CWR - Robins (1 Viewer)

[Mucca Mad Boys]

First time that I will admit this, but Robins fucked up tonight, he is just as much to blame as our shambolic defending was. Their players knew Haynes was our weak link tonight and kept sending this ball down his direction, which means Crowley done his homework, whereas Robins clearly never.

They kept targeting Haynes, yet, if you look at their first three goals, McDonald loses a header every time:

— first goal, McDonald gets beat to the ball, it’s nodded down to Rhead
— second goal, their player flicks it on to Palmer, who absolutely skins Grimmer for an easy finish. McDonald lost that aerial battle.
— thirdly, McDonald again losses the header, which every defender missed on its way to the far post, Grimmer’s man scores. He was equally lost at sea.

They had a tactic to utilise high balls to both full backs, Grimmer was beaten by Palmer all day for the high ball. McDonald was bullied and exposed, and if you rewatch all the goals, targeting Haynes doesn’t come close to identifying the real issue. Stokes wouldn’t have made a difference.

 

[ccfcway]

First time that I will admit this, but Robins fucked up tonight, he is just as much to blame as our shambolic defending was. Their players knew Haynes was our weak link tonight and kept sending this ball down his direction, which means Crowley done his homework, whereas Robins clearly never.

Grimmer was our weak link last night

 

[Otis]

Grimmer was our weak link last night

He certainly was one of them. Him and McDonald especially.

 

[skybluepm2]

Its not about judt reacing playoffs. We dont want to judt.make numbers

We need this loss to be brst thing that eve rhsppened to us. Give us that hesrt a d steel required to win thr plsyoffs

We need to see change. And fast

Lob for burge
Davies for rod possibly
Stokes for Haynes
Reid for shipley or bayliss

4 possible changes fir sat. Burge and haynes must be dropped

Agree with all of that. The top 3 should’ve been implemented and maintained/persevered with, weeks ago.

 

[covcity4life]

Agree with all of that. The top 3 should’ve been implemented and maintained/persevered with, weeks ago.

woke up this morning and feel it more than ever, yesterday was good for us in the long run

had that happened in playoffs it would be season over

now we have time to fix it beforehand, no excuses, lets see if we really are good enough to get promoted.

 

[Greggs]

woke up this morning and feel it more than ever, yesterday was good for us in the long run

had that happened in playoffs it would be season over

now we have time to fix it beforehand, no excuses, lets see if we really are good enough to get promoted.

Are you joking? The long run....we've been on the long run for 30 years!!

 

[Sbarcher]

Can't understand why we didn't man-mark the big fella. We let him roam and bully the smaller weaker full backs and wander all over the pitch. He always came short into midfield to win keeper kick outs, normally against Doyle. We should have been up his arse from minute 1. Mind you, not too sure who we could have stuck on him!

 

[Londonccfcfan]

I'd prefer he says what he is going to do about it.

To show his disgrace he put Ponticelli on left midfield to change the game.

There will be 3 changes for Saturday.

Burge, haynes and Rod ...out.

 

[Nick]

Can't understand why we didn't man-mark the big fella. We let him roam and bully the smaller weaker full backs and wander all over the pitch. He always came short into midfield to win keeper kick outs, normally against Doyle. We should have been up his arse from minute 1. Mind you, not too sure who we could have stuck on him!

Said it at the time, we were making him look like Messi the way he could stroll about.

He would walk over to Haynes and they would put the ball there.

Even on throws we had 1 player on him most of the time, rather than 1 behind and 1 in front.

 

[covcity4life]

i remember dke challenging akinfenwa and doing enoguh to put him off at least

rhead looked like he was playing in park with his kids

 

[Nick]

i remember dke challenging akinfenwa and doing enoguh to put him off at least

rhead looked like he was playing in park with his kids

I think Stokes also got stuck in and gave him a bit of shit when he got mouthy too?

 

[clint van damme]

Can't understand why we didn't man-mark the big fella. We let him roam and bully the smaller weaker full backs and wander all over the pitch. He always came short into midfield to win keeper kick outs, normally against Doyle. We should have been up his arse from minute 1. Mind you, not too sure who we could have stuck on him!

Davies.

 

[covcity4life]

I think Stokes also got stuck in and gave him a bit of shit when he got mouthy too?

we need stokes back

i understood why he was dropped as he did lose form but hes a big lad who also gets forward, haynes has nothing over him

 

[torchomatic]

I know he's made tactical errors but it was refreshing to hear Robins have a go at the defence. He is one of those managers who obviously does his ticking off in private, but like most of us he has had enough and vented his spleen on the radio. Good to hear. And good to hear him naming names for once. It almost took my mind of the detour I had to take because the A46 was closed yet again.

 

[oucho]

we need stokes back

i understood why he was dropped as he did lose form but hes a big lad who also gets forward, haynes has nothing over him

Agreed. Grimmer (despite 2 errors last night leading to goals), Willis, Davies, Stokes for me on Sat.

