onevalefan.co.uk Present Past Specials About Forum
Jump to content
onevalefan.co.uk forum

Advert


Advert


Match Thread : Macclesfield Town v Port Vale


Fosse69

Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, DistantVale said:

 

The difference between us and Crewe is firstly they have a plan, they have an academy and they have stuck with it through thick and thin , and secondly they have a good manager who recruits very well. Blackdog names the young players, but they also have an experienced strong spine of the team with Hunt Green, Powell ,and Porter who would all get into our team. Its hurts to praise them, but its football and sometime you have step back and admit they are doing well simply because they are organised !        

Not sure Vale fans would accept the Crewe way. They accept a few lean years for some better seasons when younger players come good. It's taken them to The Chapionship and also the lower reaches of League 2. They have a plan and stick to it even if things go wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Advert

24 minutes ago, DistantVale said:

 

The difference between us and Crewe is firstly they have a plan, they have an academy and they have stuck with it through thick and thin , and secondly they have a good manager who recruits very well. Blackdog names the young players, but they also have an experienced strong spine of the team with Hunt Green, Powell ,and Porter who would all get into our team. Its hurts to praise them, but its football and sometime you have step back and admit they are doing well simply because they are organised !        

There are a few more differences than that between us and Crewe I'm pleased to say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some gross over reaction to a defeat. Macclesfield are one team who do have a lower budget than us but we still only have a lower mid table budget, although increased for Atkinson.

Not sure Pope in a front 2 with a diamond was the right way to go. Whenever the diamond works teams tend to have 2 up front who can run the channels. 

A few players had shockers. Pope was poor, Gibbons was dreadful and I can't remember Atkinson touching the ball until he moved to right back. Thought Taylor was quite busy and Worral was Ok, the rest bottom end of average.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, JRC said:

Some gross over reaction to a defeat. Macclesfield are one team who do have a lower budget than us but we still only have a lower mid table budget, although increased for Atkinson.

Not sure Pope in a front 2 with a diamond was the right way to go. Whenever the diamond works teams tend to have 2 up front who can run the channels. 

A few players had shockers. Pope was poor, Gibbons was dreadful and I can't remember Atkinson touching the ball until he moved to right back. Thought Taylor was quite busy and Worral was Ok, the rest bottom end of average.

As I saw it, system-wise, they were playing three at the back and getting their width from their wing backs. We were dead narrow in midfield with the "diamond". Which was the worst of all possible worlds. Our full backs got over loaded when they were coming forward. And had no options in front of them when we had the ball. Plus individually we were lethargic and poor all over the pitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course it would have made a difference. If that’s the case why bother having subs?  I’m quite sure many sides underperform and then make subs and can change the game. We were dire. We should have changed it early and could have changed the game. 
Not arguing the point about needing subs, my point was after the substitutions we were still second best. We should of been bombarding there goal last 10 minutes, never happened though.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Biddulph_PV said:

Let’s say that over the next 4 games we get 4 points from our two home games and, as I fully expect, us to get zilch from two away games at Bradford and Crewe. We’ll then be a point worse off than at the same stage last year under the much-criticised Aspin. Is this progress??

That’s only supposition. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, toyahw said:

As I saw it, system-wise, they were playing three at the back and getting their width from their wing backs. We were dead narrow in midfield with the "diamond". Which was the worst of all possible worlds. Our full backs got over loaded when they were coming forward. And had no options in front of them when we had the ball. Plus individually we were lethargic and poor all over the pitch.

I'd agree with the comments. At times we also sat too deep. Joyce was guilty of always trying to be behind Taylor and Atkinson and the defence seemed to then set themselves 5 to 10 metres behind Joyce. That gave them quite a big pocket of space to drive in to quite high in their attacking third. I think it might have worked better with a midfield 3 and Joyce as a 10 with liscence to get onto the wings. The problem with the diamond is it creates a big hole in the middle of midfield. Personally its the one formation I don't really get.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also felt Askey was guilty of picking a system to suit players who did well against 10 men the week before but accommodate Gibbons. That meant 3 systems in 2 games. Top players can adjust, ours are on mid table league 2 wages for a reason. We play 433 week in week out and sometimes 442. Maybe in a cup game against higher league opposition but Macc Town away? If he wanted Gibbons in drop Atkinson, if he also wanted Atkinson drop Joyce. Managers have to make tough choices and from the off yesterday it felt he'd tried to pick a system he felt might suit the 11 players he wanted to pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, JRC said:

Also felt Askey was guilty of picking a system to suit players who did well against 10 men the week before but accommodate Gibbons. That meant 3 systems in 2 games. Top players can adjust, ours are on mid table league 2 wages for a reason. We play 433 week in week out and sometimes 442. Maybe in a cup game against higher league opposition but Macc Town away? If he wanted Gibbons in drop Atkinson, if he also wanted Atkinson drop Joyce. Managers have to make tough choices and from the off yesterday it felt he'd tried to pick a system he felt might suit the 11 players he wanted to pick.

