Post-Match Thread and Ratings Southend Utd 1-2 Cambridge Utd

[rhrussell]

Cambridge showed what seasoned strikers can do, however our forward line is made up of boys, thats why we have smallest goals scored, and that is why we are bottom, yesterday we should have put this game to bed in the first half, MM we need a couple of seasoned pro's up front

 

[sufc4life21]

Tale of 2 halves! First half we pressed them back and got the goal we deserved, tho we probably should of been atleast 2 up at the break. Second half cambridge came out the blocks quicker and iv got to admit their first goal was quality finish, shame they scored so quick after the break. Second goal hart lost his man which lead to their second. I think MM was wrong to drop Fairchild for achuah, I feel in the first half especially with Fairchild shooting ability we could of gone into the break 2 or 3 up and the game would of been different story. In the end cambridge took their chances and we didn't.

We move on and try get 3 points against Mansfield! UTB

 

[Ayrshire Blue]

I’m not gonna do ratings. But I am going to defend Acquah here. In the past this season I have questioned his seemingly low interest. He’d look lethargic from the get go and never break out of a jog.

Particularly in the first half last night he had upped his game. He was pressing well, they all were, and he was being a real nuisance. To me his inclusion in the starting lineup made total sense to introduce the likes ANG & RHF on the hour.

He had a good scoring opportunity as well where he reacted quickly to a loose ball on the edge of the box.

I wouldn’t be against seeing him up front with Akinola again. I like a big man-little man partnership

 

[sufc4life21]

I’m not gonna do ratings. But I am going to defend Acquah here. In the past this season I have questioned his seemingly low interest. He’d look lethargic from the get go and never break out of a jog.

Particularly in the first half last night he had upped his game. He was pressing well, they all were, and he was being a real nuisance. To me his inclusion in the starting lineup made total sense to introduce the likes ANG & RHF on the hour.

He had a good scoring opportunity as well where he reacted quickly to a loose ball on the edge of the box.

I wouldn’t be against seeing him up front with Akinola again. I like a big man-little man partnership

My only real criticism of achuah is he does need to get his shots off earlier and not take his time. Couple of chances went away last night due to achuah not getting the shot off earlier!

 

[Ayrshire Blue]

My only real criticism of achuah is he does need to get his shots off earlier and not take his take his time. Couple of chances went away last night due to achuah not getting the shot off earlier!

He’s still in a developmental phase of his career. I’m sure he will have gone way from that and realised that split second time difference between U23’s football and first team football. I agree with you, the shots need to be quicker. But he gets himself in the areas now. The chances need to be created for him in order to work on finishing

 

[Stuart W]

That's because, after seeing a replay I saw it differently. I saw Hart get to the ball, but he took their player out to get there, i.e. he went into their player, not the other way round. It was brave, but possibly a bit silly.

That said, I would also say you could argue it both ways. But, if you could argue it both ways then the ref is entitled to act on his opinion even if it is different to others.

Well if that was the case, tell me the last occasion a player "took another player out" and it wasn't deemed a bookable offence?

 

[Chairman Trigg]

From Day one this season our struggle has always been to score goals,and unfortunately all our games are going to be tight and nerve racking as we lack the ability to put games to bed.If we had been two up at half time we would probably have got a point and if we had a decent striker last Saturday Grimsby should have been beaten.Its not going to be an easy task to make safety as our striking options are very limited and very few goals come from our midfield.
15 goals from 23 games highlights where the improvement is needed to save us

 

[dannypav]

From Day one this season our struggle has always been to score goals,and unfortunately all our games are going to be tight and nerve racking as we lack the ability to put games to bed.If we had been two up at half time we would probably have got a point and if we had a decent striker last Saturday Grimsby should have been beaten.Its not going to be an easy task to make safety as our striking options are very limited and very few goals come from our midfield.
15 goals from 23 games highlights where the improvement is needed to save us

I’m sorry but IMO Our struggle from day one was conceding goals , lots of them.
MM has addressed that by having a settled defence and some experienced players in midfield.
Of course we do also lack a goal scorer , you’re right , but these naturally gifted players just aren’t around in bucket loads and any that are will be expensive and not be attracted to the team 24th in L2 in Jan.
We have to work with what we have , a strong defensive / midfield base , some young talented wide players and Akinola and/or Acquah up front.
We are a totally different side than we were pre-embargo and we now have a chance of staying up.
Will we ?
IMO , yes , but it will be an almighty struggle and not by much ( apologies in advance to the play off brigade ).

 

[Bratislava Blue]

Yet we were winnIng with the starting line up

Winning yes, but not with a goal margin that the performance deserved. A more positive line up would have put Cambridge to the sword. A big opportunity lost.

 

[londonblue]

Well if that was the case, tell me the last occasion a player "took another player out" and it wasn't deemed a bookable offence?

Why?