 

[covcity4life]

Agreed. Grimmer (despite 2 errors last night leading to goals), Willis, Davies, Stokes for me on Sat.

and sort out if your gonna play 442 or 433

if 442 it has to be for me
jch------ponticelli
reid---------------------mcnulty
doyle kelly

if 433

reid jch mculty
shipley doyle bayliss

 

[clint van damme]

and sort out if your gonna play 442 or 433

if 442 it has to be for me
jch------ponticelli
reid---------------------mcnulty
doyle kelly

if 433

reid jch mculty
shipley doyle bayliss

you want to play McNulty out wide and replace him up front with Ponticelli?

 

[oucho]

and sort out if your gonna play 442 or 433

if 442 it has to be for me
jch------ponticelli
reid---------------------mcnulty
doyle kelly

if 433

reid jch mculty
shipley doyle bayliss

McNulty is best when playing up front, don't get why people think he should play wide.....

 

[Nick]

I'd rather put Biamou Right mid than McNulty.

 

[covcity4life]

McNulty is best when playing up front, don't get why people think he should play wide.....

i agree, but we dont have a right winger and i think he can best do that job playing like an inside forward like hazard robben etc,cutting in long range shots and the like

he is our best striker and much better down the middle but if hes a 9/10 striker and a 6/10 out wide its better overall than ponticelli who is 8/10 striker and 4/10 out wide if you get what i mean

also even last night mcnulty got the ball in wide positions quite a bit so i am not sure it would be a dramatic change as some think but take your point

biamou could be worth a possible go out wide as he runs at defenders sometimes

 

[Otis]

woke up this morning and feel it more than ever, yesterday was good for us in the long run

had that happened in playoffs it would be season over

now we have time to fix it beforehand, no excuses, lets see if we really are good enough to get promoted.

Yep.

Same way we fixed it after Yeovil. Do get what you are saying though. Better now than in the play-offs. Knowing the City though, we'll probably get it in the play-offs too.

 

[Otis]

Very galling to also notice that Yeovil haven't won a single game since they played us.

 

[oucho]

i agree, but we dont have a right winger and i think he can best do that job playing like an inside forward like hazard robben etc,cutting in long range shots and the like

he is our best striker and much better down the middle but if hes a 9/10 striker and a 6/10 out wide its better overall than ponticelli who is 8/10 striker and 4/10 out wide if you get what i mean

also even last night mcnulty got the ball in wide positions quite a bit so i am not sure it would be a dramatic change as some think but take your point

biamou could be worth a possible go out wide as he runs at defenders sometimes

No, because then you are compromising a strength to make up for a weakness. Put your best players in their best positions and let the rest fit in where they can.

 

[covcity4life]

No, because then you are compromising a strength to make up for a weakness. Put your best players in their best positions and let the rest fit in where they can.

i am just thinking out loud oucho

mcnulty upfront makes sense to all of course

 

[Otis]

i am just thinking out loud oucho

mcnulty upfront makes sense to all of course

Not to all obviously.

 

[covcity4life]

Not to all obviously.

what r u talking about

i am thinking of overall team shape without a right winger, any other scenario mcnulty be upfront in ideal world.

it could work with mcnult yupfront and biamou out wide possibly. just dont want ponticelli there

 

[Otis]

what r u talking about

i am thinking of overall team shape without a right winger, any other scenario mcnulty be upfront in ideal world.

it could work with mcnult yupfront and biamou out wide possibly. just dont want ponticelli there

I am talking about a certain Mr. Robins. He seems to think it is fine to play McNulty wide.

 

[Earlsdon_Skyblue1]

Very galling to also notice that Yeovil haven't won a single game since they played us.

I warned this would happen. Bunch of cabbages.

 

[Otis]

I warned this would happen. Bunch of cabbages.

We made them look like a top of the table side that day.

 

[oucho]

Very galling to also notice that Yeovil haven't won a single game since they played us.

Argh who cares, we don't support Yeovil. Their giving us a hiding was galling, but I couldn't give a damn how they get on in their other games.

 

[clint van damme]

Argh who cares, we don't support Yeovil. Their giving us a hiding was galling, but I couldn't give a damn how they get on in their other games.

but it's relevant. If they'd gone on to put 4 or 5 past teams since then it makes our result not seem so bad. The fact they haven't won since makes it an even worse result.

 

[oucho]

but it's relevant. If they'd gone on to put 4 or 5 past teams since then it makes our result not seem so bad. The fact they haven't won since makes it an even worse result.

I don't agree - 6-2 at home is a horrendous result for us regardless of Yeovil's subsequent form.

 

[stupot07]

I don't agree - 6-2 at home is a horrendous result for us regardless of Yeovil's subsequent form.

100% Correct.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[clint van damme]

I don't agree - 6-2 at home is a horrendous result for us regardless of Yeovil's subsequent form.

No ones saying it's not an horrendous result. But their subsequent form has made it all the more horrendous.
Losing to Accrington at home was a bad result but their subsequent form make it a bit easier to stomach.

 

[Otis]

but it's relevant. If they'd gone on to put 4 or 5 past teams since then it makes our result not seem so bad. The fact they haven't won since makes it an even worse result.

Exactly! Entirely relevant because it just highlights how poor we were and upon reflection, even poorer than we first thought because we were indeed giving Yeovil some praise on the day. Seems that may have been unwarranted, or at least overhyped.