www.altyfans.co.uk

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

PLEASE JOIN THE ALTRINCHAM FC PATRONS SCHEME TODAY
* HELP THE CLUB THROUGH THE COVID-19 SHUTDOWN
* HELP FUND THE CLUB TO BIGGER AND BRIGHTER THINGS
* HELP THE MANAGERS ATTRACT THE PLAYERS THEY NEED TO PUSH THE CLUB FORWARD

https://www.altrinchamfc.com/club/the-patrons-scheme

+ www.altyfans.co.uk » General Category » Altrincham FC First Team
 FCUM Match Thread
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5]

Author Topic: FCUM Match Thread  (Read 15900 times)

Toff Apple

  • Global Moderator
  • Regular First Team
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3167
    • View Profile
Re: FCUM Match Thread
« Reply #60 on: August 15, 2018, 03:57:57 PM »

Leamington was a bit of an unknown for me, as first games generally are. Southport was a pleasant surprise, and I came away from Spennymoor bemused not to have won. Last night was such a frustrating loss because it was the first game of the season that held a degree of expectancy much unlike the other three.

It was just so Alty.

Pulling in a crowd triple that of our first Tuesday night Evo-Stik game, seeing a few faces return to the terraces to give it another try, and tripping over our own feet. Its football, but its also a very bad habit this club has had for as long as I've watched them.

Football wise - I know we're better than that, they know they're better than that. I do worry that we didn't really seem to change anything in terms of chasing the game, it was very much just more of the same and hope it comes off. Severely missed Hancock as others have stated. Quite a few heavily reactionary comments in this thread though in my opinion. At least we're in a situation where the problem areas are quite blatant. I'd be more concerned if we were underperforming across the pitch and didn't really know where to start addressing things.

This, one defeat does not mean players are not up to it, keep the faith
Logged
Bernard Taylors barmy army

Mausoleum Alty

  • Guest
Re: FCUM Match Thread
« Reply #61 on: August 15, 2018, 05:03:42 PM »

A question for those at Spennymoor. I know we conceded four but did both central defenders deserve to be dropped last night? I know White was injured but changing three of the back four seems a bit extreme.
Logged

roytonmike

  • Guest
Re: FCUM Match Thread
« Reply #62 on: August 15, 2018, 05:31:34 PM »

Too slow allover the pitch.
Despartly need Poole or Hancock back.
Having 2 CBS on the bench is a bit bizzare
I would imagine that the reason for having the two centre-backs on the bench was the expectation that one or more of the returning defensive trio wouldn't last the game, whereas in fact they all did. Harrison made a couple of vital tackles in the first half to prevent the opposition scoring, which I would have thought balances out any blame re the winning goal (he wasn't the only one backing off - the opposition gained possession midway inside their own half & proceeded unchallenged from there). All the indications seem to be that Hancock may not be ready till Bank Holiday weekend & Poole wasn't doing much more than running last night, so he may be missing until Daniels' loan runs out (at which point a one-way train ticket back to the Potteries would be my suggestion - he may have something but I haven't seen it in the two home games). Not having been at Spennymoor I don't know how much the energy expended there influenced the tempo last night but it may well have done. We certainly missed Richman in midfield, but fair play to him for as I understand it suggesting that he wouldn't be any use even on the bench given the hamstring tweak.
Two more thoughts - don't take the league table seriously until everybody's played ten games (i.e. till the Cup comes around); & the manager was right when he said there will be ups & downs.
« Last Edit: August 15, 2018, 05:36:14 PM by roytonmike »
Logged

Leon

  • Regular First Team
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1539
    • View Profile
Re: FCUM Match Thread
« Reply #63 on: August 15, 2018, 05:39:16 PM »

Too slow allover the pitch.
Despartly need Poole or Hancock back.
Having 2 CBS on the bench is a bit bizzare
I would imagine that the reason for having the two centre-backs on the bench was the expectation that one or more of the returning defensive trio wouldn't last the game, whereas in fact they all did. Harrison made a couple of vital tackles in the first half to prevent the opposition scoring, which I would have thought balances out any blame re the winning goal (he wasn't the only one backing off - the opposition gained possession midway inside their own half & proceeded unchallenged from there). All the indications seem to be that Hancock may not be ready till Bank Holiday weekend & Poole wasn't doing much more than running last night, so he may be missing until Daniels' loan runs out (at which point a one-way train ticket back to the Potteries would be my suggestion - he may have something but I haven't seen it in the two home games). Not having been at Spennymoor I don't know how much the energy expended there influenced the tempo last night but it may well have done. We certainly missed Richman in midfield, but fair play to him for as I understand it suggesting that he wouldn't be any use even on the bench given the hamstring tweak.
Two more thoughts - don't take the league table seriously until everybody's played ten games (i.e. till the Cup comes around); & the manager was right when he said there will be ups & downs.

