• Welcome to the ShrimperZone forums.
    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which only gives you limited access.

    Existing Users:.
    Please log-in using your existing username and password. If you have any problems, please see below.

    New Users:
    Join our free community now and gain access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and free. Click here to join.

    Fans from other clubs
    We welcome and appreciate supporters from other clubs who wish to engage in sensible discussion. Please feel free to join as above but understand that this is a moderated site and those who cannot play nicely will be quickly removed.

    Assistance Required
    For help with the registration process or accessing your account, please send a note using the Contact us link in the footer, please include your account name. We can then provide you with a new password and verification to get you on the site.

Post-Match Thread and Ratings Cambridge Utd 0-0 Southend Utd

I'm not getting the Acquah love, he looked to be poor in his decision making, an ineffective target man and weak in his challenges. Found him very frustrating to watch.

I thought we missed Kyle Taylor when he was subbed - I assume that was precautionary. Ferguson was playing too deep, two players we really didn't get the best out of today. On the contrary though, Ash Nathaniel-George had an immense game, my MOTM. Hope Akinola is ok, he's an important player.

Defensively, Ox had a good game, Elvis and John were back to their battling best, and young Tom Clifford showed his versatility.

Ox - 7
Bwomono - 7.5
White - 7.5
Hobson - 6.5
Clifford - 7
Ferguson - 6.5
Dieng - 6.5
Taylor - 7.5
Nathaniel-George - 8.5
Akinola - 8
Acquah - 6.5

Subs:
Reeco for Taylor -7, odd sub, did ok when he came on
Goodship for Akinola - n/a, good to see him back, a good run through where he was fouled

Officials were ok, expected a lot worse than we got!

I don't think its a case of love. I think its more a case of people pleased that, like the rest of the team, he had a better performance than expected.

If MM had chosen Halford or Goodship then the same posters would be calling MM clueless before KO. Yes it was only a point but its shuts up some of the serial whingers on here. Of course people are entitled to an 'opinion' but some like to repeat the same hate over several threads at every opportunity and every week.

The number 9 target man is the toughest job in Football. Its a dying trade and not helped by a life time of non contact in academy football. Fans are well aware that keepers take time to peak but so do number 9's. Plenty of players that have looked good against us in recent seasons were all released from clubs in their early 20's, even Barry Corr.... Shaun Goater wasn't signed by City until he had completed a long time learning his trade.

Will EA make it? The odds say no but as others have rightly said thats still no excuse for some of the behaviour. Most of us know the real reasons why some feel the need to do it. I fully back MM's calls for action, If you cant say it face to face then its not an opinion.
 
