Cheltenham T (H) match thread 28th Oct

[Alfie1962]

7 hours ago, Granville said:

A few weeks ago we were lauding Ripley's capacity to play put from the back, but he had Smith on the right, Jones in the middle and Iacovitti on the left. Smith is playing left centre back now because Iacovitti and Jones are both injured, Balmer arguably hasn't settled and is also now injured and Cass is now the only centre half we have who looks comfortable with the ball to his feet which is why Ripley is going long. Its why Ojo is dropping deeper to get the ball.

I don't think Crosby is picking Smith there out of choice, he's doing it because his two first choice left sided centre backs are injured and he is capable, rather than outstanding. 

Prior to getting injured Balmer was our best defender by a mile in my opinion

[Vtid]

16 minutes ago, Alfie1962 said:

Prior to getting injured Balmer was our best defender by a mile in my opinion

The yak for me, Balmer done alright tho after a shaky start he was starting to come really good 👍🏻 

[Warren]

9 hours ago, philpvfc said:

Do you think any manager out there, certainly one who’d come to the Vale will get much better out of the starting 11 that started against Cheltenham?.

I thought the team Inc subs that played Cheltenham was a very useful L1 side on paper. Then I thought it's whole tactics were barking mad. That includes playing out from the back and kicking long at the same time. This is down to Crosby. What the .... is he telling them to do. The Peterborough game had more farce in it including their goal for which Crosby is less culpable. But it's still him that thinks it's a great idea for Ojo to shoot from 30-40 yards multiple times. It's still him that thinks the team's best playmaker is Ripley. He either has no idea how to coach attacking or, he does, but has completely lost the plot at the moment in some football laboratory.

There is a difference here. When someone like Aspin was playing kick it long and high, it was because our squad was bottom end of L2. The players we had out last week were perfectly capable of beating Cheltenham and Peterborough. But we didn't. Crosby is a big part of the reason we didn't. 

Mega worried about what will happen this week results wise.

[Stockleys_socks]

13 minutes ago, Warren said:

I thought the team Inc subs that played Cheltenham was a very useful L1 side on paper. Then I thought it's whole tactics were barking mad. That includes playing out from the back and kicking long at the same time. This is down to Crosby. What the .... is he telling them to do. The Peterborough game had more farce in it including their goal for which Crosby is less culpable. But it's still him that thinks it's a great idea for Ojo to shoot from 30-40 yards multiple times. It's still him that thinks the team's best playmaker is Ripley. He either has no idea how to coach attacking or, he does, but has completely lost the plot at the moment in some football laboratory.

There is a difference here. When someone like Aspin was playing kick it long and high, it was because our squad was bottom end of L2. The players we had out last week were perfectly capable of beating Cheltenham and Peterborough. But we didn't. Crosby is a big part of the reason we didn't. 

Mega worried about what will happen this week results wise.

Got to give Cheltenham & Clarke a bit of credit. Its clear what the playing about from the back is supposed to achieve. On Tuesday Peterborough pressed, which stretches the play and provides opportunities for passing through midfield. However, Cheltenham decided not to press, they let our defenders have the ball, which meant all our midfield and strikers are marked and the defenders have no one to pass to hence why Ripley had no choice but to launch it.

Unfortunately, we didn't seem to know what to do to counteract it. Could it be that there was no direction from the bench or was it that the players were just too static and not able/willing to make intelligent runs to lose their markers? 

 

[philpvfc]

1 hour ago, Warren said:

I thought the team Inc subs that played Cheltenham was a very useful L1 side on paper. Then I thought it's whole tactics were barking mad. That includes playing out from the back and kicking long at the same time. This is down to Crosby. What the .... is he telling them to do. The Peterborough game had more farce in it including their goal for which Crosby is less culpable. But it's still him that thinks it's a great idea for Ojo to shoot from 30-40 yards multiple times. It's still him that thinks the team's best playmaker is Ripley. He either has no idea how to coach attacking or, he does, but has completely lost the plot at the moment in some football laboratory.

There is a difference here. When someone like Aspin was playing kick it long and high, it was because our squad was bottom end of L2. The players we had out last week were perfectly capable of beating Cheltenham and Peterborough. But we didn't. Crosby is a big part of the reason we didn't. 

Mega worried about what will happen this week results wise.

I disagree that the team on Saturday are a useful div 1 team.

Smith…..very good league 1 player but not at LCB

Debra….improving but not up to standard yet

Cass……not good enough

Plant…..League 1 standard when played in the right position but he wasnt

Sang…odd decent game but as a whole not consistent enough this season to show he is good enough

Devine…will be one day but still developing 

Thomas…same as Devine

Loft….Rovers fans didn’t think he’s good enough and not seen anything to suggest otherwise.

Do you really think the above are good enough (playing in the positions they had to play in)?
That team is always going to struggle to stay up - we do have players who didn’t play because of injuries who are plenty good enough but while they are out we will continue to fall down the table and I don’t think by replacing Crosby it will make any difference.

[valefan16]

4 minutes ago, philpvfc said:

I disagree that the team on Saturday are a useful div 1 team.

Smith…..very good league 1 player but not at LCB

Debra….improving but not up to standard yet

Cass……not good enough

Plant…..League 1 standard when played in the right position but he wasnt

Sang…odd decent game but as a whole not consistent enough this season to show he is good enough

Devine…will be one day but still developing 

Thomas…same as Devine

Loft….Rovers fans didn’t think he’s good enough and not seen anything to suggest otherwise.

