|
|
Post by localboy86 on Jul 5, 2018 9:34:34 GMT
So just shy of 9 weeks since our semi-final defeat in the play-offs, this Saturday we find ourselves facing League One Coventry City in our pre-season opener (just like last year).
We’ve been back in training for around a week now so the players probably feel like they need some game time - it will be good to see Dan Wishart and Charlie Clough in our colours once again. I expect we may well field a couple of trialists too.
Hopefully a few people stay on for the England game after!
|
|
|
|
Post by surreyu on Jul 5, 2018 11:58:04 GMT
Since the bars have been done up over the summer is anyone able to comment on what the tele situation is for the England game afterwards? Will there be a projector showing it?
|
|
|
|
Post by surreyu on Jul 6, 2018 12:25:11 GMT
PreviewThink there will be a lot of unhappy people with the new crash barrier rule. Surely that also obliterates our maximum capacity with a large amount of the ground now wasted space
|
|
trev
1st team skipper
In Matt We Trust
Posts: 2,477 
|
Post by trev on Jul 6, 2018 12:44:08 GMT
PreviewThink there will be a lot of unhappy people with the new crash barrier rule. Surely that also obliterates our maximum capacity with a large amount of the ground now wasted space With average attendances a little over 2000 last season, barring another spectacular FA cup run, I really can't see that being much of an issue for the foreseeable future. |
|
|
|
Post by surreyu on Jul 6, 2018 13:30:43 GMT
PreviewThink there will be a lot of unhappy people with the new crash barrier rule. Surely that also obliterates our maximum capacity with a large amount of the ground now wasted space With average attendances a little over 2000 last season, barring another spectacular FA cup run, I really can't see that being much of an issue for the foreseeable future. We had over 2500 people in the ground on many occasions last year that is a lot of people that will need to be moved. Plus you don't need a "spectacular" cup run anymore, win one game and we might have Sunderland or Wimbledon at the ground. The away end especially will lose a lot of space. If Orient are flying high in April they'll be very very unhappy |
|
trev
1st team skipper
In Matt We Trust
Posts: 2,477
|
Post by trev on Jul 6, 2018 13:33:44 GMT
Yes, I agree it's a much bigger deal for away fans, given the confined area available to them. But the club have confirmed they are looking at a workaround, so here's hoping this is only temporary...
|
|
|
|
Post by timall on Jul 6, 2018 15:05:46 GMT
I will be disappointed if I'm not able to stand in the spot I've occupied for the last (almost) 40 years.
If we are now to be "moved back" away from the perimeter fence then not only will we be further away from the pitch, and action, but the atmosphere will change for both supporters and players alike. Dos has asked for a better atmosphere on more than one occasion so it sems counter-intuitive to move supporters away from the pitch.
It will be good to get it confirmed this decision isn't a permanent one, rather it is something under review that might get amended over the course of the next few weeks. It also seems counterintuitive that in forcing the crowd "backwards" away from the pitch, the effect will be to increase the density of the crowds which will be more likely to reult in an incident, "crush" barriers notwithstanding.
Whilst it will require an increased investment is there not a possibility that the perimiter fence itself be "upgraded" to be a sufficient "crush" barrier in itself, allowing for the crowd to stay where it is, be more spaced out, and to be considered "safe" from whatever it is that is concerning the Health and Safety authorities?
