG B - they top their league. If my timings weren’t all so screwed up I would be there to witness their next game, at home to second-placed Moulins. But that would have meant no Barnsley game. Guess while I am in Lyon I’ll have to settle to Suzanne’s slow-cooked leg of lamb, washed down with whatever we pick up at the wine fair during the week. Like the league table, it ain’t all bad.
If there is a theme it’s that through no fault of my own the season seems to be passing me by. I’ve managed just three of the 10 games so far, having had to forego home games against Hull (wedding in Lille) and Watford (work-related Amsterdam trip). Work doesn’t make midweek away trips especially easy and while Forest was in retrospect possible Ipswich was ruled out (my partner Suzanne chose that weekend for a London visit and when faced with the option of a day’s outing or a slow-cooked leg of lamb ... well, she is French). Any thoughts of Blackpool were ruled out by returning from Amsterdam with the office bug.
The way things are looking it’s not going to get any easier. I’m off to Lyon for the week ahead and, easyjet permitting, will fly back in time on Saturday morning to get across town for Barnsley. But the next Amsterdam trip could rule out the home game against Cardiff and to round things off Suzanne’s penchant for forward planning meant that we booked to go to Brussels for new year, only to discover when the fixture list came out that we head off the day Ipswich come to town. I’m still pondering whether it’s possible to watch the game and still make the last Eurostar, or just hoping that for some reason they bring forward the kick-off, but my prevarication is starting to cause concern in Lyon as the prices tick up with each passing day.
It all makes things rather disjointed, which is a fair assessment of the season to date (you see, there’s always a link). Three games witnessed to date and the season almost a quarter gone. I’ve seen a win, a draw and, according to the record books, one defeat (albeit one that is blessedly fading from my memory; give me another couple of weeks and it just won’t have happened). Add in the loss of Kermorgant and Wiggins, as well as Taylor, Jackson and Wagstaff, plus the new guys who’ve come in, and it’s given rise to an air of uncertainty that we learnt to live without last season. And it’s a fine line at the moment between uncertainty when we hover around the drop zone and opportunity/excitement when a win sees us looking upwards. Any team which includes three consecutive defeats in the first 10 games isn’t going to be among the early pace-setters and we’ve yet to manage back-to-back wins; it’s Barnsley’s role to get rid of that unwanted statistic.
The decision to drop Wright-Phillips for Blackpool will have been a tough one, but another Addick who attended the Ipswich match commented that he had a poor game there – and the result speaks for itself. Wilson seems to be taking his opportunity, however tough it is on Evina, and the little I’ve seen so far of Kerkar was positive. I can’t comment at all on Razak (or Dervite for that matter), but it’s an exciting move, especially if this works well for Fuller (and signing him was nothing less than a master-stroke). It remains to be seen whether Sir Chris will keep the formation for a home game, but you have to say why not? If there is a figure which stands out from the table it’s four goals in five home games.
I have rambled on before about the contrast with last season, but a fellow Addick pointed out that it’s actually been a number of seasons since we began a campaign without a clear idea of what would constitute success (and failure). At this stage we can only rank the priorities (starting with the blindingly obvious), especially as each time the media tags us as ‘struggling’ Charlton we respond with an away win. Progress is good enough for me as we have time to think about our own ‘next level’ (which is a spurious link to allow some criticism of the normally sensible Mick McCarthy who recently on Radio 5 trotted out the silly line that somehow it was Charlton fans demanding more that led to Curbs’ departure).
And it seems we are not alone in making progress. My adopted French team, Lyon Duchere, has made an explosive start to their CFA Groupe B campaign. With five wins and three draws from the first eight games – including a 4-3 victory over PSG B - they top their league. If my timings weren’t all so screwed up I would be there to witness their next game, at home to second-placed Moulins. But that would have meant no Barnsley game. Guess while I am in Lyon I’ll have to settle to Suzanne’s slow-cooked leg of lamb, washed down with whatever we pick up at the wine fair during the week. Like the league table, it ain’t all bad.
Saturday, 29 September 2012
Almost A Good Win
You’re never going to be truly satisfied with a draw at home when the second half is goalless and you have the majority of the chances on offer. But in the circumstances it didn’t feel that bad; a late winner would not have flattered us (and there were possibilities) while Blackburn, after a fairly traumatic 24 hours, were content to see out the game. If there was a neutral’s man of the match it would probably have gone to their keeper Robinson, which says enough, even though the best chance to win the game has to go down as an unwanted block by Wright-Phillips (more of that later). You had the impression that after losing their manager the night before the game they were happy with a point, and that after losing another striker we weren’t too disappointed either, unless Jackson’s injury proves to be serious.
The surprise before kick-off was that Fuller was out of the picture (I have checked the club site and it cites illness). Rather than Smith getting a start (or a late call going out to Scunthorpe to recall Clarke), the choice was to go 4-5-1 with BWP ploughing a lone furrow and Hollands returning in a packed midfield. Now in my book 4-5-1 works in one of two ways: either you are Spurs with Allen, who did nothing except for knocking the ball in the net (repeatedly) after a midfield including Hoddle, Ardilles et al did all the work, or you are Chelsea with a Drogba and Robben and Duff either side. We did once have the latter, with Bent up front, Thomas and Rommadahl out wide, and a midfield of Murphy, Smertin and Kishishev. It’s why I couldn’t bring myself to join in the booing of Murphy; he was petulant, abrasive and generally dislikeable, and he threw his toys out the pram when leaving us (having not been recalled for England and dropped by Curbs when we switched back to 4-4-2). But he played in the best Charlton team I’ve ever seen.
