+ Visit Crewe Alexandra FC Mad for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13

Thread: Cambridge

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    2,959

    Cambridge

    Here we go again! So, we've stopped the rot away from home, so what about home matches?
    Which Crewe Alex will turn up. Which team will be fit to play? Well, we know that Ainley is out for up to 2 months. Finney can show if he's ready by playing against Wigan so please don't pick him on Saturday. There was a hint that Madger won't be ready in DAs preview. Does that mean 5-2-3/3-4-3 is likely? If that is the case, then we must throw the wing-backs further forward to work with the wide players. Those wide players also need to get closer to Mika. The other point about this formation is the back 3: should Daniels be the pivot or Thomas?
    So, prediction? Dare I suggest that we might actually score 2 again? 2-1 win.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    707
    Gotta be positive ...4-1 win today !

    The big difference at the moment is with players unavailable for various reasons, DA can still put out a competitive team.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    709
    Quote Originally Posted by frogpole View Post
    Gotta be positive ...4-1 win today !

    The big difference at the moment is with players unavailable for various reasons, DA can still put out a competitive team.
    I admire frogpoles optimism and I do hope he is right, however I still think we are extremely 1 dimensional and Cambridge will know exactly who to mark out of the game and that will be our 1 and only threat Bennett so until Artell figures out different attacking plans I think predictability will be our Achilles heal and a 3-1 defeat will be the outcome today.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    2,959
    Interesting choices in line up. Daniels preferred to Thomas. Finney playing in addition to Porter is risky. Neither will be contributing a lot to the game so therefore loading the workrate on to the other 8 outfield players. The full backs will have to do a lot of ball carrying. Meanwhile, Murphy and Robertson will have to keep the back covered while funneling the ball forward.
    Bit worried as Cambridge soak up pressure and overload on the counter.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    2,959
    So what happened? It sounded like we just sat on it. Which we are never able to do successfully.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    267

    Not again!

    One gets very nervous about the outcome of a game when Crewe appear to have the game sewn up for three points. Yet again they concede from what looks like a winning position by allowing the opposition to score in the dying minutes of the game. What is wrong with the team to allow this to happen!

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    709
    Quote Originally Posted by Fidler View Post
    One gets very nervous about the outcome of a game when Crewe appear to have the game sewn up for three points. Yet again they concede from what looks like a winning position by allowing the opposition to score in the dying minutes of the game. What is wrong with the team to allow this to happen!

    Lack of options on the bench can’t agree with Frogpole I think the squad is weak and stilling lacking in numbers the bench was poor today and lacking in any quality to change the game, when you replace your winger with a center forward that tells you all you need to know. Lundstrum is not good enough so Gomes must be no better I assume ? Macfazdean for Bennett WTF !! Artell has a lot of questions to answer still 3 players light get on with getting them in Dave before it is too late, nailed on relegation.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    1,106
    Quote Originally Posted by Wartman View Post
    Lack of options on the bench can’t agree with Frogpole I think the squad is weak and stilling lacking in numbers the bench was poor today and lacking in any quality to change the game, when you replace your winger with a center forward that tells you all you need to know. Lundstrum is not good enough so Gomes must be no better I assume ? Macfazdean for Bennett WTF !! Artell has a lot of questions to answer still 3 players light get on with getting them in Dave before it is too late, nailed on relegation.
    We looked in no trouble in the first half but they definitely upped their game in the second period. We didn't! Repacing Kashket with Mandron was unavoidable due to the injury. Mandron obviously is not a winger or wide man and our natural replacement for him would be Knight who is currently out injured. So, yes we are going to look weak in areas where our cover is injured. Macfadzeen is a midfielder or Left Back so a reasonable option to replace Bennett on paper at least. Lundstrum I think is good enough. He is just a different type of player to Finney and Ainley. Gomez I suspect is not quite up to it yet (won't have had a pre-season) although I expected to see him had we managed to increase our lead early in the second half

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    1,128
    Quote Originally Posted by Timmy58 View Post
    We looked in no trouble in the first half but they definitely upped their game in the second period. We didn't! Repacing Kashket with Mandron was unavoidable due to the injury. Mandron obviously is not a winger or wide man and our natural replacement for him would be Knight who is currently out injured. So, yes we are going to look weak in areas where our cover is injured. Macfadzeen is a midfielder or Left Back so a reasonable option to replace Bennett on paper at least. Lundstrum I think is good enough. He is just a different type of player to Finney and Ainley. Gomez I suspect is not quite up to it yet (won't have had a pre-season) although I expected to see him had we managed to increase our lead early in the second half
    I agree completely - my guess was Mandron was due to replace Porter after 60 minutes, but Kashket's injury ruined that and we had no striker option. Clearly Lundstrom didn't bring what DA hoped (steadiness - his touch was awful) to the lineup when he came on and given that maybe keeping Finney on (playing as a No 10 as he was) would have been better. McFadzean was meant to bring a lead protecting lineup into everyone's minds I think but he seemed to think he was a winger. If we'd gone 3 up it would have been the perfect time to give Gomes a run out - surely must play Tuesday v Wigan, though we need to make fewer changes than normal with no game after for 10 days.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    709
    Quote Originally Posted by ShropshireAlex View Post
    I agree completely - my guess was Mandron was due to replace Porter after 60 minutes, but Kashket's injury ruined that and we had no striker option. Clearly Lundstrom didn't bring what DA hoped (steadiness - his touch was awful) to the lineup when he came on and given that maybe keeping Finney on (playing as a No 10 as he was) would have been better. McFadzean was meant to bring a lead protecting lineup into everyone's minds I think but he seemed to think he was a winger. If we'd gone 3 up it would have been the perfect time to give Gomes a run out - surely must play Tuesday v Wigan, though we need to make fewer changes than normal with no game after for 10 days.
    So I repeat the squad is short still and the bench limited; Mandaron is a center forward not a winger has he has proven several times, Lundstrum is not good enough (at present) he maybe in the future but at the moment is way short. Macfazdean was brought in as a full back not a winger. You can’t reduce the squad in numbers as Crewe have done to improve the quality within the budget as you then have to over play the players and they get injured and the back up squad is not there!! This current squad is heading to league 2 no doubt about it.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •