Post Match Charlton 2 Leicester 1

[lanxfox jnr]

We haven't won back-to-back games all season...

Kingy has to be pushing for a starting place ahead of James. Would be interested to here how Vardy did from anyone who was there as I thought he was decent on Saturday.

Ran all night. Looked one of our best players tonight, my Motm. Missed a sitter in the last minute though.

 

[H T B]

Down that we lost, but not too down due to chances created.

If, and it's a big IF, Dyer had scored his chance before they scored their first, it would have been a very different game (suppose that's just stating the bleedin obvious, but I'm not ready to call for Gally just yet!)

 

[Macky]

The width from dyer was wasted as he continually cuts inside and seems as if he doesn't have the confidence to eat a player

Maybe he was full up, or are you saying he isn't hungry enough?

 

[cafe]

Incredible-only 2 teams with100% record this early in the season.

 

[atlantafox]

As if we didn't dislike Kermit enough, he goes and scores tonight. Well he is still a wanker and just to remind everyone

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iad3gV-9C1U

 

[Matt_B]

Incredible-only 2 teams with100% record this early in the season.

And yet we are still above you. Tut tut.

 

[Motown Fox]

Incredible-only 2 teams with100% record this early in the season.

One of which will lose such record tomorrow night.

This season will be tight as a ducks arse for points I reckon.

If we can get 13 or 14 points from our first 8 games then that should put us in play-off position or thereabouts. Which if we then replicate or better during the season we should get one of the play-off spots or if we improve could even make a charge on the Top 2 depending on who else does well this season. But there will likely be a situation of teams beating each other so no one gets too far ahead.

 

[SJN-Fox]

Maybe he was full up, or are you saying he isn't hungry enough?

Maybe he just doesn't like to do that sort of thing in public.

 

[Brown Nose]

This is just crap. We clearly were good enough to outplay a decent side away from home with two wingers - we did in the second half! And most of the first half!

NP said after the match that we lost both goals because we failed to challenge effectively for second balls. He also said that he didn't blame the defence for the result. It isn't a 'shame' that we gave them a two goal start, it is an indication that we were set up wrongly in the first half. How could we not anticipate that Charlton would have a go at us first half? Would we have been more, or less, likely to have done better in that first half with a three of Danns, Drinkwater and King in the centre of midfield? I say we'd have been much more likely to retain and win back possession and protect the defence. Instead we had Marshall and Dyer mostly adding nothing as secondary full backs.

Once we were two down and starting the second half, the situation is completely different. Charlton don't need to press as much and we have to force the game, so playing two wingers then makes perfect sense. This is why they became more effective.

I said before the season began that playing two wingers away from home against decent opposition was wrong. If he does it again on Saturday and Blackburn play well, we'll concede goals again. It just makes no sense when the purpose has to be gathering points. When you play away from home in this league, you need to frustrate the home side - much like Peterborough did first half on Saturday - and try to control the pace of the game. As the game develops, and most Championship games are decided in the second half, you try to exploit your attacking strengths.

Yet again away from home, we had to make changes and we played so much better in the second half. Just as often occurred last season, we were tactically out thought and only got the message when it was too late.

 

[Waxed]

We lost but we definitely shouldn't have done and there were plenty of positives to take. It's the classic case of taking (or not in our case) your chances.

Although we enjoyed the majority of the possession in the first half, the cohesion up front was dreadful. Beckford was absolutely horrendous and Vardy wasn't much better. Marshall was barely in the game, while Dyer was infuriating all night.

Charlton looked likely to score every time they went forward and ultimately did, twice. Wright-Phillips' was against the run of play and Kermorgant was allowed far too much space inside the box to get a shot away like that.

But in the second half it all changed. The ineffective James went off, King scored and we were well in the ascendency. Nugent put himself about up front, and while he should have scored, did enough to keep his place in the side for me. Vardy looked sharper too but wasted a glorious chance near the end.

Another huge plus in Knockaert. The lad has so much skill it's ridiculous. On another day he would have been so more effective. Also special mentions to Schmeichel, De Laet and Drinkwater, who both put up good showings for themselves.

Schmeichel - 7.5

De Laet - 8
Morgan - 6
Moore - 6
Konchesky - 7

Drinkwater - 7.5
James - 3
Marshall - 4 (not particularly his fault though)
Dyer - 3

Beckford - 2
Vardy - 5

Subs:
King - 7
Nugent - 6
Knockaert - 8

 

[Redditch Fox]

This season: better attacking options ( but bet Charlton were pleased with the options chosen for this game - Beckford generally doesn't seem to like coach travel) and down to bare bones defence; unconvincing team selection especially for away fixture against respectable opponents.
Getting less confident about Nigel's judgement. But it looks like a league where anyone can beat anyone.

My concern is that other clubs seem to get better value from much less spending e.g. Blackpool but then i thought Holloway was useless with us.

All very confusing and not too much has gone right for our club since we left Filbert Street. I assume there isn't much chance of going back on that one.

 

[bocadillo]

NP said after the match that we lost both goals because we failed to challenge effectively for second balls. He also said that he didn't blame the defence for the result. It isn't a 'shame' that we gave them a two goal start, it is an indication that we were set up wrongly in the first half. How could we not anticipate that Charlton would have a go at us first half? Would we have been more, or less, likely to have done better in that first half with a three of Danns, Drinkwater and King in the centre of midfield? I say we'd have been much more likely to retain and win back possession and protect the defence. Instead we had Marshall and Dyer mostly adding nothing as secondary full backs.

Once we were two down and starting the second half, the situation is completely different. Charlton don't need to press as much and we have to force the game, so playing two wingers then makes perfect sense. This is why they became more effective.