I guess the point is that with a five-man midfield you need fluidity, especially if it’s not a de facto 4-3-3. The formation was forced on us, and in the end we nearly came away with the win. But in the first half especially there wasn’t enough movement to really make it work. It needed one of Hollands, Stephens and Jackson to be bombing forward and too often they played their natural game. Not really criticism of them, or of the formation, but there was a feeling in the crowd (I think) that goals would be hard to come by, unless Green and/or Kerkar made the difference, or Morrison and/or Cort produced something from a set piece. In the event, it was a case of almost, on all fronts.
It was another edgy start, with us trying to adapt to not knocking balls forward in the air and both wingers trying to come to terms with the fact that a decent cross from out wide would probably be fruitless. Sometimes the ball had to be hit high and part of the problem was that Wright-Phillips managed to win some, to his credit but to no practical advantage given that nobody was going to be further forward than him. But we had a couple of half-chances, with a Cort header going over the bar and a Kerkar shot-come-cross going narrowly past the far post. Just when we seemed to be finding a way into the game they scored, after around 15 minutes.
You have to say it was a decent goal. Their midfield guy saw an opportunity to make a well-timed run forward down our left side and for once Solly was caught out. The ball was delivered well, he ran on to it, past the static Solly, and finished well, giving Hamer no chance. The thought at that point was that there was still enough Premiership quality about them that we might find it difficult to get back into things, especially with Rhodes up front. That it didn’t turn out that way is to our credit as Cort and Morrison kept a tight grip on their forwards and as the midfield won possession, providing the basis for us to have the better of the balance of play.
That said, we got back on level terms in fortunate circumstances. A set piece cross in and their guy decided to shove one of ours. He fell nicely to the ground and with the ref having a clear line of vision there was no doubt it was a penalty. Soft, unnecessary, but unquestionable. Robinson faffed around but Jackson’s conversion record gave us confidence. He went for a drive down the middle but Robinson’s legs were left trailing and the kick was blocked. However, the ball was never really cleared and when it found its way back into the box Jackson met it on the full and it flew into the roof of the net. Back on level terms after about 30 minutes and it seemed it could go either way. Blackburn still looked capable of scoring, but we were starting to dominate possession and managing to break up their attacks, while Kerkar was steadily coming more into the game. The one further chance of note in the first half was a Green shot from inside the box that took a deflection and cannoned back off the post.
The second half simmered but never really caught fire as the second goal wouldn’t come. Worryingly, Jackson went down and after lengthy treatment couldn’t continue, casting some doubt about his availability for the games coming up. In practical terms, Pritchard coming on did give us more movement and fluidity as he seemed to have a truly free role behind BWP. Kerkar was starting to give their full back a torrid time and Green was finding space on the other flank, supported by Wilson, which created a game in which we were happy to take a set piece, to allow Morrison and Cort to come forward, or for the wide men to take a shot. And shots there were. Green sent a free kick over the bar and after that a swerving one that Robinson managed to turn away for a corner. One corner found Cort at the far post and his header back produced a scramble which saw Robinson fist the ball away from (probably) not fully over the line.
Blackburn threatened periodically, but generally it was about whether we would get the winner. In the event the best chance came from another free kick. As it floated into around the penalty spot both Morrison and Wright-Phillips had beaten an offside ploy. Morrison got the flick and there’s little doubt that it would have gone in, with Robinson stranded, but BWP had shaped up for it as well and the deflection saw the ball hit him instead of nestle in the net. Can’t really blame Wright-Phillips for it as he’s a forward shaping up to score, but if he hadn’t made the run it surely would have gone in. I did think we should have had another penalty at the death as Cort rose at the far post and was clearly shoved while in the air, stopping him getting in a clean header. It was perhaps one for the linesman to spot but it went begging. For some reason Evina was given the final 30 seconds on the pitch, replacing Kerkar, who had threatened to be the match-winner, although with set pieces in the last couple of minutes I thought we might have sent on Smith – or anyone to add to the aerial threat.
So, far from perfect, but in its way creditable. For the most part we nullified Blackburn as an attacking threat, after their goal had suggested we would struggle to do so. The five-man midfield seemed something cobbled together after the loss of Fuller; it had its pros and cons but with a bit more crispness in the passing and more movement it could have won us the game. The concerns are Jackson going off and Fuller not being available, given the unavailability for the foreseeable future of Kermorgant and Wiggins. Hopefully in both cases it proves to be nothing worrying.
Player Ratings:
Hamer – 8/10. As against Palace, what mark do you give a keeper who has no chance with a goal scored, few other efforts on target to deal with, but copes capably with everything else?
Wilson – 7/10. Another competent game. Did get caught out once in the second half as he had gone forward and suddenly there was a gap, but at the moment you can’t argue with Powell’s decision regarding Wiggins, however tough it is on Evina.
Solly – 6/10. Has to lose a mark for their goal as it was his area and their guy stole a march on him. Otherwise no problems at all.
Cort – 8/10. No errors I can remember in defence, won everything in the air, and at the other end the guy is just a constant threat. What more can you ask for (except turning the headers into goals)?
