Man Of The Match

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wales-Bales

I thought Tanner had a good game. He was playing in front of me in the opening half so I had a very good look at him, and his first touch was superb.

---

Did you have your guide dog with you? First half he lost possesion half a dozen times from poor first touch or over hitting simple passes. He also passed the buck a couple of times when he could have shot or cross himself.

He improved after the break and helped assist the 2nd goal but wasted a lot of good positions first half.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J R Hartley

Did you have your guide dog with you? First half he lost possesion half a dozen times from poor first touch or over hitting simple passes. He also passed the buck a couple of times when he could have shot or cross himself.

He improved after the break and helped assist the 2nd goal but wasted a lot of good positions first half.

---

Perfect summery of how I saw it as well :thumbup:

Kept on giving poor passes, instead of taking responsibility himself

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J R Hartley

Did you have your guide dog with you? First half he lost possesion half a dozen times from poor first touch or over hitting simple passes. He also passed the buck a couple of times when he could have shot or cross himself.

He improved after the break and helped assist the 2nd goal but wasted a lot of good positions first half.

---

I haven't seen any of the highlights and was working yesterday. It sounds like we played well, but what were Peterborough like? I have zero knowledge of this division.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tuerto

I haven't seen any of the highlights and was working yesterday. It sounds like we played well, but what were Peterborough like? I have zero knowledge of this division.

---

It's hard to know. Wimbledon were worse.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Des Parrot

Wintle for me, with Rubin a very close second. Nobody had a poor game.

---

The 2 centre backs?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tuerto

I haven't seen any of the highlights and was working yesterday. It sounds like we played well, but what were Peterborough like? I have zero knowledge of this division.

---

They were poor. Of course, it's the first game of the season and they could go on to be anything in the long run, but to me they looked a weak side and not very physically robust by League One standards.

Peterborough finished 18th last season. They conceded more goals (81) than any other side apart from Crawley, who were relegated. To put that into perspective, City conceded 73 goals last season in the Championship while finishing bottom.

There were some very encouraging performances yesterday and it was an enjoyable game to watch, but I have a feeling that Peterborough at home was an ideal fixture for a young and somewhat experimental City side to begin with and there will be much stiffer tests to come.

Apparently, Peterborough lost several of their best players over the summer. I'd never heard of any of them other than Ricky-Jade Jones, who we were supposed to have been interested in signing at one stage, but the Racing Post pundits suggested they were 'influential'.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tuerto

I haven't seen any of the highlights and was working yesterday. It sounds like we played well, but what were Peterborough like? I have zero knowledge of this division.

---

Hard to tell what the standard is in terms of the league as we completely dominated the ball and wasted some good positions first half. You could tell straight away there was a gulf between the two sides, it was just a case of getting R Colwill on the ball and ticking. They seemed to be happy to hang in there first half and scored off a penalty from their first real attack.

2nd half we came flying out of the traps and turned the game around straight away. Then it was back to them hanging in there but us being wasteful again and we didn’t put them to bed. They had a bit of a go last 10 mins plus 10 mins of injury time and Turner had to make one very good save near the end, but it would have been undeserved if they somehow managed to pinch the draw.

I think better teams will hurt us more defensively but going forward we looked really good even if we did waste some good chances and positions.

8/10 performance for me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WJ99mobile

The 2 centre backs?

---

Poor is a bit unfair but they were certainly the weaker players in our side yesterday. Both got a bit nervous and shaky after Lawlor was booked and then shortly after Fish gave the ball away cheaply which led to him then giving the penalty away. Both certainly needed half time to compose themselves and I felt Lawlor was treading on eggshells so it was the right decision to hook him before he got booked again and sent off.

I don’t think both can play together at the moment, they don’t have any experience, it needs to be one or the other with an experienced centre half.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BLUETIT

Sorry Bob, but Tanner wasted so much good possession down the left, or was I watching a different game ?!

One decent cross in the first half out of what seemed maybe 10 to 15 touches!

