My take on today

Good win to get the confidence back up. Oldham were very poor at the back - worse than us I would have said. Still they caused us plenty of trouble in the air with numerous crosses coming in from the right and their long throws. Hit the foot of the post at one stage and had one disallowed for offside...but they were rubbish.

Some of the referees decisions were apalling though for a change most of them in our favour. Nardiello managed to get on the refs bad side and was stupidly booked for chelping I think..He never got a decision his way after that despite getting kicked & pulled all over.

3 quick goals in 14 mins largely finished the game as a spectacle.

Good work from Hayes chasing what looked like a lost cause down the right brought the first. He managed to shrug off the defender and keep the ball in play to find burns? (or was it Howard) who floated an inch perfect cross to beat the defence and find Nardiello who cooly finished with a neat header.

Second goal I am a bit hazy on but a cross found Devaney in space on the left. He appeared to take too much time and lose his chance but then stabbed a low shot into the bottom right corner...not sure how the keeper failed to save it but I suppose it was perfectly placed.

Third Goal came when a loose ball in the area fell to shuker who again from 10 yards placed it out of reach of the keeper into the bottom right hand corner.

Game over effectively and for the remainder of the half it was about even stevens with Carbon looking increasingly uncomfortable though I thought he made missed very little and played well.

Hayes? blasted one against the bar when it looked easier to score.

Fourth goal came as Nardiello was causing Oldham some difficulty and under pressure from defenders he found the unmarked Shuker who gleefully finished from 8 yards.

Could have had more as Nardiello and the Devaney squandered chances when an easy pass would have made goal No 5.

Comedy moment in 2nd half when Howard? challenged for a ball on the touch line.. Oldham player put it out of play but howard continued with his outstretched leg and placed his heel firmly into the crown jewels of the unfortunate oldham player who was now in his own little universe of pain. Strangely it took the man in the hat several minutes to realise the player would not continue despite the vehement gesticulations of his physio!!

Ratings

Colgan 7 looked largely untroubled though he hesitated a couple of times from crosses.

Williams 6 pretty solid though a number of crosses were getting into the area from the RHS.

Carbon 7 looked pretty comfortabe with the defending but is carrying an injury and left the field at HT. As we all knew at season start hes not going to complete 30 games. Pity as I think hes quality when not injured. We need cover in this position by next week..no excuses Rich T.

Reid 7 Another solid performance never looked troubled

Hassle 7 Good performance

Devaney 7 Looked OK, took a good goal but he and williams sqaundered good posession when it looked easier to get a cross in.

Howard 7 lookerd OK to me ..good home debut, fitted in well if a little unfit.

Burns 8 Tireless as ever worked hard with howard to close up the middle ground.

Shuker 9 MOM Gave 100% as ever and with 2 good finishes deserves the credit. May have had his hattrick had Nardiello been more alert.

Hayes 7 Started well and made the first goal. Looked lively for the most part. Needs another goal or two to get some confidence.

Nardiello 8 Played well despite my snipes. Took a good goal and for 75 mins worked hard (much to my surprise) but should have come off then for Jarman IMHO. Seems to be crrying a calf strain.

Subs.

Wroe 6 why bother? put Devaney clean through though.
Richards 5 Won a couple of headers but offers nowt that BBB doesn't. Poor IMHO Jarman is a much better prospect

On the whole we took three early chances and the game was over. Ild stick with this starting 11 but get some quality cover for Carbon and switch the bench around.

 

Don't rock the boat Spartacus

The Gaffer says we have plenty of cover in defence, so I believe him. Even if I can't seen where it's coming from! :S

 

Hmm...

Hayes shot that hit the bar- unlucky rather than poor finish. He did everything right.

Devaney's goal was an excellent finish- keeper had no chance with it.

Richards could stand on his head for 90 minutes and be better than Conlon. It isn't saying much though.

 

Im afraid your last comment

..sums up your football knowledge to a tee.

Devaney hesitated and nearly fecked a good chance up.

If BBB had missed Hayes chance you and others would be settinh up a lynch mob. Now get things into perspective...

Devaney when clean through on the keeper could not muster a shot within 10 yards of the post.

I'm not saying hes ***** but hes not that great either.

 

RE: Im afraid your last comment

Conlon is a joke,the quicker he goes the better for all concerned. The man is a DONKEY?

 

Yawn

 

it's true im afraid

 

In your opinion

Lets agree to differ eh?

I dont care who scores the goals as long as we win.

I will say however that I believe

1. Marc Richards IS a donkey.

2. Nardiello is lazy, injury prone and wont play 30 games.

3. Hayes is lazy and lacks a cutting edge or any pace.

I believe that BBB is hated mostly by those that think Nardiello is our saviour, the same people that disliked Chopra when he arrived and mostly either dont attend games or sit in the Ponty.

 

a couple of questions

what is the forward players job? and which of our three main forwards (ignoring richards) is the worst at this job?

