|
|
Post by aussie on Oct 3, 2010 10:01:14 GMT
Well no Kerswell go slow for the Ref and we get a fair crack of the whip! Also I hope the O`kane knockers are reading these match reports, too small, light wieght, can`t tackle, can`t pass!!! My arse! He`s brilliant!
Well it sounded like we killed `em one all, at their place as well. D.T was waxing lyrical on the radio and got so excited he nearly swore but just caught himself in time and corrected himself, made me laugh anyway! It was when Zeb was taking the piss out of their full back and sat the guy on his arse, Dave T suddenly corrected himself and politely said bum instead, you could hear him turning red live on air! Brilliant D.T. just don`t get too carried away as you might end up like Sparksey and none of us wants that to happen!
|
|
|
|
Post by register on Oct 3, 2010 10:32:58 GMT
It's strange, but when the 4 4 1 1 or 4 5 1 that Buckle likes so much is used against the right teams, as I think it was yesterday...it works!  For our last two home games it was disasterous of course! Horses for courses! |
|
|
|
Post by loyalgull on Oct 3, 2010 10:44:13 GMT
have got to add that the away support was brilliant yesterday,our fans were in total control vocally,we made the shrewsbury fans a little embarassed with our chanting,all of which was of totally acceptable language.They even managed to applaud our fans at the final whistle,in a game that we made shrewsbury look very ordinary.
|
|
merse
TFF member
Posts: 2,684
|
Post by merse on Oct 3, 2010 10:46:58 GMT
It was quite obvious that passing, passing and more passing had been drilled into them all week.  Sounds like a team with confidence in it's own and individual ability if you ask me. Shrewsbury's pitch is three yards longer and three yards wider than ours and that's a hell of a lot more space to play in and I appreciate your point about passing with a purpose rather than "over" passing for the sake of it without recourse to the actual reason for the pass in the first place. We ARE going to miss that man of substance up front and at the moment it is a choice between the light framed and strength challenged Benyon who has now proved he has bags of ability to score as well as developing a better sense of anticipation as he gains experience, and the much bigger and stronger Gritton who when I saw him at Stevenage was poor of first touch, of limited mobility and couldn't hit the cow's arse with a banjo, ukulele or double bass combined for that matter. Maybe Macklin will emerge as the "front runner" we all seek. Comments about Benyon "not putting himself about" as much as he used to, are maybe missing the point that he could have been instructed to be less mobile, less erratic and thus, an easier target to find for the midfield players. |
|
|
|
Post by awayday on Oct 3, 2010 13:29:31 GMT
It seems the last few games Benyon has been told not to go wide. He was awesome yesterday of running for the long ball (which was a game we didn't need to play yesterday) but like most teams with any sort of defence, they just picked their moments and defended the ball. Danny Stevens started well, but again once their wide defenders realised all they had to do was stand up to him, Danny couldn't get past them. Were as if they are running with him, he can turn inside them quite quickly and open up their defence.
Not sure about others, but I was suprised how "ordinary" Shrews were, I thought we would have to fight for a goal, let alone a point, but after our 1st penalty they seemed to let us pass the ball around them.
IMHO if we stuck with a 4-4-2 and kept the ball on the ground we could have scored in the 2nd half.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ditmar van Nostrilboy on Oct 3, 2010 14:15:03 GMT
Comments about Benyon "not putting himself about" as much as he used to, are maybe missing the point that he could have been instructed to be less mobile, less erratic and thus, an easier target to find for the midfield players. Lets hope it's that and not a problem with his knee again  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2010 14:21:37 GMT
Three games without a win now ~ "Sort it out Turner" and cue gates of barely two thousand. Oh no I forgot, this isn't Torquay it's Shrewsbury isn't it and the attendance today was 6,000 (only 250 of them away fans) from a population (70,000) roughly half of Torbay's. Makes you realise why WE struggle and THEY don't. Now don't tell me that with Shrewsbury's unemployment level twice as high as Torbay's that's nothing short of a disgraceful illustration of the apathy rife down in th Bay and the totally different civic pride in a small county town in farming country which is hardly "footballing hotbed" land is it? Like us ( and before us) Shrews dropped out of the Football League, but today commanded three times the miserable gate we attracted on Tuesday night. Don't read that as an attack on the "Kind & Gentle Folk" of Utopia Dave, just try and justify that truly awful FACT in a way that exonerates Torbay from being described as the "Apathy Capital of the Footballing World".There are so many reasons why this is a load of bollocks. It’s just a load of sweeping conjecture based on football attendance figures. Here are some counter suggestions: - How about that life in Shrewsbury, only consisting of farms according to you, is so boring that watching Shrewsbury play is positively exciting in comparison?
- How about that there are other things of interest available to residents of Torbay that make TUFC appear boring in comparison?
- How about that the cost of living in Shrewsbury is cheaper than Torbay so those on benefit have more disposable income?
- How about staunch supporters, like my nephews for instance, who now have sufficient disposable income to afford to go to London and watch Arsenal play instead? Where there’s a clash the Gulls lose out.