Surely the reason we had two centre backs on the bench is because we only had 16 fit and available players and four of them are centre backs?
Logged

roytonmike

  • Guest
Re: FCUM Match Thread
« Reply #64 on: August 15, 2018, 05:42:29 PM »

Too slow allover the pitch.
Despartly need Poole or Hancock back.
Having 2 CBS on the bench is a bit bizzare
I would imagine that the reason for having the two centre-backs on the bench was the expectation that one or more of the returning defensive trio wouldn't last the game, whereas in fact they all did. Harrison made a couple of vital tackles in the first half to prevent the opposition scoring, which I would have thought balances out any blame re the winning goal (he wasn't the only one backing off - the opposition gained possession midway inside their own half & proceeded unchallenged from there). All the indications seem to be that Hancock may not be ready till Bank Holiday weekend & Poole wasn't doing much more than running last night, so he may be missing until Daniels' loan runs out (at which point a one-way train ticket back to the Potteries would be my suggestion - he may have something but I haven't seen it in the two home games). Not having been at Spennymoor I don't know how much the energy expended there influenced the tempo last night but it may well have done. We certainly missed Richman in midfield, but fair play to him for as I understand it suggesting that he wouldn't be any use even on the bench given the hamstring tweak.
Two more thoughts - don't take the league table seriously until everybody's played ten games (i.e. till the Cup comes around); & the manager was right when he said there will be ups & downs.
Surely the reason we had two centre backs on the bench is because we only had 16 fit and available players and four of them are centre backs?
Fair point - hadn't done my sums in that regard!
Logged

robininstockport

  • Regular First Team
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5689
    • View Profile
Re: FCUM Match Thread
« Reply #65 on: August 15, 2018, 05:53:04 PM »

I take the point about only 16 fit outfield players.

What's happened to Bannister and have we any players' on dual registration?
Logged
Full time and proud of it

buchanj9

  • Youth \ Reserve Team
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 83
    • View Profile
Re: FCUM Match Thread
« Reply #66 on: August 15, 2018, 05:55:37 PM »

I take the point about only 16 fit outfield players.

What's happened to Bannister and have we any players' on dual registration?

Apparently Bannister is waiting on international clearance from Belgium?
And we had Downing on the bench who is also on dual registration
Logged

Sale Holmfield

  • Regular First Team
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 914
    • View Profile
Re: FCUM Match Thread
« Reply #67 on: August 15, 2018, 06:14:51 PM »

A question for those at Spennymoor. I know we conceded four but did both central defenders deserve to be dropped last night? I know White was injured but changing three of the back four seems a bit extreme.

I was in the Sponsors' Lounge before the game, (and at Spennymoor) and in his pre-match Phil Parkinson seemed to be saying that while wasn't scapegoating the young central defenders in the slightest - White was injured - after conceding four goals, he wanted to bring in some older more experienced heads now they were available.
I say "seemed" as the chairman's loud mobile went off, and I couldn't catch all PP was saying!
Logged

Timperley The Best

  • Administrator
  • Regular First Team
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4164
    • View Profile
Re: FCUM Match Thread
« Reply #68 on: August 15, 2018, 07:47:32 PM »

Maybe Goulding and Jones were carrying knocks not sure who our  best two central defenders are when everyone is fit
Logged

robininstockport

  • Regular First Team
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5689
    • View Profile
Re: FCUM Match Thread
« Reply #69 on: August 15, 2018, 10:28:33 PM »

With the cbs, I think it's a case of getting the partnership sorted. I'd like to see Hannigan and Goulding
Logged
Full time and proud of it

cheshire cat

  • Regular First Team
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1750
    • View Profile
Re: FCUM Match Thread
« Reply #70 on: August 15, 2018, 11:22:12 PM »

It's about the partnerships right across the field. If a sub comes on they need to slot in and understand how the team operates. Didn't always happen last night.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5]
+ www.altyfans.co.uk » General Category » Altrincham FC First Team
 FCUM Match Thread