Crawley

[Isaac]

Bit surprised to find no comment on here about the game.

I watched it on Sky, who felt Crawley were robbed by the last minute goal. They were a bit, as especially during the 2nd half they looked the stronger side and created more chances. A lot of our side (especially Brevett who was terrible) looked knackered. However, throughout the game the chances we created were better, we also forced their keeper to make a number of good saves whereas Turley spent most of the game watching the ball go past the post (quite often as it turned out). Again, the same pattern I've seen all season emerged, if we can get the ball to Burgess often enough we can produce some very good football and with the ball on the floor the midfield is tidy, especially Pettefer. I thought Anaclet was excellent on the right too and probably our best player on the night.

The strikers were disappointing though, we all know about Basham, he's not strong, or quick, or particularly good in the air so it's no surprise that unless he gets a couple of chances he's anonymous. Robinson looked ok as a sort of Trevor Aylott blunt instrument, but appears to be lacking in confidence. Duffy was terrible when he came on and Yemi struggled to get involved.

I don't think we'll batter many teams this season, but with the likes of Burgess we seem to have better quality in the final third than most sides which can make a difference and if the defence remains firm (I thought they were too deep too often last night) then we've got a decent chance.

[GodalmingYellow]

Yes, yes, but did you record it to DVD Isaac?

I had forgotten how difficult it is to judge a game from down low, but I thought it was our worst performance of the season, and generally not a good game. Very scrappy.

Everyone in the group I was with agreed 0-0 would have been a fair reflection of both the teams and the game.

But as we all know, football isn't won by fair reflections. It is won by the team who scores the most goals. And that was us.

I'll post up my player reviews later, but I don't think anyone was outstanding.

[SteMerritt]

Thought it was an average game, too much midfield scrap and not enough class going forward. Oxford just stopped passing the ball at half-time. Don't think Crawley did enough to deserve to win the game, did Turley have to make a single save? Yeah they went close a couple of times, but so did we (and I thought it was a penalty when Anaclet went down in the second half).

[Matt D]

well, if crawley had players who had managed to shoot, head, or take follow-ups, they would have scored several times. they were points where it seemed easier to score than miss and they managed it.

but as is often pointed out, they didn't have those people, and we have defenders who can shoot like matt day.

pettefer and burgess tried hard to put some shape onto a very scrappy game.

nice to see the oxvox banner on tv!

[Mooro]

Interesting to read the comment so far...

For a variety of reasons I have not managed to see the yellows this season and only managed to see the last 20 minutes or so last night.

However, compared to the last few games I had seen, it seemed to be a massive improvement. There was a hunger, commitment and an impressive level of fitness to keep running right to the final whistle, which resulted in a win as opposed to the draw we would have settled for in the past.

All in all, I found it quite enjoyable, better than many games from higher leagues and certainly from Div 2. On another day two or three of Crawleys chances could have flown in, particularly as Turley looked unlikely to reach them, but on the other hand I thought we put together better moves than I remember seeing from us for some time - notably the break where we hit the bar twice..

Perhaps you regulars have already got used to the improvement on previous seasons and are now fine tuning your analysis, but for me as a first timer for this season I was highly encouraged.

[DLT]

I thought the performance lacked quality.

Anaclet did sterling work running down the wing but he failed to deliver a single decent cross I can recall.

Hackett anybody?

We are a very solid, hard working side who lack pace.

[Mally]

Anaclet did sterling work running down the wing but he failed to deliver a single decent cross I can recall.

What about the one Burgess hit the bar from?

[A-Ro]

I've just seen the goal again and it looked better than it did last night, a lot of bend on it, keeper slightly unsighted but couldn't cope with the bend.

[YF Dan]

I thought the performance lacked quality.

Anaclet did sterling work running down the wing but he failed to deliver a single decent cross I can recall.

Hackett anybody?

We are a very solid, hard working side who lack pace.

---

DLT - we almost used to agree on football matters but here I have to take issue.

Anaclet put in 3 or 4 really decent crosses, and offers the team so much width and energy, playing effectively two positions at once.

1)We are a Conference team. We're not going to get Carlos Alberto.
2) the lad is 19
3) He's almost certainly on bugger all money
4) He's making an impossible position work.

Who would you rather? Stockley? McNiven? Imagine our team without Anaclet at the minute and see if we make it out of our half.

The occasional cross is going to go awry, if it didn't, he'd be playing in the Premiership.

[GodalmingYellow]

I thought the performance lacked quality.

Anaclet did sterling work running down the wing but he failed to deliver a single decent cross I can recall.

Hackett anybody?

We are a very solid, hard working side who lack pace.

---

DLT - we almost used to agree on football matters but here I have to take issue.