Atkinson played most of his games at full back when he was at Mansfield so maybe he should start on Saturday at full back as Gibbons doesn’t deserve a place on Saturdays showing.

Just hope Askey has given his players a kick up the anus and not made excuses for such an inept performance.
Is he too nice to motivate them?

Maybe they need to be not paid and extra training on their day off to prove a point.

Donate their wages to the Macc players who well deserved their win.

Cant wait for Vassell and their cheating goalie to come to Vale for the return match.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JRC said:

Also felt Askey was guilty of picking a system to suit players who did well against 10 men the week before but accommodate Gibbons. That meant 3 systems in 2 games. Top players can adjust, ours are on mid table league 2 wages for a reason. We play 433 week in week out and sometimes 442. Maybe in a cup game against higher league opposition but Macc Town away? If he wanted Gibbons in drop Atkinson, if he also wanted Atkinson drop Joyce. Managers have to make tough choices and from the off yesterday it felt he'd tried to pick a system he felt might suit the 11 players he wanted to pick.

This is the contradiction in Askey's message.

Historically, he's had success with 433, yet has been quoted as saying you fit a system to the players.

He's probably right, but he seems to be falling between stools at the moment, so really needs to make his mind up to avoid confusion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Biddulph_PV said:

I’m not interested in a 15th place finish. For me it should be at least the play-offs. We have the squad to achieve this. By Askey’s own admission, all teams are much or a muchness in this league so there is absolutely no reason for us not to achieve this.

i wonder what Crewe’s expectations are now?? They’ve hardly flashed the cash and yet look at them.

Its taken crewe a couple of years to stabilise and then climb the table though,they gave their manager time despite the struggles

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DistantVale said:

Pathetic comment we are talking football ! 

We have much better owners than them.  They have been trying to get rid of their major shareholder for ages but he won't move.  That's talking football.  What's your problem??  We also have better fans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Biddulph_PV said:

I’m not saying bin Askey. That said I’m not doing cartwheels either. Yesterday’s result was definitely a massive step backwards. 

I don’t think it’s the result, it’s the manner of how we got there. No one has the right to beat anyone, you have to earn it. Still waiting to be convinced with Askey. Can’t say I have seen much high tempo football and yesterday and last week for that matter, was not a team to be proud of. Vale fans will forgive defeat if there is some endeavour present. Macc showed it in abundance. For me people will look at the defence and say we conceded 2 sloppy goals and then at the strikers because they had no shots. But the real issue is the centre of the park we are awful in the middle, to slow and flat footed. One burst of pace, or ball over the top from the opposition and you are past our midfield and in on goal. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Reporting Posts and other information

    Rules - This forum is moderated but the admin team don't read everything. Don't assume we'll spot rule breaking and alert us by reporting content. Logged in users can hover over the post and click the orange button. Guests can contact us here. If you don't get on with another user you can "ignore" them. Click this link, type in their username and click save. Please check with the admin team if you wish to sell/auction any items. We're happy to support good causes but check first.

    Use - This forum may not be suitable for all as it may contain words or phrases not considered appropriate for some. You are personally responsible and potentially liable for the contents of your posting and could face legal action should it contain content of a defamatory or other illegal nature. Every message posted leaves a traceable IP number. Please do not reveal any personal information about yourself or anyone else (for example: phone number, address or email address). This forum is not in any way affiliated with Port Vale FC. OVF reserve the right to edit, delete, move or close any thread for any reason. If you spot an offensive post please report it to the admin team (instructions are above).

    Adverts - This site occasionally a) has adverts and sponsored features about gambling b) accepts sponsored posts from third parties. If you require help and advice on gambling read these links: Information on protecting young people | Addiction help from gambleaware.co.uk
  • Friends of OVF

×
×
  • Create New...