Last edited:
Picking up four points from these two games against these two opponents was way beyond my expectations. Once the game went ahead some kind of result was really important for us as even a draw builds on the momentum gained by our unexpected win at Newport. Is a nice little unbeaten run allowing us to climb up a few places in the table too much to hope for? After a good start to the month January was not good, and, it is absolutely vital we build on what have so far achieved in February.
I remain convinced we will look a pretty decent side once the pitches firm up although it seems every time I allow myself that thought the weather takes a bad turn! I will try to stop thinking that, and, hopefully, both the weather and the pitches we play on, can improve.
Yesterday our effort and commitment was first rate, and, I am happy to give the management full credit for that.
I was long of the opinion that midfield was the area where we desperately needed reinforcing. While I am not questioning JD's skill, commitment or effort I do wonder if he now has the legs to play two games in five days and be effective in both? Nathan Ferguson looked to me one of our better players yesterday, and, had lack of options forced us to play JD yesterday we may have found it harder in midfield. I repeat this not a criticism of JD, who is never less than wholehearted in his approach, but more an acknowledgement of physical realities. As Evita sang towards the end of that iconic musical 'what is the use of the strongest heart in a body that is falling apart; what I would give for a hundred years but the physical interferes'. Or something like that. But you know what I am trying to say!
It seems to be generally accepted that Acquah had a good game yesterday. Would he have been as effective had he played against Newport ie has he yet the strength to play twice in a week in such a physically demanding position? Although many queried the selection of Halford against Newport it seems likely he was played with an eye on the Cambridge game to allow Acquah to start. Lack of squad depth leading to limited options was why we were so hopeless at the start of the season. Things have improved immeasurably since then.
And while on the subject of Acquah it helps him when he plays with better and more experienced players as it would any player at his stage of his career. Even the vastly more experienced Elvis looked better yesterday, and, I put that down to playing alongside a functioning midfield.
Oxley: in this team and set up he looks good and his booming clearances are always an asset in a game like yesterday's. No doubt he still feels he is a chance to challenge for top scorer of the season and I was in awe of his first half long range effort;
Elvis; good and much much better I thought;
TC: excellent;
JW: usual gritty and committed display;
Sean H: can sometimes look lost and indecisive when playing in the back three but rarely looks like that when occupying the middle of the back four. He was very good I thought;
NF: Wow, Looks a pretty decent, and, I have to wonder why Crawley let him go! As has been noted by many on here he seems to have time on the ball. If he stay up he may turn out to have been a key addition, but, perhaps before I get ahead of myself I should be hoping he play like he did yesterday on a consistent basis;
TD: worked tirelessly and was a key member of a functioning midfield;
KT: not at his best and he may be working his way back to full fitness after his attack of COVID which can affect some more seriously than others;
EA: got through a ton of work and often unsettled their defence. And they are the league leaders. 'Nuff said?
ANG: I really enjoy watching him play as I feel he has the potential to produce a game changing moment. It has not yet happened but it will soon right? He was a not irregular goal scorer with Crawley but has yet to open his account with us. Prediction: he will score a brace for us in a game soon! Hope I am right! Yesterday he looked better than anything they had to offer in attack. When JO returns we could have at least two players possessing the 'X' factor;
SA: I love watching him play as he is energetic and smart. I think the management team do really well with him as they are getting the best out of him. Something perhaps for those critical of MM to think about?
Both subs were lively enough when they came on to make a contribution to what was an outstanding team performance and effort.
On the basis of what we saw yesterday there is a lot to build on even if we do not receive and of the threatened reinforcements.
I have an open mind about Jay Simpson provided he is fit as more options up front would surely help us.
I suspect if we sign Ranger we live to regret it but would love to be proved wrong.
I have always rated Ricky Holmes, and, while it would be unrealistic to expect too much from him he might still have enough in him to terrorise a few League 2 defences.
Even without any of these additions we still might be good enough to stay up if we can continue to produce the commitment and team effort we saw on display yesterday.
Time to put together a decent unbeaten run!
I’ll trust MM’s judgement on Acquah as a footballer, but him not signing the contract we offered him until he realised he wasn’t getting anything anywhere else has hardly helped us warm to him. How he thought he was too good for us I’ll never know.
I’ll trust MM’s judgement on Acquah as a footballer, but him not signing the contract we offered him until he realised he wasn’t getting anything anywhere else has hardly helped us warm to him. How he thought he was too good for us I’ll never know.
Maybe he didn't think he was too good for us but instead felt that the prevailing atmosphere at the club at that time was unlikely to help his career develop. Just t a thought.
 
My main take out from the game was the strength of the midfield. It looked most importantly strong when defending and looked threatening when going forward. The individuals all played key roles in the teams performance. It made for a more pleasant watch. I was also pleased that MM decided to bench JD. He now has got better personnel ahead of him to chose.
 
