I sometimes wonder if we are where we are because of DM or in spite of him. Yesterday was a prime example, his subs had a big impact but it just confirms to me his starting XI was wrong. If Conor was injured, why was Heneghan not on for some height? It would certainly have helped on set pieces. 
He also had 4 full/wingbacks in the team and brought another one on - all a little bizarre to me. 
At least Stockley looked back to his best and won all his headers. 

Edited January 19, 20251 yr by soothsayer

7 hours ago, Granville said:

Stockley and Tolaj should start. Hackford and Umolu off the bench. Paton hasn't scored in open play in the league. I'm not sure why people are so keen on him. If he wasn't a character no one would be bothered. 

He’s not been given a fair chance either. Played one 90 mins all season it’s really bad treatment. I agree Stockley & Tolaj then for me it should be Paton & one of the two loanees not both. Hackford is nowhere the footballer Ruari is. Yes he has pace but that’s all he does have. Madness I’m supporting Dundee now on 😂

DM on the way to another Manager of the month lol 🙂

7 hours ago, Family Stand Terrier said:

I get the disappointment with the 1st half, but I saw enough moments that I knew we could go on to win it 2nd half.

The starting 11 caused a stir, but it wasn't rocket science to figure out what Moore was trying to do. He wanted to keep the 11 / formation as close to unchanged from Doncaster as he could. Hall being injured scuppered that. As a knock on effect he list that left sided player to bring balance to the back 3, so brought Hart in. No way Moore could predict that performance from Hart. 

I just felt though we seemed a bit lethargic, but when we pressed well with urgency and aggression they couldn't live with us, and with a bit more luck and quality could have been leading at half time.

2nd half we played that way throughout. Smith, brilliant. Clarke and John down the right, brilliant. Headley, assist and winning goal, brilliant. Stockley, brilliant when he came on. Sang, brilliant, so much energy and enthusiasm. 

Thoroughly deserved win. And a mention for the atmosphere. Shame about the jeering of Hart, but otherwise, that was the best I've heard Vale Park for a long time. Even before the 2nd equaliser we were getting behind the team because you could see they were really trying and creating chances. After the equaliser and the winner the noise sounded brilliant from the Lorne St.

I was in the Railway Stand, the booing at every missed placed pass,was embarrassing in the first half, the second half just goes to show what the players can do, when we all play our part, at times some of us are as bad as the lardies down the road

 

36 minutes ago, SFBT said:

DM on the way to another Manager of the month lol 🙂

We're still undefeated in January! 

15 hours ago, Dol Boy said:

That is such wishful thinking! 

You missed the irony in my comment 😆 

Whichever way you look at things we have on the bench players who can change the game! That has not been the case for sometime! We are assembling a decent squad a few tweaks here and there and who knows! 

9 hours ago, Granville said:

Stockley and Tolaj should start. Hackford and Umolu off the bench. Paton hasn't scored in open play in the league. I'm not sure why people are so keen on him. If he wasn't a character no one would be bothered. 

Not been given a chance always stuck on the wing or given 5 minutes off the bench. He is our player that the club have spent a fair bit of cash on. He  should be getting a chance ahead of Hackford 

1 hour ago, soothsayer said:

I sometimes wonder if we are where we are because of DM or in spite of him. Yesterday was a prime example, his subs had a big impact but it just confirms to me his starting XI was wrong. If Conor was injured, why was Heneghan not on for some height? It would certainly have helped on set pieces. 
He also had 4 full/wingbacks in the team and brought another one on - all a little bizarre to me. 
At least Stockley looked back to his best and won all his headers. 

Exactly this for me. That win was definitely in spite of the manager 

I've been leaning Moore out for a few weeks, but 'if we lose it's on him, when we win it's in spite of him' is proper mental gymnastics lads.

1 hour ago, soothsayer said:

I sometimes wonder if we are where we are because of DM or in spite of him. Yesterday was a prime example, his subs had a big impact but it just confirms to me his starting XI was wrong. If Conor was injured, why was Heneghan not on for some height? It would certainly have helped on set pieces. 
He also had 4 full/wingbacks in the team and brought another one on - all a little bizarre to me. 
At least Stockley looked back to his best and won all his headers. 

