| Decent performance but that game was there for the taking. 16:55 - Jan 23 with 1190 views | Matt_Netherlands |
Scrappy game, but never looked like winning the sort of game which quite simply, if we want to go up we can’t be losing. |  | | |  |
| Decent performance but that game was there for the taking. on 16:56 - Jan 23 with 1169 views | wkj |
I have a feeling I may not be the only one who take exception with the "Decent performance" summary. |  |
| |
| Decent performance but that game was there for the taking. on 16:56 - Jan 23 with 1165 views | homer_123 |
Decent...no. we only looked threatening after going down for the last 10 mins.
Is that promotion football? [Post edited 23 Jan 2021 16:58]
|  |
| |
| Decent performance but that game was there for the taking. on 16:57 - Jan 23 with 1118 views | oldbluey |
| Decent performance but that game was there for the taking. on 16:56 - Jan 23 by homer_123 |
Decent...no. we only looked threatening after going down for the last 10 mins.
Is that promotion football? [Post edited 23 Jan 2021 16:58]
|
LAMBERT OUT |  |
| |
| Decent performance but that game was there for the taking. on 16:59 - Jan 23 with 1067 views | jayessess |
It wasn't a decent performance, at all. |  |
| |
| Decent performance but that game was there for the taking. on 17:01 - Jan 23 with 1042 views | Matt_Netherlands |
| Decent performance but that game was there for the taking. on 16:56 - Jan 23 by wkj |
I have a feeling I may not be the only one who take exception with the "Decent performance" summary. |
Don’t get me wrong, football like that certainly isn’t getting us promoted any time soon. Decent on the sense I was expecting us to get royally pumped and that wasn’t the case.
Holy - no real save to make
Defence - handled their front three quite well although we looked sluggish and our distribution was shocking. Too many errors in there and our OAP full backs give us no attacking threat or cover in behind.
Midfield - All quite scrappy but got on the ball more than the Posh midfield. Lacked any creativity other than Bishop / Nolan
Wingers / Strikers - quite ineffective but that’s largely because ethos CB had drinnan tucked inside their pocket all game.
Decent / ok / average / meh.... point I was making was that it was better than some of the garbage we’ve seen but still not good enough. | | | |
| Decent performance but that game was there for the taking. on 17:03 - Jan 23 with 1015 views | Matt_Netherlands |
| Decent performance but that game was there for the taking. on 16:56 - Jan 23 by homer_123 |
Decent...no. we only looked threatening after going down for the last 10 mins.
Is that promotion football? [Post edited 23 Jan 2021 16:58]
|
Absolutely not promotion football. But you can’t say we really deserved to lose it, can you?
Annoying that Shambert has a fluke own goal to blame the defeat on. | | | |
| Decent performance but that game was there for the taking. on 17:03 - Jan 23 with 1002 views | jas0999 |
Dreadful performance. |  | | |
| Decent performance but that game was there for the taking. on 17:05 - Jan 23 with 976 views | bluepigeon |
| Decent performance but that game was there for the taking. on 17:03 - Jan 23 by jas0999 |
Dreadful performance. |
Game of fine margins which Posh just edged on this occasion |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Decent performance but that game was there for the taking. on 17:08 - Jan 23 with 931 views | Matt_Netherlands |
| Decent performance but that game was there for the taking. on 17:03 - Jan 23 by jas0999 |
Dreadful performance. |
For what it’s worth, I don’t think lambert should be in a job and want him out ASAP. But...
Based on our recent form, the fact we had no senior strikers fit, against a team unbeaten in their last 7, were you expecting us to absolutely hammer them?
Bottom line is we’ve played worse this season, we didn’t deserve to lose that game today (or win in tbh), but ultimately that still isn’t good enough. | | | |
| Decent performance but that game was there for the taking. on 17:08 - Jan 23 with 920 views | LankHenners |
| Decent performance but that game was there for the taking. on 17:01 - Jan 23 by Matt_Netherlands |
Don’t get me wrong, football like that certainly isn’t getting us promoted any time soon. Decent on the sense I was expecting us to get royally pumped and that wasn’t the case.
