We were awful

[Me For Crewe]

I was beginning to think I was the only one who thought we played OK on Saturday, so am relieved to see I’m not! Can’t see how Lowery was to blame for the first goal, when an experienced CH misjudged the bounce, let the Number 10 get ahead of him and then showed his lack of pace before bringing him down. There was me thinking it was his job to mark a CF!

We did look better when Walker replaced Grant, and George certainly had one of his off days. Lowery was the pick of the midfield for the reasons given above; comparisons with Jones are a bit premature I think, although I can see similarities- maybe Tommy will start scoring more often when he takes pens too!

The reason we lost was because our strikers couldn’t take advantage of the chances created for them. 2 one on ones in the first 15 minutes, inviting crosses sent in by Ainley and Bowery where Porter didn’t take the risk of attacking them, several bouts of pinball in their box where it didn’t quite go our way. If Stanley are promotion material then we have nothing to worry about; problem with that is they aren’t promotion material on that showing.

Much more like I saw the game rather Ruocul. I still believe that there is no massive differences between any of the teams at the moment. Where it counts is when squads get stretched and teams like Notts County benefit greatly. Very interesting when we played them that I knew of every one of their substitutes, last Saturday completely different.

Hi MikeSB, I view this site through Google Chrome with the ad blocker on and there is no sign of any pop ups. I hope that this might be of help.

[alexmick]

My concern now is the fact that they could not introduce another striker when one was clearly needed, simply because the club was unaware of the ruling about wearing jewellery. According to the Crewe Chronicle, this rule came into force at the start of this campaign. How we could have done with our fox in the box, to poke a foot out at those timely crosses and perhaps rescue a point from this game. Never mind, Dave Artell will just have to call the fire brigade. That ring will have to come off or Dagnall will be redundant for the rest of this season and will have to collect his P45.

[alexmick]

My concern now is the fact that they could not introduce another striker when one was clearly needed, simply because the club was unaware of the ruling about wearing jewellery. According to the Crewe Chronicle, this rule came into force at the start of this campaign. How we could have done with our fox in the box, to poke a foot out at those timely crosses and perhaps rescue a point from this game. Never mind, Dave Artell will just have to call the fire brigade. That ring will have to come off or Dagnall will be redundant for the rest of this season and will have to collect his P45.

Listening to Keith Hackett on BBC Radio Stoke tonight, it transpires that the ruling on not wearing jewellery has been in operation for about 10 years.