Well I thought I'd give it 24 hours to see if I could see the game a little more objectively and to try and see if there were any positives to be gained from the game and to consider the managers post-match comments. Regrettably, I still feel the same as yesterday....we were total dross. We were at home to a part-time team 25 places below us who looked fitter, sharper and more committed than we did. Apart from Stockton's goal and very late efforts from Norwood and Dunn we failed to break them down and create any meaningful chances. It has been hinted elsewhere that Chelmsford came to "park the bus", nothing could be further from the truth. For most of the game they played a 4-4-2 but were able to get cover back when needed because we were so slow in working the ball forward it was ridiculously easy for them to switch from attack to defence.
Our midfield, supposedly the engine room of any team, was totally ineffective other than for the efforts of Maynard who for some inexplicable reason was dragged off at half-time. Wallace was dreadful from start to finish failing to find a white shirt 9 times out of 10, he is totally unfit and can hardly summon up the energy to move forward in any attacking sense or provide defensive cover when needed, which meant whatever role he was supposed to provide was limited to searching for the miracle pass from an essentially static midfield position, which he totally failed to do. By the end of the match his demeanor was one of absolute dejection.
I feel the limited movement of Wallace meant more pressure was placed on Hughes and this impacted adversely on his performance. Until Micky bites the bullet and acknowledges that an unfit Wallace is actually detracting from overall team performances we are going nowhere. God only knows what Harris must feel at being left on the bench while an immobile and ineffectual Wallace stays on the field.
I heard nothing from Micky in his post-match summary, apart from a half-hearted apology of sorts to Maynard, to alleviate my sense of disappointment and frustration with a system which seems to be organised to accommodate Wallace. At least we were not subjected to the nonsense of the "10% underperformance" which he promulgated as the cause of our failure against Dagenham. Taking nothing away from Chelmsford, who actually deserved to win this match, this was, certainly apart from the final 20 minutes an absolutely spineless display by Rovers, who, as a team, displayed no passion, no desire, no conviction and I'm sorry Micky, apart from haranguing each other, very little in terms of effort.