Holy - no real save to make
Defence - handled their front three quite well although we looked sluggish and our distribution was shocking. Too many errors in there and our OAP full backs give us no attacking threat or cover in behind.
Midfield - All quite scrappy but got on the ball more than the Posh midfield. Lacked any creativity other than Bishop / Nolan
Wingers / Strikers - quite ineffective but that’s largely because ethos CB had drinnan tucked inside their pocket all game.
Decent / ok / average / meh.... point I was making was that it was better than some of the garbage we’ve seen but still not good enough. |
Peterborough having a poor game doesn’t bump us up to ‘decent’. We were poor, they weren’t much better, they looked more likely to score and missed a penalty.
And if we accept that we kept them quiet and got on the ball well in midfield, how come we had zero goal threat bar a couple of speculative hits towards the end? |  |
| |
| Decent performance but that game was there for the taking. on 17:08 - Jan 23 with 908 views | jayessess |
| Decent performance but that game was there for the taking. on 17:01 - Jan 23 by Matt_Netherlands |
Don’t get me wrong, football like that certainly isn’t getting us promoted any time soon. Decent on the sense I was expecting us to get royally pumped and that wasn’t the case.
Holy - no real save to make
Defence - handled their front three quite well although we looked sluggish and our distribution was shocking. Too many errors in there and our OAP full backs give us no attacking threat or cover in behind.
Midfield - All quite scrappy but got on the ball more than the Posh midfield. Lacked any creativity other than Bishop / Nolan
Wingers / Strikers - quite ineffective but that’s largely because ethos CB had drinnan tucked inside their pocket all game.
Decent / ok / average / meh.... point I was making was that it was better than some of the garbage we’ve seen but still not good enough. |
Peterborough put away their penalty and I think that game looks more or less identical to our games against Hull, Portsmouth or Charlton. Energetic spell at the beginning, total lack of threat going forward, at least one defender does something silly and game over.
Add to that our manager being passive enough to watch us manage zero shots on target for 70 minutes but still not consider changing any of the attacking players and there you have it all. | |
| |
| Decent performance but that game was there for the taking. on 17:10 - Jan 23 with 872 views | chrismakin |
| Decent performance but that game was there for the taking. on 17:03 - Jan 23 by Matt_Netherlands |
Absolutely not promotion football. But you can’t say we really deserved to lose it, can you?
Annoying that Shambert has a fluke own goal to blame the defeat on. |
You can say we deserve to lose
we were at home, needing to win, we put Judge on the wing, continued with 1 up top in Drinan which quite frankly was pathetic.
We set out not to lose. Not to win. |  |
| |
| Decent performance but that game was there for the taking. on 17:12 - Jan 23 with 843 views | Matt_Netherlands |
| Decent performance but that game was there for the taking. on 17:10 - Jan 23 by chrismakin |
You can say we deserve to lose
we were at home, needing to win, we put Judge on the wing, continued with 1 up top in Drinan which quite frankly was pathetic.
We set out not to lose. Not to win. |
Agree with everything you’ve said about the situation.... but none of that is to do with how we played. | | | |
| Decent performance but that game was there for the taking. on 17:13 - Jan 23 with 826 views | Matt_Netherlands |
| Decent performance but that game was there for the taking. on 17:08 - Jan 23 by jayessess |
Peterborough put away their penalty and I think that game looks more or less identical to our games against Hull, Portsmouth or Charlton. Energetic spell at the beginning, total lack of threat going forward, at least one defender does something silly and game over.
Add to that our manager being passive enough to watch us manage zero shots on target for 70 minutes but still not consider changing any of the attacking players and there you have it all. |
Take your point that the game might’ve looked very different if their penalty hadn’t hit row Z. All the teams you just mentioned caused us far more problems that Pboro did today though | | | |
| Decent performance but that game was there for the taking. on 17:14 - Jan 23 with 809 views | jayessess |
| Decent performance but that game was there for the taking. on 17:10 - Jan 23 by chrismakin |
You can say we deserve to lose
we were at home, needing to win, we put Judge on the wing, continued with 1 up top in Drinan which quite frankly was pathetic.
