Match Thread vs. York City 07.08.21 [PSF]

[countygump]

[Magpies1959]

Notts78, my comments about Cameron were just as I saw his game yesterday. I do believe he will be a good signing for us, and he definitely a leader, always encouraging. Maybe he is one of those playerd that find it hard to play at full intensity. I used to think it was easy to use 'PSF' as an excuse for a seemingly disappointing defeat, but it was clear the difference in energy levels being put in between the two sides yesterday.
I hope there is a stream/highlights of the Solihull game, as I think both sides will be playing to similar levels of performance, and would give a better idea of where we are at.

[Elite_Pie]

Notts78, my comments about Cameron were just as I saw his game yesterday. I do believe he will be a good signing for us, and he definitely a leader, always encouraging.

I was really pleased when we signed Cameron because he seems a leader, but there's no denying he had a poor game yesterday. I don't think he won a single aerial challenge against Beck, and was out-muscled for the goal.

[countygump]

Burch's take in the EP.

''Burchnall said there were plenty of aspects about the game which encouraged him, but said the goals they conceded could have been avoided.

"It was a good exercise for us," he said.

"I thought we were very good in the first half and created a lot of good chances across the game.

"But we got a little bit exposed where some of our weak spots will be which is what these games are for.

"You can't sleepwalk into the season thinking everything is perfect. We are far from the finished article.

"We are still on the way up, but I still saw a lot of nice elements. We created a lot of really good chances, but the goals we conceded were quite weak really.

"Two were on the counter-attack and one was from out wide. They are the areas that we have to pay attention to."


https://www.nottinghampost.com/sport...MC8Dj2d00dX4m4

[countygump]

Not that it matters much but did it actually cross the line?



https://twitter.com/i/status/1424279211817242624

[countygump]

It obviously did:

[MAD_MAGPIE]

The game at least confirmed that Sam is just not good enough... He has had enough opportunities to come good, but we now need to off load him..

He needed to impose himself more on the game in terms of the physical side yesterday for me. He was probably the same height as the equivalently tall York striker who was winning everything in the air and made it known he was around. Also contributing to a goal.

Whilst Sam maybe far more technical at this level than most 6ft 5in strikers, and target men I believe you've got to have those physical attributes to win the ball first before you can play with the ball at this level, otherwise there will be games like against York where he will be anonymous.

The jury is still out for me and I hope we see him grow in confidence and come good this season. It would be a shame if he became a player that produces a piece of magic every three games and goes undetected for the other two games.

[eastwoodmagpie]

Coming away from the game, I was obviously disappointed to have lost to a side a division below us, after doing well against a side three divisions above us last week.
On reflection, I think last week our players were looking to impress against higher opposition, and the same could be said for York and their players this week. We were (hopefully) playing to a level of tempo, or lack of, set by IB.
That said, I was disappointed in Cameron, who won nothing in the air, (one of his strengths), and also his lack of pace when defending. Slocombe has looked shaky, but his track record at NL level left me with no worries in this department.
I have to trust IB to sort the defensive frailties out, and think when we play at full bore, our attacking play will blow sides away. Cal and Nemane down the right could be very pleasing on the eye to watch.
Does anyone know what price York are to be promoted, they looked to have good players in key areas.

Also disappointed in Cameron, not a captains performance, seems rather slow and suspect in the air , think Barrows Mark Ellis would have put up a better battle against Yorks Beck.

[Kelton]

I agree.

The bottom line is that Brindley and Chicksen aren't centre-halves. Brindley has a bit of height and can 'do a job' in that position, but Chicksen just isn't big and physical enough to play that role regularly. Opposition scouts have and will target him as a weakness. I appreciate that Burchnall wants the right and left centre-halves to be adventurous while Rawlinson sits in, but they do still need the physical attributes to be able to do their defensive job when we're under pressure.

As you say, Lacey can't come back soon enough (because he can defend and play), and we probably do need another 'proper' central defender (albeit a cultured one) if we're going to play three most of the time. This in turn would free up Chicksen to compete for his more natural position on the left-side.

I did tell you so but was harangued for saying this

[Chicken Balti Pie]

At a 3 at the back, you don't have 3 centre backs, you have 1 usual centre back and basically 2 hybrid full back centre backs, i.e. Brindley and Chickson, they are pretty much perfect for how 3 at the back is played