Picking up four points from these two games against these two opponents was way beyond my expectations. Once the game went ahead some kind of result was really important for us as even a draw builds on the momentum gained by our unexpected win at Newport. Is a nice little unbeaten run allowing us to climb up a few places in the table too much to hope for? After a good start to the month January was not good, and, it is absolutely vital we build on what have so far achieved in February.
I remain convinced we will look a pretty decent side once the pitches firm up although it seems every time I allow myself that thought the weather takes a bad turn! I will try to stop thinking that, and, hopefully, both the weather and the pitches we play on, can improve.
Yesterday our effort and commitment was first rate, and, I am happy to give the management full credit for that.
I was long of the opinion that midfield was the area where we desperately needed reinforcing. While I am not questioning JD's skill, commitment or effort I do wonder if he now has the legs to play two games in five days and be effective in both? Nathan Ferguson looked to me one of our better players yesterday, and, had lack of options forced us to play JD yesterday we may have found it harder in midfield. I repeat this not a criticism of JD, who is never less than wholehearted in his approach, but more an acknowledgement of physical realities. As Evita sang towards the end of that iconic musical 'what is the use of the strongest heart in a body that is falling apart; what I would give for a hundred years but the physical interferes'. Or something like that. But you know what I am trying to say!
It seems to be generally accepted that Acquah had a good game yesterday. Would he have been as effective had he played against Newport ie has he yet the strength to play twice in a week in such a physically demanding position? Although many queried the selection of Halford against Newport it seems likely he was played with an eye on the Cambridge game to allow Acquah to start. Lack of squad depth leading to limited options was why we were so hopeless at the start of the season. Things have improved immeasurably since then.
And while on the subject of Acquah it helps him when he plays with better and more experienced players as it would any player at his stage of his career. Even the vastly more experienced Elvis looked better yesterday, and, I put that down to playing alongside a functioning midfield.
Oxley: in this team and set up he looks good and his booming clearances are always an asset in a game like yesterday's. No doubt he still feels he is a chance to challenge for top scorer of the season and I was in awe of his first half long range effort;
Elvis; good and much much better I thought;
TC: excellent;
JW: usual gritty and committed display;
Sean H: can sometimes look lost and indecisive when playing in the back three but rarely looks like that when occupying the middle of the back four. He was very good I thought;
NF: Wow, Looks a pretty decent, and, I have to wonder why Crawley let him go! As has been noted by many on here he seems to have time on the ball. If he stay up he may turn out to have been a key addition, but, perhaps before I get ahead of myself I should be hoping he play like he did yesterday on a consistent basis;
TD: worked tirelessly and was a key member of a functioning midfield;
KT: not at his best and he may be working his way back to full fitness after his attack of COVID which can affect some more seriously than others;
EA: got through a ton of work and often unsettled their defence. And they are the league leaders. 'Nuff said?
ANG: I really enjoy watching him play as I feel he has the potential to produce a game changing moment. It has not yet happened but it will soon right? He was a not irregular goal scorer with Crawley but has yet to open his account with us. Prediction: he will score a brace for us in a game soon! Hope I am right! Yesterday he looked better than anything they had to offer in attack. When JO returns we could have at least two players possessing the 'X' factor;
SA: I love watching him play as he is energetic and smart. I think the management team do really well with him as they are getting the best out of him. Something perhaps for those critical of MM to think about?
Both subs were lively enough when they came on to make a contribution to what was an outstanding team performance and effort.
On the basis of what we saw yesterday there is a lot to build on even if we do not receive and of the threatened reinforcements.
I have an open mind about Jay Simpson provided he is fit as more options up front would surely help us.
I suspect if we sign Ranger we live to regret it but would love to be proved wrong.
I have always rated Ricky Holmes, and, while it would be unrealistic to expect too much from him he might still have enough in him to terrorise a few League 2 defences.
Even without any of these additions we still might be good enough to stay up if we can continue to produce the commitment and team effort we saw on display yesterday.
Time to put together a decent unbeaten run!


Maybe he didn't think he was too good for us but instead felt that the prevailing atmosphere at the club at that time was unlikely to help his career develop. Just t a thought.
great post
 
I’ll trust MM’s judgement on Acquah as a footballer, but him not signing the contract we offered him until he realised he wasn’t getting anything anywhere else has hardly helped us warm to him. How he thought he was too good for us I’ll never know.

There are many reasons why Emile may have been taking his time on signing the contract offered to him.

He’d had previously only been offered a 3rd year scholar so last season was his 1st year pro contract. Minimal money, with some accommodation expenses and probably with a one year club option on the same terms with 25% salary deduction in relegation.

It’s very likely Emile had activated various pay rises under SC based on appearances that put him on a reasonable wage and no doubt he felt that he’d earned those by being selected!

Ron had to activate that clause by a set date which would have meant a further year on the same terms, so by not doing that, Emile was effectively out of contract and had to renegotiate. We have no idea how those conversations went but knowing Ron once the ‘option’ period expired the ‘new’ contact he offered wouldn’t have been particularly lucrative.

It’s perfectly reasonable to accept Emile had every right to discuss this however he saw fit. But its also perfectly reasonable to accept that the new contract offered was on substantially reduced terms.

So for all we know Emile stalling had nothing to do with thinking he was better than Southend and everything to do with making a stand against a chairman who could well have been taking the complete ****!

He may have offered him a wage LOWER than his previous wage prior to appearance based increases! A scholars wage that would be lower than he could earn at Concord!!!

He may have excluded his accommodation expenses.

He may have made him ‘re do’ appearances to re-earn increases.

To get around incoming wage caps or the embargo it may not have even been a first team contract and been a development squad one.

They may have just been stalling over win bonuses or goal bonuses.

New contracts may well have Covid clauses built in stipulating a maximum wage should the league get stopped again which for all we know was equivalent to SSP.

To put the blame on Emile is unfair and another example (as with Sam Barrett) of assumptions made that if Southend offer you a contract you should bite their hands off!!

Football contracts are not like your average employment contract offered when you interview for a job at your local office block. They are very complex and, being offered less than you feel you’ve already earned (especially when based on appearances which is factually undeniable) or are worth, negotiations can sometimes drag on especially if what’s being offered could be matched or even bettered by non league sides.

These players have financial commitments and families they may need to look after just like the rest of us and have every right to fight for the best deal possible.
 
Last edited:
There’s always a bigger picture, like there was with Kelman and even Cox. These players have relatively short careers, they have agents and family in their ears, they want what’s best for them not a season ticket holder sat behind their keyboard demanding to know the ins and outs of every decision made. They’ve got bills to pay just like us. If I was a player and read some of the views on here I’d most likely think “**** this”.
 
......and the same applies to everyone else!
This was a reply to the idea that yesterday's draw was a good one, which it was!
But draws aren't going to save us. Simple maths: 18 more games; 18 draws = 42 points and relegation.
There was a bit of me wondering whether to fork out £10 to watch a massacre at 2.55pm.
As the game wore on, and many have said the same, a draw short changed us.
I wonder whether missed opportunities will come back to bite us?
Maybe not, he hopes...
 
Best performance all year in my opinion.....great work ethic, doubling up on them for 90 mins.
Up front obviously the weak spot although Acquah had his best game by far!

Ox 7.....one decent stop at the right height
Clifford 7 prefer Hart's attacking ability when on song
Elvis 7 ok but just not the player he was
White 9.... absolute rock all game
Hobson 8.....back to his best in a four
Taylor 7.....obvious class and talent...under used
Ferguson 7...like him, classy and strong
ANG 8......unbelievable ball control, as good as Premiershite quality, this in mind should be utilised to feed any potential new strikers.
Dieng 7....bit in and out
Acquah 7....much better presence
Akinola 7 good player that needs an equally good partner
Hackett F 7.... not much time but showed he can be more than useful
 
There are many reasons why Emile may have been taking his time on signing the contract offered to him.

He’d had previously only been offered a 3rd year scholar so last season was his 1st year pro contract. Minimal money, with some accommodation expenses and probably with a one year club option on the same terms with 25% salary deduction in relegation.

It’s very likely Emile had activated various pay rises under SC based on appearances that put him on a reasonable wage and no doubt he felt that he’d earned those by being selected!

Ron had to activate that clause by a set date which would have meant a further year on the same terms, so by not doing that, Emile was effectively out of contract and had to renegotiate. We have no idea how those conversations went but knowing Ron once the ‘option’ period expired the ‘new’ contact he offered wouldn’t have been particularly lucrative.

It’s perfectly reasonable to accept Emile had every right to discuss this however he saw fit. But its also perfectly reasonable to accept that the new contract offered was on substantially reduced terms.

