Date:Sunday November 23 2008
Following yesterday's 4-2 victory over Port Vale at Adams Park, here are some views from Valiants' manager Dean Glover and a few of their fans.
Vale manager Glover felt that his side's defending had let them down.
Glover told The Sentinel newspaper: 'I felt possession-wise we did very well and we were complimented by their manager, but that doesn't justify the bad defending. We went in 2-0 at half-time and I don't think we deserved that. The penalty was given against us through Dave Howland's rash challenge, but then we were sucker punched just before half-time."
Glover went on to say: "I said to the lads at half-time to keep playing the football, but be a bit more ruthless in the final third and I told them they had to start brightly. The more we kept them back from scoring, the better chance we had of nicking one early doors to get back in the game. Fortunately it worked out like that. But, unfortunately, as the game went on we gave them two extra goals which were absolutely poor.
'Our defending is a big problem.' said Glover.
Quite a few compliments this week from the Vale fans.
The following extracts are taken from BBC606, Football Forums, The Football Forum, The Staffordshire Sentinel and the 'OneVale Fan' message board.
Dan Phillips wrote:
'At 3-2, we were still in it, and I was fairly confident we'd equalise. Until Wycombe played hoof ball to get their fourth. Anyway, Zebroski is immense, and had a field day with our defence. Will take a very good performance from the opposition to beat Wycombe.'
paul vale wrote:
'A cracking game of football, Wycombe's front two caused us problems all match. We looked decent going forward ourselves but our defending let us down. I can't see when Wycombe will next lose.'
PVFC Fan wrote:
'As per-usual we lack in defence. We have the makings of a Play off side with a few good players but we need a good 3 or 4 new players to come in first.'
RAF Vale wrote:
'This was only the second time I have seen the Vale this season (Gills away last time). The difference between the two displays was huge, despite losing both, Vale actually looked like they could play football a bit yesterday, far more so than earlier in the season.'
'Watching both teams attack today, Wycombe (and many others in this league) attack much more directly than we do. What's the point of 10/15 passes when you're no closer to the goal at the end of it?'
ox valiant wrote:
'A draw would have been a fair result, but we gave away two very sloppy goals. Couldn't argue with their pen, was the correct decision, but didn't deserve to be two down at HT, but at a team who had only conceded six goals in their 15 previous games, getting anything from the game was going to be tough. Got back into it with a dubious pen and had some good spells of possession and movement, but you can see why Wycombe are up there - both strikers are useful and link up well, they are organised and they have a lot of height in the side.'
'Strange game, and one we didn't deserve to lose. In patches we played some really nice football, albeit in the first half it wasn't all that threatening. Their first goal looked a poor refereeing decision, it looked a fair tackle. But we then got given an even softer pen when Richman fell with minimal contact, the ref couldn't give it quick enough which suggests he perhaps felt he got the first one wrong as well.'
Chelmsford Vale wrote:
'It was an odd game and we were not put to the sword, which you might think we were when you consider we conceded 4. Howland made a rash tackle for their penalty, if you tackle someone from behind in the box they will go down.'
'We did really well against the league leaders, dominated possession 1st half and came in 2 down, which was a strange feeling as I wasn't annoyed because we had kept the ball so well and looked really confident in possession.'
'Although we conceded 4, we played rather well and I for one really enjoyed the game. We played some nice football and at times we properly took the game to Wycombe, who we made to look distinctly mediocre at times. However, they took their chances excellently. Our penalty was generous to say the least.'
march hare wrote:
'We are not aggressive enough and physically strong enough which would allow us to dominate teams. We are supposed to be the big boys of this poor league, but sorry to say and it hurts, we can kiss promotion out of the window it's just too easy to turn us over.'
'Our penalty was a ridiculous decision, don't know how it was given, theirs probably was a penalty. We didn't do anything in the first half, don't remember us having a shot. We deserved to lose but their goals were classic 'sucker punch hoof it down the wing to a fast lad who cuts in and scores' goals. However, I can't stress strongly enough that we didn't deserve anything from the game.'
'Not exactly a massive shock to lose at Wycombe is it?'
Opposition fans say nicer things about us if we let them score a couple of goals before we beat them !
Date:Sunday November 23 2008
The Opposition View - Cambridge United (Sunday September 28 2014)
Matchwinner Hayes lifts the Blues to 2nd (Sunday September 28 2014)
Stats: Wycombe Wanderers v Cambridge United (Saturday September 27 2014)
Preview: Wycombe Wanderers v Cambridge United (Thursday September 25 2014)
The Opposition View - Portsmouth (Sunday September 21 2014)
Blues held to a draw at Pompey (Sunday September 21 2014)
Stats: Portsmouth v Wycombe Wanderers (Saturday September 20 2014)
Preview: Portsmouth v Wycombe Wanderers (Thursday September 18 2014)
Hayes the hero as Blues go 3rd (Wednesday September 17 2014)
The Opposition View - Plymouth Argyle (Wednesday September 17 2014)
|Robins chase York target
» York : 30/09/2014 16:11:00
|Minstermen sign striker
» York : 30/09/2014 13:34:00
|Argyle Player Of The Month?
» Plymouth : 30/09/2014 09:12:00
|Summerfield: The Guys Stood Up Really Well
» Burton : 30/09/2014 08:52:00
|On this day in history...30th September
» Portsmouth : 30/09/2014 07:00:00