 

[Camden Blues]

Just read through both the official and post match threads. Is this what commentators means by a polarised society?!

 

[Dubai]

Winning yes, but not with a goal margin that the performance deserved. A more positive line up would have put Cambridge to the sword. A big opportunity lost.

OR we wouldn’t have dominated at all and the performance would’ve been different?

 

[Bratislava Blue]

Cambridge showed what seasoned strikers can do, however our forward line is made up of boys, thats why we have smallest goals scored, and that is why we are bottom, yesterday we should have put this game to bed in the first half, MM we need a couple of seasoned pro's up front

It's not just about having seasoned pros up front performing to a high standard on a regular basis. Our seasoned pros in other positioned are not performing on a regular basis. JD is a prime example. Again his performance was full of flaws. Bad displays of discipline. Trying to con the referee unsuccessfully to get free kicks. Another stupid dive in the middle of the pitch that gave possession to Cambridge and resulted in a dangerous attack. He's a liability too often.

 

[damien]

A more positive line up is a bit of a silly thing to say if you actually watched the game.

Regardless of the formation if you've got two 'wing backs' attacking, two forward attacking and a midfielder or 2 you've still got 5 or 6 men attacks.

4 4 2 - 5 or 6 men attacks

4 5 1 - 5 or 6 men attacks

Last night was not a negative line up, we could have been out of sight at half time. What on earth was negative about that setup, pressing high and hard, playing football in their third and creating chances.

Is it the numbers in the 'formation' that were negative?

 

[Stuart W]

Why?

I thought my question was obvious

 

[Bratislava Blue]

OR we wouldn’t have dominated at all and the performance would’ve been different?

I tend to have a more positive outlook on our performances. However, this can only achieved if we have an attacking line up. When I saw the line up it was too defensive. When we went 1 up I was saying to myself we need to get at least a 2nd. However, we didn't have the correct personnel on the pitch to take advantage of the situation, turn the screw and push on. Cambridge would have been happy with only having a 1 goal deficit to turn around in the second half. If it was a 2 goal lead they would have had to be more expansive.

 

[Dubai]

I tend to have a more positive outlook on our performances. However, this can only achieved if we have an attacking line up. When I saw the line up it was too defensive. When we went 1 up I was saying to myself we need to get at least a 2nd. However, we didn't have the correct personnel on the pitch to take advantage of the situation, turn the screw and push on. Cambridge would have been happy with only having a 1 goal deficit to turn around in the second half. If it was a 2 goal lead they would have had to be more expansive.

But your just guessing. Maybe a more "positive lineup" means small/faster players I think in your eyes, might not have dominated in the same way we did.

We were dangerous at set plays because of the team we put out and scored because of that. Not in spite of it.

Regardless, if you gave the manager, players and fans the chance to be 1-0 up at HT think everyone would've beaten your handoff.

What we could've done better is start the 2nd half a bit tighter, attacked the ball into the box and not let the lead slip so quickly.

 

[Medway Blue]

That's because, after seeing a replay I saw it differently. I saw Hart get to the ball, but he took their player out to get there, i.e. he went into their player, not the other way round. It was brave, but possibly a bit silly.

That said, I would also say you could argue it both ways. But, if you could argue it both ways then the ref is entitled to act on his opinion even if it is different to others.

Can't agree with this at all. Firstly, contact was essentially shoulder to shoulder I think. Even if not, only reason Hart 'took their player out' was because their player bottled a 50/50 ball. You can't legislate for that, and certainly shouldn't be penalising the player who's brave enough to go for a 50/50 ball in a contact sport. Game's gone.

 

[wiggy]

My only real criticism of achuah is he does need to get his shots off earlier and not take his time. Couple of chances went away last night due to achuah not getting the shot off earlier!

Immobile, can’t jump, not quck enough to get shots off, apart from that......

 

[Bratislava Blue]

But your just guessing. Maybe a more "positive lineup" means small/faster players I think in your eyes, might not have dominated in the same way we did.

We were dangerous at set plays because of the team we put out and scored because of that. Not in spite of it.

Regardless, if you gave the manager, players and fans the chance to be 1-0 up at HT think everyone would've beaten your handoff.

What we could've done better is start the 2nd half a bit tighter, attacked the ball into the box and not let the lead slip so quickly.

You are also guessing at my preferences! "Smaller/Faster"... And your guessing/assumption.is incorrect... Why play Halford at the back when he was found out in that position against Barrow and increases the time on the ball of Hobson when he is not a ball playing defender? Why start with JD and not give Kyle Taylor the minutes on the pitch who is more of a threat going forward than JD. JD can always come on and try to protect score lines. I would have started either ANG or Hackett-Fairchild instead of Aquah just based on current and recent performances.

So to summarize my preferences are not just "smaller/faster" but are also a more positive line up at home against a team that we want to gauge ourselves against based on our recent good form and their justified position in the league.

A missed opportunity in my opinio...