So for all we know Emile stalling had nothing to do with thinking he was better than Southend and everything to do with making a stand against a chairman who could well have been taking the complete ****!

He may have offered him a wage LOWER than his previous wage prior to appearance based increases! A scholars wage that would be lower than he could earn at Concord!!!

He may have excluded his accommodation expenses.

He may have made him ‘re do’ appearances to re-earn increases.

To get around incoming wage caps or the embargo it may not have even been a first team contract and been a development squad one.

They may have just been stalling over win bonuses or goal bonuses.

New contracts may well have Covid clauses built in stipulating a maximum wage should the league get stopped again which for all we know was equivalent to SSP.

To put the blame on Emile is unfair and another example (as with Sam Barrett) of assumptions made that if Southend offer you a contract you should bite their hands off!!

Football contracts are not like your average employment contract offered when you interview for a job at your local office block. They are very complex and, being offered less than you feel you’ve already earned (especially when based on appearances which is factually undeniable) or are worth, negotiations can sometimes drag on especially if what’s being offered could be matched or even bettered by non league sides.

These players have financial commitments and families they may need to look after just like the rest of us and have every right to fight for the best deal possible.
Well explained, and your first four paragraphs are telling.
Another factor is the buyer's market in which Ron found himself.
Had this been a footballer pulling up trees; the offer would have no doubt been better.
In the end, a person pays what he thinks someone is worth. Twas always thus...
 
I don't think its a case of love. I think its more a case of people pleased that, like the rest of the team, he had a better performance than expected.

If MM had chosen Halford or Goodship then the same posters would be calling MM clueless before KO. Yes it was only a point but its shuts up some of the serial whingers on here. Of course people are entitled to an 'opinion' but some like to repeat the same hate over several threads at every opportunity and every week.

The number 9 target man is the toughest job in Football. Its a dying trade and not helped by a life time of non contact in academy football. Fans are well aware that keepers take time to peak but so do number 9's. Plenty of players that have looked good against us in recent seasons were all released from clubs in their early 20's, even Barry Corr.... Shaun Goater wasn't signed by City until he had completed a long time learning his trade.

Will EA make it? The odds say no but as others have rightly said thats still no excuse for some of the behaviour. Most of us know the real reasons why some feel the need to do it. I fully back MM's calls for action, If you cant say it face to face then its not an opinion.
"Most of us know the real reasons why some feel the need to do it". I don't! So am guessing a racist slant is implied?
Clarification, please?
 
I have been critical of Acquah but credit to him today he battled up top on his own and played like the target man we’ve missed all season. One thing that seemed to help is that we didn’t seem to boot it to his head but more to his body and feet which he was far more comfortable controlling and winning.

4/6 points away to top and 5th with two clean sheets?
The project is well and truly back on!
This exactly - it annoys me that some of our fans make up their mind about a player and then however that player performs, they slate him.

Acquah had a pretty good game yesterday, showed good strength, some nice touches to bring in colleagues and battled well against more experienced centre backs.

OK he shot into the side netting near the end, when we'd have loved him to have slotted the ball away but it was a snap shot and at least he got into the position to make it.

I thought he was 10 times more effective than Halford was against Newport, he's only 20 years old, he's a local lad and one of our own.

We all wish we had a 30 goal a season centre forward instead of Emile and he could learn his trade in the Under 23s or out on loan at a non-league club, but we are where we are so let's give the lad some support and encouragement.
 
I have been critical of Acquah but credit to him today he battled up top on his own and played like the target man we’ve missed all season. One thing that seemed to help is that we didn’t seem to boot it to his head but more to his body and feet which he was far more comfortable controlling and winning.

4/6 points away to top and 5th with two clean sheets?
The project is well and truly back on!

While I agree with what you say about Acquah's performance yesterday, the project might well end up taking us down at the end of the season.
 
The criticism of Acquah reminds me a little of the criticism Ladapo got during his brief spell, Acquah is going to become a very good lower league target man if he does what he did yesterday and occupy defenders to let others play. If it wasn't for Acquah, Ang wouldn't have had as much freedom to impress as much as he did
 
Back
Top