Cambridge

Anything yellow and blue
Isaac
Dashing young thing
Posts: 621
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 9:32 am

Cambridge

Post by Isaac »

Serendipitously, I was close enough to Cambridge and lucky enough to get a ticket for this one. I had no sense of strangeness being back at a live game after 18 months or so, I think because you quickly get caught up in the familiarity and distraction (from real life) of football - which is half the attraction of the game from my point of view.

Given we've been useless at the start of the last 3 seasons I thought this was a good performance. A couple of missed chances at the start of the 2nd half cost us ultimately. We kept the ball, passed it well and looked organised defensively. Brannagan was our best player I thought, he more or less ran the game - a bit like his performances at the end of last season. All 3 wingers were disappointing though, especially Whyte, but given they're all new players this is perhaps to be expected. Dangerous to base it on one game but Seddon looked possibly more solid that Ruffels defensively and his goal was Ruffels-esque. Thorniley looked competent as well, but not as much of a presence, physically, or in the ability to carry the ball forward as Atkinson.

Perhaps the concern for me is that Robinson identified the "lack of physicality" in the team after the Blackpool defeat which I agreed with but I don't see where that's coming from at the moment. Perhaps McGuane, when presumably fully fit could add to that side of the game, but the team, as you'd expect, looks a lot like a normal Karl Robinson team at the moment.
Dr Bob
Middle-Aged Spread
Posts: 1064
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 2:16 pm
Location: Nottingham

Re: Cambridge

Post by Dr Bob »

With the issue of slow starts, I wonder if it is almost inevitable given KRs preferred style of play. It will take longer than pre-season can offer to build up partnerships and familiarity with patterns of play, given the sort of possession-based passing game we have. And this will be compounded with multiple new players coming in. That said, there is no accounting for a player sticking a leg out like that to give away a penalty...
Kernow Yellow
Grumpy old git
Posts: 3075
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 5:16 pm

Re: Cambridge

Post by Kernow Yellow »

Well it it was very frustrating for me NOT being able to watch a match for the first time in over a year. I was always very much in favour of the Saturday afternoon TV blackout before, but now that kick-offs are so spread out anyway, and plenty of people still don't think it's a very sensible idea to travel the length and breadth of the country to watch a match in the company of thousands of strangers, I'm surprised that the situation hasn't been revisited. It remains to be seen whether midweek games will be available to watch on iFollow - it seems to be at the home club's discretion. So for now I'll be back to commenting on the few games I can get to in person - starting next Saturday.

UTM
grandpont tom
Brat
Posts: 110
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2017 5:31 pm

Re: Cambridge

Post by grandpont tom »

I think the common feeling at the end amongst the fans was that we'd let 2 points get away - but I don't think we need to compete physically with Cambridge. They seemed to have loads of six footers and more -with one slippery little bloke to supply the ammo - which didn't really work as apart from the penalty they didn't really threaten us -
I agree that Brannagan was the best player on the day - I'd love to see him play 20 yards further up the field.
grandpont tom
Brat
Posts: 110
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2017 5:31 pm

Re: Cambridge

Post by grandpont tom »

I think the common feeling at the end amongst the fans was that we'd let 2 points get away - but I don't think we need to compete physically with Cambridge. They seemed to have loads of six footers and more -with one slippery little bloke to supply the ammo - which didn't really work as apart from the penalty they didn't really threaten us -
I agree that Brannagan was the best player on the day - I'd love to see him play 20 yards further up the field.
Isaac
Dashing young thing
Posts: 621
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 9:32 am

Re: Cambridge

Post by Isaac »

Kernow Yellow wrote: Mon Aug 09, 2021 4:08 pm Well it it was very frustrating for me NOT being able to watch a match for the first time in over a year. I was always very much in favour of the Saturday afternoon TV blackout before, but now that kick-offs are so spread out anyway, and plenty of people still don't think it's a very sensible idea to travel the length and breadth of the country to watch a match in the company of thousands of strangers, I'm surprised that the situation hasn't been revisited. It remains to be seen whether midweek games will be available to watch on iFollow - it seems to be at the home club's discretion. So for now I'll be back to commenting on the few games I can get to in person - starting next Saturday.

UTM
I've, erm, heard it is possible to get ifollow still, you need a half-decent VPN. If you message me I can share what I've heard, as given the pandemic, I understand the uncertainty around travelling.
OtmoorYellow
Puberty
Posts: 444
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2017 1:35 pm

Re: Cambridge

Post by OtmoorYellow »

Definitely 2 points dropped.