Morrison – 8/10. My man of the match as his display was near faultless. Should have come away having scored the winner for us.
Kerkar – 8/10. Grew into the game and his threat seemed to increase. Adapted to the fact that often having worked a good position there was no point in slinging in a cross as BWP was outnumbered, but when there’s a Fuller or a Kermorgant to aim at it should be good.
Jackson – 6/10. Having been switched inside for Ipswich he had to adjust to a central three. Not a bad game, but between the three of them it would have been good to see more fluidity. The penalty save is just one of those things and he buried the chance that followed quickly after. Just hope the injury isn’t serious.
Hollands – 6/10. Much the same as Jackson. Effective but not dramatic.
Stephens – 7/10. He tended to pull the strings when we had possession. Could have been marked down for one bad set piece.
Green – 7/10. The shooting was mixed but he too could have been a match-winner. Some times you feel he should be making himself more available for an easy pass, but the space he found in the second half could have been decisive.
Wright-Phillips – 7/10. Asked to do a different job and applied himself to it well. There was one chance that fell to him late on and he didn’t get too much on it. But I’m not going to mark him down for blocking Morrison’s header. He’s a striker and it’s his job to get on the end of things.
Subs – Pritchard (7/10 – did make a difference as he found the space between midfield and Wright-Phillips that others hadn’t); Evina (oh come on, on the pitch for 30 second and didn’t touch the ball; he’s every right to be disappointed but I hope his mind is still right).
The surprise before kick-off was that Fuller was out of the picture (I have checked the club site and it cites illness). Rather than Smith getting a start (or a late call going out to Scunthorpe to recall Clarke), the choice was to go 4-5-1 with BWP ploughing a lone furrow and Hollands returning in a packed midfield. Now in my book 4-5-1 works in one of two ways: either you are Spurs with Allen, who did nothing except for knocking the ball in the net (repeatedly) after a midfield including Hoddle, Ardilles et al did all the work, or you are Chelsea with a Drogba and Robben and Duff either side. We did once have the latter, with Bent up front, Thomas and Rommadahl out wide, and a midfield of Murphy, Smertin and Kishishev. It’s why I couldn’t bring myself to join in the booing of Murphy; he was petulant, abrasive and generally dislikeable, and he threw his toys out the pram when leaving us (having not been recalled for England and dropped by Curbs when we switched back to 4-4-2). But he played in the best Charlton team I’ve ever seen.
I guess the point is that with a five-man midfield you need fluidity, especially if it’s not a de facto 4-3-3. The formation was forced on us, and in the end we nearly came away with the win. But in the first half especially there wasn’t enough movement to really make it work. It needed one of Hollands, Stephens and Jackson to be bombing forward and too often they played their natural game. Not really criticism of them, or of the formation, but there was a feeling in the crowd (I think) that goals would be hard to come by, unless Green and/or Kerkar made the difference, or Morrison and/or Cort produced something from a set piece. In the event, it was a case of almost, on all fronts.
It was another edgy start, with us trying to adapt to not knocking balls forward in the air and both wingers trying to come to terms with the fact that a decent cross from out wide would probably be fruitless. Sometimes the ball had to be hit high and part of the problem was that Wright-Phillips managed to win some, to his credit but to no practical advantage given that nobody was going to be further forward than him. But we had a couple of half-chances, with a Cort header going over the bar and a Kerkar shot-come-cross going narrowly past the far post. Just when we seemed to be finding a way into the game they scored, after around 15 minutes.
You have to say it was a decent goal. Their midfield guy saw an opportunity to make a well-timed run forward down our left side and for once Solly was caught out. The ball was delivered well, he ran on to it, past the static Solly, and finished well, giving Hamer no chance. The thought at that point was that there was still enough Premiership quality about them that we might find it difficult to get back into things, especially with Rhodes up front. That it didn’t turn out that way is to our credit as Cort and Morrison kept a tight grip on their forwards and as the midfield won possession, providing the basis for us to have the better of the balance of play.
That said, we got back on level terms in fortunate circumstances. A set piece cross in and their guy decided to shove one of ours. He fell nicely to the ground and with the ref having a clear line of vision there was no doubt it was a penalty. Soft, unnecessary, but unquestionable. Robinson faffed around but Jackson’s conversion record gave us confidence. He went for a drive down the middle but Robinson’s legs were left trailing and the kick was blocked. However, the ball was never really cleared and when it found its way back into the box Jackson met it on the full and it flew into the roof of the net. Back on level terms after about 30 minutes and it seemed it could go either way. Blackburn still looked capable of scoring, but we were starting to dominate possession and managing to break up their attacks, while Kerkar was steadily coming more into the game. The one further chance of note in the first half was a Green shot from inside the box that took a deflection and cannoned back off the post.
The second half simmered but never really caught fire as the second goal wouldn’t come. Worryingly, Jackson went down and after lengthy treatment couldn’t continue, casting some doubt about his availability for the games coming up. In practical terms, Pritchard coming on did give us more movement and fluidity as he seemed to have a truly free role behind BWP. Kerkar was starting to give their full back a torrid time and Green was finding space on the other flank, supported by Wilson, which created a game in which we were happy to take a set piece, to allow Morrison and Cort to come forward, or for the wide men to take a shot. And shots there were. Green sent a free kick over the bar and after that a swerving one that Robinson managed to turn away for a corner. One corner found Cort at the far post and his header back produced a scramble which saw Robinson fist the ball away from (probably) not fully over the line.