|
|
jr
1st team skipper
Posts: 2,199
|
Post by jr on Jul 6, 2018 16:40:43 GMT
I will be disappointed if I'm not able to stand in the spot I've occupied for the last (almost) 40 years. If we are now to be "moved back" away from the perimeter fence then not only will we be further away from the pitch, and action, but the atmosphere will change for both supporters and players alike. Dos has asked for a better atmosphere on more than one occasion so it sems counter-intuitive to move supporters away from the pitch. It will be good to get it confirmed this decision isn't a permanent one, rather it is something under review that might get amended over the course of the next few weeks. It also seems counterintuitive that in forcing the crowd "backwards" away from the pitch, the effect will be to increase the density of the crowds which will be more likely to reult in an incident, "crush" barriers notwithstanding. Whilst it will require an increased investment is there not a possibility that the perimiter fence itself be "upgraded" to be a sufficient "crush" barrier in itself, allowing for the crowd to stay where it is, be more spaced out, and to be considered "safe" from whatever it is that is concerning the Health and Safety authorities? Unfortunately I expect it to be permanent thanks to the over zealous HSE. I can understand it a little if we had crowds of say 8000 but there is absolutely zero problems as far as I'm aware with crowds of up to 3000. Unfortunately the barriers are by the walk way and I believe the HSE demand that this be kept free of people. I reckon the club realise our unhappiness in this but their hands are tied and they have to do what the HSE say otherwise we will be locked out of our ground. The solution of course would be to move the terracing closer to the pitch but someone has to fund this so we have to do some fund raising or get to the 3rd round of the FA Cup and get Man U away! |
|
|
|
Post by georgieboy on Jul 6, 2018 19:29:18 GMT
I will be disappointed if I'm not able to stand in the spot I've occupied for the last (almost) 40 years. If we are now to be "moved back" away from the perimeter fence then not only will we be further away from the pitch, and action, but the atmosphere will change for both supporters and players alike. Dos has asked for a better atmosphere on more than one occasion so it sems counter-intuitive to move supporters away from the pitch. It will be good to get it confirmed this decision isn't a permanent one, rather it is something under review that might get amended over the course of the next few weeks. It also seems counterintuitive that in forcing the crowd "backwards" away from the pitch, the effect will be to increase the density of the crowds which will be more likely to reult in an incident, "crush" barriers notwithstanding. Whilst it will require an increased investment is there not a possibility that the perimiter fence itself be "upgraded" to be a sufficient "crush" barrier in itself, allowing for the crowd to stay where it is, be more spaced out, and to be considered "safe" from whatever it is that is concerning the Health and Safety authorities? Good points. This decision needs sorting and reversing. Ridiculous. |
|
|
|
Post by sallycat on Jul 6, 2018 21:04:30 GMT
I will be disappointed if I'm not able to stand in the spot I've occupied for the last (almost) 40 years. Well you can't stand there if you're in Fife can you  |
|
|
|
Post by timall on Jul 6, 2018 22:08:59 GMT
Well I doubt I will be missed for the first few games. Ironically the way my legs are feeling now I think that by the end of the 3 months I will need a seat anyway. That said I'm looking forward to Maidstone. Last time I was there I'm sure I watched the game from their perimeter fence. Until then I will be following our exploits on here.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jared on Jul 7, 2018 7:11:22 GMT
I will be disappointed if I'm not able to stand in the spot I've occupied for the last (almost) 40 years. If we are now to be "moved back" away from the perimeter fence then not only will we be further away from the pitch, and action, but the atmosphere will change for both supporters and players alike. Dos has asked for a better atmosphere on more than one occasion so it sems counter-intuitive to move supporters away from the pitch. It will be good to get it confirmed this decision isn't a permanent one, rather it is something under review that might get amended over the course of the next few weeks. It also seems counterintuitive that in forcing the crowd "backwards" away from the pitch, the effect will be to increase the density of the crowds which will be more likely to reult in an incident, "crush" barriers notwithstanding. Whilst it will require an increased investment is there not a possibility that the perimiter fence itself be "upgraded" to be a sufficient "crush" barrier in itself, allowing for the crowd to stay where it is, be more spaced out, and to be considered "safe" from whatever it is that is concerning the Health and Safety authorities? Good points. This decision needs sorting and reversing. Ridiculous. Write to your local councillor and MP then. This was always going to happen as the club progressed due to legislation and laws regarding Football grounds. The clubs hands are tied. |
|
|
|
Post by mca on Jul 7, 2018 7:40:07 GMT
Good points. This decision needs sorting and reversing. Ridiculous. Write to your local councillor and MP then. This was always going to happen as the club progressed due to legislation and laws regarding Football grounds. The clubs hands are tied. Everybody knows this isn't the club's decision but it really needs sorting. It's taken me 2 seasons to get my son into it, and this year I bought 4 season tickets for him and 2 mates, but I know for a fact if they're not able to stand at the front and A. Feel involved and B actually see the game in front of adults, their enjoyment will be hugely decreased. It's so frustrating because as far as I could tell there hasn't been a single issue with people standing against the fence. The statement said it's allowed elsewhere depending on what fense you have, is a new fense an option? |
|
trev
1st team skipper
In Matt We Trust
Posts: 2,477
|
Post by trev on Jul 7, 2018 16:21:25 GMT
A solid performance from the U's today to make it 2-0 in a game which we controlled from the outset, rarely looking in jeopardy. We clearly inspired the national squad to carve out an identical scoreline with similar solidity.
