| Should’ve started Burgess 22:05 - Aug 16 with 1347 views | Strimmer |
Hindsight is 2020 sure but the head it kick it game we played properly (and needed to) from 50mins onwards was very much his bag imo. Doubt he’d have played as many dangerous balls around his box either. |  |
| |  |
| Should’ve started Burgess on 22:07 - Aug 16 with 1285 views | WicklowBlue |
Keogh incoming for such games imho! |  | | |
| Should’ve started Burgess on 22:08 - Aug 16 with 1256 views | StokieBlue |
We didn't concede any goals and won the match.
Burgess isn't the answer to anything, some have a real blind spot for him on here, he can't tackle and he can't pass.
He's 2nd reserve at best now.
SB |  |
| Avatar - M51 - The Whirlpool Galaxy - Taken on 29th April 2024 |
| |
| Should’ve started Burgess on 22:10 - Aug 16 with 1195 views | SitfcB |
We won and got a clean sheet 🤷ðŸ»â€â™‚ï¸ |  |
| |
| Should’ve started Burgess on 22:11 - Aug 16 with 1165 views | JDB23 |
| Should’ve started Burgess on 22:08 - Aug 16 by StokieBlue |
We didn't concede any goals and won the match.
Burgess isn't the answer to anything, some have a real blind spot for him on here, he can't tackle and he can't pass.
He's 2nd reserve at best now.
SB |
Yeah I don't think Burgess would have helped us that game. McKenna clearly wants us to play out from the back even in those circumstances and while Woolf and Fridge were a bit sloppy tonight, Burgess would have been much worse.
Kicking it long would have also been no benefit to us, that's not how we play and the ball would have just kept coming straight back at us. | | | |
| Should’ve started Burgess on 22:12 - Aug 16 with 1155 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
I thought Edmundson had a very mixed game today - some very good things but a couple of very poor passes that put us in trouble.
I definitely wouldn't play Burgess ahead of him.
I did wonder if Edmundson's place might be threatened by Keogh once fit. |  |
| |
| Should’ve started Burgess on 22:13 - Aug 16 with 1125 views | Strimmer |
| Should’ve started Burgess on 22:08 - Aug 16 by StokieBlue |
We didn't concede any goals and won the match.
Burgess isn't the answer to anything, some have a real blind spot for him on here, he can't tackle and he can't pass.
He's 2nd reserve at best now.
SB |
We didn’t concede but you’ve got to admit we looked shaky at times. I’m thinking fairly specificly of Wycombe away as the model. He came on for an injury early and sat under a barrage of bombs with comfort and we won 4-1. Taking a horses for courses attitude I think our first half would’ve been more comfortable with him in the three | |
| |
| Should’ve started Burgess on 22:15 - Aug 16 with 1077 views | WicklowBlue |
| Should’ve started Burgess on 22:12 - Aug 16 by Nthsuffolkblue |
I thought Edmundson had a very mixed game today - some very good things but a couple of very poor passes that put us in trouble.
I definitely wouldn't play Burgess ahead of him.
I did wonder if Edmundson's place might be threatened by Keogh once fit. |
Possibly re. Keogh. That is the positive of competition in the squad, if you don't keep up the standards then you may lose the shirt.
However a good battling win, quality shone through and 3 points.
Keogh will play a part in due course, up to the others to keep him out. | | | |
| Should’ve started Burgess on 22:19 - Aug 16 with 1003 views | BlueandTruesince82 |
| Should’ve started Burgess on 22:15 - Aug 16 by WicklowBlue |
Possibly re. Keogh. That is the positive of competition in the squad, if you don't keep up the standards then you may lose the shirt.
However a good battling win, quality shone through and 3 points.
Keogh will play a part in due course, up to the others to keep him out. |
Type of game where a warhorse does you no end of good, someone with nouse too in tight spots. Hope he gets up to speed quickly because a lot of teams will play like that against us |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Should’ve started Burgess on 22:19 - Aug 16 with 1003 views | BlueToad |
Woolfenden has a massive rick in him nearly every game.
Don't really understand the cream for him. His long range passing is woefully random and he has an Nsiala episode at least once or twice a match. |  |
| |
| Should’ve started Burgess on 22:23 - Aug 16 with 945 views | Scuzzer |
| Should’ve started Burgess on 22:19 - Aug 16 by BlueToad |
Woolfenden has a massive rick in him nearly every game.
Don't really understand the cream for him. His long range passing is woefully random and he has an Nsiala episode at least once or twice a match. |
Still better than Edmundson tonight. |  |
| |
| Should’ve started Burgess on 22:24 - Aug 16 with 926 views | Vic |
Why? We didn’t concede. We won. |  |
| |
| Should’ve started Burgess on 22:25 - Aug 16 with 922 views | StokieBlue |
| Should’ve started Burgess on 22:12 - Aug 16 by Nthsuffolkblue |
I thought Edmundson had a very mixed game today - some very good things but a couple of very poor passes that put us in trouble.
I definitely wouldn't play Burgess ahead of him.
I did wonder if Edmundson's place might be threatened by Keogh once fit. |
Wolf was also shakey as he often is but he very rarely gets criticised whilst Edmundson gets pelters.
It's an interesting phenomenon.
