fct Posted October 30, 2004 Report Share Posted October 30, 2004 Well the away team came with no ambition but to get a 0-0 and got it. Teams like that kill football as a spectacle, but it really is down to the other side to beat them and today City's players lacked the know-how to beat this workmanlike but ordinary team. City's most lively periods were the first 10 of each half and the last 15 or so. Apart from that the game itself was a sterile tedius affair, only enlivened by the crowd barracking Fagan who ought to have been booked for a couple of nasty off-the-ball kicks on Hill. Colchester had about three chances; Phillips blocked one, a far post header in the second half was wasted and an offside flag against Fagan came with their best chance that Phillips somehow flicked over the bar. At the other end Wilkshire carried on wit some long-range shooting he'd demonstrated so far this season but he lackd accuracy on a few occasions; Lita and Brooker had an off day in the box and Gillespie had two chances after coming on which were blocked by desperate defending. Phillips: 6 - not much to do and what he did he dealt with competently. Smith: 6 - fair performance and linked down the right well, but went in rashly a couple of times and was beaten. Butler: 7 - dominant in the air, played another sound match and is something like his best again. Hill: 7 - another on form player, comfortable on the ball and looks a better player than last season. Bell: 7 - Mickey is playing as good as he has done for years but sometimes his crossing lacks quality. Apart from that gies City an extra edge in attack. Murray: 5 - Not the player he was and wasteful when given the ball. Tried hard but today it just wasn't going to work. Orr: 6 - Tidy, reasonable but didn't set the game alight when it cried out for a midfielder to do so. Dinning: 5 - Not the best debut and all too often lost the ball which as the game went on led to some of the few Colchester breaks. Wilkshire: 6 - Lively, the best passer in the side but not on his game totally today and shot wastefully wide when a telling pass was required. Lita: 6 - Not one of his best games, battled but seemed off the pace for some reason. One decent shot that was saved. Brooker: 6 - His ariel power is an asset but he lacks the ability to carve open chances himself. Needs a better supply of passes to feed on. subs: Fortune: 6 - OK when coming on for Dinning and slotted in at left back. Nothing spectacular, just did a sound job. Gillespie: 6 - Promised to break the deadlock with his first touch but his two shots were blocked, and then screwed a late chance wide with the box full of defenders lying on their buttocks. On for Murray. Cotterill: 6 - Promising cameo appearance, I'd like to see more of him to assess what he is capable of, but showed he's a useful man on the ball. On for Bell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedUn Posted October 30, 2004 Report Share Posted October 30, 2004 Just about covers one of the more forgettable games. As Robbored said on Radio Brizz after the game we lacked ideas 20yds from goal and didn't get a single decent cross in to our new target man all day; the main culprits in that regard were Murray and Bell, the latter especially poor with his corners and was almost embarassing by the time he was finally subbed; Smith's crossing wasn't much better. As for Dinning I thought he held things together pretty well in the first half without covering too much ground too quickly. But by the hour mark he was struggling for fitness and giving the ball away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbored Posted October 30, 2004 Report Share Posted October 30, 2004 The main problem imo was the absence of Tinnion.City needed some experience and guile today and without BT lacked any real idea's. Agree with your marks though'.Hill was City's MoM which says alot - he's a defender. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlokeCDP Posted October 30, 2004 Report Share Posted October 30, 2004 Smith's crossing wasn't much better. ← Smith was playing????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tunley Legend Posted October 30, 2004 Report Share Posted October 30, 2004 Smith was playing????? ← Didn't you notice? He was the guy who gave the ball away 700 times!! Another thing I noticed about Smith's performance today, unfortunately, is that he didn't mind going in hard when the tackle was 60:40 in his favour. When it was 50:50 he seemed to lose more tackles than he won. Hill defended really well. I reckon he is a 500% better player at Centre Half. Dinning was knackered by 60 minutes and Tinnion was slow substituting him. He needs to play a full 90 on Tuesday. The midfield as a whole were awful today. Many more teams will do what Colchester did today now that we are climbing the league. Tinnion needs to find some answers in breaking 10 man defensive teams down. An out and out left winger would help in my opinion with Wilkshire playing more centrally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Longacre_red Posted October 30, 2004 Report Share Posted October 30, 2004 Smith was playing????? ← Ye Smith had a bit of a poor game! i thought Mickey Bell had a terrible 2nd half and tired! was it just me that thought that?! :Confused13: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
openEnd Posted October 30, 2004 Report Share Posted October 30, 2004 but didn't he have 2 good runs at them? I thought he was one who looked most up for it in the second half and then he got subbed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elko Posted October 30, 2004 Report Share Posted October 30, 2004 Just a general comment on the game - if Gillespie had scored at the end I think everyone would be thinking very differently, saying that we put them under pressure for long periods and it paid off. On another day we could have won, so I'm not getting too down hearted by a 0-0 draw at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlokeCDP Posted October 30, 2004 Report Share Posted October 30, 2004 Generally a shame to come away from a home game with just one point, especially against a "shut up shop" team. But one is better then none. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
94th Minute Posted October 31, 2004 Report Share Posted October 31, 2004 Brooker: 6 - His ariel power is an asset but he lacks the ability to carve open chances himself. Needs a better supply of passes to feed on. ← Frgot to mention that his first touch is extemely poor and his only shot went both high and wide by quite some way Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerry Gows' Tash Posted October 31, 2004 Report Share Posted October 31, 2004 Fair comments overall. As a spectactle it was pretty dire. Both defences were on top of the game and we seemed to lack the ability to get behind them. To be fair Murray was up against a very good full back and didnt get much change out of him. We were awfull in midfield and didnt get enough quality balls in the last third, I hate to say it but I think the long ball game might have been more effective in the last 20 mins. Gillespie could have scored 2 at the end with better finishing but at least he was right place right time, unlike the rest of the fromt line who had a collective bad day at the office. I would have kept Murray on for nuisance value and taken Lita off for Hefernan, with Gillespie on for Dinning, who I thought had a pretty poor game. The worst I've seen this season for entertainment value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desso Posted October 31, 2004 Report Share Posted October 31, 2004 Heffernan wasn't on the bench yesterday. He is injured! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.