Hourihane

Played well in my opinion and put himself about though wasn't involved as much in the second half for whatever reason.

 

Thought he had his best game in ages. Poor sub Given the paucity of Watkins display

 

I can understand the sub if you are changing to one up front and wanting to go with proper wingers on each side to stretch them but I'd have taken one of the two supposed holding players off

 

I think Watkins had a good game, the miss aside.

Couple of moments in particular. One where he somehow managed to keep the ball in and flick it over the defenders head before beating him to the ball and getting away from him (despite having his shorts pulled - ref bottled the booking). Second where he plucked the ball out of the sky, cut inside the defender and made the keeper pull off a terrific save.

 

First half, I thought Hourihane and Watkins were both playing well. We were just hopeless in the second half and the changes weren't great.

 

Miss? ??? Don't you mean the good save in the first half? ???

 

Assuming he means the chance he had, but decided to play a poor ball to Winnall instead.

 

I'm a fan of Hourihane and think he attracts undue criticism. I do however think he and Crowley are both best in the same central position. Hourihane is not effective in the wider role, having to track back and attempt to run forward and get crosses in. I'd prefer to see Crowley wider, his dribbling and mobility is superior to Connor's. To me Hourihane needs to be in central areas as much as possible, ideally with few defensive responsibilities.

 

If you read my post you'll see I mentioned the good save.

The miss was the decision to square it to a defender rather than shoot.

 

It was disapointing all four shots he had in the first half were off target. Unlucky to hit the post with his third one mind.

 

We slate the goal scorer and the fella who created said goal? Some people....