|
Post by garethl on Dec 30, 2022 11:48:05 GMT
I also think Pierre looked utterly out of shape and should not have played. Either Ben g is fit to play or not, I don't believe in subbing CBs unless injured or out of sight. We got away with it but if we don't raise our game against an in form AFC W it's going to be a rather disappointing start to 2023. They will be far less forgiving than a toothless gills side. Ben simply isn’t ready to play 90 minutes without risking his recovery. We can’t and shouldn’t take any risks. Obviously you wouldn’t ordinarily sub your centre half in a game like that, all covered in the interview with Matt.
|
|
markf
Top Performer
Posts: 3,315
|
Post by markf on Dec 30, 2022 12:01:41 GMT
It's that sort of opinion (the one about Ben G) that deters me from bothering to post regularly any more.
What a complete load of balderdash. Just as well the author is not part of our medical team.
|
|
|
Post by simon on Dec 30, 2022 13:06:09 GMT
I also think Pierre looked utterly out of shape and should not have played. Either Ben g is fit to play or not, I don't believe in subbing CBs unless injured or out of sight. We got away with it but if we don't raise our game against an in form AFC W it's going to be a rather disappointing start to 2023. They will be far less forgiving than a toothless gills side. Ben simply isn’t ready to play 90 minutes without risking his recovery. We can’t and shouldn’t take any risks. Obviously you wouldn’t ordinarily sub your centre half in a game like that, all covered in the interview with Matt. I was surprised to see him get 70 after not playing full stop prior to yesterday.
|
|
|
Post by garethl on Dec 30, 2022 13:38:34 GMT
Whilst not quite the same he had played a decent chunk in an internal training game during the little break we had post Orient if I recall correctly.
|
|
|
Post by ajluck96 on Dec 30, 2022 14:35:23 GMT
Yes Pierre was partly at fault for the goal, although he wasn't helped out by Enzio swinging and missing or the greasy pitch, there were other opportunities to deal with it and apart from that, he look quite assured winning headers and not giving them too much after that. It is difficult when you haven't played properly for near on 6/7 months to get going especially in those conditions. Don't forget, it took Ben 10/15 minutes to find his feet with a couple of scuffed clearances prior.
Overall, thought we looked the better team, we just can't create good chances against teams who are intent on sitting back defensively and playing on the break
|
|
|
Post by Del on Dec 30, 2022 17:38:17 GMT
3 points is 3 points now on to Wimbledon!
|
|
|
Post by davethegrave on Dec 30, 2022 18:52:07 GMT
I don't agree that it was a naff game and we weren't very good. It's just the cutting edge we're missing. Gillingham looked very weak and we should've taken advantage. I was worried when they equalised but thank goodness for Craig. The 2 young strikers played with a lot of energy. Omar was brilliant but unfortunately not a prolific goalscorer.
|
|
|
Post by paz on Dec 30, 2022 20:06:05 GMT
Poor game and probably a draw would have been fair. They are a boring side to play against and just keep breaking up play. They pinched the last one and a we pinched this one. We played ok for the last 10m of each half half and they had a decent 15m leading up to their goal. Good for the defenders to come back and get some playing time under their belts, BG showed signs of why we need him. 3 much needed points.
For some reason Matt has not got much faith in the strikers we have so we need to see some signings we actually see on the pitch more. David A has just come in on loan so that's a start! Although the old saying "never go back" does spring to mind, we shall see.
|
|
|
Post by baboonfish on Dec 30, 2022 21:12:01 GMT
It's that sort of opinion (the one about Ben G) that deters me from bothering to post regularly any more. What a complete load of balderdash. Just as well the author is not part of our medical team. I agree, it's probably best not to post regularly if you can't cope with opinions which oppose your own. It's not the markf appreciation society forum, despite what some of your admirers on here have led you to believe. Matt took a gamble and it paid off. On another day, we lose that game 2 1 after Ben g came off. From what I saw, Pierre was not close to being physically ready and my personal opinion is that a CB should not start a game of any importance with the expectation of not being able to complete it. Like I say, on this occasion it worked out, so fair play. Matt is boss and I am a mere observer. However, make no mistake, we were extremely fortunate to win that game. I personally would have stuck with kizzi at CB and bought Ben g on at some stage if required or if the game was safe, with Pierre no more than back up to a back up at this stage. I'm entitled to that opinion. Perhaps some of you should start your own forum where only refereeing decisions are open to scrutiny, but until then I'll continue to offer occasional mild criticism of Matt's decisions as I see them.
|
|
markf
Top Performer
Posts: 3,315
|
Post by markf on Dec 30, 2022 22:42:28 GMT
You can give opinion as you wish and I will give mine too, which I did.
You can make mild or whatever criticism of Matt too (he doesn't read ap anyway, I wonder why?) which you did.
But when it comes to the fitness of players and their ability to play ex amount of minutes I think I will trust the management and their fitness team rather than an anonymous poster on a football forum. Thanks anyway.
Answer this. How is Ben meant to get match fit, match sharp if he should only start if he can do the 90? How, after such a long lay off is he meant to build up to a full 90? By your own statement you wouldn't change a cb unless necessary (injury) so that means he would never play! And that's where the balderdash bit comes in.
The markf appreciation forum. There's an idea. Perhaps I can get the admin guys to rename ap for me? Who knows or do I have to die first?
As for my past posts being exclusively about refereeing then perhaps you should review them first before commenting.
I have had plenty of messages from past and current fans saying I actually offer balance in my posts and one even saying common sense.
I wouldn't know if any of that's true but it is an alternative view to yours.
But that's fine cos all I did was disagree with your post and give a reason (one of many) why I can't be arsed to do regular post match observations any more.
By your response it seems to have stung a bit.
|
|
|
Post by Andy K on Dec 30, 2022 23:03:50 GMT
The salient point of the above exchanges, as Matt has said a number of times in interviews. Being physically fit isn't the same as being match fit. And you only get match fit by playing matches.
In terms of Ben G. He has missed 22 and a half league games plus up to 6 Cup games. He needs to play. But also that needs to be managed. Especially with another game 3 days later. Same as Pierre who will, all being equal, get less chance of gametime.
Whilst everyone is entitled to their opinion, what Matt did was pragmatic and sensible whichever way you slice it.
|
|
|
Post by davethegrave on Dec 31, 2022 9:47:26 GMT
I think the trouble was Pierre took a bit too long to get into the swing of things.
|
|