Ex-rated

[YF Dan]

Can it be a surprise that we were totally overrun in midfield when we were playing 5-2-3?

It seems that we will play any formation other than 4-4-2.

Exeter, who themselves started 5-3-2, will be kicking themselves they didn't start with Elam, because as soon as they brought on a winger they created eight good chances to our none.

[Baboo]

Imho fitness is a bigger part of the problem than Patto is caring to admit, but yes hearts and minds are too. How many of our players looked really knackered at the end?

Petts might not be a heavy weight, but light weight is an unfair assessment I feel. He would have helped the midfield tremendously.

Not that any fan rates Gnu but why did Jim have him on the bench if he was not going to bring him on when we were under the cosh?

I don’t go along with the “we played well for 75 minutes

[Pe├▒a Oxford United]

they didn't start with Elam

He's a funny bloke (4).

[GodalmingYellow]

Well I was at Oxford United v Exeter City, I've no idea where you were AscOx.

It was nothing to do with lack of bottle from the players, you really should look beyond what the management and coaching staff use as excuses.

We were playing 7 v 8 defensively at the same time as losing our first choice keeper. That's bad management. We were overrun defensively, and as a result the players tired vcery quickly.

As Ty said, the 3-4-3 soon became 5-2-3 and even 7-0-3 at points.

We were left with no battle in midfield so any clearance came straight back. The defence tried to cope by retreating and the rest is history.

The defeat had nothing to do with Hutchinson being injured. To be frank for a second (assuming Frank doesn't mind), that's a ridiculous excuse. Our team is perfectly capable of beating Exeter without Hutchinson and to suggest otherwise is barmy.

I have no problem with Yemi coming on, but that should have been at the expense of Shaw, not at the expense of Standing, and that was the moment we were destined to drop 2 more home points.

Pettefer should have been on for Standing. There was no need for Robinson, not that he did anything wrong.

Then for the last half hour we would have had 8 defenders and midfielders versus 8, we would not have been overrun in midfield, we would have had fresh legs precisely where the legs were tired, as well as the pace and runs of Yemi, and imo Exeter would have continued to find it difficult to break through. Ergo management failing in making the wrong substitutions and changing the system to one which made us vulnerable just when we had lost our keeper.

If Jim doesn't accept that he might be wrong in his substituions and formations, I seriously fear we may face mid-table obscurity this year, and financial woe as a result next year.

[Myles Francis]

[Don't agree about the ref either (someone else posted he had a good game). He gave a stunning number of unnecessary free kicks to Exeter for next to nothing. Another ref would have sent off the Exeter player for the handball for the second penalty. He didn't keep up with play, and allowed far too many tackles from behind to go unpunished. Even Paul Parker commented on it.

Can't argue with that. I lost count of the number of times an Exeter player went through the back of Shaw. And how blocking a goal-bound shot with a deliberately raised hand can only be considered a yellow card, I will never know.

I do, however, agree with Isaac's anaylsis on the Yemi susbtitution. That in itself wasn't the downfall, as we looked so much brigther going forward when he first came on. It was the failure to do the simple things once we were 2-0 up that was the problem.

[Ascension Ox]

Well I was at Oxford United v Exeter City, I've no idea where you were AscOx.

It was nothing to do with lack of bottle from the players, you really should look beyond what the management and coaching staff use as excuses.

We were playing 7 v 8 defensively at the same time as losing our first choice keeper. That's bad management. We were overrun defensively, and as a result the players tired vcery quickly.

As Ty said, the 3-4-3 soon became 5-2-3 and even 7-0-3 at points.

We were left with no battle in midfield so any clearance came straight back. The defence tried to cope by retreating and the rest is history.

The defeat had nothing to do with Hutchinson being injured. To be frank for a second (assuming Frank doesn't mind), that's a ridiculous excuse. Our team is perfectly capable of beating Exeter without Hutchinson and to suggest otherwise is barmy.

I have no problem with Yemi coming on, but that should have been at the expense of Shaw, not at the expense of Standing, and that was the moment we were destined to drop 2 more home points.

Pettefer should have been on for Standing. There was no need for Robinson, not that he did anything wrong.

Then for the last half hour we would have had 8 defenders and midfielders versus 8, we would not have been overrun in midfield, we would have had fresh legs precisely where the legs were tired, as well as the pace and runs of Yemi, and imo Exeter would have continued to find it difficult to break through. Ergo management failing in making the wrong substitutions and changing the system to one which made us vulnerable just when we had lost our keeper.

If Jim doesn't accept that he might be wrong in his substituions and formations, I seriously fear we may face mid-table obscurity this year, and financial woe as a result next year.

It was EVERYTHING to do with lack of bottle and experience. There was nothing wrong with the substitutions. Patterson was spot on with his post match assessment.

In addition If you cannot see that in order to win regularly in this league you need a hard man in midfield to complement skilful, lighweight passers you must be blind.

