Rovers 1 Charlton 1

[Boz]

First half fairly even, Rovers took the lead after Addicks keeper didn't cope with a Devaney overhead kick and Ryan Brunt scambled it home for his first league goal. OFW hadn't been tested that much.

Second half, the visitors may have come out with more determination, but they were helped by Rovers sitting too deep, 11 men back at corners (we'd kept one up in the first half) and the like. It was no surprise when they equalised, one of those that hit the crossbar and bounce down. The assistant ref adjudicated it had crossed the line. Thereafter the visitors looked more likely to score, but despite an effort finding the back of the net, an offside flag ruled that out and Rovers held out for a point. Worrying though that most of the sides below us won today as the gap to the drop zone narrows.

Did feel that Les should have changed the system with subs. Nothing going for McGurk, but should have gone more to a two up front with Tiryaki rather than Akins who did nothing when he came on. We were getting so swamped in midfield that it was a surprise Les did nothing to alter the balance there.

MoM: Ash Taylor did a good job in defence. Wallace also impressed but couldn't score in the proverbial brothel with a pocket of tenners.

 

[SonkORLY?]

Did feel that Les should have changed the system with subs. Nothing going for McGurk, but should have gone more to a two up front with Tiryaki rather than Akins who did nothing when he came on. We were getting so swamped in midfield that it was a surprise Les did nothing to alter the balance there.

If we're getting swamped in midfield then taking a central midfielder off in place of a striker doesn't seem to be the logical solution. And while it is true that Akins didn't do much, he wasn't even on the pitch 10 minutes.

All in all it was an alright game, Charlton probably edged it.

 

[Boz]

If we're getting swamped in midfield then taking a central midfielder off in place of a striker doesn't seem to be the logical solution. And while it is true that Akins didn't do much, he wasn't even on the pitch 10 minutes.

If we're being pedantic, Akins was on 11 minutes and he barely touched the ball...I can't remember him doing anything of significance.

As for the midfield, Wallace took a knock towards the end which might have hampered him. I'd have considered Joss to replace him. Although it might have been seen as negative, there was an argument for pushing Ash into midfield to break up some of their play.

 

[bigmart]

A good point especially as we were hanging on somewhat in the 2nd half.

Our bad run continues and 1 win in 18 is simply not good enough we are now a point closer to the bottom 4 and unless we get a win or two soon we will be in the bottom 4. Yet another manager sacked today yet Les doesnt seem to be under that much pressure.

 

[Rockford's Love Child]

I thought it was a good performance and a fair result. Tactically we got it pretty much spot on: Charlton have pace and movement in abundance up front and by denying them space in behind we restricted them to relatively few chances. We possibly dropped ten yards two deep in the second half, but Charlton were throwing a lot at us and the players were obviously desperate to take something from the game.

I thought there were a lot of good performances. The midfield trio have worked much better in recent games and seem to be developing an understanding, as Les commented after the game; Taylor and Goodison were outstanding at the back; Brunt did well and showed a good striker's instinct for the goal; Holmes was excellent again; Devaney was quieter than on Tuesday but still put in a couple of great deliveries.

In the last two games the shape and discipline have returned to the side and we have defended much better. In the next five games, against lesser opposition, we need to find a way of scoring a second goal and getting that elusive win (in this regard, hopefully Brunt will take confidence from his performance today, assuming we can afford to keep him). It is this sequence of matches that may pretty much make or break our season.

 

[SonkORLY?]

Midfield trio are better than they were but I still labour the point that whoever is at the tip of that triangle is never able to get close enough to Brunt, and also that this role doesn't seem to be particularly well designated.

As for the midfield, Wallace took a knock towards the end which might have hampered him. I'd have considered Joss to replace him. Although it might have been seen as negative, there was an argument for pushing Ash into midfield to break up some of their play.

How would this facilitate a move to 4-4-2, as you suggested?

Also I definitely would have left Ash where he was given how well he was playing in an important position.

 

[Rockford's Love Child]

I think if we had switched to 4-4-2 today, even for a short period, we would probably have been battered to be honest. I am all for playing that system against Wycombe, Rochdale etc., but I don't think today's game was the right occasion.