 

Depends on what the manager has asked him to do!

Can you not concede that Ritchie has asked BBB to shore up a weak midfield and defend set pieces knowing full well BBB's lack of mobility and pace.

Game after game BBB has appeared to play this role and I find it incomprehensible he was not doing exactly what ritchie wanted.

Yesterday he had Howard in central midfield to shore up matters and opted for the Hayes / Nads partnership up front.

BTW I dont think we were that more mobile up front yesterday than any other game..we just got early goals (two from midfield) which effectively ended the game after 15 mins.

I would still stick with yesterdays line up though and give them a chance to forge a partnership. I believed Hayes and Nardiello would get bags full this season and still do.

To claim BBB is a donkey though utter is rubbish.

I also think we looked noticably weaker defending crosses than usual..wonder why?

 

RE: Depends on what the manager has asked him to do!

I still think we should try Baz at centre half.

 

forwards are there to score goals

if conlon isnt there to do that then he should be retrained as a midfielder or defender and play in that position. he shouldnt be allowed to play up front whilst acting as a defender.

interestingly this season nardiello has been scoring at a rate of one goal every 281 minutes on the pitch, this rate is THREE times as good as barry conlon who based on his current goalscoring rate will need to play 1664 minutes to get nardiellos 2 goals and 2496 minutes to score the three goals that hayes has bagged. that is a massive 41 hours and 36 minutes of football to score three goals which as a forward player is simply not good enough for any team.

 

I'm afraid players play where the manager tells them to do so.

otherwise they are dropped and if you cant get that into your head then there is no hope!

He was not playing BBB as an out and out forward.

 

im confused

nardiello and hayes both went back for corners and freekicks yesterday but they still meanaged to RUN up the pitch again so that when we broke forwards there was somebody to pass to. when conlon goes back to defend he walks back up the pitch. obviously he isnt helping the defence out at that point because WE have the ball.

are you telling me that ritchie tells conlon to walk back up the pitch and that is his role?

 

Im telling you Ritchie knows full well BBB's limitations

As he knows Hayes and Nardiello's.

BBB defends, passes,holds the ball better and works harder generally

Nardiello and Hayes are quicker more mobile and are better finishers. But they can be Lazy and Nardiello particularly is shocking when he cant be bothered i.e. Scu.nthorpe away and is also injury prone.

Each player has his merits and the manager knows what they are.

BBB has his uses and certainly merits a subs shirt ahead of Richards.

 

conlon puts more effort in than the others?

could you then explain the walking up the pitch that happens in every single game he plays in? im talking about when mr's burns, kay, austin etc all run forwards and mr conlon is still walking behind them.

that isnt effort or commitment, that is lazy and workshy.

 

I think he does that once or twice a game

Generally after a spurt of running the length of the pitch.

I will tell you this, you wont see him not running for a ball which he could quite easily reach of shirk a tackle. Not a statement that could be said of Nardiello, a younger player of much higher fitness levels and potential.

Much as I dont think Ritchie is the best man for the managers job, I still think he knows more about football than either of us and he has largely thought BBB worthy of inclusion.

 

ive just checked the stats

and with nardiello playing we have scored 8 and conceeded 8, with conlon we have 9 for and 10 against.

Obviously we have played more with conlon than nardiello so going back to minutes per goal we can see that as a team we score a goal every 70 minutes that nardiello plays while it takes us 92 minutes to score a goal with conlon playing.

Defensively we let in a goal every 70 minutes while nardiello plays but only once every 83 minutes that conlon plays.

From this we can work out a few things. Firstly with nardiello playing we will score more goals but will also conceed more than with Conlon playing. Secondly we can see that a team featuring nardiello scores a goal and lets one in at the same rate so over the course of a season we can assume our goal difference would be 0 if Nardiello played the full 46 games. With Conlon however we conceed goals more often than we score them, this shows that over a season our goal difference would be a minus figure.

Exactly how many goals would we score and conceed? Well for nardiello we would score and conceed 59 goals. A goal difference of 0.
for Conlon we would score 45 and conceed 50. This is a goal difference of -5.

Of course this is only based on 14 games and doesnt take into account the fact that at times they have BOTH been on the pitch together but it does show that considering Barry Conlon is an attacking player his presence in the team does not help out the defence sufficiently to excuse his lack of prowess in front of goal.

As a side note the stats for Hayes show that as with nardiello the team scores a goal every 70 minutes but we conceed one every 80 minutes. This shows that attacking he is on a par with nardiello and defending he is just behind Conlon. The goal difference would be +8.

 

**** on my shoe

the feckin lot of ya,s

 

RE: Depends on what the manager has asked him to do!

Just because Baz defends set pieces very well, does not mean he'll make a centre half. Its a total different ball game. Will he be able to read a game? Can he even tackle?
If hes up against any average pacey striker he'd get caught out straight away for pace. He should however be at least our first choice striker to come on as a sub.