Upset of the round, YMCA over WPH. Was at the game. Ordinary 1st half, second half YMCA should by a lotto ticket today with WPH do everything but get the ball in the back of the net with squillions of chances, before the soccer Gods said enough is enough and gave Y a late late goal.
Admittedly the Y defended for most of the 2nd half, but the keeper only had 2 saves to make...1 brilliant one and 1 straight forward...WPH did not do enough, simple. I thought they were quite poor considering they were undefeated. And why would a team who is undefeated, playing against a lower team, sit back in the first half and not even go forward? Lose the ball and retreat back to your own half and defend with 11 players against a team not known for their attacking qualities...baffling!!!
PB,
They started with a 4-4-2 in the 1st half and it didn't work. I think they changed to 3-5-2 2nd half and hence dominated the possession. Why they didn't start 3-5-2 against a team as you put, "not known for their attacking qualities" is a puzzling one????
was also at the game you cannot say wph were unlucky not to win the game,they sat back in the first half and created nothing in attack,the y just worked the ball for the majority of the half creating a few chances but nothing clear cut, yeh wph had chances in the middle of the second half but how many were from outside the box,the majority of them being over zealous attempts from long range which did not trouble the keeper who simply had to pick it up,wph failed to break down the defence of the y and were forced to shoot from long range as PB said the GK made one freakish save and one parry if that is squillions of chances ur mistaken.I think the y's win deserve's a bit more credit then saying its a lucky win,The Y deserved at least a point of out of the game and would of felt hard done by with a loss.
One header cleared off the line, two glaring volleys from inside 18 yards unopposed that weren't on target from a player who regularly hits the target (just not yesterday) and a few other chances where a foot got in the way. WPH did do enough PB.
You are correct though, WPH did play poorly. The first half was boring. Where was the attacking football they have been playing? They did the same against RAV in the fist half. What is coach saying? Playing too conservative against lowly teams if you ask me.
Y out Played WPH in the first half WPH did not get out of there defence area.
Y has a lot of time on the ball WPH did not close them down Y rang rings around WPH
rhino
wrote on 20-May-06 18:04first wph 0 ymca 1 ressie wph 2 ymca 0
Water Boy
wrote on 20-May-06 19:061sts PEN 7-1 EEW NRM 5-0 LEA RAV 3-1 THL STA 2-2 NERds Stiffs PEN 4-0 EEW i think i know Penno won RAV 3-1 THL
wrote on 21-May-06 00:07my theory is right - THL will go to sleep against the 'bottom' teams.
Ed
wrote on 21-May-06 00:09first LEA 0 NMH 5 ressie LEA 2 NMH 3
Pete
wrote on 21-May-06 08:09Upset of the round, YMCA over WPH. Was at the game. Ordinary 1st half, second half YMCA should by a lotto ticket today with WPH do everything but get the ball in the back of the net with squillions of chances, before the soccer Gods said enough is enough and gave Y a late late goal.
PB
wrote on 21-May-06 12:06Admittedly the Y defended for most of the 2nd half, but the keeper only had 2 saves to make...1 brilliant one and 1 straight forward...WPH did not do enough, simple. I thought they were quite poor considering they were undefeated. And why would a team who is undefeated, playing against a lower team, sit back in the first half and not even go forward? Lose the ball and retreat back to your own half and defend with 11 players against a team not known for their attacking qualities...baffling!!!
Buble
wrote on 21-May-06 13:02PB, They started with a 4-4-2 in the 1st half and it didn't work. I think they changed to 3-5-2 2nd half and hence dominated the possession. Why they didn't start 3-5-2 against a team as you put, "not known for their attacking qualities" is a puzzling one????
observer
wrote on 21-May-06 13:04was also at the game you cannot say wph were unlucky not to win the game,they sat back in the first half and created nothing in attack,the y just worked the ball for the majority of the half creating a few chances but nothing clear cut, yeh wph had chances in the middle of the second half but how many were from outside the box,the majority of them being over zealous attempts from long range which did not trouble the keeper who simply had to pick it up,wph failed to break down the defence of the y and were forced to shoot from long range as PB said the GK made one freakish save and one parry if that is squillions of chances ur mistaken.I think the y's win deserve's a bit more credit then saying its a lucky win,The Y deserved at least a point of out of the game and would of felt hard done by with a loss.
Pete
wrote on 21-May-06 13:08One header cleared off the line, two glaring volleys from inside 18 yards unopposed that weren't on target from a player who regularly hits the target (just not yesterday) and a few other chances where a foot got in the way. WPH did do enough PB. You are correct though, WPH did play poorly. The first half was boring. Where was the attacking football they have been playing? They did the same against RAV in the fist half. What is coach saying? Playing too conservative against lowly teams if you ask me.
Admin
wrote on 21-May-06 21:00Tipping comp tally board has been updated.
Old Supporter
wrote on 22-May-06 12:07Y out Played WPH in the first half WPH did not get out of there defence area. Y has a lot of time on the ball WPH did not close them down Y rang rings around WPH
Pete
wrote on 22-May-06 13:07Rack off back to all age Old supporter