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

Advert


Advert


Match Thread: Oldham Athletic v Port Vale


Doha

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, Biddulph_PV said:

I don’t think that is correct, because either way it amounts to the same thing,  expecting the ball to come into the box and having three CB’s rather than two to deal with it. If you play with conventional full backs, then surely you would expect these to work on the wingers to reduce the number of crosses coming in?? 

I'm no fan of the 3-5-2 system and have posted before that it is hard to argue against a system that's got us to 2nd in the table. However no one knows where we would be playing 4 at the back, top and 5 points clear or midtable!!!

Three at the back could have cost us the first goal but the last two goals were from set pieces and all the Vale players were back defending.

For their first goal their No2 skipped around Pett as though he wasn't there and put the ball in the box, there were only 3 Vale players in the box and 4 Oldham players. Cass was the wrong side of Piergianni and outside the left hand post, Martin was in no man's land and the other Vale defender in the middle of the Vale goal was Worrall, no Jones in sight. Header from Piergianni back across the goal over Martin and Worrall and a free header for their player into the net.

With 4 at the back the 2 center backs are usually true center backs who are "good" in the air and occupy more space across the box and hence potentially there may/would've been another Vale player (to head the ball away) between Worrall and the Oldham player who scored.

For me the game changed when Oldham moved Piergianni up front and Vale couldn't cope with his physicality and ability in the air.  There's gonna be ups and downs, we can't expect a "Cake walk".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Advert

6 hours ago, soothsayer said:

Personally, for his first full game back for a while I thought he did ok. He certainly wasn’t the reason we lost that game as rank poor defending was the reason for that. 
The trouble with Devante’s season is it has got going. First an a three game suspension, then a personal issue and then an injury. I really don’t think people should be writing the lad off as it’ll be another few games before he’s match sharp.

 

Good evening soothsayer,

One hopes that you are keeping well.

Jeff has seen many things in his time, especially when at sea. He's seen things that are good and things that are bad. What Jeff saw from Devante Rodney on Saturday he certainly wouldn't consider as "ok". 

The trouble with Devante's season for Jeff would be that he's been absolutely terrible.

All the very best,

Jeff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Jeff. said:

Good morning fellow Valiants,

One hopes you are all keeping well on what is a fine autumnal morning.

Jeff would just like to take the opportunity to ask the delightful people on this platform if anybody knows who is responsible for telling Devante Rodney that he is of a good enough standard to play professional football?

As the individual who made this evaluation needs to take a trip out to sea with Captain Jeff, where we will have a chat and reflect on the regrettable decisions we have made in life. Returning to shore as wiser folk.

All the very best,

Jeff.

It is nice to see you back with your words of wisdom Captain Jeff. May one enquire if Sting may also be reconnecting with us shortly?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Iron Curtain said:

Colchester are the only team on that list that could be classified as one of the worst teams in the league… and they RAVE about George and claim that without him they would have been dead and buried already.

He’s a good keeper. 

Of the other teams Tranmere, Orient, Swindon and Hartlepool are not “the worst teams in the league”… the contrary infact.

That leaves Salford… Tom King is someone a few on here were touting as a good signing for us and is a good keeper.

And that leaves Mansfield. I don’t know lots and lots about Bishop. But he is in good company in that list.


I get your point, but 7 clean sheets certainly shows Covolan is doing well (let’s not forget the meltdown about how poor our defence is on here tonight), total saves also backs that up for a team 3rd in the league.

You can attack Prevented goals for its loose interpretation… but it’s certainly not “absolutely meaningless”

 

Will agree to disagree on this. 

GK is so much more than shot stopping ( I still don't think Cov is good at this level at it). George tops the list is a decent shot stopper but is not a good all round keeper at this level.

Cov is still the weak link in our team and( nothing to do with Sat and I'm not suggesting he should be replaced by Stone) to imply he's one of the better GK's in the league using these stats is very misleading which is why I think they are absolutely meaningless.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, MBE said:

Will agree to disagree on this. 

GK is so much more than shot stopping ( I still don't think Cov is good at this level at it). George tops the list is a decent shot stopper but is not a good all round keeper at this level.

Cov is still the weak link in our team and( nothing to do with Sat and I'm not suggesting he should be replaced by Stone) to imply he's one of the better GK's in the league using these stats is very misleading which is why I think they are absolutely meaningless.

 

Those things outside of shot stopping are some of the areas Covolan is better than the average.

He’s decent. The stats back him up.

Football fans, vale fans in particular have a need for someone to target their frustrations at and in some people’s eyes he will never shake the sendings off. 

But yes, let’s agree to disagree because to call him the weak link, even before the narrative of lacking a commanding centre half, is very wrong in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Iron Curtain said:

Those things outside of shot stopping are some of the areas Covolan is better than the average.

He’s decent. The stats back him up.

Football fans, vale fans in particular have a need for someone to target their frustrations at and in some people’s eyes he will never shake the sendings off. 

But yes, let’s agree to disagree because to call him the weak link, even before the narrative of lacking a commanding centre half, is very wrong in my opinion.

My view of Cov as our weak link has nothing to do with one sending off or with our CB's inability to deal with high balls in the box.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, PV1973 said:

Loads of knicker wetting, over reactions and finger pointing going on after a defeat. Can’t wait til tuesdays game to get this hysteria out of the way. 

Hopefully we can recreate the form after our last shock injury time loss at Sutton!

UTV

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wasn't going to say anything as I think most of what has been said  is fair. Yesterday was dissapointing but we absolutely bossed the game until they tried the only thing avaiable to them - lump it into the box and hope. For me, if Devante had of put the chance away that he somehow skied, they would not have come back into it. Not that I blame him for the loss, its just that it was the easiest of the chances we had to put the game to bed.

My beef is with the ratings on the front page....

1159578009_Screenshot2021-11-21at21_10_27.png.26915614a5b514b1fdcff17f707204c5.png

 

Sorry, but that is harsh. 2 marks lower than any of the other starters - really? Jones and Cass as the people either side of the middle man and who are allowed to come forward get 5 and 6's... Where was Cass for the first? Didn't show much strength for the second either. Yet somehow its Martin who is to blame? Come on, stop scapegoating.

We let three goals in and unfortunately the third was another bizzarre own goal. He tried to do the right thing and instinctively throw himself at the ball to prevent the scuffed shot going towards the net. Right attitude, unlucky..  I thought he did a decent job for someone coming back into the side.

I love our sprit, I love that we are playing football. The worst team got away with it yesterday. Good luck to them. They need it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, NellyTheValiant said:

And he wins a good number of headers.  I'd be disappointed if he was subbed on Saturday if he wasn't injured, he had a decent game and we lost a bit of our shape and press when he went off.

He got booked. Maybe Clarke took him off to save the ref watching him for another foul?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, PV1973 said:

I don’t see what Walker has done to justify being touted as coming to the side in place of garrity? Other than players seem to get better in some fans eyes by not playing. 

I'd tend to agree with that, Walker will need time to get up to speed anyway.  I think for him it's unfortunate that Pett has been excellent in the position that seems to suit Walker best.  If you were looking to bring Walker on then it's a complete change around of the midfield.  Garrity's the played pulled most games and he's replaced with the "very frustrated" Taylor.

 

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


Advert



×
×
  • Create New...