Tactical tomfoolery

General chat about the MK Dons and other footy related topics. Other related sites include:

Official website : http://www.mkdons.premiumtv.co.uk/page/Welcome

Milton Keynes Dons Supporters Association - official voice for Milton Keynes Dons FC supporters : http://www.mkdsa.com/

Moderator: MKDons Moderators

Tactical tomfoolery

Postby MKDF » Sat Feb 10, 2018 6:26 pm

Put aside McGrandles' and Williams' stupid errors for their two goals, the players didn't deserve that loss. In fact, we should have been clear away by half time.

To put EEL on in midfield is such a spectacular own goal I can't believe it. Took out any ability to control the midfield. That's where we lost that game.

Tactical tomfoolery from our new manager.


An afterthought for another shit set of officials. I swear the main stand Lino was half asleep - missed a smack in Lewies face - and ref was a toxic mix of inconsistent and naive. Agard thought he was playing in an abattoir the way he was being cut up.

Finally, maximum 2,000 away fans for evermore please.
MKDF
 
Posts: 2214
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2012 2:24 pm

Re: Tactical tomfoolery

Postby Furzdonny » Sat Feb 10, 2018 7:24 pm

On the positive side the side was positive. It also showed a lot of passion, commitment and good football. I thought Ed Upson and Scott Wootton had very good games and hope they get new contracts, if we are in league 1 or 2.
User avatar
Furzdonny
 
Posts: 1656
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2011 2:39 pm

Re: Tactical tomfoolery

Postby ACDon » Sat Feb 10, 2018 9:43 pm

Maybe, it's not saying a lot, but IMO today's performance was our best of the season. Play like that for the rest of the season and we'll be fine. :D
ACDon
 
Posts: 6254
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 6:47 pm

Re: Tactical tomfoolery

Postby dons50 » Sat Feb 10, 2018 10:18 pm

Cisse was struggling. Not sure he had many other options. It certainly didnt lead to us losing the game.
dons50
 
Posts: 2274
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2011 8:08 am

Re: Tactical tomfoolery

Postby dons50 » Sat Feb 10, 2018 10:21 pm

MKDF wrote:Finally, maximum 2,000 away fans for evermore please.


Why?

Our responsibility is wider than just the performance of our team. If 6,000 opposition fans want to come, and we have room, and it doesn’t breach security standards, it’s only fair to let them in.
dons50
 
Posts: 2274
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2011 8:08 am

Re: Tactical tomfoolery

Postby MKDF » Sat Feb 10, 2018 10:50 pm

dons50 wrote:
MKDF wrote:Finally, maximum 2,000 away fans for evermore please.


Why?

Our responsibility is wider than just the performance of our team. If 6,000 opposition fans want to come, and we have room, and it doesn’t breach security standards, it’s only fair to let them in.


Forgive me. I thought we were competing with them for success. We should just be nice to everyone.

If I think about it, they're all very nice to us.
MKDF
 
Posts: 2214
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2012 2:24 pm

Re: Tactical tomfoolery

Postby ACDon » Sat Feb 10, 2018 11:00 pm

dons50 wrote:
MKDF wrote:Finally, maximum 2,000 away fans for evermore please.


Why?

Our responsibility is wider than just the performance of our team. If 6,000 opposition fans want to come, and we have room, and it doesn’t breach security standards, it’s only fair to let them in.


Totally agree, we are fortunate enough to have the facility to accommodate so many away fans, it means more revenue for us, so why turn it away?
ACDon
 
Posts: 6254
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 6:47 pm

Re: Tactical tomfoolery

Postby MKDF » Sun Feb 11, 2018 9:11 am

ACDon wrote:
dons50 wrote:
MKDF wrote:Finally, maximum 2,000 away fans for evermore please.


Why?

Our responsibility is wider than just the performance of our team. If 6,000 opposition fans want to come, and we have room, and it doesn’t breach security standards, it’s only fair to let them in.


Totally agree, we are fortunate enough to have the facility to accommodate so many away fans, it means more revenue for us, so why turn it away?


It's a fine point isn't it. No one can prove what effect their fans had on the result. Still, our current position should bring those risks into focus. Win the battle lose the war?
MKDF
 
Posts: 2214
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2012 2:24 pm

Re: Tactical tomfoolery

Postby ACDon » Sun Feb 11, 2018 10:40 am

dons50 wrote:Cisse was struggling. Not sure he had many other options. It certainly didnt lead to us losing the game.



Surely McGrandles is a better all round option in the middle than Cisse.
ACDon
 
Posts: 6254
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 6:47 pm

Re: Tactical tomfoolery

Postby MKDF » Sun Feb 11, 2018 10:55 am

ACDon wrote:
dons50 wrote:Cisse was struggling. Not sure he had many other options. It certainly [ ? ] didnt lead to us losing the game.



Surely McGrandles is a better all round option in the middle than Cisse.


McGrandles replaced Pawlett at inside right but dropped back.

EEL replaced Cisse as an advanced inside left.

After that we had too little to get forward. If you're winning, you want to play up the other end of the field.

Prior to that, we were still in full control and Portsmouth showed nothing.

That's the reason the game turned and our defence came under more pressure in the last 10 minutes.
MKDF
 
Posts: 2214
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2012 2:24 pm


Return to Milton Keynes Dons FC - MK Dons and general footy chat

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 44 guests

cron