Heneghan wasn't on because he wanted a balanced back 3, with Hart on the left. Makes complete sense. Height had nothing to do with either goal conceded, the first was flicked over Hart at the back post, Heneghan wouldn't have been there, the 2nd was purely down to Hart being weak, falling over and the lad having a free header around waist height.

The problems we faced 1st half yesterday were completely unforeseeable. Moore tried to stick to a winning team as close as possible, which we're all crying out for. Harsh on Heneghan, but his position was taken by Smith, who had a great game. Or he could have put Smith on the right of the back 3...but would anyone say he got the right hand side wrong? John and Clarke were immense. 

Unfortunately some people's minds are made up re Moore. The criticism I've seen of him so far are ridiculously lazy. Cliches, like tinker man, square pegs round holes etc....but no one can back the criticism up with anything of any substance. The changes he made are completely logical if you give it any more than a seconds thought. Square pegs (from a comment I saw on X), who played out of position yesterday in the starting 11? And then to further show how ridiculous that comment is, Sang came on at left side of centre half and was absolutely immense. That's about as squarer peg as you're likely to see.

The only criticism I could throw at Moore would just be how the team seemed so lethargic 1st half, and that's mainly on the players, he wouldn't have told them to play that way. At the same time, the ref played a big part in that. Any time we got close to them, they fell over and he fell for it. So you could say, Moore didn't quite get the best out of them, but that's not all on him. We showed small glimpses in the 1st half of how dangerous we could be when we were aggressive and pressed them hard. 

So that's where you have to give Moore credit, he wasn't standing there watching the game pass us by. He made 3 brilliant changes of personnel that changed the game. Great management. One of our heroes Clarke had a great plan B. But for that to be evident, plan A has to have gone wrong.

Yesterday was a really entertaining game, we had 21 shots, 10 on target. Won, coming from behind for the first time this season. Scored 3 goals. A great day...yet the first thing people think of is, get on the manager's back with lazy ill thought out criticism. Who'd be a football manager eh. About as clear as it gets that you can never win with some people.

Edited January 19, 20251 yr by Family Stand Terrier

1 hour ago, soothsayer said:

I sometimes wonder if we are where we are because of DM or in spite of him. Yesterday was a prime example, his subs had a big impact but it just confirms to me his starting XI was wrong. If Conor was injured, why was Heneghan not on for some height? It would certainly have helped on set pieces. 
He also had 4 full/wingbacks in the team and brought another one on - all a little bizarre to me. 
At least Stockley looked back to his best and won all his headers. 

Hart is an obvious choice to play on the left of the back 3 as he’s naturally left footed. If he played Heneghan in the centre that pushes Smudge to the right.  Maybe he wanted to play John on the right to get him to carry the ball forward with Clark (we all know Smith isn’t the best at this).

So I’m going to give him the benefit of the doubt and say he wanted the wing backs and the 2 outside centre half’s to be better on the ball to carry the game forward. With Lowe and Croasdale sitting when those players pushed on. It might not have panned out like that but I think he was maybe being proactive in those selections at the back. 
 

Having said that I thought John was found out defensively, especially first half where I thought he was poor. So we’ve sacrificed being more defensive in that position to put in someone who can be decent on the ball going forward. 

Edited January 19, 20251 yr by PV1973

Folk can say what they like. It’s 3 points.

Headley looks a class above L2 from what I’ve seen of him. Solid defensively, finds a positive pass, strong, quick and his crosses from corners and open play are causing chaos. I was thinking this before he pops up with the winner! Looks like a fantastic signing on a 2.5 year deal! 

10 hours ago, MBE said:

Personally I don’t mind the formation but feel we lack a ball carrier with pace to do it well.

When Byers and Garrity played as the central midfield pair 343 it looked OK.

That’s why I feel we need a Benecio replacement in the transfer window as a plan b or c.

 

 

That formation would be fine with Hall and Henneghan replacing John and Hart. We lacked height in defence and both struggled in their role. Clark and Headley did really well playing where they were yesterday and I’m sure both John and Hart would have done better had they been playing in those positions but neither are LCB or RCB.