---

He was also asleep half the time, plenty of passes played out to him that he hadn't read the flight of and cost us possession

There are times with Tanner that you can see the talent that's there, but his concentration and ability to read the game are lacking

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J R Hartley

Poor is a bit unfair but they were certainly the weaker players in our side yesterday. Both got a bit nervous and shaky after Lawlor was booked and then shortly after Fish gave the ball away cheaply which led to him then giving the penalty away. Both certainly needed half time to compose themselves and I felt Lawlor was treading on eggshells so it was the right decision to hook him before he got booked again and sent off.

I don’t think both can play together at the moment, they don’t have any experience, it needs to be one or the other with an experienced centre half.

---

I think that's fair. One thing I'd not about Lawlor is he looked more comfortable on the ball than Fish and was regularly playing the ball directly into midfield with accuracy, players seemed to trust him to take his time on it too. Fish's passing by contrast was pretty telegraphed and led to the penalty award

I think one of them will come out for Chambers initially, I think it depends how highly you value passing it out from the back. It may be bias as I don't rate him but I didn't feel particularly comfortable when Daland came on

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J R Hartley

Did you have your guide dog with you? First half he lost possesion half a dozen times from poor first touch or over hitting simple passes. He also passed the buck a couple of times when he could have shot or cross himself.

He improved after the break and helped assist the 2nd goal but wasted a lot of good positions first half.

---

Attachment 6644

Tanner is frustrating but he didn’t look fully fit yesterday. He’ll be great in this league.

Ashford worries me, he’s not a winger and I’d prefer Willock to him, and I don’t rate Willock at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coyote

Kpakio was my MOTM. Very good battle against Peterborough's nippy Number 10, scored the wonder goal in the second, and was a constant presence and thorn in most Boro attacks.

Wintle played very well too, as did Rubin and I was very impressed by Turner in goal too.

---

https://x.com/freflchampvids/status/1951792347114856846

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J R Hartley

R Cowlill by a country mile. Scored a superb free kick and laid on several other chances for his team mates. Looked like a big boy playing against younger kids when he got on the ball.

Kpakio and Wintle the best of the rest.

---

I'd go the same, and the keeper had a great start.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

So the man of the match thread descends into a let’s knock the 18 year old match winner one. I thought Kpakio got caught out the once near the end and his poor throw in got Lawlor booked, but, apart from that, I thought he was very good and, on a day when we gave the ball away carelessly quite a lot, he was one who I felt confident about when he was in possession.

Think Rubin Colwill deserved the man of the match, Tanner and Kpakio were candidates, as was Wintle and Joel Colwill had a good second half.

---

Spot on Bob. The moaning Minnies will always focus on the negatives. The usual suspects will find it hard to compliment Rubin. And when they do, it will be accompanied with "he's found his level". Many strong candidates for MOM yesterday. Wintle, Kpakio, and Joel Colwill could all make cases. I was also very impressed by Tanner who grew stronger and more influential as the game went on. But my MOM was Rubin. Of course, he scored possibly the best free kick we've seen since the mighty Whitts but he also performed really well in the areas which even his supporters would have said are not his strengths. His energy was impressive, his press was very effective, he showed strength and I can't remember any occasion when he ended up on his arse. Damn, he was even effective in the air.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Garth Blue

Spot on Bob. The moaning Minnies will always focus on the negatives. The usual suspects will find it hard to compliment Rubin. And when they do, it will be accompanied with "he's found his level". Many strong candidates for MOM yesterday. Wintle, Kpakio, and Joel Colwill could all make cases. I was also very impressed by Tanner who grew stronger and more influential as the game went on. But my MOM was Rubin. Of course, he scored possibly the best free kick we've seen since the mighty Whitts but he also performed really well in the areas which even his supporters would have said are not his strengths. His energy was impressive, his press was very effective, he showed strength and I can't remember any occasion when he ended up on his arse. Damn, he was even effective in the air.