We supported Brunt well at Carlisle, less so today, possibly because of our wariness of the opposition. Hopefully we will play a bit higher up the pitch in the matches ahead.

 

[SonkORLY?]

That's what I'm getting at. Fans were bemoaning the Brunt/Tiryaki substitution and calling for 4-4-2 as usual, but Brunt was knackered and we had to keep that 5 across the middle IMO.

Our bad run continues

Past two results have been good...

 

[Boz]

I think if we had switched to 4-4-2 today, even for a short period, we would probably have been battered to be honest. I am all for playing that system against Wycombe, Rochdale etc., but I don't think today's game was the right occasion.

While battered is too strong a word, we were certainly under the cosh right from ko in the second half, playing 451, so I'm unsure altering the formation could have made things any worse. Certainly McGurk/Akins are in reality strikers rather than midfielders, so keeping Brunt on with Tiryaki wouldn't have meant a great loss in our defensive capacity. It also seemed that their keeper was a bit of a flapper, so being pressured by two strikers might have yielded results.

I didn't understand why we stopped leaving a man up at corners etc in the 2nd half, as we had done before half-time. There was no outlet, the pressure built up leading to an inevitable equaliser.

Charlton disappointed, was expecting something more from a side in their position.

 

[bigmart]

Sonkorly, 1 win in 18 says it all.

 

[Rockford's Love Child]

I didn't understand why we stopped leaving a man up at corners etc in the 2nd half, as we had done before half-time. There was no outlet, the pressure built up leading to an inevitable equaliser.

Charlton disappointed, was expecting something more from a side in their position.

Agree about leaving a man up at corners. Away from home, we even drag all ten men back when we are under no real pressure.

I thought Charlton were relatively unimpressive because we contained them so well; in flashes you could see they are a decent side.

 

[Rockford's Love Child]

Sonkorly, 1 win in 18 says it all.

Yes, but even if we were high in the league and in good form, the last two results would have been viewed as good. There has been a definite improvement in those two games, particularly defensively.

If we balls up against Oldham / Chesterfield / Orient by all means reconsider the situation, but now is not the moment to be harassing Parry even further.

 

[SonkORLY?]

Sonkorly, 1 win in 18 says it all.

While I accept that we need to start winning games, you categorically can't say that "our poor form is continuing" after two good results.

While battered is too strong a word, we were certainly under the cosh right from ko in the second half, playing 451, so I'm unsure altering the formation could have made things any worse. Certainly McGurk/Akins are in reality strikers rather than midfielders, so keeping Brunt on with Tiryaki wouldn't have meant a great loss in our defensive capacity. It also seemed that their keeper was a bit of a flapper, so being pressured by two strikers might have yielded results.

I didn't understand why we stopped leaving a man up at corners etc in the 2nd half, as we had done before half-time. There was no outlet, the pressure built up leading to an inevitable equaliser.

Charlton disappointed, was expecting something more from a side in their position.

Akins works as hard as any "midfielder" we have on our books. Brunt was knackered. Taking off a midfielder for a striker when we're being overrun in midfield can't be a good plan! The substitution made perfect sense to me.

I didn't think we left a man up in the first half either. Weird that we seemed to see different things in this regard. Interestingly, Charlton also brought 10 men back for most set pieces, despite having pacey options to leave up front.

 

[Boz]

Akins works as hard as any "midfielder" we have on our books. Brunt was knackered. Taking off a midfielder for a striker when we're being overrun in midfield can't be a good plan! The substitution made perfect sense to me.

I didn't think we left a man up in the first half either. Weird that we seemed to see different things in this regard. Interestingly, Charlton also brought 10 men back for most set pieces, despite having pacey options to leave up front.

We''ll have to agree to differ on tactics. I'm fairly sure we left a player up when defending corners in the first half, perhaps it was one of the loanees not realising they were meant to stay back. Or perhaps I'm going senile...

As to the question of whether this was a good result, in terms of possession Charlton were on top, so it falls into the point gained category for me. However, a point at 5pm doesn't look as good as it did at the start of play because of the results below us in particular Chesterfield and Scunthorpe winning unexpectedly.

 

[darrens8761]

good point imo but the run goes on. they were not that good yesterday and i felt we should have won the match.