Anaclet put in 3 or 4 really decent crosses, and offers the team so much width and energy, playing effectively two positions at once.

1)We are a Conference team. We're not going to get Carlos Alberto.
2) the lad is 19
3) He's almost certainly on bugger all money
4) He's making an impossible position work.

Who would you rather? Stockley? McNiven? Imagine our team without Anaclet at the minute and see if we make it out of our half.

The occasional cross is going to go awry, if it didn't, he'd be playing in the Premiership.

Carlos Alberto? Wouldn't want him, he's 62 now. Probably still quicker than Dave Woozley though!

[Mark G]

Mentioning Woozley, how unfortunate that Hollins dropped him. I was looking forward to Yemi having to play against him in the 2nd half after coming on as sub.

[DLT]

I thought the performance lacked quality.

Anaclet did sterling work running down the wing but he failed to deliver a single decent cross I can recall.

Hackett anybody?

We are a very solid, hard working side who lack pace.

---

DLT - we almost used to agree on football matters but here I have to take issue.

Anaclet put in 3 or 4 really decent crosses, and offers the team so much width and energy, playing effectively two positions at once.

1)We are a Conference team. We're not going to get Carlos Alberto.
2) the lad is 19
3) He's almost certainly on bugger all money
4) He's making an impossible position work.

Who would you rather? Stockley? McNiven? Imagine our team without Anaclet at the minute and see if we make it out of our half.

The occasional cross is going to go awry, if it didn't, he'd be playing in the Premiership.

Dan

Ok I forgot the Burgess header.

If you search backto my review of Grays game I called for patience with Anaclet because of his age and experience.

Yes he was our contant source of width. But he did put in a high percentage of poor crosses.

I am still not convinced he has electric pace, but he has good skills and lots of stamina for sure.

BTW, I would have Stockley back anyday, butI am biased because I sponsored him.

Another moan that struck me last night. Throw ins. They outclassed us on these. We don't seem to know how far our guys will throw the ball and seemed to give up the ball easily every time. We could do with working on that.

[Baboo]

A familiar pattern is emerging here – coming away from a game and saying we were lucky, then after a bit of debate concluding that a) Turley didn’t have many saves to make b) finishing in the Conference is CRAP. c) most of the opposition’s efforts were from long range. d) We keep going to the end.

But we didn’t play well last night though. Brevitt was knacked – too old for 2 games in 3 days? Robinson just doesn’t look the business. Disagree with the comments on Bash – I thought he held the ball up well at times and looked a quality footballer at the level. If only he had a decent partner up front. When was the last time we had an effective combination of strikers? Burgess – some good stuff but again thought he was too fancy at times. I thought people shouting at him to work harder was unfair though. Quinn – won loads of ball and did a lot of tidying up, which was good to see after the torrid time he had on Saturday. Eddie, eddie ,eddie – some good balls amongst the not so good. Where does he get the energy from. I think people are being too critical.

An assessment after 10 games:
– We are not vastly superior to other Conference teams.
– We have a good chance of winning the title (but I’m a fair way from counting any chickens just yet)
– The leading scorer in the Conference will not be an Oxford player (unless we nick someone else’s prized asset when the transfer window reopens)
– We will probably let in fewer goals than anyone else.

[Matt D]

I am still not convinced he has electric pace, but he has good skills and lots of stamina for sure.

BTW, I would have Stockley back anyday, butI am biased because I sponsored him.

Another moan that struck me last night. Throw ins. They outclassed us on these. We don't seem to know how far our guys will throw the ball and seemed to give up the ball easily every time. We could do with working on that.

after we talked about this the other day i was trying to think why i thought he was fast. i realised it was two things:

1. he was genuinely pacy in pre-season against portsmouth and manchester united
2. rage online calls him 'fast eddie', so he must be fast.

re: the throw-ins - i think it would have taken a very poor team not to have outclassed on those. they weren't working, but willmott persisted with the same tactic.

[A-Ro]

I am still not convinced he has electric pace, but he has good skills and lots of stamina for sure.

BTW, I would have Stockley back anyday, butI am biased because I sponsored him.

Another moan that struck me last night. Throw ins. They outclassed us on these. We don't seem to know how far our guys will throw the ball and seemed to give up the ball easily every time. We could do with working on that.

after we talked about this the other day i was trying to think why i thought he was fast. i realised it was two things:

1. he was genuinely pacy in pre-season against portsmouth and manchester united
2. rage online calls him 'fast eddie', so he must be fast.

re: the throw-ins - i think it would have taken a very poor team not to have outclassed on those. they weren't working, but willmott persisted with the same tactic.

And they had Danny Brown who has a phenomenal throw, not much else though.