Torquay United Fans Forum

First Half - Marsh, Wright, Verma for good link-up play and the goals
Second Half - Lavercombe for early save to stay at 2-1
Heslop for tremendous energy, covering Berry, commitment to get forward

A great result indeed, and, as Nico said post-match, the team played as a team, worked for one another, AND DID THE BASICS. Just what everyone needed, a performance which so stood out from the dross that has been seen at Plainmoor during other matches. And a training ground move worked second time round for the second goal. And for the first goal a hard low cross, instead of the hopeful high lobs which have created little all season.
Keep on doing the basics lads, you really gave us something to cheer today, and the Popside was magnificent.

We are meant to be professional - however we cannot even impose ourselves on lesser teams - worse, we do not even seek to impose ourselves on visiting teams. Is it so difficult to play real football to feet instead of hoofing the ball forwards and hoping to get a head on it (and to what purpose?). Even throws-in and possession are totally wasted by constantly lobbing the ball at two heads surrounded by 5 opponents.

The current negative thinking on the pitch seems to be play for 0-0 at half-time; against Wrexham, with a gale at our backs, we were too unadventurous to use the wind to any goal-threatening effect. Against Chesham, who hoofed the ball out of defence in the first half, we again showed no urgency, no intent to push forward and retain possession in order to create pressure and real chances. And yet the playing conditions were much more ideal for team play.

How on earth do we think we will ever score again, other than by a scramble from a corner? When we do shoot, mostly from hopeful distance, we hardly ever make the keeper play.
What goes on in training; apparently not footballing basics like ball control, triangles, one-twos, and certainly not composure.

So, does it matter who gets selected if we are just to play amateur hoofball, if we are going to avoid any attempt at midfield control, and if we cannot create pressure and something for the fans to believe in?

Spot on Arcadia and Modgull. We are consistently headless chickens; the players are not no-hopers but we have no system of play, just a dysfunctional set of individuals, and hence cannot make realistic goal-scoring opportunities but have to rely on hoofball and occasional shots from distance.

Goalkeeping coach - why is it so difficult to line up a wall and stop teams scoring from 30 yards? why does our keeper hide behind the ineffective wall of three?

Midfield - why do we not pass the ball to one another and build play? why is there no central focus player wanting the ball and being available?

Opposition forwards can come off their marker and receive the ball to feet then play triangles etc with the midfield and wide support - why do we not try to play on the deck?

Set pieces - generally very careless, constantly over-hitting, no variety, no apparent awareness that there are two goalposts not just the far one.

It is not rocket science, so let us learn from all our defeats and get more organised and actually try to play as a team. And be professional and not a Sunday league outfit.

Tremendous vocal support last night, mostly lots of effort from the players (except for sure our uncommanding captain), but let down badly by the tactics - do training sessions consist of just lofting hopeful balls? I am so fed up with seeing the visiting sides play us off the park with basic football skills and tactics, with support from midfield, with movement and triangles.
Wake up management, airball does not win games, we looked threatening when playing on the deck so let's try to play as a team, a modern team.
And perhaps even try shooting low/straight and making the opposing keeper play so at the very least shots rebound off him.
And setting up a defensive wall - for the second goal we had 4 defenders blocking the centre of the goal with our keeper behind them; the strikes were excellent, skimming over the slick surface, but both sides of the goal were left available. Why?

Lavercombe should be given his chance - he showed amazing calmness at the end of last season, in contrast to the evident nervousness of Spiess whenever the ball is in the air.
Shot-stopping is not enough, the defence needs assurance behind them; alas, Spiess is not giving that now,neither when coming off his line nor when attempting to take any high balls cleanly. He also tends to be ball watching at dead-ball situations instead of clocking or anticipating the opposition movements.
There was an enormous contrast between him and Phillips in the Cheltenham goal, and I really look forward to Lavercombe progressing his career if only he can get the opportunity.

It is not enough to say we had one bad day at the office and that bad mistakes led to conceding goals; it was our game plan which let us down. We lined up as 3-5-2, yes five in midfield and yet the only tactic in the first half for fully 40 minutes was to miss out the midfield by lumping the long ball and hoping to get someone on the end of it.
Exceptionally unprofessional when playing against 10 men from early on; as Cheltenham showed (and has had Woking previously) it is hardly rocket science to play organised possession football, and it was embarrassing watching how easily a team could play through us with basic passing/link-up/movement.
There was no leadership on the park, except from the tireless Courtney Richards, and no security at the back. And yet we have full-time coaches...
Let's see some real football rather than route one. And more variety on corners and crosses (there are two goalposts to attack, not just the far one).
And let's have a goalkeeper in whom the defence can have some faith; shot-stopping is not enough, a keeper has the best view of the match and should be able to dictate his defence by observation, anticipation, and confidence. Alas that is apparently lacking - lack of observation and anticipation of opposition movement, lack of confidence with high balls and through balls, and lack of composure and concentration when flapping before the penalty which was passed into the net next to him.
Cannot fault the effort of the players, but let's channel all that effort in a more controlling and productive fashion. Come on Team.