We set out not to lose. Not to win. |
We were retreating from minute 55 until their goal and were happy to just hope the game would keep drifting. We absolutely deserved to concede. | |
| |
| Decent performance but that game was there for the taking. on 17:14 - Jan 23 with 805 views | MrTown |
That seriously worries me that someone thinks that is a decent performance.
I know everyone sees the game different. But we look like a long ball side to an incredibly lonely striker, the most under coached side I have ever seen in an Ipswich Town shirt. |  |
| |
| Decent performance but that game was there for the taking. on 17:14 - Jan 23 with 799 views | oneoffposter |
when we finally get rid of lambert which will hopefully be soon things won’t suddenly change
We don’t have a striker who will score a decent amount of goals
We don’t have a winger who will score regularly
We don’t have a centre mid who will get forward and score regularly
The above points have nothing to do with tactics and how players are managed - even in a dire team you can tell the players who will score goals - we don’t have any
We won’t get promoted no matter who is charge and that is the reality
New manager whenever that is will need to overhaul the attacking areas and require plenty of patience from us
It’s important to not kid ourselves that our squad is good enough to go up because it isn’t | | | |
| It wasn't dreadful... but it wasn't good enough on 17:15 - Jan 23 with 797 views | unstableblue |
| Decent performance but that game was there for the taking. on 17:03 - Jan 23 by jas0999 |
Dreadful performance. |
It was overall a poor game. BUT we had at times a good press, and 2 spells of promising attacking play in the final 3rd.
2 spells needs to be 15 spells in a game, that's the problem.
Drinan who tried hard was just too isolated.
But the talking point for me is just how woeful our senior players were, our full backs, were for the majority of the game - terrible! these guys should be inspiring, influencing and driving us forward. They did this in early season - but today, I'm sorry that passing accuracy and presence is unacceptable. |  |
| |
| Decent performance but that game was there for the taking. on 17:17 - Jan 23 with 777 views | backwaywhen |
| Decent performance but that game was there for the taking. on 17:01 - Jan 23 by Matt_Netherlands |
Don’t get me wrong, football like that certainly isn’t getting us promoted any time soon. Decent on the sense I was expecting us to get royally pumped and that wasn’t the case.
Holy - no real save to make
Defence - handled their front three quite well although we looked sluggish and our distribution was shocking. Too many errors in there and our OAP full backs give us no attacking threat or cover in behind.
Midfield - All quite scrappy but got on the ball more than the Posh midfield. Lacked any creativity other than Bishop / Nolan
Wingers / Strikers - quite ineffective but that’s largely because ethos CB had drinnan tucked inside their pocket all game.
Decent / ok / average / meh.... point I was making was that it was better than some of the garbage we’ve seen but still not good enough. |
Agree , at least there was no tippy tippy across the back line all game , a slight positive in itself , no goal threat from us as usual , mid table finish or below for me . | | | |
| It wasn't dreadful... but it wasn't good enough on 17:20 - Jan 23 with 759 views | Matt_Netherlands |
| It wasn't dreadful... but it wasn't good enough on 17:15 - Jan 23 by unstableblue |
It was overall a poor game. BUT we had at times a good press, and 2 spells of promising attacking play in the final 3rd.
2 spells needs to be 15 spells in a game, that's the problem.
Drinan who tried hard was just too isolated.
But the talking point for me is just how woeful our senior players were, our full backs, were for the majority of the game - terrible! these guys should be inspiring, influencing and driving us forward. They did this in early season - but today, I'm sorry that passing accuracy and presence is unacceptable. |
I always think that 4-2-3-1 formation means the wingers will always have to tuck inside to support the strikers, without full backs getting up to support with any real contribution, attacks will always break down which we see time and time again.
Chambers and Ward both looked past it today. They looked a lot like Skuse last season I.e. players we should be bringing on to see our games, not players with any ability to inspire a win. Not that we have any leads to hold onto at the minute..... | | | |
| Decent performance but that game was there for the taking. on 17:22 - Jan 23 with 737 views | jayessess |
| Decent performance but that game was there for the taking. on 17:13 - Jan 23 by Matt_Netherlands |
Take your point that the game might’ve looked very different if their penalty hadn’t hit row Z. All the teams you just mentioned caused us far more problems that Pboro did today though |
We caught them on a bad day and still lost (and fairly easily all told). | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
