FAC1R vs. Slough Town (match-thread)

[VCLXI]

Was a bit of a damp squib. (Pardon the pun.) From where I was it looked like a blatant penalty for Slough, the highlights will clear up any doubt but it did look a poor call from the ref. As did their keeper handling of the box, but again, highlights should clear it up.

Hi hum, not much else to add which hasn't already been said. An enjoyable visit as always regardless of any result, plus the first time in a while I've been able to watch two home games two weekends in row.

[os]

Nov 10, 2018 22:17:24 GMT VCLXI said:

Was a bit of a damp squib. (Pardon the pun.) From where I was it looked like a blatant penalty for Slough, the highlights will clear up any doubt but it did look a poor call from the ref. As did their keeper handling of the box, but again, highlights should clear it up.

Hi hum, not much else to add which hasn't already been said. An enjoyable visit as always regardless of any result, plus the first time in a while I've been able to watch two home games two weekends in row.

From where I was it looked a blatant penalty in real time and on video it looks even worse, we are very lucky to still be in the FA Cup. I thought Cloughie was immense today, both at the back and up front, but it shows how we are lacking in that area to need to push him forward.

We looked tired today, lacked energy, and I think Dos is spot on with his assessment, we were second almost everywhere apart from JC and CC, when we did get opportunities, the ball often ran away or it ended with an abysmal cross. Since we lost Tommy to injury we are lacking a bit of sparkle, its not effort, but we are missing them Roarie Deacon or Bolly moments of old to get us over the line.

If we are staying with the front 3, they need to do a lot of work together on the training pitch.

[oohaah]

Nov 10, 2018 22:17:24 GMT VCLXI said:

but it did look a poor call from the ref. As did their keeper handling of the box,

For once, we can't blame the ref for that one. If it was outside the box then the assistant should have been best placed to make that call.

[baboonfish]

As far as I can see we've been lining up essentially in a 4-2-4 which is not, imo, a formation that has a place in the modern game. It allows the opponents to control the midfield, slough kept it simple, defended well, pushed their two forwards up and kept a rigid bank of 4 in the middle. Easty and Kenny didn't play badly but were very much outnumbered. That said we probably created the better chances, easty was clean through but a poor touch saw a great chance slip away while KC should have got his shot on target. Their big chance in the second half came courtesy of two big errors.

I felt we were just starting to get on top in an extremely open end to end second half and was bemused by the change. Clough did do some decent work up front but he's a hugely important part of our defence. However I do understand the idea behind the tactical switch but taking off both JA and AD was not the right move. I think JA was starting to get into the game and would have been a better option than TB or KC to play off clough.

Yes we were a bit fortunate but in terms of clear chances we edged it and as dos says we won't be that bad next time. Hopefully that's the end of the 424 experiment and I'm sure we will see a striker come in soon.

[markf]

I'm not sure we have been lining up as 4-2-4 but more of how it has transpired. People need to remember that we have two very young and inexperienced players up front and as Dos has often said in the past, youngsters don't always perform to the level that is known they can.

One of our problems yesterday was that the ball kept coming back as we failed to hold it up front. Nisbet (no 5) is a very experienced defender having played at Maidenhead for a number of seasons and he showed that against the inexperience of our youngsters. When this happens the more seasoned of our team need to be on their game and I am not sure that they all were yesterday.

I haven't listened to Dos's full interview but would suspect putting Cloughie up front was an attempt to win more ball because as the second half went on it just wasn't sticking. In the end he was the only player to extend Jack Turner as all the other shots we had on target were hit straight at him.

Slough stuck to their game plan and while many think they should have won, I think a draw was probably right. They had two shots on target to our five and just one other. As for their penalty claim, I have seen the clip and their player barges into Dean B before going down in the ensuing tangle. No pen for me, although bearing in mind the amount of soft free-kicks given during the match perhaps it is a surprise a free-kick wasn't given one way or the other.

It wasn't a great spectacle yesterday but then not all cup ties are and the heavy rain must have made things difficult for all players. Even so, an all-pay gate of over 1800 is decent.

