Jump to content
IGNORED

Eliasson


Charlie BCFC

Recommended Posts

Like a deer in a headlights (IMO) unfortunately. Wrong decision to bring him on with the game on a knife edge. Pretty much all attacks after him and COD came on were from the two of them losing their man. First thing he did was an awful dive which the ref was having none of. 

Clearly has a good left foot though. Clever shot toward the end which would've been a great goal had it gone in. Looks like he's going to be trusted to be in/around the first team rather than loaned out/in the 23s

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, petehinton said:

Like a deer in a headlights (IMO) unfortunately. Wrong decision to bring him on with the game on a knife edge. Pretty much all attacks after him and COD came on were from the two of them losing their man. First thing he did was an awful dive which the ref was having none of. 

Clearly has a good left foot though. Clever shot toward the end which would've been a great goal had it gone in. Looks like he's going to be trusted to be in/around the first team rather than loaned out/in the 23s

Thank you, do see him possibly starting on Tuesday my first look at him will be next Saturday v Millwall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Flint says No said:

Thank you, do see him possibly starting on Tuesday my first look at him will be next Saturday v Millwall.

Potentially. The type of player he seems to be, he may be one of those players that are typically better off the bench (Sproule, Burns esq) but we'll see 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't get why play him on the right. Realise lee wanted o'dowda on as well, but every time he got in a good position he'd have to cut back inside.

Thought he had some good touches, and delivery wasn't too bad, but didn't put himself about enough, chickened out for alot of challenges against Robinson, and lost his man for the goal (though I thought hegeler massively over committed meaning he got his shot off unchallenged).

think we need another attacking player, but would like some more experience in the team 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, EDoubleD said:

I don't get why play him on the right. Realise lee wanted o'dowda on as well, but every time he got in a good position he'd have to cut back inside.

Thought he had some good touches, and delivery wasn't too bad, but didn't put himself about enough, chickened out for alot of challenges against Robinson, and lost his man for the goal (though I thought hegeler massively over committed meaning he got his shot off unchallenged).

think we need another attacking player, but would like some more experience in the team 

Cut inside so he can have lots of shots and score goals. This is how Ronaldo, Messi, Neymar and some of the worlds best wingers score.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, EDoubleD said:

I don't get why play him on the right. Realise lee wanted o'dowda on as well, but every time he got in a good position he'd have to cut back inside.

Thought he had some good touches, and delivery wasn't too bad, but didn't put himself about enough, chickened out for alot of challenges against Robinson, and lost his man for the goal (though I thought hegeler massively over committed meaning he got his shot off unchallenged).

think we need another attacking player, but would like some more experience in the team 

Cotterill would've eaten him alive. Complete mismatch in size. He gave O'Dowda nothing 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He 100% shouldn't have played - you could see by how he moved he wasn't suited to the league and needed to practice and play some cup games first.

although saying that - he did whip in 2 dangerous crosses which could've led to goals, just think it was the wrong decision to bring in a new signing who is unfamiliar to the league when 2-1 down in a stadium where the fans are outsinging you

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Eastside Moonwalker said:

He 100% shouldn't have played - you could see by how he moved he wasn't suited to the league and needed to practice and play some cup games first.

although saying that - he did whip in 2 dangerous crosses which could've led to goals, just think it was the wrong decision to bring in a new signing who is unfamiliar to the league when 2-1 down in a stadium where the fans are outsinging you

The fact is we were not 2-1 down when we brought him on.

:no:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, petehinton said:

Like a deer in a headlights (IMO) unfortunately. Wrong decision to bring him on with the game on a knife edge. Pretty much all attacks after him and COD came on were from the two of them losing their man. First thing he did was an awful dive which the ref was having none of. 

Clearly has a good left foot though. Clever shot toward the end which would've been a great goal had it gone in. Looks like he's going to be trusted to be in/around the first team rather than loaned out/in the 23s

Well obviously he's gunna be in the first team! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Eastside Moonwalker said:

He 100% shouldn't have played - you could see by how he moved he wasn't suited to the league and needed to practice and play some cup games first.

although saying that - he did whip in 2 dangerous crosses which could've led to goals, just think it was the wrong decision to bring in a new signing who is unfamiliar to the league when 2-1 down in a stadium where the fans are outsinging you

What do you mean practice :laugh: and what cup games

Link to comment
Share on other sites

An absolutely bizarre decision from lj and blame firmly rests at his door. 