---

My MOTM as I’ve said earlier in the thread and it was a great free kick, but your forgetting the two, almost identical, worldy free kicks from Tomlin if you think it was the best free kick since the days of Whitts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wales-Bales

Attachment 6644

---

And? What does this prove? Just one websites motm. He had an assist and a shot on target 2nd half and I acknowledged he improved after HT, but first half he was guilty of losing possession several times because of poor touch and control.

I thought Rubin's knuckle technique beat Tomlin's efforts.....just.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Garth Blue

I thought Rubin's knuckle technique beat Tomlin's efforts.....just.

---

It was brave, I’ll give him that, especially in front of the Canton, and at 1-0 down. The knuckle technique can go horribly wrong if not caught right and the easy option would have been to cross from that position, or a left footer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wales-Bales

https://x.com/freflchampvids/status/1951792347114856846

---

He did have a great game, although the last 15 minutes you could see he had tired and a couple of bad decisions crept in. I think him and Tanner will tear this league apart. Everything good we done yesterday was on their side and they worked well together, Tanner was particularly good helping him double up on their winger at times too. Quite fitting that they combined for the winner.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J R Hartley

Hard to tell what the standard is in terms of the league as we completely dominated the ball and wasted some good positions first half. You could tell straight away there was a gulf between the two sides, it was just a case of getting R Colwill on the ball and ticking. They seemed to be happy to hang in there first half and scored off a penalty from their first real attack.

2nd half we came flying out of the traps and turned the game around straight away. Then it was back to them hanging in there but us being wasteful again and we didn’t put them to bed. They had a bit of a go last 10 mins plus 10 mins of injury time and Turner had to make one very good save near the end, but it would have been undeserved if they somehow managed to pinch the draw.

I think better teams will hurt us more defensively but going forward we looked really good even if we did waste some good chances and positions.

8/10 performance for me.

---

Fair do’s Fisherman. That’s a decent summary of the game. You can construct decent posts when you try. You just need to be a bit more consistent. A bit like Rubin Colwill 👍

Rubin Colwill with Tanner a very close second. They were way ahead of anybody else on the park. I think Tanner did more than Colwill with the ball (goal aside) but..its easy to miss the times Colwill pulled 1-2 players out of position by his presence alone to make huge gaps for others in the attacking third hence I think it has to be Colwill.

On the other end of the scale was Lawlor for me..no composure and played his teammates into trouble countless times. I understand he's young but that excuse doesn't get us league points.

Hot take no doubt..i see people on the other forum saying the complete opposite :-)

I would have gone for Wintle, he snuffed out a lot of their attacks, and his diagonal balls out to the wings were our main attacking outlet for most of the game.
on one occasion fish went on a bit of a run into their half and Wintle immediately slotted into the back 4 and was there to mop up when the move broke down, I don't think we have too many other midfielders who would have had as big an influence on the game as he did

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blooburd2

Rubin Colwill with Tanner a very close second. They were way ahead of anybody else on the park. I think Tanner did more than Colwill with the ball (goal aside) but..its easy to miss the times Colwill pulled 1-2 players out of position by his presence alone to make huge gaps for others in the attacking third hence I think it has to be Colwill.

On the other end of the scale was Lawlor for me..no composure and played his teammates into trouble countless times. I understand he's young but that excuse doesn't get us league points.

Hot take no doubt..i see people on the other forum saying the complete opposite :-)

---

Lawlor had no composure? I don't think he can be accused of that at all, he looked very composed on the ball and played solid passes to his teammates

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by City123

Lawlor had no composure? I don't think he can be accused of that at all, he looked very composed on the ball and played solid passes to his teammates

---

I can see why some think that. He stood on the ball when there wasn't a peterborough player within 20 yards of him (i call this wasting time rather than composure) but when he had any pressure on him i found he was snatching at the passes and although some hit their mark it was normally to a player who had 1-2 players all over them already.

Doesnt mean i was right its just how i saw it