Blackburn threatened periodically, but generally it was about whether we would get the winner. In the event the best chance came from another free kick. As it floated into around the penalty spot both Morrison and Wright-Phillips had beaten an offside ploy. Morrison got the flick and there’s little doubt that it would have gone in, with Robinson stranded, but BWP had shaped up for it as well and the deflection saw the ball hit him instead of nestle in the net. Can’t really blame Wright-Phillips for it as he’s a forward shaping up to score, but if he hadn’t made the run it surely would have gone in. I did think we should have had another penalty at the death as Cort rose at the far post and was clearly shoved while in the air, stopping him getting in a clean header. It was perhaps one for the linesman to spot but it went begging. For some reason Evina was given the final 30 seconds on the pitch, replacing Kerkar, who had threatened to be the match-winner, although with set pieces in the last couple of minutes I thought we might have sent on Smith – or anyone to add to the aerial threat.
So, far from perfect, but in its way creditable. For the most part we nullified Blackburn as an attacking threat, after their goal had suggested we would struggle to do so. The five-man midfield seemed something cobbled together after the loss of Fuller; it had its pros and cons but with a bit more crispness in the passing and more movement it could have won us the game. The concerns are Jackson going off and Fuller not being available, given the unavailability for the foreseeable future of Kermorgant and Wiggins. Hopefully in both cases it proves to be nothing worrying.
Player Ratings:
Hamer – 8/10. As against Palace, what mark do you give a keeper who has no chance with a goal scored, few other efforts on target to deal with, but copes capably with everything else?
Wilson – 7/10. Another competent game. Did get caught out once in the second half as he had gone forward and suddenly there was a gap, but at the moment you can’t argue with Powell’s decision regarding Wiggins, however tough it is on Evina.
Solly – 6/10. Has to lose a mark for their goal as it was his area and their guy stole a march on him. Otherwise no problems at all.
Cort – 8/10. No errors I can remember in defence, won everything in the air, and at the other end the guy is just a constant threat. What more can you ask for (except turning the headers into goals)?
Morrison – 8/10. My man of the match as his display was near faultless. Should have come away having scored the winner for us.
Kerkar – 8/10. Grew into the game and his threat seemed to increase. Adapted to the fact that often having worked a good position there was no point in slinging in a cross as BWP was outnumbered, but when there’s a Fuller or a Kermorgant to aim at it should be good.
Jackson – 6/10. Having been switched inside for Ipswich he had to adjust to a central three. Not a bad game, but between the three of them it would have been good to see more fluidity. The penalty save is just one of those things and he buried the chance that followed quickly after. Just hope the injury isn’t serious.
Hollands – 6/10. Much the same as Jackson. Effective but not dramatic.
Stephens – 7/10. He tended to pull the strings when we had possession. Could have been marked down for one bad set piece.
Green – 7/10. The shooting was mixed but he too could have been a match-winner. Some times you feel he should be making himself more available for an easy pass, but the space he found in the second half could have been decisive.
Wright-Phillips – 7/10. Asked to do a different job and applied himself to it well. There was one chance that fell to him late on and he didn’t get too much on it. But I’m not going to mark him down for blocking Morrison’s header. He’s a striker and it’s his job to get on the end of things.
Subs – Pritchard (7/10 – did make a difference as he found the space between midfield and Wright-Phillips that others hadn’t); Evina (oh come on, on the pitch for 30 second and didn’t touch the ball; he’s every right to be disappointed but I hope his mind is still right).
Monday, 17 September 2012
Attempt At Sober Reflection
Seems it doesn’t take much to turn us back into miserable gits, although the past week or so has been disappointing to say the least. I suspect there are a number of factors behind reaction to Friday night. First, and foremost, we lost to Palace, at home. I see that Fuller has said that we deserved to take something from the game. That is true by definition; it was Palace, ergo a comfortable victory is the world as it should be.
At a more practical level, I don’t think he was putting too much of a gloss on things. Yes, it was disconcerting that Palace played better football than us on the night, enjoyed better possession, and we couldn’t have complained (no doubt I would have done) had we been behind at the break. But to me that isn’t the full story. Palace’s wide men did cause us all sorts of problems in their build-up play, but what they did from good positions was generally dire. Having got free down the right, their guy crossed feebly into Hamer’s arms; when one was pulled back it was blazed over; and more often than not – in the second half as well – from them it was head down and shoot, badly. The problems they caused us didn’t end up hurting us (although I guess they affected our play); whether their failure to capitalise on their good positions worked was just an off night for their finishing or indicative of players still learning their trade I don’t know and frankly don’t care.
The fact is we should have gone in at the break one up, against the run of play or not. The game would have played out differently if that had been the case. After they scored, we had to find a way to get something out of the game and sometimes that means playing to a strength. And aerial power from set pieces was the obvious strength. It certainly wasn’t pretty, but it contributed to pushing Palace back, protecting the defence, and it nearly worked. I really wouldn’t have cared how scrambled an equaliser might have been.
