Arabdownsouth wrote:

Tek wrote:

Arabdownsouth wrote:

 
Who?

Robson.
 

 
Ah right of course, now it makes sense.

 
Need to put my Gregorys on before texting

PatReilly wrote:

Their goal, aye Smith may have cut out the cross, but we've maybe got used to seeing opposition defenders stop attempted crosses because our wide boys find it hard to put the ball into the box. A full back can't stop every cross.
.

Wasn't suggesting they can Pat.

But Smith could certainly have got closer to his man and at least attempted to stop the cross on Saturday. As it was he done nothing. Just shadowed his man. 

Reynolds should have dealt better with the cross also however.
 

Tek wrote:

PatReilly wrote:

Their goal, aye Smith may have cut out the cross, but we've maybe got used to seeing opposition defenders stop attempted crosses because our wide boys find it hard to put the ball into the box. A full back can't stop every cross.
.

Wasn't suggesting they can Pat.

But Smith could certainly have got closer to his man and at least attempted to stop the cross on Saturday. As it was he done nothing. Just shadowed his man. 

Reynolds should have dealt better with the cross also however.
 

Can’t be 100% sure but remember at the time that Reynolds was moving to a position to hoof the ball but a Hamilton player got a little nick on the ball which took it ove Reynolds head.
 

Surely it was Mark Connolly's fault?

Reynolds went off 2 mins after their goal, tactical or did he get a knock?

Haha - definitely not Connolly's fault he was in the correct position for me.  Smith should have blocked the cross (most blame), Edwards wasn't close enough to his man (next in line for blame) and then Reynolds judges that the boy isn't getting the touch and goes to meet it where he thinks it is going and gets totally done by the touch (next in line for blame).  Arguably Siegrist could come and punch it (still a weakness in his game) but he's probably entitled to think that 3 CHs can do that (Siegrist's cross prowess, or lack of it, is another reason that MM goes for 3 CHs).  So I actually think there are two bigger culprits here than Reynolds both of whom have failed to switch on sufficiently.  Reynolds switches on too much and goes to block something that is never there thus leaving the boy with the free header.  So three sequential errors in the space of a second or so that flogs a really poor goal.  That said, would we have scored if they hadn't of scored?

I absolve him, but he is very passive at cross balls and with that one he was as well not being there.

I agree he has improved beyond expectation, but just saying it as I see it.  It's an area of his game that I think he can work on but for now Micky clearly wants the CHs to deal with crosses which generally they have done recently.  Smith is clearly most to blame, but for me its Edwards next.  If he starts closer to his man (which there is no reason he doesn't) then he stops the guy getting the touch and Reynolds deals with it.  Reynolds has to take some of the blame as he should anticipate the touch and doesn't.  But the fact Edwards doesn't deal with the first touch puts Reynolds in a no win situation.  If the guy doesn't touch it then if he sticks to his man, given the direction they are both travelling in, the Hamilton player is favourite to get a goalscoring touch unless Reynolds does something positive.  So Reynolds probably needs to do something which he does and is unfortunately made to look a bit stupid.  He's also to blame but behind Smith and Edwards for me.

I can't believe the stick Liam Smith is getting tbh. Which fullback in the world stops every cross during 90 minutes? I'd wager its not very often it happens. People forget which level we play at sometimes. The boy had an excellent game apart from one lapse which was poorly defended in the box. We whinge when our wide players can't beat the first man, yet whinge also that we can't defend crosses. Just enjoy the win, enjoy where we are sitting in the league and move on to the next game 👍

Tek wrote:

Arabdownsouth wrote:

I can't believe the stick Liam Smith is getting tbh. Which fullback in the world stops every cross during 90 minutes? I'd wager its not very often it happens. People forget which level we play at sometimes. The boy had an excellent game apart from one lapse which was poorly defended in the box. We whinge when our wide players can't beat the first man, yet whinge also that we can't defend crosses. Just enjoy the win, enjoy where we are sitting in the league and move on to the next game 👍

And i cannae believe the over reaction to a couple of posters commenting that he could/should have done better at their goal.

You would think a baby seal had been clubbed over the head.

Ian Harkes get's annihilated by our support every week. No one bats an eyelid.

Yet, comment that Smith could have done a bit better at a goal (the first minor criticism of him in ages) and some posters are really taking umbrage at that opinion.

