poor result today

[MadJohn]

1.) Anyone who wants to drop Hazell obviously didn't go to today's game- he was our best player by miles.

6.) The two big differences in the two teams today was the quality up front, their final ball was usually good (and ours usually wasn't) and their finishing was much better, aside from the save, they scored with almost every attack. Plus whilst the ref got at least one of the decisions which looked dubious right in my opinion he got an awful lot of stuff wrong as was seemingly very lenient about their foul play but strict with us. Case in point 2 of their players go down in their own box, both get treatment but neither goes off. We had a corner and should have been attacking with at least one of their players off the pitch, if not 2.

7.) Out of our back 4 only one had a decent game defensively, the rest were poor. The midfield didn't provide them with much support either. I think its been the way Hartlepool have played of late; they play counter attacking football with good wingers and people getting in the box from midfield (I'm still trying to work out who they actually played up front- I think it was Humphries and he isn't really a centre forward).

 

Hi all, Hartlepool fan here. Haven't posted for a while...

 

1. Agreed that Hazell was the best of your defenders yesterday. There were a couple of incidents where he had to get his decision making and his control spot on or he was in trouble. He did well both times.

6. Just shows how biased us football supporters are, because we were of the opposite opinion! Oldham's defenders were VERY consistent when it came to aerial challenges in that the defending player would always get in a sly shove just before jumping, giving himself an unfair advantage. It looked too well-executed to be random; must be down to coaching. It took the referee about 40 minutes to spot it, during which time we were getting increasingly frustrated with the tactic. As for the incident that saw Sweeney and Collins both receive treatment, referess are under instruction this season to NOT make the players leave the pitch if two players from the same side are injured in the same incident. A rare case of common sense reaching the decision makers. The referee got that one right.

7. We started with James Brown up front and Humphreys on the left as a straight swap for the absent Monkhouse. Humphreys was getting little joy down the left so Mick Wadsworth swapped them over and that coincided with us getting on top in the game. For the last hour or so it was Humphreys up front with Brown and McSweeney interchanging on the wings.

 

The general opinion among our lot yesterday was that we beat a good side. Of course you must have played better than that this season but there was still enough there to suggest that you'll cause problems for any side even when off your best. Taylor was one disappointment. After not getting awarded a free kick and arguing to the extent that he earned himself a booking, he spent the rest of the game sulking more than contributing.

 

 

I notice that's the third recent game that Ritchie Jones has started from the bench. Having left us to seek more regular football has he gone off the boil? I always thought that there was a good player in there but he was just so frustrating. He'd produce one good performance in every 5 or 6 games, but that one performance would be man-of-the-match giving rise to hope that he might just have cracked it, then he'd go missing for another 5 or 6....

 

Good luck

[LaticsLee]

Hi all, Hartlepool fan here. Haven't posted for a while...

 

1. Agreed that Hazell was the best of your defenders yesterday. There were a couple of incidents where he had to get his decision making and his control spot on or he was in trouble. He did well both times.

6. Just shows how biased us football supporters are, because we were of the opposite opinion! Oldham's defenders were VERY consistent when it came to aerial challenges in that the defending player would always get in a sly shove just before jumping, giving himself an unfair advantage. It looked too well-executed to be random; must be down to coaching. It took the referee about 40 minutes to spot it, during which time we were getting increasingly frustrated with the tactic. As for the incident that saw Sweeney and Collins both receive treatment, referess are under instruction this season to NOT make the players leave the pitch if two players from the same side are injured in the same incident. A rare case of common sense reaching the decision makers. The referee got that one right.

7. We started with James Brown up front and Humphreys on the left as a straight swap for the absent Monkhouse. Humphreys was getting little joy down the left so Mick Wadsworth swapped them over and that coincided with us getting on top in the game. For the last hour or so it was Humphreys up front with Brown and McSweeney interchanging on the wings.

 

The general opinion among our lot yesterday was that we beat a good side. Of course you must have played better than that this season but there was still enough there to suggest that you'll cause problems for any side even when off your best. Taylor was one disappointment. After not getting awarded a free kick and arguing to the extent that he earned himself a booking, he spent the rest of the game sulking more than contributing.