Do you really think the above are good enough (playing in the positions they had to play in)?
That team is always going to struggle to stay up - we do have players who didn’t play because of injuries who are plenty good enough but while they are out we will continue to fall down the table and I don’t think by replacing Crosby it will make any difference.

That XI on Saturday plus subs should of been enough to beat Cheltenham who had been largely the whipping boys, especially at home.

 

[NorthwoodValiant]

1 hour ago, Vtid said:

The yak for me, Balmer done alright tho after a shaky start he was starting to come really good 👍🏻 

I actually didn't rave about Yak whilst he was playing, but we haven't won a game since he has been out, he went off injured in the Burton game.

So results speak for themselves?

[Stockleys_socks]

19 minutes ago, philpvfc said:

I disagree that the team on Saturday are a useful div 1 team.

Smith…..very good league 1 player but not at LCB

Debra….improving but not up to standard yet

Cass……not good enough

Plant…..League 1 standard when played in the right position but he wasnt

Sang…odd decent game but as a whole not consistent enough this season to show he is good enough

Devine…will be one day but still developing 

Thomas…same as Devine

Loft….Rovers fans didn’t think he’s good enough and not seen anything to suggest otherwise.

Do you really think the above are good enough (playing in the positions they had to play in)?
That team is always going to struggle to stay up - we do have players who didn’t play because of injuries who are plenty good enough but while they are out we will continue to fall down the table and I don’t think by replacing Crosby it will make any difference.

What is plant's position? Who should he be in the side ahead off if he doesnt play LWB?

Loft - thats the problem for him; so many fans formed an opinion before he had kicked a ball on the basis of what Bristol Rovers fans said. He's not even played a full game yet, still building up his fitness. Wilson takes 6-7 games to get up to speed and the sun shines out of his behind despite being ineffective. Yes, he has a lot to prove based on his performances so far but I think that there's a potential number 9 in there if he can build his confidence.

[Vtid]

22 minutes ago, NorthwoodValiant said:

I actually didn't rave about Yak whilst he was playing, but we haven't won a game since he has been out, he went off injured in the Burton game.

So results speak for themselves?

Proper leader, took him a few games to get used to things i feel but once he did he made a massive difference as you've said since he's been out we've been a shambles. Big unit, good in both boxes, wears his heart on his sleeve, big communicator, likes to get forward, scores goals & has goals wrongly disallowed. So much to like about the yak. Huge miss right now 

[Vtid]

49 minutes ago, Stockleys_socks said:

What is plant's position? Who should he be in the side ahead off if he doesnt play LWB?

Loft - thats the problem for him; so many fans formed an opinion before he had kicked a ball on the basis of what Bristol Rovers fans said. He's not even played a full game yet, still building up his fitness. Wilson takes 6-7 games to get up to speed and the sun shines out of his behind despite being ineffective. Yes, he has a lot to prove based on his performances so far but I think that there's a potential number 9 in there if he can build his confidence.

Hes a number 10 or wide of a front three which ever way we're set up, like you say it's who does he replace when he's not being played at lwb. Would be good off the bench with his pace if he wasn't starting 

[Stockleys_socks]

42 minutes ago, Vtid said:

Hes a number 10 or wide of a front three which ever way we're set up, like you say it's who does he replace when he's not being played at lwb. Would be good off the bench with his pace if he wasn't starting 

But I'm not sure he's that quick?

[Osh]

12 hours ago, Mellor! said:

I'd give him until Saturday myself Osh. After yesterday, if we're out of both cups on Saturday, then the only thing we'll have to look forward to is a relegation battle. I'm not sure going into that with a rookie (and in my opinion naive) manager is the best course.

Think about that a bit further.  We have a limited squad, playing in four competitions, Sat/Tue/Sta/Tue repeat.  That squad has already been depleted by at least a third and you still want AC to pull a rabbit out of a hat not once but three times, without the backup to do it.

So, we're saying produce the results or your out, while all the time kicking the chair from under him.  

For me the league is THE most important thing.  Yes, cup runs are nice, but we HAVE to focus on the league and the league ONLY.  I honestly don't care if we go out of the EFL and Carabou cups.; would be nice to get through to the next round of the FA Cup - BUT, if it cost us any more injuries, i'd say no.

[Osh]

11 hours ago, Granville said:

A few weeks ago we were lauding Ripley's capacity to play put from the back, but he had Smith on the right, Jones in the middle and Iacovitti on the left. Smith is playing left centre back now because Iacovitti and Jones are both injured, Balmer arguably hasn't settled and is also now injured and Cass is now the only centre half we have who looks comfortable with the ball to his feet which is why Ripley is going long. Its why Ojo is dropping deeper to get the ball.

I don't think Crosby is picking Smith there out of choice, he's doing it because his two first choice left sided centre backs are injured and he is capable, rather than outstanding. 

Granville you've hit the nail on the head.  So, if we get rid of AC and bring in someone else, that person is only going to have the same problem.  

[Vtid]

57 minutes ago, Stockleys_socks said:

But I'm not sure he's that quick?

He's not slow either is he, certainly not rapid but he's direct & will get at their defence 

[NorthwoodValiant]

4 minutes ago, Vtid said:

He's not slow either is he, certainly not rapid but he's direct & will get at their defence 

If we are talking about Plant he is indeed very quick, not sure where the slow has come from here