It was a natural reaction for Sykes to try to clear the ball, but players need to be aware of their opponents positions, and an attacking player running through will find is easy to locate a defender’s body to fall over. Even so, we had 2 very good shouts for penalties as well, and a few maybes too.

We dominated lengthy spells, particularly in the first half, and created plenty of half chances and balls into the box, begging to be attacked. No criticism of Taylor who was up against a couple of big lumps. Winnall did sod-all, and my feeling was that Agyei would have been a better replacement in the second half.

Williams had an excellent game, and was always involved. We looked strong down the left too, as Cambridge gave Whyte far more space than he deserved. The link up with Seddon looked reasonably honed too for this early part of the season. I would like to have seen Whyte attack the goal directly on occasion, rather than always going for the byline.

CamBran distributed well and the floating Sykes was an interesting variant.

In the second half, Cambridge switched to a more regular 4-4-2, meaning our midfield were a little outnumbered at times, and Cambridge gradually got more out of the game the longer it went on. We didn’t adapt, and the subs weakened us, rather than giving us fresh legs and a second wind.

Hoolihoolihoolihan was very good for Cambridge, and should have had man of the match. We had several who could have claimed that award, and I would have given it to Seddon, who looked very solid on the left.

I remain unconvinced about Forde at right back and I can only assume Long isn’t quite there fitness wise. Forde didn’t have a bad game, he just looks a bit fish out of water there.

It’s first game of the season, so no complaints with a draw, but Cambridge will, I suspect, not be troubling the top half of the table too much this season.

It felt surreal to begin with, being in and around a crowd. As the game wore on, the less I noticed the feeling, and it was great to hear the chanting and banter and oohs and aahs.
Kernow Yellow
Grumpy old git
Posts: 3075
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 5:16 pm

Re: Cambridge

Post by Kernow Yellow »

Isaac wrote: Mon Aug 09, 2021 4:38 pm
Kernow Yellow wrote: Mon Aug 09, 2021 4:08 pm Well it it was very frustrating for me NOT being able to watch a match for the first time in over a year. I was always very much in favour of the Saturday afternoon TV blackout before, but now that kick-offs are so spread out anyway, and plenty of people still don't think it's a very sensible idea to travel the length and breadth of the country to watch a match in the company of thousands of strangers, I'm surprised that the situation hasn't been revisited. It remains to be seen whether midweek games will be available to watch on iFollow - it seems to be at the home club's discretion. So for now I'll be back to commenting on the few games I can get to in person - starting next Saturday.

UTM
I've, erm, heard it is possible to get ifollow still, you need a half-decent VPN. If you message me I can share what I've heard, as given the pandemic, I understand the uncertainty around travelling.
I've also heard this, and will probably look into it further soon! Thanks for the offer.
Kairdiff Exile
Mid-life Crisis
Posts: 707
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2013 3:59 pm

Re: Cambridge

Post by Kairdiff Exile »

Kernow Yellow wrote: Mon Aug 09, 2021 4:08 pm Well it it was very frustrating for me NOT being able to watch a match for the first time in over a year. I was always very much in favour of the Saturday afternoon TV blackout before, but now that kick-offs are so spread out anyway, and plenty of people still don't think it's a very sensible idea to travel the length and breadth of the country to watch a match in the company of thousands of strangers, I'm surprised that the situation hasn't been revisited.
I should imagine that the Football League is trying to make sure that as many people as possible go back to grounds as early as possible and re-establish the old routines, so that member clubs can start getting some much-missed ticket revenue.

If they have to allow UK residents access to streaming again, they should at least make sure they’re paying the same price as a match ticket rather than watching at a discount.
Kernow Yellow
Grumpy old git
Posts: 3075
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 5:16 pm

Re: Cambridge

Post by Kernow Yellow »

Kairdiff Exile wrote: Mon Aug 09, 2021 7:49 pm If they have to allow UK residents access to streaming again, they should at least make sure they’re paying the same price as a match ticket rather than watching at a discount.
Can you actually think of any event where it costs the same to stream it as to attend it? I won't tell you how much I spent on a ticket to Lords next Sunday, when I could have bought a NOWTV day pass for a tenner or whatever. The idea that that everyone will watch from home if it's a bit cheaper is laughable. Midweek FL games have been available for a tenner on iFollow for several years now anyway, even pre-Covid.

Not that I'm particularly arguing that all matches should be streamed - just pointing out that it was strange not being able to do so on Saturday having got used to seeing every game last year. With a 450-mile round trip to Oxford, I'm only ever going to manage half a dozen or so home games in any given season. If OUFC could take a tenner off me for the rest of the games, they'd be making more money off me, not less. And I'd bite their hand off.
Isaac
Dashing young thing
Posts: 621
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 9:32 am

Re: Cambridge

Post by Isaac »

I agree that the match ticket should be a similar price to the cost of getting the game streamed, but that's an argument for lowering the prices of match tickets, rather than increasing the cost of the streaming.

