Chilvers performance

[Howjy04]

Regardless of all our differing opinions on McDonald, Chilvers, McCombe and Davis, the bottom-line is none of them are really good enough. The signing of purse may help, but we still lack mobility and pace in the centre-half positions no matter what the pairing is.

 

I think the only one to exclude from 'not really good enough' is Davis IMO.Only a small improvement is needed and if he gets games he will improve.The others are not good enough as you say.Purse and Davis at the back for me,the rest can go to non- league.

[Vital Spark]

I think the only one to exclude from 'not really good enough' is Davis IMO.Only a small improvement is needed and if he gets games he will improve.The others are not good enough as you say.Purse and Davis at the back for me,the rest can go to non- league.

 

Davis is a liability, by making silly decsions and silly passes. Hes old enough now to have eliminated these from his game but he doesn't seem to learn from his mistakes. If he kept things simple instead of trying the Hollywood passes and moves, then he might make a decent player, but hes got a long way to go before he could be considered a starter.

 

If we was going to make it, he would have by now.

[Bernieseven]

Chilvers is not good enough

[Valiant62]

I thought Chilvers had another poor game last night,he was at fault for the first goal by bad defending

 

I can't find video on line just now, but from last night I was sure it was Purse who was "marking" Midson for their first. I also think the penalty was harsh in the extreme.

[CambridgeDon]

IMO The one who certainly didn't deserve his wages last night, was Lee Hughes--for most of the time he was on the park, he looked more like a player from a pub team than a professional footballer--then he missed an absolute sitter after being beautifully set-up by Myrie-Williams. I'm not surprised Mickey subbed him!

 

With a bit of luck, after that display, Hughes can become our super sub. The one player we missed last night to link the midfield and attack was Dodds, though Williamson too would have done a better job than Hughes who seemed to have no idea about dropping back to help in midfield and joining up the play.

 

Tactically, the choice is we either play two wingers and one up front, with the second forward dropping deep into the hole to link the play, or one winger and two out and out forwards with three in midfield.

 

Last night we were effectively playing 4-2-4 and better teams than Wimbledon will exploit it to the full.

[sheffield61]

You can't find a car in Sheffield:doh: so no chance with needles:laugh:

 

Having Boom back is the key I think. Not much between chilvers n clayt . Good point about Davis

OI! Leave Sheffield out of it!...... lol

[born_late58]

I thought Chilvers had another poor game last night,he was at fault for the first goal by bad defending and then conceded the penalty I thought he looked nervous all of the game,I can't for the life of me understand Mickey letting Clayton MacDonald out on loan when I think he's far better than Chilvers,who at best is a Conference player hence him playing for Telford.

 

Agree with all that, very poor performance again from Chilvers.

[man in the pub]

If we had a fully fit squad, what would everyones back 4 be?

 

Mine would be Yates, Boom, Purse, Jones

 

totally agree, felt yates very unlucky to be left out and is the better option on that side .Feel Duffy is cruelly exposed for pace by anyone who can break into half a canter. Chilvers is just stop gap till boom is back but feel he is the better option to mcdonald.

[man in the pub]

I can't find video on line just now, but from last night I was sure it was Purse who was "marking" Midson for their first. I also think the penalty was harsh in the extreme.

 

totally agree in the pub we all thought a very harsh decision, suprised on the radio when mickey said it was the right decision to give it.Thought it was so wrong was half expecting the ref to give us one in the second half to even it up.

[tsproston]

Vincent was partly to blame for their first goal jones was marking 2 players.

[cheshirevaliant]

If we was going to make it, he would have by now.

 

He's not 20 until November!

[CJ Valiant]

Davis is a liability, by making silly decsions and silly passes. Hes old enough now to have eliminated these from his game but he doesn't seem to learn from his mistakes. If he kept things simple instead of trying the Hollywood passes and moves, then he might make a decent player, but hes got a long way to go before he could be considered a starter.

 

If we was going to make it, he would have by now.

 

That is the most ridiculous post ever! The lad is still young and has bags of potential and will only get better with games.

 

Footballs a funny old game and full of mixed opinions. Chilvers is not good enough IMO.

 

Ideal back 4 would be Duffy, McCombe, Purse and Jones. With Davis to come in for boom boom whilst he's out injured.

[big ee]

Why not just give some credit to Wimbledon for their first goal. It was a slick move and a decent finish through Purse's legs.

 

The second was a harsh penalty and Chilvers actually had his shirt pulled.

 

For me Jones should have defended better and looked off the pace for the first part of the game. He did grow into the game and overall played well and scored a screamer.

 

I suppose it's alot easier to have some scapegoats and it appears Chilvers and Vincent appear to be those players.

 

All I can say is thank god we have MA picking the team and not some of you lot.

[Timothius]

i think davis would learn a lot from playing next to purse, like Paynter did with Angell. I see little point in investing in youth if Adams wont give it a cgance. Back end of last season and when he came on at Burton, I thought Davis was good.

[Bycarsbill]

With a bit of luck, after that display, Hughes can become our super sub. The one player we missed last night to link the midfield and attack was Dodds, though Williamson too would have done a better job than Hughes who seemed to have no idea about dropping back to help in midfield and joining up the play.

 

Tactically, the choice is we either play two wingers and one up front, with the second forward dropping deep into the hole to link the play, or one winger and two out and out forwards with three in midfield.

 

Last night we were effectively playing 4-2-4 and better teams than Wimbledon will exploit it to the full.

 

I agree totally.