Boro player ratings (4 Viewers)

[edgy]

Thought Majeika did alright in limited time.

 

---

[duffer]

According to the Boro fans, we are the second coming of Wimbledon

Frankly, I couldn't care less what they think. And I'd much rather play direct and pressure teams than fiddle around with ten passes across the back whilst hoping the opposition doze off.

There's more than one way to play football, and the key to winning is to do what the opposition struggle against.

The only time we looked stressed was when we dropped back and invited them on, other than that, we bossed the game.

Credit where it's due, Boro are a good footballing side, and I wish them well - but it's sour grapes to complain that you were beaten because the opposition didn't play in the style you wanted. If you want points for artistic interpretation, try figure skating.

 

[Gibbo]

Farming laugh reacts. Fair play.

Player ratings are in direct relation to the result at the end, no matter what the performance over 90 minutes. We were a Targett's errant arm and a centimeter on Sarmiento's shot away from 2-2 . Those ratings are fair for 90 minutes - not just how ebullient and relieved you felt when the final whistle blew

After the first 20, which we dominated, Boro were the better team. We resorted to endless hoofball which Boro repeatedly collected and brought back. Our lucky break (again) was that Conway is crap.

Our strategy was clearly based on high energy, physical intimidation which is difficult to sustain for 90 minutes.

 

[Grendel]

Player ratings are in direct relation to the result at the end, no matter what the performance over 90 minutes. We were a Targett's errant arm and a centimeter on Sarmiento's shot away from 2-2 . Those ratings are fair for 90 minutes - not just how ebullient and relieved you felt when the final whistle blew

After the first 20, which we dominated, Boro were the better team. We resorted to endless hoofball which Boro repeatedly collected and brought back. Our lucky break (again) was that Conway is crap.

Our strategy was clearly based on high energy, physical intimidation which is difficult to sustain for 90 minutes.

They weren’t really in the game in the first half at all

 

[Deity]

This was smash and grab. We were actually a bit lucky. Could easily have lost 3-1. Lots of effort but lacking in skill particularly to keep possession.

8's for Haji, Saka, Thomas
7's for the rest except
6 for MVE, Grimes

Clueless. You make the sky blue fancast look insightful.

 

[Shannerz]

After the first 20, which we dominated, Boro were the better team. We resorted to endless hoofball which Boro repeatedly collected and brought back. Our lucky break (again) was that Conway is crap.

We completely dominated the first half.

Second half, they were only the better team if you take the better team as being the one that dominates possession. That was a deliberate ploy; as you rightly state, the high intensity and aggression of the first half was not sustainable, hence the deliberate tactic of sitting in a lower block and hitting them on the break. A tactic that played dividends.

Your determination to see negatives in even the most tactically astute and impressive of victories is really, really boring.

Very few victories are gained without jeopardy, and in this game, we were playing an extremely good team. Your posts suggest you don't really understand that.