There is an element of papering over the cracks in that assessment. After a splendid point away at Birmingham, so nearly an apparently deserved victory, the first half against Leicester gave us good reason to be confident that we could thrive in this division. They contributed to that with a very open approach to the game, but we took them on, played well with movement, invention and threat, and went 2-0 up. That we were hanging on for much of the second half was justifiable in the circumstances (wanting to get a win on the board and not to surrender a lead late on for the second game running). Hull was a little disappointing as far as the result was concerned, but the conditions were a factor. And the Stephens affair was clearly a factor behind the poor display for much of the game against Forest. But on Friday night there were no good reasons – other than the occasion, perhaps the effects of the previous defeat – to explain away the absence of the sort of confidence and edginess that characterised much of our display.
The fact that in pure footballing terms we were outplayed for much of the Palace game was sobering, not just because it was them, a team not expected to be fighting it out at the top. Again, if we had got a point with one of the late efforts there would have been a positive element of us having worked out a way to get something out of a game (we weren’t outplayed often last season, but the first half away at MK Dons was a case in point, when we regrouped at the break and came away with a draw). But that still would have left the impression that in some respects we have to wise up. Some of the things that worked last season won’t do against better opposition (and just on the basis of league placings we are obliged to include Palace in that group). Defenders make fewer mistakes and the fact that Kermorgant wins more than his fair share to knock on for Wright-Phillips won’t translate into the number of goals we saw last season (again, hoofing it up towards the end on Friday night when there was Kermorgant, Fuller, Cort and Morrison, then Hamer as well, to aim at was a case of needs must).
We need more strings to our bow and I suspect a clearer move away from what worked so well last season, namely progressively overpowering the opposition. We do have options, although I can’t say whether the players concerned are match-fit (or indeed how they are shaping up in training) and how possible combinations might work out. It’s fair to say both that before the start of the season both Green and Wagstaff needed to show that they can thrive in this division and that most would have been surprised by the use of Pritchard in a wide role. I thought Pritchard was a star in the first half against Leicester as they just couldn’t pick him up. He had a poor game on Friday night but is still learning. What didn’t help him – and remains in my view unforgivable – was that elements of the crowd, who seem intent on howling at every misplaced pass, steadily eroded his confidence instead of giving him the backing that might have helped him. We now have the additional problem that with Wiggins out there’s a bigger question mark over Jackson. He has got used to working with Wiggins (I hope he’s been practising with Evina), who often provides the overlap to compensate for the fact that Jackson is by no means an out-and-out winger.
In short, there’s a case to be made for changes on either or both flanks. I haven’t seen anywhere near enough of Kerkar or Cook to make any recommendations, but whether it’s a case of giving Pritchard a rest and using Green, Wagstaff or Cook, or even leaving out Jackson for Kerkar (which without Wiggins might be too much of a risk), any such decision by Sir Chris would seem reasonable. I do feel that with more options on the flanks Hollands and Stephens would be able to move the ball forward more effectively. From his comments it would seem that Fuller doesn’t think he’s ready for a starting place, which does keep in abeyance the question of whether we can accommodate him plus Kermorgant and BWP. I can’t really see how, so for me it’s two from these three, depending on what works as a partnership, with Haynes (if fit) the fourth on the bench (which implies Smith having to wait a bit longer).
That all brings us around to the less tangible factors behind the response to the Palace game. We went into the season uncertain where to place expectations and in the space of a couple of weeks have gone from whispering about ‘doing a Southampton/Norwich’ to contemplating the unpalatable. Finish below Palace and the dread is of returning to the third flight. It is far too soon for any such thoughts, but one can’t help thinking them, at least ahead of the next win (ie tomorrow).
Behind this, the boardroom changes and speculation over the financial state of (and prospects for) the club have an unsettling effect when suddenly all is not going well. Silence and secrecy have their consequences. We know we missed out on some transfer targets during the summer but I for one don’t have a clear impression of what we might be ready and able to do if we have to strengthen the squad. Here too any such thoughts are premature. The players earned the right to show what they can do in this division and we have strengthened in some areas of the squad (yes Leon, you were accurate in your assessment of your future at Charlton). Managing even a modest transition through incorporating those acquired can’t be an easy task. It is a test for Sir Chris (and just for the record the talk elsewhere of his position being questioned has to be the silliest thing I’ve come across since Clarke thought he might have a future at Charlton).
It’s also a test for the crowd, in the event that the two coming away games don’t go well. Pritchard in particular needed support on Friday and was let down by some. We all hope that this season takes a quick turn for the better and it is (very) early days. If it doesn’t, I’d only ask anyone who comes away from a game hoarse from moaning out loud at every misplaced pass/’wrong option’ rather than singing their heart out takes a long, hard look at themselves.
At a more practical level, I don’t think he was putting too much of a gloss on things. Yes, it was disconcerting that Palace played better football than us on the night, enjoyed better possession, and we couldn’t have complained (no doubt I would have done) had we been behind at the break. But to me that isn’t the full story. Palace’s wide men did cause us all sorts of problems in their build-up play, but what they did from good positions was generally dire. Having got free down the right, their guy crossed feebly into Hamer’s arms; when one was pulled back it was blazed over; and more often than not – in the second half as well – from them it was head down and shoot, badly. The problems they caused us didn’t end up hurting us (although I guess they affected our play); whether their failure to capitalise on their good positions worked was just an off night for their finishing or indicative of players still learning their trade I don’t know and frankly don’t care.