When U's did get the ball on the ground though, we looked to have the ability to open them up but either failed with the final ball or the attempt on goal wasn't quite good enough.

Jamie B's booking was totally unnecessary considering the ref was dealing with the deliberate handball and he is now suspended for the replay.

U's will have to create club history to get through as having drawn a 1st round tie at GGL, we have lost the replay (three separate occasions) without scoring and have never won a cup tie at either of Slough's previous grounds. Not including cup finals or ground shares, I think this will be the first time we have played a team at a third home venue, although I stand to be corrected on that one.

U's are still in the hat, so not all doom and gloom and while we have the long trip to Gateshead next week, Slough have a challenge with the visit of Woking.

[davef]

Interesting stat Mark. Could we have played Corinthian-Casuals on three grounds ?

[markf]

I did say not including ground-shares. They were lodgers at Sandy Lane and Champion Hill. If you include The Oval and Tolworth, that's only two.

[davethegrave]

This is very worrying. I hate to criticise the players but we really need to sign a goal scoring striker. When Tommy got injured why did we let Ross leave? Some very strange decisions. Then when we are struggling to score we take off both our strikers and put a centre back up front? Granted Cloughie did his best but maybe we should've put Taylor on to run at them.

Also just a thought. Clough? Slough? Shouldn't they be pronounced the same??

[davef]

Whoops, Mark, that'll teach me to read what is written !

[baggiesansutton]

Nov 11, 2018 21:28:33 GMT davethegrave said:

This is very worrying. I hate to criticise the players but we really need to sign a goal scoring striker. When Tommy got injured why did we let Ross leave? Some very strange decisions. Then when we are struggling to score we take off both our strikers and put a centre back up front? Granted Cloughie did his best but maybe we should've put Taylor on to run at them.

Also just a thought. Clough? Slough? Shouldn't they be pronounced the same??

Doswell covered it in his post match interview regarding Lafayette,purely a financial decision which concerns me much more than anything that's happened on the pitch this season. If things really are that tight then it doesn't bode well for any kind of sudden progression.

[Andy K]

Imagine how tired we would have been if we'd played Barnet midweek as originally planned!

Again it's probably another opportunity to manage expectations. I've read a lot of stuff over the weekend on Social Media pointing the finger at certain players (Drinan seems to be getting the most flack) and some of the most vocal being some who have only been following Sutton a couple of years, and on same said social media there wasn't one person who predicted a score for it to be anything apart from a Sutton win. And of course there's a lot of shouts for "we need another striker", not realising that to be sustainable we may have to let someone go to get one (and like for like - you get rid of Drinan, you'll get another young unproven loan striker).

Dos's reaction in his post match interview showed how angry he was. Not seen him like that for a while. If we'd lost and played better he wouldn't have been that angry, but one thing shone through was the determination that "we won't play that bad again". We won't and I believe that Slough have had their chance. But we do have to remember that we won't win the league this year, and with the resources available to us we shouldn't. But we've still only lost 3 times in 23 games this season (not counting a penalty shootout). That's a record any team will be proud of.

Worrying is the club about to go bust. Which isn't happening. Worrying is us having form like Maidenhead. Which isn't happening. There's nothing to worry about if you accept what our expectations are.

[readingrebel123]

Nov 11, 2018 20:51:24 GMT markf said:

I'm not sure we have been lining up as 4-2-4 but more of how it has transpired. People need to remember that we have two very young and inexperienced players up front and as Dos has often said in the past, youngsters don't always perform to the level that is known they can.

One of our problems yesterday was that the ball kept coming back as we failed to hold it up front. Nisbet (no 5) is a very experienced defender having played at Maidenhead for a number of seasons and he showed that against the inexperience of our youngsters. When this happens the more seasoned of our team need to be on their game and I am not sure that they all were yesterday.

I haven't listened to Dos's full interview but would suspect putting Cloughie up front was an attempt to win more ball because as the second half went on it just wasn't sticking. In the end he was the only player to extend Jack Turner as all the other shots we had on target were hit straight at him.