Yes the ref was truly abysmal, but we did not lose because of him - although we should have had the opportunities to go ahead and win from the obvious penalty and from the free-kick incident on the edge of the area just before Woking scored the winner. We played supportive passing football in the first half but not in the second.
Woking changed to a more attacking formation in the second half and we could not handle it sufficiently; Woking made a hatful of chances, from which they should have scored, whereas we mustered only six attempts on goal (mostly from distance) of which none were on target! The long-ball game was shown to be very ineffective in the second half, whereas Woking played basic triangles and 1-2s at pace and were good to watch.
However, how do we lose to a corner when we have 3 centre backs to guard the goal? Answer, we have a goalkeeper who may be a shot-stopper but who consistently misses or drops crosses/corners. This was especially poor when nearly all of Woking's corners were sent to or beyond the far post, so it was hardly a surprise. Will Lavercombe be given any chance to develop and to make money for the club?

Nice to see how the much maligned and much absent Ben Harding can play - he has been excellent in the last two home matches, albeit against ordinary opposition, but his ability to read a game, to play with his fellow midfielders, and to link with the attacks is in stark contrast to the late on-rushing arrivals of our captain and the general disarray of our midfield play this season; his extra height in the middle of the park has been an asset too.

Very drole as ever Taxilady!

We do have players who can perform - but they are just individuals and we need to play as a team. All any opposition needs to do now is string 5 accross midfield and reduce us to a hopeful long-ball game which can be seen on any public park.
There is no leadership on or off the pitch, no plan B, no-one willing or able to put their foot on the ball and control our game, too many single-footed players who have to stop/go back/get the ball on their favoured or only foot.
What on earth is done in training? - evidently not the basics like ball control, passing, support.
Why is 4-2-4 such a sacred cow, we are overwhelmed in midfield, the 'wingers' are producing no end result, how do we expect to score when we forever play in the air?
And yet we pretend we are a professional outfit....

Spot-on Kit_robin, we are not a team but a collection of individuals, and at this stage of the season we should expect a melding of players (whoever signed them) and of tactics, and a style and platform being set for next season. But where are these elements ????

Totally agree with Swanny and Burnhamgull; tactically totally inept - how could any manager watch his team go through park-style kicknrush all game? - how did he think we could score when we mostly had a 4-4-0-2 formation? No support for the front two (incidentally, Bowman is getting much undue flak as he tried harder than most yesterday), no attempt to play through the midfield, dreadful crossing when we did get an opportunity to do so.
Anyone could see that Wrexham's smallest player (Keates, no 12) was controlling the match, he won countless headers, he was always reading the game, and we desperately needed to push someone up to challenge him, ideally our anonymous captain. Then again, anyone could read our game, from aimless long balls with the wind going out of play to pathetic throws-in aimed only at lobbing the ball at a forest of (mainly opposition) heads which only succeeded in giving the ball away.
What on earth goes on in training? What is the use in warming-up with passnmove, triangles, shooting, when in the game we just hoof the ball out of play or out the ground.
Come on management team, let's see some football. Although the players have borne the brunt of everyone's disappointment from yesterday's woeful showing, they surely play to orders, and even with the wind at our backs we never tried to control the game or put pressure on Wrexham, and that is unforgiveable in the context of a Wembley day at stake.

Amateur sums it up; how on earth do we expect to hold onto a lead when, after expending much effort in winning the ball, we just give it back to a team which had easily played through us in the second half and should have scored earlier from any of the chances made.
As noted elsewhere, our formation is far too predictable and rigid; if we want to stop the opposition scoring why not keep the ball? If we are being overrun in midfield why not bulk up the midfield where we demand far too much from just two central players - this would then provide a holding player in front of the back 4 and enable our captain to get forward more effectively where he is likely to hurt the opposition.
If it is so obvious to mere fans that we need the midfield to pass the ball to one another rather than everyone just hoofing it, why is it not so obvious to our professional management team?
More leadership required both from the touchline and on the park.

Perhaps we could try something revolutionary against Halifax and change from our rigid 4-2-4 - reasons for this:

- we consistently get crowded out in midfield where we have only two players
- our various wingers are under-performing - Cameron has been poor since coming back from injury, Chappell tries hard but cannot beat a man or send in meaningful crosses, Ajala looks promising but wanders around at times , is unaware of what is happening around him and has inconsistent ball-control
- crosses from wide men almost always go long - why? - we do not have a forward who is going to score with a bullet header, so we should be attacking with lower balls into the box, attacking the near post while the second striker covers the middle and the far post
- because we do not create enough from wide we were reduced to a long-ball game against a packed Barnet defence
- playing a third midfielder would release our most likely scorer, Luke Young, to get forward even more to support the frontmen

The Barnet game has gone, but we should learn from it and should give ourselves more opportunity to control and be composed...

Yes, the ref was only interested in giving free-kicks against us, Ricey could have done better by at least coming off his line to clear the cross for the first goal; but, surely the manager can see that we are 3-1 up, that FGR were controlling the midfield and over-running our central two, and that, in order to conserve our lead, we need to beef up our presence in the middle and not play with two wide men. However, on the bench we had three young forwards, a young goalkeeper, and a young defender. Why no midfielder?
FGR did not panic when 2 down but stuck to their ball-playing ethos, tight in mid-field, forwards coming off their markers to receive and then spread play, thus enabling the midfield to go forward and support. And we just did not try to counteract it. Which then increases the pressure on our defensive backline. It is not rocket science, just footballing basics.

Point 2, we consistently waste possession with dire throws-in. We hardly ever throw the ball to feet or chest, we just lob the ball in the air towards our two players surrounded by 4 or 5 opponents, and hence give them possession. More imagination and movement/ support needed.