You are 1-1 away to an established side, who in the 2nd half were on top. To throw on someone with no experience with the clear aim to win the game was a poor decision....one change perhaps but two, downright wrong.

Lj must learn from these mistakes.....he must be more savvy.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Alessandro said:

Glad to see in true OTIB fashion a new player has been judged and nearly written off by some after 20 minutes of his first appearance.....:thumbsup:

I can only see comments stating it was LJ's error to bring on a new player at that time in the match?

Can't see anyone writing the player off?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, RumRed said:

I can only see comments stating it was LJ's error to bring on a new player at that time in the match?

Can't see anyone writing the player off?

Not so much written off, hence the cheeky emoji, but I think there is a perhaps a little too much criticism of the player for a 20 minute cameo.

LJ bringing him on is a different matter that I didnt comment on...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Londoner said:

An absolutely bizarre decision from lj and blame firmly rests at his door. 

You are 1-1 away to an established side, who in the 2nd half were on top. To throw on someone with no experience with the clear aim to win the game was a poor decision....one change perhaps but two, downright wrong.

Lj must learn from these mistakes.....he must be more savvy.

 

I don't think it was nieve decision to put an attacking player in Eliasson on, we deserved at least a point if not more from the game and a few players were looking tired at that stage. If Đurić had been fit then he would have been used upfront as well. I thought Johnson shouldn't have criticised Eliasson in his interview afterwards for not tracking back. Johnson made the decision to put him on to be the attacking threat and the lad has only been in the country 3days and playing in the championship. I would have brought Hinds on as well and taken a defender of for the last 5/10 minutes

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Londoner said:

An absolutely bizarre decision from lj and blame firmly rests at his door. 

You are 1-1 away to an established side, who in the 2nd half were on top. To throw on someone with no experience with the clear aim to win the game was a poor decision....one change perhaps but two, downright wrong.

Lj must learn from these mistakes.....he must be more savvy.

 

The poor decision was not bringing Eliasson on, it was taking Brownhill off. For me Elliasson for Paterson (who was poor and needed to come off) would have made much more sense rather than bringing on Colin 'no end product' O'Dowda.

If Brownhill had stayed on, their 2nd goal doesn't happy, cos he would have stayed with the runner.

LJ error for sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Londoner said:

An absolutely bizarre decision from lj and blame firmly rests at his door. 

You are 1-1 away to an established side, who in the 2nd half were on top. To throw on someone with no experience with the clear aim to win the game was a poor decision....one change perhaps but two, downright wrong.

Lj must learn from these mistakes.....he must be more savvy.

 

As I said on an earlier thread , I felt it was giving up the midfield when LJ brought the two wide men on .

There is a part of LJ that believes Roy of the Rovers was real and he dreams the impossible.

When it comes off it is magic but mostly we lose out to more pragmatic teams.

Sometimes , particularly away from home , shutting up shop and caution are the way to go. 

IMHO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, old_eastender said:

The poor decision was not bringing Eliasson on, it was taking Brownhill off. For me Elliasson for Paterson (who was poor and needed to come off) would have made much more sense rather than bringing on Colin 'no end product' O'Dowda.

If Brownhill had stayed on, their 2nd goal doesn't happy, cos he would have stayed with the runner.

LJ error for sure.

O'Dowda offers nothing. Really disappointed with him since signing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, 50cal said:

I don't think it was nieve decision to put an attacking player in Eliasson on, we deserved at least a point if not more from the game and a few players were looking tired at that stage. If Đurić had been fit then he would have been used upfront as well. I thought Johnson shouldn't have criticised Eliasson in his interview afterwards for not tracking back. Johnson made the decision to put him on to be the attacking threat and the lad has only been in the country 3days and playing in the championship. I would have brought Hinds on as well and taken a defender of for the last 5/10 minutes

I shall have to listen to LJ but if he criticised him that is more than poor. I really do not like nor see why a manager has to name and shame in public more so when the guy is new, new to England and only played for 1/4 of a match. 

What does that do other than enable him to release his anger? As far as the player is concerned he now spends the weekend totally deflated and not a little humiliated. Once again I think that is very poor man management.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...