Cheltenham (Hive) The Adverse Match Thread

Anything and everything related to Barnet FC
Bee_Forever
Posts: 4319
Joined: 21 Jan 2011, 20:25

Re: Cheltenham (Hive) The Adverse Match Thread

Post: # 232700Post Bee_Forever »

For me, the only explanation is that McGhee is picking a deliberately poor team to force Tony's hand in the January transfer window. How else do you explain Clough, Watson and Blackman starting ahead of Fonguck, Tutonda and Vilhete.

Clough has put in poor performance after poor performance and yet he keeps on playing, he is such a clumsy and limited defender it is infuriating that he continues to play. Surely Tutonda had to start as the left sided centre back a position he has excelled in this season

Blackman is an ill disciplined player who rarely if ever tracks his winger, and constantly puts himself and his team in trouble. Mauro is energetic, dynamic and will track back, and he knows what it means to wear the Barnet shirt in a relegation battle.

Ryan Watson can pass long, but not short, and can't tackle. His performance in the first half was pure car crash. If you are stupid enough to select him, you select him in a midfield 3 so someone else can cover his inadequacies and let him do the hollywood passes without concern of cover. He is basically a taller version of Ruben Bover. Fonguck is a unit, who is not showy, but values possession, and gives licence to our only decent attacking central midfielder.

Either McGhee is playing the long game, or he has still not a clue about his best team, 4 weeks in to the role....
barnetpete
Posts: 2296
Joined: 24 Jan 2011, 13:37

Re: Cheltenham (Hive) The Adverse Match Thread

Post: # 232710Post barnetpete »

Playing two fullbacks as wingbacks meant they sat too deep, meaning we were effectively 523. Even the best two CM’s would struggle holding together the middle of the park, when one is the useless Watson it’s no surprised we were cr@p. Add that to the tactic of ‘put it on the right back and JCR will get it and beat the man’ which was flawed as most of the time JCR wasn’t there, but the players followed instructions putting it there anyway made us look shambolic. The alternative tactic of lumping it on to Akinde’s head for a knock on is as bad as that’s not his strength. He wants it in behind to run on to - surely McGhee will have watched the videos of how we have scored goals for the last few seasons?

However boring at times MA tactics were he played to the teams strengths and used Akinde, our goal threat in the best way.
Mcghee decisions are odd. . Changing a winning 4411 to a 343 which was so badly executed it made us look shambolic.
Please consider donating, to help disadvantaged Children & Young People in Barnet, https://www.youngbarnetfoundation.org.uk/donate,
becbee
Posts: 11933
Joined: 22 Jan 2011, 11:43

Re: Cheltenham (Hive) The Adverse Match Thread

Post: # 232717Post becbee »

Very depressing but I think the last two posts hit the nail on the head.

I would also add that the tactic of kicking the ball long and aerial, aiming at nobody but working on a 50/50 probability that it might reach a teammate, has shown itself to be extremely flawed as usually the opposition are more alert so usually they win the ball anyway.
Itai-bee
Posts: 667
Joined: 26 Sep 2016, 14:37

Re: Cheltenham (Hive) The Adverse Match Thread

Post: # 232719Post Itai-bee »

barnetpete wrote:Playing two fullbacks as wingbacks meant they sat too deep, meaning we were effectively 523. Even the best two CM’s would struggle holding together the middle of the park, when one is the useless Watson it’s no surprised we were cr@p. Add that to the tactic of ‘put it on the right back and JCR will get it and beat the man’ which was flawed as most of the time JCR wasn’t there, but the players followed instructions putting it there anyway made us look shambolic. The alternative tactic of lumping it on to Akinde’s head for a knock on is as bad as that’s not his strength. He wants it in behind to run on to - surely McGhee will have watched the videos of how we have scored goals for the last few seasons?

However boring at times MA tactics were he played to the teams strengths and used Akinde, our goal threat in the best way.
Mcghee decisions are odd. . Changing a winning 4411 to a 343 which was so badly executed it made us look shambolic.
Completely agree
That team selection and formation was complete suicide.
McGhee seems a million miles away from knowing his best team and formation.
The players looked unsure and at times scared to go near the ball.
It seems like that’s this inexperienced squad is being asked to play different styles of football with different players, every other week.
This surely breeds uncertainty.
At the same time. Where was the character from the team yesterday?.
You would hope that the players would be big enough to let the manager know that it’s not working.
becbee
Posts: 11933
Joined: 22 Jan 2011, 11:43

Re: Cheltenham (Hive) The Adverse Match Thread

Post: # 232721Post becbee »

The manager has eyes like the rest of us, he should be able to see it's not working.
Maybe Tutonda, Vilhete and Fonguck were "big enough" to tell the manager - there must be some reason why they are clearly out of favour.
LeftSideRun
Posts: 1699
Joined: 26 Jan 2011, 11:26

Re: Cheltenham (Hive) The Adverse Match Thread

Post: # 232723Post LeftSideRun »

I'm a fan of Stephens but yesterday was his worst game by a distance. Had already come out and flapped an astounding 5 times and got away with it before we went behind. This poor decision making affected the whole defence. Maybe he needs a rest.