Weird 🤔
 

Totally agree Tek - some folk just see things in black and white.  I never said Smith was honking or not worthy of his place.  I just said he was most at fault for the goal.  For me a fact.  Does that mean that I want him on the transfer list?  Far from it.  We are clearly much better with him in the team than out of it and he is still finding his feet at this level - as are most of them - so they may well improve further.  Similarly I've also got huge respect for the rest of the defence for doing what defenders are supposed to do and having done it really well bar a couple of games all season (i.e. not let in goals).  I thought a football forum was for discussing the football - I know we get carried away with other stuff at times but surely comments on the actual football are allowed?  I'm pretty sure Mellon will have already taken those defenders through the action including the goal to point out how we can try to avoid.  Albeit it has to be accepted, and for me is, that a full back won't stop all crosses, a centre half won't win every header and the other centre half won't anticipate every glanced ball - otherwise we'd be winning every game and there would be no fun in it...

I'm not over reacting to anything, just saying it how I see it. If we had lost the game I'd understand the scrutiny of the goal a bit more, but we didn't. Our defence has by and large been one of the most effective in the league to date, as is apparent in our league position. Ian Harkes does get a lot of stick that's true but I do remember also sticking up for him at least once, although not 100% certain if that was on here or on mad tbh.

Tek wrote:

Arabdownsouth wrote:

I'm not over reacting to anything, just saying it how I see it. If we had lost the game I'd understand the scrutiny of the goal a bit more, but we didn't. Our defence has by and large been one of the most effective in the league to date, as is apparent in our league position. Ian Harkes does get a lot of stick that's true but I do remember also sticking up for him at least once, although not 100% certain if that was on here or on mad tbh.

So, you can't mention any negative aspect about the game if we win?

C'mon.

What's the point of this Forum if we can't analyse points of the game, good and bad (and many good points were mentioned).
 

 
I didn't say that, just offering my perspective.

Finn Seemann wrote:

Arabdownsouth wrote:

Tek wrote:

So, you can't mention any negative aspect about the game if we win?

C'mon.

What's the point of this Forum if we can't analyse points of the game, good and bad (and many good points were mentioned).
 

 
I didn't say that, just offering my perspective.

Oh...I think you did.  You said you didn't understand scrutiny of the goal when we won.  Or put another way, why are you talking about negatives when we got the three points.  Tek is 100% correct in his analysis.  Anyway, nobody was giving Smith stick.  People do accept that players are not perfect (how could you still be following United if that was your barometer) but that doesn't mean you can't dissect a goal and decide who you think was most to blame.  Others thought Reynolds was the main culprit (fair enough) but I thought that was too easy seeing as the back 3 have (regardless of their actual record) generally taken a lot of stick (as you call it).  Smith a player that very rarely is criticised negatively was for me most to blame.  So in a way I was defending Reynolds more than criticising Smith and Edwards.  Others' opinions were no doubt as valid as mine but to be criticised for discussing them at all because we won seems weird to me.

 
OK not gonna argue with you. But I didn't tell anyone what they could say, just said I didn't understand it. I'm entitled to my opinion and I gave it

Finn Seemann wrote:

Arabdownsouth wrote:

Finn Seemann wrote:

Oh...I think you did.  You said you didn't understand scrutiny of the goal when we won.  Or put another way, why are you talking about negatives when we got the three points.  Tek is 100% correct in his analysis.  Anyway, nobody was giving Smith stick.  People do accept that players are not perfect (how could you still be following United if that was your barometer) but that doesn't mean you can't dissect a goal and decide who you think was most to blame.  Others thought Reynolds was the main culprit (fair enough) but I thought that was too easy seeing as the back 3 have (regardless of their actual record) generally taken a lot of stick (as you call it).  Smith a player that very rarely is criticised negatively was for me most to blame.  So in a way I was defending Reynolds more than criticising Smith and Edwards.  Others' opinions were no doubt as valid as mine but to be criticised for discussing them at all because we won seems weird to me.

 
OK not gonna argue with you. But I didn't tell anyone what they could say, just said I didn't understand it. I'm entitled to my opinion and I gave it

We're clearly coming to the end of this one as I'm bored of it now.  I agree you are entitled to your opinion, but the impression you gave was that others were wrong to be discussing the concession of a goal.  If you are happy to have your opinion you should be happy to allow others theirs without inferring they shouldn't be giving it.  

 
OK cool, no worries 👍