The fact is we should have gone in at the break one up, against the run of play or not. The game would have played out differently if that had been the case. After they scored, we had to find a way to get something out of the game and sometimes that means playing to a strength. And aerial power from set pieces was the obvious strength. It certainly wasn’t pretty, but it contributed to pushing Palace back, protecting the defence, and it nearly worked. I really wouldn’t have cared how scrambled an equaliser might have been.
There is an element of papering over the cracks in that assessment. After a splendid point away at Birmingham, so nearly an apparently deserved victory, the first half against Leicester gave us good reason to be confident that we could thrive in this division. They contributed to that with a very open approach to the game, but we took them on, played well with movement, invention and threat, and went 2-0 up. That we were hanging on for much of the second half was justifiable in the circumstances (wanting to get a win on the board and not to surrender a lead late on for the second game running). Hull was a little disappointing as far as the result was concerned, but the conditions were a factor. And the Stephens affair was clearly a factor behind the poor display for much of the game against Forest. But on Friday night there were no good reasons – other than the occasion, perhaps the effects of the previous defeat – to explain away the absence of the sort of confidence and edginess that characterised much of our display.
The fact that in pure footballing terms we were outplayed for much of the Palace game was sobering, not just because it was them, a team not expected to be fighting it out at the top. Again, if we had got a point with one of the late efforts there would have been a positive element of us having worked out a way to get something out of a game (we weren’t outplayed often last season, but the first half away at MK Dons was a case in point, when we regrouped at the break and came away with a draw). But that still would have left the impression that in some respects we have to wise up. Some of the things that worked last season won’t do against better opposition (and just on the basis of league placings we are obliged to include Palace in that group). Defenders make fewer mistakes and the fact that Kermorgant wins more than his fair share to knock on for Wright-Phillips won’t translate into the number of goals we saw last season (again, hoofing it up towards the end on Friday night when there was Kermorgant, Fuller, Cort and Morrison, then Hamer as well, to aim at was a case of needs must).
We need more strings to our bow and I suspect a clearer move away from what worked so well last season, namely progressively overpowering the opposition. We do have options, although I can’t say whether the players concerned are match-fit (or indeed how they are shaping up in training) and how possible combinations might work out. It’s fair to say both that before the start of the season both Green and Wagstaff needed to show that they can thrive in this division and that most would have been surprised by the use of Pritchard in a wide role. I thought Pritchard was a star in the first half against Leicester as they just couldn’t pick him up. He had a poor game on Friday night but is still learning. What didn’t help him – and remains in my view unforgivable – was that elements of the crowd, who seem intent on howling at every misplaced pass, steadily eroded his confidence instead of giving him the backing that might have helped him. We now have the additional problem that with Wiggins out there’s a bigger question mark over Jackson. He has got used to working with Wiggins (I hope he’s been practising with Evina), who often provides the overlap to compensate for the fact that Jackson is by no means an out-and-out winger.
In short, there’s a case to be made for changes on either or both flanks. I haven’t seen anywhere near enough of Kerkar or Cook to make any recommendations, but whether it’s a case of giving Pritchard a rest and using Green, Wagstaff or Cook, or even leaving out Jackson for Kerkar (which without Wiggins might be too much of a risk), any such decision by Sir Chris would seem reasonable. I do feel that with more options on the flanks Hollands and Stephens would be able to move the ball forward more effectively. From his comments it would seem that Fuller doesn’t think he’s ready for a starting place, which does keep in abeyance the question of whether we can accommodate him plus Kermorgant and BWP. I can’t really see how, so for me it’s two from these three, depending on what works as a partnership, with Haynes (if fit) the fourth on the bench (which implies Smith having to wait a bit longer).
That all brings us around to the less tangible factors behind the response to the Palace game. We went into the season uncertain where to place expectations and in the space of a couple of weeks have gone from whispering about ‘doing a Southampton/Norwich’ to contemplating the unpalatable. Finish below Palace and the dread is of returning to the third flight. It is far too soon for any such thoughts, but one can’t help thinking them, at least ahead of the next win (ie tomorrow).
Behind this, the boardroom changes and speculation over the financial state of (and prospects for) the club have an unsettling effect when suddenly all is not going well. Silence and secrecy have their consequences. We know we missed out on some transfer targets during the summer but I for one don’t have a clear impression of what we might be ready and able to do if we have to strengthen the squad. Here too any such thoughts are premature. The players earned the right to show what they can do in this division and we have strengthened in some areas of the squad (yes Leon, you were accurate in your assessment of your future at Charlton). Managing even a modest transition through incorporating those acquired can’t be an easy task. It is a test for Sir Chris (and just for the record the talk elsewhere of his position being questioned has to be the silliest thing I’ve come across since Clarke thought he might have a future at Charlton).
It’s also a test for the crowd, in the event that the two coming away games don’t go well. Pritchard in particular needed support on Friday and was let down by some. We all hope that this season takes a quick turn for the better and it is (very) early days. If it doesn’t, I’d only ask anyone who comes away from a game hoarse from moaning out loud at every misplaced pass/’wrong option’ rather than singing their heart out takes a long, hard look at themselves.