Watson has only ever looked half way competent at full back. He should not be starting in centre-mid ahead of Sweeny, Vilhete or Fonguk.

I thought Blackman had his best game yesterday. Not saying much, I realise, but he was trying hard. Brindley looked like he was more comfortable in a back 4, then at wing back, when he kept running away from the man on the ball. Often that was Santos, who has gone backwards after looking like a top player when he joined. His confidence looks absolutely shot.

JCR often carries our attack but if he is going to play on the left he needs to practice crossing with his left. So easy to defend against, the full back knows he will check back to cross with his right.

Thought Akinola was probably our best player and deserves a start.
RichardM
Posts: 1530
Joined: 23 Jan 2011, 18:19

Re: Cheltenham (Hive) The Adverse Match Thread

Post: # 232725Post RichardM »

barnetpete wrote:However boring at times MA tactics were he played to the teams strengths and used Akinde, our goal threat in the best way.
If MA was still our manager the football would not be very pretty and supporters would be moaning more than ever but we would not be sitting at the bottom of the table. Many were glad to see him leave for Eastleigh but I am reminded of the Charlton supporters who helped to get Alan Curbishley removed from the manager's job when Charlton were in the Premier League only to see the club rapidly fall down to division 1 of The Football League.
#Beebot
Posts: 5738
Joined: 04 Feb 2016, 19:54

Re: Cheltenham (Hive) The Adverse Match Thread

Post: # 232727Post #Beebot »

RichardM wrote:
barnetpete wrote:However boring at times MA tactics were he played to the teams strengths and used Akinde, our goal threat in the best way.
If MA was still our manager the football would not be very pretty and supporters would be moaning more than ever but we would not be sitting at the bottom of the table. Many were glad to see him leave for Eastleigh but I am reminded of the Charlton supporters who helped to get Alan Curbishley removed from the manager's job when Charlton were in the Premier League only to see the club rapidly fall down to division 1 of The Football League.
The damage was not done when MA left. Many many poor decisions have been made since.
talldarkslim
Posts: 1003
Joined: 17 Aug 2011, 13:59

Re: Cheltenham (Hive) The Adverse Match Thread

Post: # 232739Post talldarkslim »

At least we will have the fa trophy to look forward to next season
LoudmouthBFC
Posts: 1489
Joined: 19 Mar 2016, 18:39

Re: Cheltenham (Hive) The Adverse Match Thread

Post: # 232750Post LoudmouthBFC »

Barnet F.C. 0 v Cheltenham Town F.C. 2 | The Nightmare Before Christmas | Matchday Vlog (23/12/17)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F0EICoJyDfU
letchbee94
Posts: 8119
Joined: 21 Jan 2011, 20:59

Re: Cheltenham (Hive) The Adverse Match Thread

Post: # 232752Post letchbee94 »

RichardM wrote:
barnetpete wrote:However boring at times MA tactics were he played to the teams strengths and used Akinde, our goal threat in the best way.
If MA was still our manager the football would not be very pretty and supporters would be moaning more than ever .
Exactly Richard this is 1 of reasons I believe why he should not come back
letchbee94
Posts: 8119
Joined: 21 Jan 2011, 20:59

Re: Cheltenham (Hive) The Adverse Match Thread

Post: # 232753Post letchbee94 »

Well done to Cheltenham who fully deserved the win and could have easily won by more than the 2 they got.

We was poor from start to finish.
barnet_pls
Posts: 605
Joined: 06 Feb 2011, 08:33

Re: Cheltenham (Hive) The Adverse Match Thread

Post: # 232754Post barnet_pls »

Well it seems to me that whilst Rossi had several part of the jigsaw missing - thus not winning - he seemed closer to a winning and competitive team than MM. Certainly with JA and RB now back, we wouldn't not have been so clueless as yesterday and we could all see what he was trying to do - short term and long term.
Post Reply