Your arrogance is breathtaking. You sit hundreds of miles away from either location but feel justified in using your conjecture as a basis to insult the supporters and residents of Torbay. My conjecture is that you probably used info acquired through Google. I say that because there’s no way I can believe you know the population of Shrewsbury off by heart or that its unemployment is twice Torbay’s. I don’t even know if those ‘facts’ are actually true, anyway. I also believe you used Google Earth and Google yesterday to appear as an ‘expert’ on Shrewsbury’s new ground, and as a basis to attack someone else for deciding not to attend. Pretty rich from someone not prepared to make the journey either; very sanctimonious and hypocritical. I no longer live in Torbay either but I would never slate my home town. And as for this 'fact' that Torbay is the 'Apathy Capital of the Footballing World' could you tell me in which reference book I can actually find this fact? |
|
tufc01
TFF member
Posts: 1,179
|
Post by tufc01 on Oct 3, 2010 14:24:45 GMT
Danny Stevens started well, but again once their wide [glow=red,2,300]defenders [/glow]realised all they had to do was stand up to him, Danny couldn't get past them. Were as if they are running with him, he can turn inside them quite quickly and open up their defence. IMHO if we stuck with a 4-4-2 and kept the ball on the ground we could have scored in the 2nd half. Defender 's, Plural, being the operative word. With 2 Defender's going to Stevens it opened up space all afternoon for Nicholson on the overlap and on several occasions for O'Kane or Mansell to utilise the space that was created as a result. Besides I thought Danny got past them pretty much all afternoon, there were a couple of occasions in the second half when he won free kicks in dangerous positions because the defenders over commited. Whilst I am a big fan of 4-4-2, especially at home, I not so sure that 4-4-2 would have worked any better in the second half yesterday. I thought we kept the ball on the floor anyway and with the 5 man midfield on what we now know was a very wide pitch, it gave us the opportunity to play it wide down the flanks, which in turn created lots of space. It was only the woodwork and their keeper that prevented us scoring in the second half. |
|
Rags
TFF member
Posts: 1,210
|
Post by Rags on Oct 3, 2010 14:42:34 GMT
There are so many reasons why this is a load of bollocks. And one very major one why it's not. |
|
|
|
Post by awayday on Oct 3, 2010 16:38:02 GMT
Danny Stevens started well, but again once their wide [glow=red,2,300]defenders [/glow]realised all they had to do was stand up to him, Danny couldn't get past them. Were as if they are running with him, he can turn inside them quite quickly and open up their defence. IMHO if we stuck with a 4-4-2 and kept the ball on the ground we could have scored in the 2nd half. Defender 's, Plural, being the operative word. With 2 Defender's going to Stevens it opened up space all afternoon for Nicholson on the overlap and on several occasions for O'Kane or Mansell to utilise the space that was created as a result. Besides I thought Danny got past them pretty much all afternoon, there were a couple of occasions in the second half when he won free kicks in dangerous positions because the defenders over commited. Whilst I am a big fan of 4-4-2, especially at home, I not so sure that 4-4-2 would have worked any better in the second half yesterday. I thought we kept the ball on the floor anyway and with the 5 man midfield on what we now know was a very wide pitch, it gave us the opportunity to play it wide down the flanks, which in turn created lots of space. It was only the woodwork and their keeper that prevented us scoring in the second half. I personally felt after the 1st half they worked out how to stop Danny, especially as he seemed to lose the ball more than create anything. I am not saying he had a bad game, far from it, I just think Shrews did well to hold us off. Also when I last checked, hitting the post doesn't count as scoring. We were not in the box as much in the second half when they seem to play 4-4-1-1. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2010 17:23:24 GMT
Which is?
Merse is your mate? You can compare 2 football attendances and make myriad deductions about the 2 towns concerned? You can slate your club's supporters and not expect them to react?
The man is deliberately antagonistic and rides roughshod over any opposing opinions (he even puts a galloping horse at the beginning of each post).
|
|
merse
TFF member
Posts: 2,684
|
Post by merse on Oct 3, 2010 18:03:10 GMT
Merse is your mate? You can compare 2 football attendances and make myriad deductions about the 2 towns concerned? You can slate your club's supporters and not expect them to react?
The man is deliberately antagonistic and rides roughshod over any opposing opinions (he even puts a galloping horse at the beginning of each post). Where have I "slated the club's supporters" ? You seem particualry adept at charging into things without reading the small print don't you! Even a one eyed ostrich could see that I was "slating" the stay aways and the apathy of the area, not the supporters who are after all the only ones going aren't they? The galloping horse is so that people like you can easily spot one of my posts and scroll on pal  |
|
|
|
Post by loyalgull on Oct 3, 2010 19:14:28 GMT
incidentally 250 of us hardy souls at the game yesterday,given that our home gate averages 2500ish,a 10% away support is pretty good going i think
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 4, 2010 1:01:55 GMT
The man is deliberately antagonistic and rides roughshod over any opposing opinions (he even puts a galloping horse at the beginning of each post). The galloping horse is so that people like you can easily spot one of my posts and scroll on pal Actually I like it, as I know that whenever I see it, it will be followed by some defensive invective; some far-fetched, illogical conjecture; or plain old drivel. But then that's what makes this forum so addictive. Crack on pal. |
|
Rags
TFF member
Posts: 1,210
|
Post by Rags on Oct 4, 2010 6:47:18 GMT
You seem particualry adept at charging into things without reading the small print don't you! That's what the MoD train them to do... |
|