Friday, 14 September 2012
Sobering Night, Unfortunately
It’s been a while since we lost a game that really mattered and since the players didn’t collectively rise to the challenge and deliver the goods. There are different standards now and tonight we came up short. No lack of effort, no problem with commitment; the players were clearly desperate to do well. But when it came to composure and quality we didn’t have enough. The game could have turned out quite differently as Palace are no world-beaters, we could have gone ahead before the break (I don’t know if it was offside but seems the replays cast doubt), and there were enough scrambled efforts in the closing minutes to have grabbed a point through our ever-apparent aerial threat. But that might be papering over a sobering night, one in which our play was somewhat edgy from the start, as if the occasion got to a few. We will need to improve.
The team was unchanged apart from Stephens returning after the deadline-day distractions saw him left behind for Forest, with Cook dropping out and Pritchard resuming widish right, while Fuller didn’t get the start that was speculated. And there’s no doubt that Palace had the better of the opening exchanges, with one of their wide guys putting Wiggins under early pressure. They might have got rewards from that had they not played like show-ponies, which they did all night. Any opportunity to shoot (badly) was taken, which was understandable when you saw the quality of their crossing. Good positions were thankfully wasted. But we struggled to make anything happen going forward and rather strangely seemed to get more of a grip at the back after Wiggins pulled something and was replaced by Wilson, with Solly initially switching to the left.
We did get more into the game as the first half wore on and there were enough signs that Kermorgant in open play and he plus Cort and Morrison from set pieces would cause them problems in the air. The game seemed to settle into a sort of stalemate, but at least we were in it and, after a dangerous cross in from the left, had the two key moments before the break. A free kick was nodded on and the inrushing Wright-Phillips seemed to have timed his run to head home, only for the flag to go up. Then just on the break we won a free kick in the sort of position that Jackson made an art of last season. This time the curler was on target but didn’t find the corner and wasn’t hit with enough power to really trouble their keeper. Seemed like he was being a bit too precise; was it pressure?
It never looked like being a goal feast and to have gone in at the break ahead might have made all the difference. It might have calmed us down. But no matter, attacking the Covered End in the second half and the game still in the balance.
Nothing much changed early in the second half, but then that vital first goal went to them. A corner seemed half-cleared but their guy nodded it back goalwards, without any clear sense of direction, and it fell to another in space. The finish was emphatic, but just why he was allowed to bring it down inside the box is a mystery to me. That not surprisingly rocked us, and Sir Chris’ response left little doubt about our tactics for the rest of the game. Fuller came on for Jackson, forming a sort of front three, with BWP moving wider. If anything it underlined the problem we are going to have if Fuller is to start as you’d imagine Kermorgant or Wright-Phillips would have to make way.
This made our play even more disjointed, but the route one approach did tend to push Palace back and it was clear that any sort of set piece might get us the equaliser. With the need for quality balls into the box, Green came on for Pritchard, who had struggled to make an impression on the game, and with Wilson and Solly getting forward the chances did come, late in the day. The best one that could be said to have been fashioned fell to Fuller, but his low shot on the turn went just the wrong side of the post. With Jackson off Kermorgant had the opportunity from a free kick, but it was a fair way out and it sailed over the bar. Then it was the final countdown and the cavalry charge, which so nearly paid off. One effort bounced up and off the crossbar, then the final act saw Hamer come up for a corner and have his header cleared off the line.
It wasn’t to be and we’ll have to live with it for a while. No problem in that respect; they will wake up tomorrow morning and realise it wasn’t just a bad dream. They still have to be Palace fans. But tonight cast some questions over whether the rather methodical approach which overpowered teams last season will be enough this time around. Wiggins looked like he could miss a few weeks, and without him Jackson appears a good deal less effective. Pritchard had a disappointing game, while the Kermorgant knock-on for Wright-Phillips to run on to was tried too often and failed to catch them out. There’s plenty for Sir Chris to be pondering ahead of two away games.
Tonight’s results adds to a certain unwanted symmetry to the results to date. Birmingham saw our first goal and first point, Leicester our first win, and Hull our first clean sheet. Forest brought the first defeat and now Palace our first home defeat. All that needs to be filled in is our first away win.
Player Ratings:
Hamer – 8/10. No chance with the goal, dealt with everything in the air, and almost won us a point at the death.
Solly – 8/10. Worked effectively on both flanks against tricky opponents. Can’t fault him on the night.
Wiggins – 6/10. Only on the pitch for about 20 minutes but during that time looked surprisingly wobbly. I guess his opposite number didn’t suit his style.
Cort – 7/10. Did what he’s primarily there to do; Palace after all had very few actual chances after the initial flurry from their wide men. Always a threat in the opposition box.
Morrison – 7/10. Same as Cort really, the problem tonight wasn’t in defence.
Pritchard – 5/10. Struggled to have the impact he had against Leicester and was outmuscled for much of the game.
Hollands – 6/10. OK game, plenty of good work, but I can’t remember much of note.
Stephens – 6/10. Kept things ticking over but I guess it wasn’t a night for great midfield play, especially once we went route one.
Jackson – 5/10. Largely ineffective, especially without Wiggins getting ahead of him, and this time the free kick didn’t go in.
Kermorgant – 6/10. Battled manfully as ever, but nothing really dropped for him.
Wright-Phillips – 6/10. Perhaps his header should have stood (I haven’t seen any replays). Didn’t get through on the end of knock-ons tonight and looked a little lost when we accommodated Fuller.
