Jump to content
CrosbyKitchens

Man of the Match - Player ratings

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Ian said:

If we'd been playing goalie wag then perhaps but I think it's a fair bet that we'd have had another keeper in his place.....a keeper that would have saved the majority if not all of the shots Westwood did

Perhaps, we both have our opinions, mine is that Westwood kept us in the game until HT.

 

That’s fair enough I think.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


4 hours ago, hirstys_achilles said:

I get your point but they are hull not barca, those negative back passes come because no player will try to take someone on or try a quick one two pass.

Lots of negatives today, i agree witb the above but also players not working hard enough to receive the ball, no movement into space or quick runs to make a give and go pass.  Then on the few occasions passes were on, we were so slow and dithering on the ball the opportunity was lost, so we pass back again. Also how many times do we lose possession from our own throw ins and free kicks, what the fornicate do they work on all week.

Rant over! Lets smash the mighty Hatters on Tuesday. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, TrickyTrev said:

Perhaps, we both have our opinions, mine is that Westwood kept us in the game until HT.

 

That’s fair enough I think.

Westwood made I think two saves in the first half that were on par to that one Dawson made from a header vs West Brom.

 

I just find it weird that we have a sub-section of the fanbase gave Dawson pelters for us conceding 1 against West Brom, yet no such criticism exists for Westwood when he concedes 3 and gives away a penalty against Hull. In fact, he gets lauded for "keeping us in it" in the first half... despite conceding right at the end of it. Where were the praises for Dawson for not conceding until the final seconds of the second half against West Brom? Hell, he even got blamed. 

 

This isn't me encouraging Westwood blaming by the way, this is me using your post as a vehicle to pose the general question for Owlstalk... why the inconsistency between player treatment?

  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

4 hours ago, hirstys_achilles said:

He made 1 save. The others I would have stopped. KW was shocking for the first 2 goals.

 

It was an excellent save but his positioning was awful, left loads over to his left hand side. Thankfully he made it across

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, oldishowl said:

I honestly think Hull have better players than us.

Their two wide players were high quality and they have a good mix of aggression, organisation and pace to go with ability.

 

However I was very disappointed with the negative way we approached it. Every time one of our players got the ball our first instinct was to pass it back, until we gave it away. If Bannan, Reach, Matias etc continually pass it back we will go nowhere.

 

I thought Hutch was the only one to put in any sort of performance today.

Correct , most teams have better players than us . A lot of our first 11 , westwood , Boyd, fletcher , hutchinson have seen better days . Lees is now crap ,  bannan and reach don’t influence games enough and Matias drifts in and out . We are where we should be in the league 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, StudentOwl said:

Westwood made I think two saves in the first half that were on par to that one Dawson made from a header vs West Brom.

 

I just find it weird that we have a sub-section of the fanbase gave Dawson pelters for us conceding 1 against West Brom, yet no such criticism exists for Westwood when he concedes 3 and gives away a penalty against Hull. In fact, he gets lauded for "keeping us in it" in the first half... despite conceding right at the end of it. Where were the praises for Dawson for not conceding until the final seconds of the second half against West Brom? Hell, he even got blamed. 

 

This isn't me encouraging Westwood blaming by the way, this is me using your post as a vehicle to pose the general question for Owlstalk... why the inconsistency between player treatment?

Westwood was the reason we weren’t at the top of the league though ... oh wait! 

 

Hes deffo seen better days ....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, mattitheowl said:

It wasn't so much that I thought we were bad, I mean how can you judge when you never have the ball for more than 3 seconds, but that Hull were fantastic.  

 

I couldn't honestly give a single player a rating as they just couldn't get anywhere near the ball or the opposition.  It's a long time since I've seen us so comprehensively played off the park like that.  

 

I genuinely don't think we were bad.  Just completely unequipped to manage Hull.  

We played Hull. They aren’t Barcelona for fizzes sake.

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, TrickyTrev said:

Perhaps, we both have our opinions, mine is that Westwood kept us in the game until HT.

 

That’s fair enough I think.

 

I was there and that is true. It was a dogshit performance from us - absolutely dreadful. As bad as I’ve seen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, StudentOwl said:

Westwood made I think two saves in the first half that were on par to that one Dawson made from a header vs West Brom.

 

I just find it weird that we have a sub-section of the fanbase gave Dawson pelters for us conceding 1 against West Brom, yet no such criticism exists for Westwood when he concedes 3 and gives away a penalty against Hull. In fact, he gets lauded for "keeping us in it" in the first half... despite conceding right at the end of it. Where were the praises for Dawson for not conceding until the final seconds of the second half against West Brom? Hell, he even got blamed. 

 

This isn't me encouraging Westwood blaming by the way, this is me using your post as a vehicle to pose the general question for Owlstalk... why the inconsistency between player treatment?

I didn’t give Dawson pelters for the West Brom goal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, CrosbyKitchens said:

We played Hull. They aren’t Barcelona for fizzes sake.

 

So because they are Hull, that means they can't play us off the park?  You don't play against the history of a team, you play against the 11 men put in front of you.  Wednesday fans need to realise that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, TrickyTrev said:

I didn’t give Dawson pelters for the West Brom goal.