Slough stuck to their game plan and while many think they should have won, I think a draw was probably right. They had two shots on target to our five and just one other. As for their penalty claim, I have seen the clip and their player barges into Dean B before going down in the ensuing tangle. No pen for me, although bearing in mind the amount of soft free-kicks given during the match perhaps it is a surprise a free-kick wasn't given one way or the other.

It wasn't a great spectacle yesterday but then not all cup ties are and the heavy rain must have made things difficult for all players. Even so, an all-pay gate of over 1800 is decent.

When U's did get the ball on the ground though, we looked to have the ability to open them up but either failed with the final ball or the attempt on goal wasn't quite good enough.

Jamie B's booking was totally unnecessary considering the ref was dealing with the deliberate handball and he is now suspended for the replay.

U's will have to create club history to get through as having drawn a 1st round tie at GGL, we have lost the replay (three separate occasions) without scoring and have never won a cup tie at either of Slough's previous grounds. Not including cup finals or ground shares, I think this will be the first time we have played a team at a third home venue, although I stand to be corrected on that one.

U's are still in the hat, so not all doom and gloom and while we have the long trip to Gateshead next week, Slough have a challenge with the visit of Woking.

Heavy rain was forecast so watering the pitch pre match was a bit of a strange thing to do.

[readingrebel123]

Any idea what sort of support you'll bring to the replay?

[Stewart]

Nov 12, 2018 11:11:44 GMT readingrebel123 said:

Nov 11, 2018 20:51:24 GMT markf said:

I'm not sure we have been lining up as 4-2-4 but more of how it has transpired. People need to remember that we have two very young and inexperienced players up front and as Dos has often said in the past, youngsters don't always perform to the level that is known they can.

One of our problems yesterday was that the ball kept coming back as we failed to hold it up front. Nisbet (no 5) is a very experienced defender having played at Maidenhead for a number of seasons and he showed that against the inexperience of our youngsters. When this happens the more seasoned of our team need to be on their game and I am not sure that they all were yesterday.

I haven't listened to Dos's full interview but would suspect putting Cloughie up front was an attempt to win more ball because as the second half went on it just wasn't sticking. In the end he was the only player to extend Jack Turner as all the other shots we had on target were hit straight at him.

Slough stuck to their game plan and while many think they should have won, I think a draw was probably right. They had two shots on target to our five and just one other. As for their penalty claim, I have seen the clip and their player barges into Dean B before going down in the ensuing tangle. No pen for me, although bearing in mind the amount of soft free-kicks given during the match perhaps it is a surprise a free-kick wasn't given one way or the other.

It wasn't a great spectacle yesterday but then not all cup ties are and the heavy rain must have made things difficult for all players. Even so, an all-pay gate of over 1800 is decent.

When U's did get the ball on the ground though, we looked to have the ability to open them up but either failed with the final ball or the attempt on goal wasn't quite good enough.

Jamie B's booking was totally unnecessary considering the ref was dealing with the deliberate handball and he is now suspended for the replay.

U's will have to create club history to get through as having drawn a 1st round tie at GGL, we have lost the replay (three separate occasions) without scoring and have never won a cup tie at either of Slough's previous grounds. Not including cup finals or ground shares, I think this will be the first time we have played a team at a third home venue, although I stand to be corrected on that one.

U's are still in the hat, so not all doom and gloom and while we have the long trip to Gateshead next week, Slough have a challenge with the visit of Woking.

Heavy rain was forecast so watering the pitch pre match was a bit of a strange thing to do.

The manager wants a damp surface at the start of play.

[trev]

Not much to add to Andy's observations, save to point out that over a third of our way into the season, these are our stats so far:

P: 18, W: 9, D: 6, L: 3, F: 25, A: 20, Pts: 33.

At this point into last season these were our stats:

P: 18, W: 8, D: 6, L: 4, F: 24, A: 22, Pts: 30.

So in summary, we have more wins, fewer losses, more goals scored, fewer goals conceded, and more points than we had in the most successful season in our club's history.

I'm not sure what the expectations of others are, but in all honesty I think we're exceeding expectations at the moment and as things stand, I don't see any cause for concern. Quite the opposite, in fact.