Callum O'Dowda Tweet

[Vincent Vega]

Fair play lad.

[Lrrr]

He was given no chance to do anything given we were just punting it down the middle. 

[ZiderEyed]

1 minute ago, hodge said:

He was given no chance to do anything given we were just punting it down the middle. 

As soon as we actually moved the ball in to wide areas we looked so much better.

[Swede]

Fair play to him.

We all know we are much better than that performance.

 

[Xiled]

Preston spoiled the game with an excess of time-wasting, feigning injury and gamesmanship but their front line and midfield stopped us playing out from the back. The consequence was an excess of long ball in the first half and too many sideways and back passes in the second half.

When the game finally stretched with 20 minutes to go, we started to get behind them with Eliasson providing some good crosses and corners. But we were then relying on Bobby and others to head a goal. Flint was trying his best but was then out of position for PNE's second.

As has been said in another thread we need to find a way to win games like this, Burton and Millwall. We do not break stubborn teams down very often.

 

[Topper 123]

Let’s hope the other players are this honest and believe they can deliver 

[The hand of RO'D]

I already rated COD highly but that’s just increased tenfold with that tweet.

It shows a lot of bollocks coming out and saying that wasn’t a good enough performance, what a genuine guy.

Its nice knowing we have players who genuinely care about us as a club and aren’t here anymore to collect a wage.

[steviestevieneville]

7 hours ago, Xiled said:

Preston spoiled the game with an excess of time-wasting, feigning injury and gamesmanship but their front line and midfield stopped us playing out from the back. The consequence was an excess of long ball in the first half and too many sideways and back passes in the second half.

When the game finally stretched with 20 minutes to go, we started to get behind them with Eliasson providing some good crosses and corners. But we were then relying on Bobby and others to head a goal. Flint was trying his best but was then out of position for PNE's second.

As has been said in another thread we need to find a way to win games like this, Burton and Millwall. We do not break stubborn teams down very often.

 

100% 

[LondonBristolian]

7 hours ago, Xiled said:

Preston spoiled the game with an excess of time-wasting, feigning injury and gamesmanship but their front line and midfield stopped us playing out from the back. The consequence was an excess of long ball in the first half and too many sideways and back passes in the second half.

When the game finally stretched with 20 minutes to go, we started to get behind them with Eliasson providing some good crosses and corners. But we were then relying on Bobby and others to head a goal. Flint was trying his best but was then out of position for PNE's second.

As has been said in another thread we need to find a way to win games like this, Burton and Millwall. We do not break stubborn teams down very often.

 

Agree with pretty much all of this but I don’t think Flint was so much out of position as he had been sent forward to try and help us get an equaliser. It was a gamble and it didn’t work.

However ultimately I think Bryan’s injury was what did for our chances of getting something from a poor performance. I get why LJ felt he had to gamble and get a striker on but it left us with no left back and that was where the second goal came from.

[tinman85]

9 hours ago, Vincent Vega said:

Fair play lad.

Drives me mad players with all the talk on twitter before and after games. How we didn't turn up for this game is beyond me. Do the talking on the pitch. 

[RedM]

1 minute ago, LondonBristolian said:

Agree with pretty much all of this but I don’t think Flint was so much out of position as he had been sent forward to try and help us get an equaliser. It was a gamble and it didn’t work.

However ultimately I think Bryan’s injury was what did for our chances of getting something from a poor performance. I get why LJ felt he had to gamble and get a striker on but it left us with no left back and that was where the second goal came from.

Indeed. And I wonder what Magnusson must be thinking now. He looked warmed up and expecting to come on and then Woodrow got the nod. Granted Woodrow scored a consolation goal, might even count for something one day, but to see a player ready and available get overlooked is quite a kick in the teeth I think. He was said to have played better at Sheffied Weds and I think his long throw could have been valuable too last night. Oh well I don't think we will see much more of him now maybe

[Dastardly and Muttley]

2 minutes ago, RedM said:

Indeed. And I wonder what Magnússon must be thinking now. He looked warmed up and expecting to come on and then Woodrow got the nod. Granted Woodrow scored a consolation goal, might even count for something one day, but to see a player ready and available get overlooked is quite a kick in the teeth I think. He was said to have played better at Sheffied Weds and I think his long throw could have been valuable too last night. Oh well I don't think we will see much more of him now maybe

Especially as it was v Preston that LJ tore him apart last time. Would have been fired up and ready to prove himself.

[Super]

9 minutes ago, RedM said:

Indeed. And I wonder what Magnússon must be thinking now. He looked warmed up and expecting to come on and then Woodrow got the nod. Granted Woodrow scored a consolation goal, might even count for something one day, but to see a player ready and available get overlooked is quite a kick in the teeth I think. He was said to have played better at Sheffied Weds and I think his long throw could have been valuable too last night. Oh well I don't think we will see much more of him now maybe

Why would we bring on another defender when chasing the game? Seemed a no brainer to bring a striker on.