 

 

I notice that's the third recent game that Ritchie Jones has started from the bench. Having left us to seek more regular football has he gone off the boil? I always thought that there was a good player in there but he was just so frustrating. He'd produce one good performance in every 5 or 6 games, but that one performance would be man-of-the-match giving rise to hope that he might just have cracked it, then he'd go missing for another 5 or 6....

 

Good luck

 

we havnt even got that yet !

[Diego_Sideburns]

Latics players never looked that comfortable on the ball and their play looked to come about more by good fortune and rebounds than by skill, with very few putting their foot on the ball to change direction.

 

A big improvement will be needed tomorrow. Form what I've seen of Dale, their midfielders can play and I will not be surprised if they create more chances than Latics. Dale may be fighting relegation but, if they win tomorrow, they will be only one point behind Latics.

 

Since writing that, I've seen in the rarely-read Rochdale Observer Dale midfielder Brian Barry-Murphy saying his first six months at Spotland have been a real education under Keith Hill.

 

"The football we play is unreal – Keith Hill is a real student of the game," he said. "We study videos of Barcelona all the time. We watch all the Spanish teams. Hilly has really opened my eyes over the last few months.

 

"The problem is that, although we started off like a house on fire – beating Southampton away and Huddersfield at home – we’re on this run where we’ve lost six out of seven. At every other club I’ve been at, the managers would say, ‘Right, we’re going more direct.’ But he says, ‘Nah, we’re going to kill teams with possession’.

 

"The problem right now is we’re not shutting out teams and we’re not taking our chances. He wants to play expansively but knows there comes a time when you can’t keep giving goals away."

 

 

Five goals at Dale against 10 men yesterday, six at Hartlepool...........it's got 0-0 written all over it!

[RobOAFC]

And as a former keeper, if Hazell or their striker (both three yards in front of Brill) had got a touch and deflected the ball inside the near post no doubt you'd have slagged him for diving for a ball that never reached him. Brill had two courses of action open to him both of which left him open to criticism from our unrealistic fans who are determined to examine every goal we concede and find a way to blame Brill. The lad is average, very average but criticism should be fair and level headed and in Brill's case, all too often it's anything but.

.

 

Unrealistic to expect a keeper to claim a cross and command at least he his six yard box? Thats just basic stuff for a keeper, and its not like he's a good shot stopper is it? Flemings a much better shot stopper and commanding his area.

 

[Diego_Sideburns]

6. Just shows how biased us football supporters are, because we were of the opposite opinion! Oldham's defenders were VERY consistent when it came to aerial challenges in that the defending player would always get in a sly shove just before jumping, giving himself an unfair advantage. It looked too well-executed to be random; must be down to coaching. It took the referee about 40 minutes to spot it, during which time we were getting increasingly frustrated with the tactic.

 

The Pool fans' frustration was very audible, but they really should get out more! That sort of tactic is used by defenders in every game.

 

6. ... As for the incident that saw Sweeney and Collins both receive treatment, referess are under instruction this season to NOT make the players leave the pitch if two players from the same side are injured in the same incident. A rare case of common sense reaching the decision makers. The referee got that one right.

 

I've said it before and I'll say it again, but for the first time this year....you learn something every day on here. Thanks for the info and I agree that it's a sensible change, even if it may lead to a second defender going down to avoid his mate having to go off after treatment.

[rudemedic]

Hi all, Hartlepool fan here. Haven't posted for a while...

 

1. Agreed that Hazell was the best of your defenders yesterday. There were a couple of incidents where he had to get his decision making and his control spot on or he was in trouble. He did well both times.

6. Just shows how biased us football supporters are, because we were of the opposite opinion! Oldham's defenders were VERY consistent when it came to aerial challenges in that the defending player would always get in a sly shove just before jumping, giving himself an unfair advantage. It looked too well-executed to be random; must be down to coaching. It took the referee about 40 minutes to spot it, during which time we were getting increasingly frustrated with the tactic. As for the incident that saw Sweeney and Collins both receive treatment, referess are under instruction this season to NOT make the players leave the pitch if two players from the same side are injured in the same incident. A rare case of common sense reaching the decision makers. The referee got that one right.