Sorry, I didn't mean to make it sound like I was popping you in the same group as that "sub-section" as I put it... like I say, I was more using your post as a vehicle. Didn't mean to sound like I was accusing you personally of my general ramblings

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since our lot bottled it at wembley none of hulls winning squad are still there, most of our squad are still there - still bottling it - its time bannon, lees , nuhui and co were cleared out 

  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Westwood  - 5. A good save early on, think he could have done better with first and third goals. Penalty: Dawson would have been castigated had he given that away.

Fox  -  5. Ok.

Lees  -  3 . Poor for the third. And generally over run by a superior opposition. 

Hector  -  5 . Poor for the third. Slow on the ball, possibly due to lack of movement ahead of him.

Palmer  -  6. Poor start, but kept his side reasonably secure. 

Hutch  -  6. Some robust challenges, but did little to protect the back four or going forward.

Bannan  -  3. Has he had a worse game for us? Gave his all, as usual, but mainly to try to recover a misplaced pass.

Reach  -  2 offered nothing going forward, nothing defensively.

Matias  -  3. Ran a bit, but nowhere useful. 

Fletcher - 2. Didn't get a chance, so can't be critiseed for not scoring, but lost out on every header, lost possession consistently. No support was part of the reason, otherwise would have rated a 1.

Boyd  - 3. Disappointing after recent improvements. Can't point to any obvious errors, just not in the game at all.

 

Nuhui  - 4. Improvement on Fletcher, even fashioned a shot on goal, but still poor.

Winnal - 4. Ran around a bit, fell over. Looks like he hasn't played for 18 months and is struggling to identify his role in the team.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, StudentOwl said:

Sorry, I didn't mean to make it sound like I was popping you in the same group as that "sub-section" as I put it... like I say, I was more using your post as a vehicle. Didn't mean to sound like I was accusing you personally of my general ramblings

Fair enough and I do understand the point you are trying to make.

 

My own personal take on the goal keeper situation is that Dawson did very well in goal and was let down by those in front of him. I just think that given the amount of goals we conceded, it was important to bring back an experienced voice behind the back 4, one that has served us so well in the past.

 

Dawsons time will come but right now I just think Westwood is the better option given our current circumstances.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I listened to the game live on iFollow - their views being that Wednesday were second best all game and that (according to JP) Hull played better than any opposing side he'd seen so far this season

I then read various reports and comments before sitting down to watch the full match replayed

 

Well I get it, they were better than us, but (imo) they weren't all that great - they were well organized though

They targeted Bannan and drove him deeper from the start, put two men on Fletcher and pressed our wide players at every chance

Plus the fact almost every challenge by one of ours led to a free kick to Hull

That said, I thought we defended well enough and if we'd held on until half time I'd have scored all 6s and 7s with Hutch & Westwood on 8

Especially as they were the division's form team going into this one, no-one could reasonably expect us to hammer them

Hope, yes. Expect, no

 

But their goal was probably deserved on balance and whatever plans Agnew & co had to address the situation 2nd half were scuppered by a gift of a penalty 5mins in

After that it was too easy for Hull to hold their shape and try to pick us off on the break

Our lack of creativity was a worry but there wasn't much fight out there either

Their third goal, yet another mix-up in defence, was only their second effort on target all half and ended the game as a contest

 

I think those last 10mins provided an excuse for low marks in the region of 3s 4s and 5s

It was a poor performance but I don't think it was that bad - we just got beat, that's all

The trick is how they respond to it, players and coaches alike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A few stating that Palmer was man of the match. Could anyone explain what he was doing for Hulls third goal

 

 

 

 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also what was Lees doing for the first shot Westwood saved? Was he scared the ball might hurt him? Why didnt he stand square on to the shot? He could learn something by watching De Gea making himself look big with how he blocked shots yesterday (without the use of his hands).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For what it's worth - and based purely on watching the full replay on iFollow ...

 

Westwood  7

Palmer  5

Lees  6

Hector  6

Fox  5

Hutchinson  7

Bannan  5

Reach  5

Boyd  5

Matias  5

Fletcher  5

Nuhiu  5

Winnall  n/a

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ethel The Tree said:

I listened to the game live on iFollow - their views being that Wednesday were second best all game and that (according to JP) Hull played better than any opposing side he'd seen so far this season

I then read various reports and comments before sitting down to watch the full match replayed

 

Well I get it, they were better than us, but (imo) they weren't all that great - they were well organized though

They targeted Bannan and drove him deeper from the start, put two men on Fletcher and pressed our wide players at every chance

Plus the fact almost every challenge by one of ours led to a free kick to Hull

That said, I thought we defended well enough and if we'd held on until half time I'd have scored all 6s and 7s with Hutch & Westwood on 8

Especially as they were the division's form team going into this one, no-one could reasonably expect us to hammer them

Hope, yes. Expect, no

 

But their goal was probably deserved on balance and whatever plans Agnew & co had to address the situation 2nd half were scuppered by a gift of a penalty 5mins in

After that it was too easy for Hull to hold their shape and try to pick us off on the break

Our lack of creativity was a worry but there wasn't much fight out there either

Their third goal, yet another mix-up in defence, was only their second effort on target all half and ended the game as a contest

 

I think those last 10mins provided an excuse for low marks in the region of 3s 4s and 5s

It was a poor performance but I don't think it was that bad - we just got beat, that's all

The trick is how they respond to it, players and coaches alike

If anyone ever needed proof that listening to and even watching on TV is absolutely no substitute for actually being there then this is it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...