[BRISTOL86]

12 minutes ago, Dastardly and Muttley said:

Especially as it was v Preston that LJ tore him apart last time. Would have been fired up and ready to prove himself.

We’re we 1 or 2 down when Woodrow came on? Either way,  can’t really see any argument about giving the nod to a striker over a defender in that situation. 

[RedM]

4 minutes ago, Super said:

Why would we bring on another defender when chasing the game? Seemed a no brainer to bring a striker on.

I was thinking more that we were encouraging Flint to go forward, (think that's where he was returning from when they scored their second) and Magnusson would at least have the long throw to try to get the ball into the box for him or others. Something we hadn't been doing well all night, and to be fair we had struggled all night down that flank anyway. As I said though Woodrow scored and we will never know if didderent subs were made what might have happened.

[Roger Red Hat]

1 hour ago, Thatch35 said:

Easy way of making yourself look good. He's a footballer so saying he 'genuinely cares about the club' is doubtful. You must live in some fantasy.

Different to the miserable dystopia that you live in.

[LondonBristolian]

1 hour ago, RedM said:

Indeed. And I wonder what Magnússon must be thinking now. He looked warmed up and expecting to come on and then Woodrow got the nod. Granted Woodrow scored a consolation goal, might even count for something one day, but to see a player ready and available get overlooked is quite a kick in the teeth I think. He was said to have played better at Sheffied Weds and I think his long throw could have been valuable too last night. Oh well I don't think we will see much more of him now maybe

I don’t reckon Magnússon would have taken that personally. Maybe we should have started with him in hindsight but it was clearly a tactical decision and, had we not done that, we would have been 1-down and committed to 4-5-1 for the rest of the game. I actually thought we improved after Woodrow came on, although that may have happened anyway. Unfortunately most of what came into the box was better suited to Djuric...

[BobBobSuperBob]

1 hour ago, RedM said:

Indeed. And I wonder what Magnússon must be thinking now. He looked warmed up and expecting to come on and then Woodrow got the nod. Granted Woodrow scored a consolation goal, might even count for something one day, but to see a player ready and available get overlooked is quite a kick in the teeth I think. He was said to have played better at Sheffied Weds and I think his long throw could have been valuable too last night. Oh well I don't think we will see much more of him now maybe

I agree with lots you normally say M but if we are going to bring on a player because he has a long throw , at this level , we have problems

There are a handful of players that we (Lee) increasingly only uses in emergencies / when we have no options and HM falls into that category IMHO

Vyner is an obvious example atm , as are Taylor and Woodrow to some degree

- Suddenly seems to have lost faith in Kelly deputising  ? Too ?

[RedM]

7 minutes ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

I agree with lots you normally say M but if we are going to bring on a player because he has a long throw , at this level , we have problems

There are a handful of players that we (Lee) increasingly only uses in emergencies / when we have no options and HM falls into that category IMHO

Vyner is an obvious example atm , as are Taylor and Woodrow to some degree

- Suddenly seems to have lost faith in Kelly deputising  ? Too ?

Yes, I guess I'm clutching at straws. Preston's tactics and antics aside I really thought we were playing like we were missing a key someone last night, not much was clicking. I thought it was Pack not starting, think he might do more than he often gets credit for. Bailey Wright was back so it wasn't that, Baker was playing too. The only other ever present was Joe who was out of sorts due to injury or being targeted, maybe he is more vital than many believe? The rest of the midfield, Korey, Brownhill etc have been in and out of the line up so not particularly them. Diedhieu we have been without for a few matches so used to playing without him now. It was an odd match.

[BCFC Grim]

Don't players even get told my the clubs commercial department to write things? Not sure it happens here but I know there are instances of it elsewhere. Either way, hope he doesn't lose to much confidence after last night, been one of our best players over the last couple of months.

[Red-Robbo]

He was at least the one player (before Eliasson's introduction) who tried to carry the ball forward and actually dribble it up the field. 

We seemed obsessed with keeping possession last night, but not in gaining yards forward. 

A slow passing game will only allow them to go back in numbers. Preston's second showed us what a quick break and actually running with the ball can do.

[Nogbad the Bad]

52 minutes ago, RedM said:

Yes, I guess I'm clutching at straws. Preston's tactics and antics aside I really thought we were playing like we were missing a key someone last night, not much was clicking. I thought it was Pack not starting, think he might do more than he often gets credit for. Bailey Wright was back so it wasn't that, Baker was playing too. The only other ever present was Joe who was out of sorts due to injury or being targeted, maybe he is more vital than many believe? The rest of the midfield, Korey, Brownhill etc have been in and out of the line up so not particularly them. Diedhieu we have been without for a few matches so used to playing without him now. It was an odd match.