7. We started with James Brown up front and Humphreys on the left as a straight swap for the absent Monkhouse. Humphreys was getting little joy down the left so Mick Wadsworth swapped them over and that coincided with us getting on top in the game. For the last hour or so it was Humphreys up front with Brown and McSweeney interchanging on the wings.

 

The general opinion among our lot yesterday was that we beat a good side. Of course you must have played better than that this season but there was still enough there to suggest that you'll cause problems for any side even when off your best. Taylor was one disappointment. After not getting awarded a free kick and arguing to the extent that he earned himself a booking, he spent the rest of the game sulking more than contributing.

 

 

I notice that's the third recent game that Ritchie Jones has started from the bench. Having left us to seek more regular football has he gone off the boil? I always thought that there was a good player in there but he was just so frustrating. He'd produce one good performance in every 5 or 6 games, but that one performance would be man-of-the-match giving rise to hope that he might just have cracked it, then he'd go missing for another 5 or 6....

 

Good luck

 

If the FA have done that then I think its a good rule change- but like Diego said what's the stop another one of the same team going down "hurt" if it means the big centre-half is available to defend the corner (please take note Dickov). I don't think your players did that, but I know a few teams that would. If you can keep that team fit you'll have a chance for promotion but I was dubious about your stength in depth (the bloke you bought on for Clarke looked more like a big full-back to me than a centre half).

 

Taylor frustrates even us with his moaning at times.

[OldhamSheridan]

If the FA have done that then I think its a good rule change- but like Diego said what's the stop another one of the same team going down "hurt" if it means the big centre-half is available to defend the corner (please take note Dickov). I don't think your players did that, but I know a few teams that would. If you can keep that team fit you'll have a chance for promotion but I was dubious about your stength in depth (the bloke you bought on for Clarke looked more like a big full-back to me than a centre half).

 

Taylor frustrates even us with his moaning at times.

 

I don't see the point of the original single person leaving the pitch rule. If you don't stop the game unless it is a head injury (obviously if it is a throw in, etc then sort other injuries out then). Just throw the other breaks in play as injury time and there is little need for the guys going off the pitch after injuries. Too often play is stopped for a kick in the shins, etc.

 

Hartlepool haven't got the physical presence to go up IMO. They'll get kicked out of too many games.

 

Taylor is a cheat. He dives and then moans about not getting a foul due to cheating - see the game just now. I won't applaud that referee for much, but not falling for Taylor's shenanigans is one of them.

Edited January 2, 2011 by OldhamSheridan

[MadJohn]

Going up wasn't on the agenda of a single Hartlepool fan in the summer. Having stayed in this division by one point and then by goal difference in the last two seasons, all we wanted was a season that showed a bit of improvement, a season in which we never looked like being involved in another relegation battle. We're just enjoying the run at the moment, a run that now stands at 7-2-2 from the last 11 games, with seven of those eleven games being away from home. It's such a tight division that anything could still happen, including promotion, AND including that relegation battle. I don't know how to read a table in which Southampton have played THIRTEEN home games and just eight away, while we have played nine and eleven. But wherever we end up in May, 2010/11 will be remembered as the season we got the fun back after a couple of grim years.

 

It's funny that our physical presence is mentioned. I tend to agree, though the fans of Brighton would offer a different view. We beat them 3-1 in our last home game before yesterday and some of the Brighton fans were up in arms about how we "kicked them off the pitch". This from fans of Brighton, one of the more physical frontrunners this division has had in a while. In truth there was nothing too physical about or game that afternoon, we just made sure we were first to every loose ball, and didn't give Brighton the space to play. It's an approach that has worked well in our last two away games that has seen us clinch surprise (to the neutral, not so much to us) victories at Bournemouth and Huddersfield.

 

I agree that strength in depth will be a problem for us. rudemedic you are correct about our substitution yesterday. It was Steve Haslam, the former Sheffield Wednesday and Halifax defender. He has spent much of his career at full back and has played most of his games for us either at fullback or at the back of midfield (where he spent the last ten minutes yesterday after we sent Armann Bjornsson on as a more physical defensive presence). He's not a centre-half, and that is the one area of the pitch where we are very short of cover. It looks like Sam Collins will be out for around four weeks and I would imagine Mick Wadsworth will bring someone in on loan to cover the loss.