[Matt D]

i was furious with the ref last night, but anyone who has just seen their team denied three points with just about the last kick of the game, when the whistle could well have been blown 30 seconds before, and from a free kick that didn't look like it to me, probably would be too.

by the time i'd got home, it felt more like a point against one of the best teams in the league. at the end, the frustration was i thought we were going to sneak two extra points besides than the one we deserved. we also DID play some good football in the first half, and really put them under pressure. i thought it was therefore an odd decision to match exeter with a formation that wasn't familiar to the team.

whoever said rose flattered to deceive - i just don't see that. i see a player who looks the most determined on the team, but who doesn't look suited to our style of play at the moment. and that's not for want of trying. unfair comment i thought.

turley going off really showed us what he gives us - but equally it was a very hard point in the game for tardif to come on. when was the last time he'd had some first team football? the odubade substitution worked i thought, and we've seen why before. he gets the ball down, runs with it, keeps it from the opposition for a time, and offers the chance that we'll sneak a goal. the robinson substitution didn't work, but i assume the logic was that he might have been able to hold some of the long balls and ease the pressure. by then it was clear to everyone in the ground that the defence needed to slow things down, calm down, and keep the ball.

looking at the league table, torquay are now starting to set the pace, and yes, while you can say we're still well-positioned, if they carry on like that we'll be waiting for their mistakes - and to be in a position to do that, we need to take three points in the games against bottom half of the table teams. last night was frustrating, but the halifax game was the more concerning of the two.

three points on saturday please.

[GodalmingYellow]

It was EVERYTHING to do with lack of bottle and experience. There was nothing wrong with the substitutions. Patterson was spot on with his post match assessment.

In addition If you cannot see that in order to win regularly in this league you need a hard man in midfield to complement skilful, lighweight passers you must be blind.

Just repeating yourself doesn't make it true.

If you think that one average midfielder being selected is a requirement to win, you know nothing about football.

Elsewhere you have posted that we must spend to the max on wages to avoid a drop in standards. Well here's the nub. Jim smith has spent to the max on wages and now you still think the players aren't good enough without relying on fitness of a single individual.

Answer 1, spending to the max doesn't work as a basis for success. Answer 2, the players are perfectly good enough, it is the managerial decision making which is the problem.

[YF Dan]

they didn't start with Elam

He's a funny bloke (4).

You've made a meal of that

[Ancient Colin]

He's a funny bloke (4).

Omit, thus change needed (5,3)

[Hog]

they didn't start with Elam

He's a funny bloke (4).

You've made a meal of that

i thought it was a bit lame too!

[Kernow Yellow]

PS - Please can we play like Exeter do?

No thanks. Exeter were a poor team last night, there for the taking. Jim realised this and threw Yemi on. We then got a second goal and should have cruised home.

But, surprise surprise, we dropped far too deep, sat back and invited them to attack. Tardif showed exactly why Turley is our number one goalkeeper, and the defence fell apart. Some of them need to take a long hard look at themselves in the mirror this morning. Captain Quinn in particular.

And to join in the midfield debate, Trainer was the weak link last night. He missed tackles and his passes often went ten yards behind the receiving wing back. Also, I thought Jeannin was supposed to be a winger? His distribution was appalling at key moments.

The second half might have been exciting for the neutral, but the first half was a very poor game of football indeed. Here's my prediction - neither Oxford nor Exeter will get promoted at the end of the season.

[Pe├▒a Oxford United]

His trademark confusion must lead to departure (5,3)

[Ascension Ox]

It was EVERYTHING to do with lack of bottle and experience. There was nothing wrong with the substitutions. Patterson was spot on with his post match assessment.

In addition If you cannot see that in order to win regularly in this league you need a hard man in midfield to complement skilful, lighweight passers you must be blind.

Just repeating yourself doesn't make it true.

If you think that one average midfielder being selected is a requirement to win, you know nothing about football.

Elsewhere you have posted that we must spend to the max on wages to avoid a drop in standards. Well here's the nub. Jim smith has spent to the max on wages and now you still think the players aren't good enough without relying on fitness of a single individual.

Answer 1, spending to the max doesn't work as a basis for success. Answer 2, the players are perfectly good enough, it is the managerial decision making which is the problem.

Average midfielder maybe but this is non league and he was needed last night. Your views are way off beam as it is way too early to conclude anything about how the season is going to pan out. It is still only 5th September!!

Last night some of the players bottled it. Let's hope they learn from the experience.

[Geoff]

Well I was at Oxford United v Exeter City, I've no idea where you were AscOx.

It was nothing to do with lack of bottle from the players, you really should look beyond what the management and coaching staff use as excuses.

We were playing 7 v 8 defensively at the same time as losing our first choice keeper. That's bad management. We were overrun defensively, and as a result the players tired vcery quickly.

As Ty said, the 3-4-3 soon became 5-2-3 and even 7-0-3 at points.

We were left with no battle in midfield so any clearance came straight back. The defence tried to cope by retreating and the rest is history.

The defeat had nothing to do with Hutchinson being injured. To be frank for a second (assuming Frank doesn't mind), that's a ridiculous excuse. Our team is perfectly capable of beating Exeter without Hutchinson and to suggest otherwise is barmy.

I have no problem with Yemi coming on, but that should have been at the expense of Shaw, not at the expense of Standing, and that was the moment we were destined to drop 2 more home points.

Pettefer should have been on for Standing. There was no need for Robinson, not that he did anything wrong.

Then for the last half hour we would have had 8 defenders and midfielders versus 8, we would not have been overrun in midfield, we would have had fresh legs precisely where the legs were tired, as well as the pace and runs of Yemi, and imo Exeter would have continued to find it difficult to break through. Ergo management failing in making the wrong substitutions and changing the system to one which made us vulnerable just when we had lost our keeper.

If Jim doesn't accept that he might be wrong in his substituions and formations, I seriously fear we may face mid-table obscurity this year, and financial woe as a result next year.

I shan't bother venting my spleen on the subject because I agree with all of the above!

Jim upstairs!