We lack an effective captain.

The captain should not only be a respected and inspirational player who leads by example, he should also be the managers' representative on the pitch.

There should be no question of the manager being baffled that the team is not following his instructions for a whole half, the captain should get amongst the players, shaking his fists, and ensuring that they do.

Bailey Wright may be a reasonable player and a tough nut to come up against, but I see nothing otherwise about his on field demeanour that indicates he should be the captain.

[wendyredredrobin]

Flinty would make a better skipper in my view, he's great when he's fired up.

[Super]

54 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said:

He was at least the one player (before Eliasson's introduction) who tried to carry the ball forward and actually dribble it up the field. 

We seemed obsessed with keeping possession last night, but not in gaining yards forward. 

A slow passing game will only allow them to go back in numbers. Preston's second showed us what a quick break and actually running with the ball can do.

Which led to the second goal. The problem I have is when he plays on the right he keeps cutting inside and there is no width, the only time in the first half he took on the full back he won a dangerous free kick. 

[ZiderEyed]

51 minutes ago, Nogbad the Bad said:

We lack an effective captain.

The captain should not only be a respected and inspirational player who leads by example, he should also be the managers' representative on the pitch.

There should be no question of the manager being baffled that the team is not following his instructions for a whole half, the captain should get amongst the players, shaking his fists, and ensuring that they do.

Bailey Wright may be a reasonable player and a tough nut to come up against, but I see nothing otherwise about his on field demeanour that indicates he should be the captain.

If Pack was playing every game I reckon he'd made a good captain. Failing that I'd like to see Flinty take it.

[Nogbad the Bad]

1 minute ago, ZiderEyed said:

If Pack was playing every game I reckon he'd made a good captain. Failing that I'd like to see Flinty take it.

It may be that Flint declined it - he's said previously he's not that keen -  although LJ was probably planning the season with his departure in mind anyway.

Flint plays like a captain every game anyway though without the official title to berate the players from a position of captaincy if necessary.

Presuming he's now staying though - he'd better be - it's time for LJ to have a persuasive word with him imo. because of all our players he'd be ideal.

It seems to me Pack would not be in LJ's first choice starting 11 if he had all the players to choose from, so that would rule him out.

 

[Red-Robbo]

16 minutes ago, Super said:

Which led to the second goal. The problem I have is when he plays on the right he keeps cutting inside and there is no width, the only time in the first half he took on the full back he won a dangerous free kick. 

Because he dithered on the ball rather than releasing it. However we aren't going to unlock their defence by sitting in our final third and punting hopeful 35 yard passes up the field. Someone has to bring the bloody ball forward. Until Eliasson was on the field, he was the only person doing this - and getting lumps kicked out of him by Preston because of it!

One wonders what the first half would have been had we played two, fit, wingers.

[ZiderEyed]

9 minutes ago, Nogbad the Bad said:

It may be that Flint declined it - he's said previously he's not that keen -  although LJ was probably planning the season with his departure in mind anyway.

Flint plays like a captain every game anyway though without the official title to berate the players from a position of captaincy if necessary.

Presuming he's now staying though - he'd better be - it's time for LJ to have a persuasive word with him imo. because of all our players he'd be ideal.

It seems to me Pack would not be in LJ's first choice starting 11 if he had all the players to choose from, so that would rule him out.

 

Do you know when he said that? Seems a bit odd.

[Fatalist]

2 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said:

Because he dithered on the ball rather than releasing it. However we aren't going to unlock their defence by sitting in our final third and punting hopeful 35 yard passes up the field. Someone has to bring the bloody ball forward. Until Eliasson was on the field, he was the only person doing this - and getting lumps kicked out of him by Preston because of it!

One wonders what the first half would have been had we played two, fit, wingers.

I don't know if this has already been said, but it annoyed the hell out of me that we didn't get a single cross over when we had Duric on, and as soon as he went off, there were loads coming in for both wings, but nobody to make anything of them.

[Lanterne Rouge]

7 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said:

Because he dithered on the ball rather than releasing it. However we aren't going to unlock their defence by sitting in our final third and punting hopeful 35 yard passes up the field. Someone has to bring the bloody ball forward. Until Eliasson was on the field, he was the only person doing this - and getting lumps kicked out of him by Preston because of it!

One wonders what the first half would have been had we played two, fit, wingers.

He did seem a bit in two minds but it was an excellent tackle from the full back too - didn`t dive in, just timed it perfectly. Most times in that situation Callum ends up on his arse and we get a free kick.