I said before the season began that playing two wingers away from home against decent opposition was wrong. If he does it again on Saturday and Blackburn play well, we'll concede goals again. It just makes no sense when the purpose has to be gathering points. When you play away from home in this league, you need to frustrate the home side - much like Peterborough did first half on Saturday - and try to control the pace of the game. As the game develops, and most Championship games are decided in the second half, you try to exploit your attacking strengths.

Yet again away from home, we had to make changes and we played so much better in the second half. Just as often occurred last season, we were tactically out thought and only got the message when it was too late.

It's not hard to tell you weren't at the game.

 

[Lako42]

I wasn't there but I wanted to strangle Dyer through the radio.

Seeing as I'm going Sat I seriously hope we don't get off on that footing again.

 

[homer]

Only 8 games to go......

 

[Kingy_85]

I wasn't there but I wanted to strangle Dyer through the radio.

Seeing as I'm going Sat I seriously hope we don't get off on that footing again.

I'll look out for you Lako!

Despite that fact I have no idea what you look like!

I hope there's a protest! Because I really can't stand Kean. How he is still in a job is beyond me, It's comicable.

The bloke lives in cloud cuckoo land.

 

[David Gwilliam]

We lost but we definitely shouldn't have done and there were plenty of positives to take. It's the classic case of taking (or not in our case) your chances.

Although we enjoyed the majority of the possession in the first half, the cohesion up front was dreadful. Beckford was absolutely horrendous and Vardy wasn't much better. Marshall was barely in the game, while Dyer was infuriating all night.

Charlton looked likely to score every time they went forward and ultimately did, twice. Wright-Phillips' was against the run of play and Kermorgant was allowed far too much space inside the box to get a shot away like that.

But in the second half it all changed. The ineffective James went off, King scored and we were well in the ascendency. Nugent put himself about up front, and while he should have scored, did enough to keep his place in the side for me. Vardy looked sharper too but wasted a glorious chance near the end.

Another huge plus in Knockaert. The lad has so much skill it's ridiculous. On another day he would have been so more effective. Also special mentions to Schmeichel, De Laet and Drinkwater, who both put up good showings for themselves.

Schmeichel - 7.5

De Laet - 8
Morgan - 6
Moore - 6
Konchesky - 7

Drinkwater - 7.5
James - 3
Marshall - 4 (not particularly his fault though)
Dyer - 3

Beckford - 2
Vardy - 5

Subs:
King - 7
Nugent - 6
Knockaert - 8

Thank you Waxed. A very useful post for those of us who were not at the match.

 

[themoralkiosk]

I like it, you have won the internet for the day.

I wanted to make sure I was the first one to get it in!

 

[camberwell fox]

I wasn't there but I wanted to strangle Dyer through the radio.

Seeing as I'm going Sat I seriously hope we don't get off on that footing again.

Somebody needs to explain to the thick twat that charlton were allowing him to cut inside as he was ineffective doing this. The first cross we got in from the byline resulted in our goal.

It really isn't rocket science, is it. I didn't think Beckford or vardy were bad I just don't think we played to their strength.

Disappointing but not the end of the world.

 

[Doggie_muz]

NP said after the match that we lost both goals because we failed to challenge effectively for second balls. He also said that he didn't blame the defence for the result. It isn't a 'shame' that we gave them a two goal start, it is an indication that we were set up wrongly in the first half. How could we not anticipate that Charlton would have a go at us first half? Would we have been more, or less, likely to have done better in that first half with a three of Danns, Drinkwater and King in the centre of midfield? I say we'd have been much more likely to retain and win back possession and protect the defence. Instead we had Marshall and Dyer mostly adding nothing as secondary full backs.

Once we were two down and starting the second half, the situation is completely different. Charlton don't need to press as much and we have to force the game, so playing two wingers then makes perfect sense. This is why they became more effective.

I said before the season began that playing two wingers away from home against decent opposition was wrong. If he does it again on Saturday and Blackburn play well, we'll concede goals again. It just makes no sense when the purpose has to be gathering points. When you play away from home in this league, you need to frustrate the home side - much like Peterborough did first half on Saturday - and try to control the pace of the game. As the game develops, and most Championship games are decided in the second half, you try to exploit your attacking strengths.

Yet again away from home, we had to make changes and we played so much better in the second half. Just as often occurred last season, we were tactically out thought and only got the message when it was too late.

It's not hard to tell you weren't at the game.

BN, you're just as entitled to an opinion as me, but I strongly disagree that we were set up wrong yesterday. We outplyed Charlton for the first 20 minutes and should have been at least one up by the time they scored, but for some wastfulness up front. I agree that it's a totally different proposition in the second half, but the facts remain that we totally outplayed Charlton for most of the first half and all of the second half with two out-and-out wingers, and neither of the goals we conceded resulted from the system we were playing. The first, we were cheap with possession in midfield (James), the second was a long-throw which we defended terribly (not positive, but Moore I think was the main culprit).

If we go away from home to the mid or lower Championship teams and play that way in that formation, we will win more than we lose. To answer your question, I don't think a midfield three of Danns, Drinkwater and King would have been any more effective, particularly, as I said, given that their goals were not a result of the system we were playing. In fact, the width that we showed all night did help us to retain possession and stretch the opposition without, in my opinion, costing us much defensively. Certainly King's introduction (into the same system) made a big difference, as James had not played very well, and Frenchie's introduction (into the same system) was equally effective, as Marshall had been totally off the boil.

Regardless, if we go away and play that well all season, I'll be happy, and we'll get more poitive results than negative, as all of the Charlton fans agreed on the way home.

 

[FryattFox]

NP picks a team.

We win.

NP picks the same team.

"Great move Nige" etc.

We lose.

"Why the **** did he pick that team?!!" etc.

And repeat.