Our triptych of new signings, Dale Bennett, Dan Wishart and Charlie Clough all started today, plus striker Jonah Ayunga, whom I gather plays for Brighton's development squad. At only 21, he looks like a talented prospect, with bundles of pace and agility. I would very much like to see him play in a Sutton shirt again, although whether he's got Tommy Wright's quality of finishing remains to be seen...
In front of a crowd I'd guesstimate at 200-300, new boy Jonah came closest to opening the scoring, with a blazing shot just wide of the near post. He started upfront with Lafayette and looked sharp throughout the first half, although I thought Josh Taylor was our best player - he kept working both wings and was tireless in his endeavours.
Bolly also has a great chance from a shot well outside the area which earned a corner. Shortly thereafter, another venomous shot from Jonah Ayunga resulted in a diving save which again nearly saw us open the scoring.
After a short water break, Jonah again burst clear on goal but the keeper smothered it. Mere seconds later, a lackadaisical back pass from City resulted in a humiliating own goal.
Three minutes later, a blistering Lafayette shot pulled off a fingertip save from City's keeper, who was kept very busy in the opening 45.
We dominated the midfield in the opening half, largely owing to Josh Taylor's (Raheem) sterling work and electrifying pace of Dan Wishart, who was by far the paciest player on the pitch.
Another save from a looping JC header almost saw Sutton extend their lead in the first half, with an impressive Jonah Ayunga challenging for every lose ball.
City looked sluggish in comparison, although former Dulwich City midfielder Reise Allassani looked rather lively, albeit with a Neymar-esque penchant for diving. In spite of the fact that former U's stalwart Biamou started, he was pretty much anonymous in the opening half, and that was largely testament to the quality of our performance.
The second half saw City field a completely different starting 11, as well as 6 Sutton subs, which inevitably meant the second half was not played with anywhere near the intensity of the first.
Our formation seemed to switch from a 4-4-2 to more of a 4-5-1 and as a result we had less goalscoring opportunities, but nevertheless, a solid display from Sutton legend Dundas saw us extend our lead to 2-0.
Thereafter, a Sutton victory never looked in doubt, and some nimble trickery from Cadogan on the left flank to Bailey almost resulted in a third goal.
In spite of a further three Sutton substitutions I thought we held our shape well, and the ref was clearly thinking about a certain quarter final fixture because he blew up early to see us through with a comfortable 2-0 victory.
I appreciate this was only a friendly, but I was impressed with our composure, possession and goalscoring opportunities, and to play with this level of solidity against a side two tiers above us bodes well for the coming season.
It's been a good day for football, overall.
|
|
|
|
Post by Amber Aleman on Jul 7, 2018 22:03:51 GMT
It's all gone rather quiet on here. Has something else been happening today?  Never mind the heat at some of the World Cup venues, it was close to 30C at GGL this afternoon and so credit goes to both sets of players for producing a half-decent game of football. Even allowing for the comedy own goal, 2-0 didn't flatter Sutton against a side who have just won the League Two play-offs. Coventry may not have been at full strength, but neither were we, with both Tommy Wright and Kenny Davis missing from the squad. And the visitors, of course, had a deeper pool of players to draw on when the inevitable second-half substitutions were made. So a very encouraging start to our pre-season. As Trev mentioned, Jonah Ayunga was a real handful for the Coventry defence. If Dos has managed to sign him from Brighton, I can see him being a huge hitter in the National League. |
|