Subs – Wilson (7/10 – had his hands full a few times against their wide men but generally did fine and as they dropped back made a more than useful contribution to the aerial threat; pity about a naff shot late on); Fuller (7/10 – a few inches away from scoring the equaliser; how do we accommodate him?); Green (7/10 – was effective late on and showed some guile that we had been lacking).
The team was unchanged apart from Stephens returning after the deadline-day distractions saw him left behind for Forest, with Cook dropping out and Pritchard resuming widish right, while Fuller didn’t get the start that was speculated. And there’s no doubt that Palace had the better of the opening exchanges, with one of their wide guys putting Wiggins under early pressure. They might have got rewards from that had they not played like show-ponies, which they did all night. Any opportunity to shoot (badly) was taken, which was understandable when you saw the quality of their crossing. Good positions were thankfully wasted. But we struggled to make anything happen going forward and rather strangely seemed to get more of a grip at the back after Wiggins pulled something and was replaced by Wilson, with Solly initially switching to the left.
We did get more into the game as the first half wore on and there were enough signs that Kermorgant in open play and he plus Cort and Morrison from set pieces would cause them problems in the air. The game seemed to settle into a sort of stalemate, but at least we were in it and, after a dangerous cross in from the left, had the two key moments before the break. A free kick was nodded on and the inrushing Wright-Phillips seemed to have timed his run to head home, only for the flag to go up. Then just on the break we won a free kick in the sort of position that Jackson made an art of last season. This time the curler was on target but didn’t find the corner and wasn’t hit with enough power to really trouble their keeper. Seemed like he was being a bit too precise; was it pressure?
It never looked like being a goal feast and to have gone in at the break ahead might have made all the difference. It might have calmed us down. But no matter, attacking the Covered End in the second half and the game still in the balance.
Nothing much changed early in the second half, but then that vital first goal went to them. A corner seemed half-cleared but their guy nodded it back goalwards, without any clear sense of direction, and it fell to another in space. The finish was emphatic, but just why he was allowed to bring it down inside the box is a mystery to me. That not surprisingly rocked us, and Sir Chris’ response left little doubt about our tactics for the rest of the game. Fuller came on for Jackson, forming a sort of front three, with BWP moving wider. If anything it underlined the problem we are going to have if Fuller is to start as you’d imagine Kermorgant or Wright-Phillips would have to make way.
This made our play even more disjointed, but the route one approach did tend to push Palace back and it was clear that any sort of set piece might get us the equaliser. With the need for quality balls into the box, Green came on for Pritchard, who had struggled to make an impression on the game, and with Wilson and Solly getting forward the chances did come, late in the day. The best one that could be said to have been fashioned fell to Fuller, but his low shot on the turn went just the wrong side of the post. With Jackson off Kermorgant had the opportunity from a free kick, but it was a fair way out and it sailed over the bar. Then it was the final countdown and the cavalry charge, which so nearly paid off. One effort bounced up and off the crossbar, then the final act saw Hamer come up for a corner and have his header cleared off the line.
It wasn’t to be and we’ll have to live with it for a while. No problem in that respect; they will wake up tomorrow morning and realise it wasn’t just a bad dream. They still have to be Palace fans. But tonight cast some questions over whether the rather methodical approach which overpowered teams last season will be enough this time around. Wiggins looked like he could miss a few weeks, and without him Jackson appears a good deal less effective. Pritchard had a disappointing game, while the Kermorgant knock-on for Wright-Phillips to run on to was tried too often and failed to catch them out. There’s plenty for Sir Chris to be pondering ahead of two away games.
Tonight’s results adds to a certain unwanted symmetry to the results to date. Birmingham saw our first goal and first point, Leicester our first win, and Hull our first clean sheet. Forest brought the first defeat and now Palace our first home defeat. All that needs to be filled in is our first away win.
Player Ratings:
Hamer – 8/10. No chance with the goal, dealt with everything in the air, and almost won us a point at the death.
Solly – 8/10. Worked effectively on both flanks against tricky opponents. Can’t fault him on the night.
Wiggins – 6/10. Only on the pitch for about 20 minutes but during that time looked surprisingly wobbly. I guess his opposite number didn’t suit his style.
Cort – 7/10. Did what he’s primarily there to do; Palace after all had very few actual chances after the initial flurry from their wide men. Always a threat in the opposition box.
Morrison – 7/10. Same as Cort really, the problem tonight wasn’t in defence.
Pritchard – 5/10. Struggled to have the impact he had against Leicester and was outmuscled for much of the game.
Hollands – 6/10. OK game, plenty of good work, but I can’t remember much of note.
Stephens – 6/10. Kept things ticking over but I guess it wasn’t a night for great midfield play, especially once we went route one.
Jackson – 5/10. Largely ineffective, especially without Wiggins getting ahead of him, and this time the free kick didn’t go in.
Kermorgant – 6/10. Battled manfully as ever, but nothing really dropped for him.
Wright-Phillips – 6/10. Perhaps his header should have stood (I haven’t seen any replays). Didn’t get through on the end of knock-ons tonight and looked a little lost when we accommodated Fuller.
Subs – Wilson (7/10 – had his hands full a few times against their wide men but generally did fine and as they dropped back made a more than useful contribution to the aerial threat; pity about a naff shot late on); Fuller (7/10 – a few inches away from scoring the equaliser; how do we accommodate him?); Green (7/10 – was effective late on and showed some guile that we had been lacking).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)