SB | |
| Avatar - M51 - The Whirlpool Galaxy - Taken on 29th April 2024 |
| |
| Should’ve started Burgess on 22:28 - Aug 16 with 884 views | pointofblue |
| Should’ve started Burgess on 22:25 - Aug 16 by StokieBlue |
Wolf was also shakey as he often is but he very rarely gets criticised whilst Edmundson gets pelters.
It's an interesting phenomenon.
SB |
Interesting - reading the forum I tend to think Woolfenden is put under the microscope more than Edmundson. | |
| |
| Should’ve started Burgess on 22:29 - Aug 16 with 879 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| Should’ve started Burgess on 22:25 - Aug 16 by StokieBlue |
Wolf was also shakey as he often is but he very rarely gets criticised whilst Edmundson gets pelters.
It's an interesting phenomenon.
SB |
From memory, Wolfenden made one mistake whereas Edmundson made 2. Overall it worked as a unit with the other players covering for the mistakes (or us just getting lucky with a couple of poor finishes). I felt both had very similar games. | |
| |
| Should’ve started Burgess on 22:29 - Aug 16 with 878 views | homer_123 |
| Should’ve started Burgess on 22:13 - Aug 16 by Strimmer |
We didn’t concede but you’ve got to admit we looked shaky at times. I’m thinking fairly specificly of Wycombe away as the model. He came on for an injury early and sat under a barrage of bombs with comfort and we won 4-1. Taking a horses for courses attitude I think our first half would’ve been more comfortable with him in the three |
But you loose the ability to play out from the back. Burgess is a bit ofxan old skool CB and yes...probably better in a physical battle but far far less as a baller.
So...for me...the trade off sees us being far less effective as an attacking threat with him as a starting CB. |  |
| |
| Should’ve started Burgess on 22:32 - Aug 16 with 858 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| Should’ve started Burgess on 22:25 - Aug 16 by StokieBlue |
Wolf was also shakey as he often is but he very rarely gets criticised whilst Edmundson gets pelters.
It's an interesting phenomenon.
SB |
You're normally spot on Stokers but Woolfy has had loads of pelters for his mistakes.
Frankly they both have had ricks/sloppy passes since the start of the season. And both have been criticised for it. |  |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
| Should’ve started Burgess on 22:32 - Aug 16 with 855 views | GlasgowBlue |
Edmundon is our best centreback in a two.
Edmunson doesn't look comfortable as a left sided centreback in a three.
Burgess looks far more comfortable as a left sided centreback in a three.
Edmunson is far more comfortable than Burgess on the ball.
Burgess can have an excellent game but has a mistake in him, which has costed us dearly in games. Even games where he has been outstanding for 89 minutes.
McKenna has obviously taken all of the above into account and had=s brought in Keogh as another option. |  |
| |
| Should’ve started Burgess on 22:37 - Aug 16 with 782 views | BloomBlue |
| Should’ve started Burgess on 22:13 - Aug 16 by Strimmer |
We didn’t concede but you’ve got to admit we looked shaky at times. I’m thinking fairly specificly of Wycombe away as the model. He came on for an injury early and sat under a barrage of bombs with comfort and we won 4-1. Taking a horses for courses attitude I think our first half would’ve been more comfortable with him in the three |
But you'll never have 100% perfect performance from every player/team every game.
You will get games where it doesn't go as planned that's football. |  | | |
| Should’ve started Burgess on 22:41 - Aug 16 with 748 views | 44_not_out |
| Should’ve started Burgess on 22:19 - Aug 16 by BlueToad |
Woolfenden has a massive rick in him nearly every game.
Don't really understand the cream for him. His long range passing is woefully random and he has an Nsiala episode at least once or twice a match. |
Toad
You’ve just won the internet for the stupidest comment tonight
Comparing Wolf to Toto….. good grief | | | |
| Should’ve started Burgess on 22:42 - Aug 16 with 734 views | jayessess |
We've had Burgess play CB for us in similar situations, where we get an aerial bombardment. The 2-1 losses at Cheltenham and Accrington last season, for instance.
The issue with Burgess is that whatever you gain in heading ability, you lose in ball-playing ability. That means less building from the back, less good possession, more clearances and more long balls and ultimately it means more opportunities for the opposition to get the ball back and launch more long balls.
The solution to long ball teams like Burton is to keep the ball off them, turn as many long balls as you can into quality possession, play through them and force them to drop deeper. The deeper they sit the less chance they have of picking up second balls. Just winning more headers and clearing more balls isn't going to cut it! |  |
| |
| Should’ve started Burgess on 22:42 - Aug 16 with 732 views | Strimmer |
| Should’ve started Burgess on 22:29 - Aug 16 by homer_123 |
But you loose the ability to play out from the back. Burgess is a bit ofxan old skool CB and yes...probably better in a physical battle but far far less as a baller.
So...for me...the trade off sees us being far less effective as an attacking threat with him as a starting CB. |
I accept that point but if anything playing out got us in hot water all first half. This may have been a symptom of our midfield not working as much as anything but either way the ball kept coming back to us. I’ve just seen the highlights on sky sports news and seeing it their chances in decent HD (my ifollow feed is dreadfully jerky and unreliable) confirms to me we got really lucky first half.
So in short my captain hindsight opinion is still play burgess in a 3 to win the headers, go direct when needed and not try to play through burtons press. Weather the storm then see what’s up at 60mins
Edit: and I did mean to say this, I know this will never happen! [Post edited 16 Aug 2022 22:43]
| |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