There's no comparison between watching a match live in person and streaming/televising it. I would think that's the majority opinion for all football fans who actually go to matches.

Put it this way, I'd already paid to stream the game on Saturday (an overseas season ticket on ifollow costs 166euros) and I paid out a further £20 to turn up, plus other associated costs. I very much doubt it's just me and KY who would be happy to shell out cash to the club to get access to what is already technically available but also would turn up to games when possible. There must be plenty of older fans in particular who would pay to watch online when actually getting to the games is unrealistic. My theory is that people who want to go to the games, will go, whether they are streamed or not.

I'd argue the more visible you make the sport - or the more engagement the club gets from it's fans, whether by streaming, attending in person etc, the better the outcome in general for the club.
Radley Rambler
Grumpy old git
Posts: 2249
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2006 4:36 pm

Re: Cambridge

Post by Radley Rambler »

Isaac wrote: Tue Aug 10, 2021 2:10 pm I agree that the match ticket should be a similar price to the cost of getting the game streamed, but that's an argument for lowering the prices of match tickets, rather than increasing the cost of the streaming.

There's no comparison between watching a match live in person and streaming/televising it. I would think that's the majority opinion for all football fans who actually go to matches.

Put it this way, I'd already paid to stream the game on Saturday (an overseas season ticket on ifollow costs 166euros) and I paid out a further £20 to turn up, plus other associated costs. I very much doubt it's just me and KY who would be happy to shell out cash to the club to get access to what is already technically available but also would turn up to games when possible. There must be plenty of older fans in particular who would pay to watch online when actually getting to the games is unrealistic. My theory is that people who want to go to the games, will go, whether they are streamed or not.

I'd argue the more visible you make the sport - or the more engagement the club gets from it's fans, whether by streaming, attending in person etc, the better the outcome in general for the club.
The lack of iFollow has been covered in great depth on the other forum. Basically Sky pump over £100m per year into the EFL and as a result (understandably whether you like it or not) demand a significant say on what is broadcast when and by whom. They want folk to watch the Soccer Saturday extravaganza rather than their own teams and unless the EFL take a very different view on life in 2024 when the deal is up for renegotiation, that's how it's going to stay.

https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/foo ... 41921.html

As for the match itself, I think the previous posts have covered it well but I'll make two points:

- Gavin Whyte is a right winger
- The game was crying out for Dan Agyei - a poll on the other forum has a 95%/5% split in favour of Agyei over Winnall, KR must see something the vast majority of us don't
Kairdiff Exile
Mid-life Crisis
Posts: 707
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2013 3:59 pm

Re: Cambridge

Post by Kairdiff Exile »

Isaac wrote: Tue Aug 10, 2021 2:10 pm There's no comparison between watching a match live in person and streaming/televising it. I would think that's the majority opinion for all football fans who actually go to matches.
Quite so, my dear old thing. But of course it’s not the view of the suits at the Football League or the TV companies to whom they have become beholden, as RR points out.

I’m probably terribly old fashioned, but if I can’t get to a game (as is often the case, because of geography and work and family), I put some money aside towards when I can. What I don’t do is expect to have every game available to me on a plate at cut-price.
slappy
Grumpy old git
Posts: 2884
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2007 3:52 pm

Re: Cambridge

Post by slappy »

Looking at a few upcoming games on the train which I haven't booked:-
Bolton (A) - £104
Cheltenham (A) - bus replacement for 1 1/2 hours from Reading
Burton (A) - £96 before I look at split ticketing

I had got quite accustomed to a Saturday afternoon in front of a computer screen at my "office" desk in a comfortable chair. 2pm team news announced; look at the Picks app game for around 9 different clubs; pick some goalscorer odds for Oxford United; listen to Radio Oxford match build-up and read the message boards. 3pm switch to the iFollow online, open first bottle of beer and enjoy the game and Stevie Kinniburgh commentary. Half time pork-pie snack. Second half, open second bottle of beer and repeat. Total cost around £20.

It's not the same as being at the match, but you can at least make your own match-day routine.
Last edited by slappy on Thu Aug 12, 2021 1:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Ancient Colin
Grumpy old git
Posts: 2662
Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 12:23 pm
Location: Nowhere near Treviso

Re: Cambridge

Post by Ancient Colin »

That seems plausible other than the "enjoy the game" bit ... !!
Post Reply