Jump to content
Melbourne Football

Spud of the Match - Rd24 vs WSW


haz
 Share

Spud of the Match - Rd24 vs WSW  

22 members have voted

  1. 1. Spud of the Match - Rd24 vs WSW

    • Bouzanis
      0
    • Atkinson
      0
    • Bort
      0
    • Jakobsen
      0
    • Jamieson
      3
    • Bozanic
      1
    • Mauk
      3
    • Brattan
      0
    • Fornaroli
      1
    • Vidosic
      0
    • Arzani
      0
    • Fitzy
      0
    • BigBoy Haz
      2
    • Muscat
      10
    • Wazza
      2

This poll is closed to new votes

  • Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.
  • Poll closed on 30/03/18 at 08:39 AM

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Tangerine said:

Really thought that was one of Jamieson’s better matches, surprised he’s getting votes here. No one really a spud. Wazza maybe should get a vote for playing Muscat as a midfielder.

No way deserved of being nominated a spud. Had a good first half. Started to back track a little to much again second half but by the last 15 we were sitting well inside our defensive half. Been happy with his forward movement with the ball last week and this week. 

Edited by n i k o
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, n i k o said:

No way deserved of being nominated a spud. Had a good first half. Started to back track a little to much again second half but by the last 15 we were sitting well inside our defensive half. Been happy with his forward movement with the ball last week and this week. 

Completely agree. I don't understand the repeated criticism of Jamieson. Last night he defended well and got forward well. Our defence was solid throughout. Delbridge also looked more composed last night and did what he had to do when he came on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, johnno cpfc said:

I made Bouzanis my spud  as for weeks i have been reading about how good his distribution is, Bullshit !!! 90% of his long balls were either over the side lines or far too long.

Weeks?? Make that years. It was the reason he replaced Sorenson and then was preferred to Galecovic. Sure, he can pinpoint some of his kicks but it is well below 50% and the number that go out is just too many. I must admit though, last night his positioning and willingness to come out for balls seemed a lot better. I am still not a fan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, jw1739 said:

Completely agree. I don't understand the repeated criticism of Jamieson. Last night he defended well and got forward well. Our defence was solid throughout. Delbridge also looked more composed last night and did what he had to do when he came on.

I don't think he has had repeated criticism though jw. I think I may have been the first to make mention of some of the things I wasn't happy with (I had to dig the thread out from last year). He certainly doesn't deserve criticism for the last 2 weeks. Quite happy with him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, n i k o said:

I don't think he has had repeated criticism though jw. I think I may have been the first to make mention of some of the things I wasn't happy with (I had to dig the thread out from last year). He certainly doesn't deserve criticism for the last 2 weeks. Quite happy with him. 

Yeh exactly. I dont think he's been the attacking player we all expected him to be, but defensively he's been as good if not better than any full back we've had in our history imo. (which tbh isnt saying a lot)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, johnno cpfc said:

I made Bouzanis my spud  as for weeks i have been reading about how good his distribution is, Bullshit !!! 90% of his long balls were either over the side lines or far too long.

But how good was the ball to Jamo in the first half. That was world class top 5 keepers in the world pass. Amazing stuff. Anyway I thought he had a good, albeit quiet game most of the time. 

Edited by n i k o
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, bt50 said:

Yeh exactly. I dont think he's been the attacking player we all expected him to be, but defensively he's been as good if not better than any full back we've had in our history imo. (which tbh isnt saying a lot)

For sure. I'll be completely honest, he has infuriated me in past games with his stalling on the ball but he's been pretty good defensively particularly from a positional point of view. Last two weeks he's been really good, hope he keeps it up. 

Serious question. What the fuck was Muscat doing in DM? Has Wazza lost his marbles. I'm almost tempted to vote for Wazza just for that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, n i k o said:

For sure. I'll be completely honest, he has infuriated me in past games with his stalling on the ball but he's been pretty good defensively particularly from a positional point of view. Last two weeks he's been really good, hope he keeps it up. 

Serious question. What the fuck was Muscat doing in DM? Has Wazza lost his marbles. I'm almost tempted to vote for Wazza just for that.

Yeh seemed an odd option at the time.

The only logical explanation i can think of is that we desperately wanted to keep that 3 goal lead. Going into the game Victory were 3 ahead of us in goal difference so given just a point seperated us we might have been trying to ensure that we maintained that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, bt50 said:

Yeh seemed an odd option at the time.

The only logical explanation i can think of is that we desperately wanted to keep that 3 goal lead. Going into the game Victory were 3 ahead of us in goal difference so given just a point seperated us we might have been trying to ensure that we maintained that?

I applaud your effort bt50, trying to find logic in this scenario is tough. The reason you is provided is logical but at the same time illogical. Yes a defensive player makes sense to defend a lead, but putting Muscat in an unnatural position almost makes things worse doesn't it? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Makes no sense. The only thing that puts it in the maybe its kinda normal category was that is was at 85 mins and even Muscat is capable of not fucking up too badly in 5 mins plus stoppages.

But he replaced Mauk so unless Budzinski really pissed off Joyce to the point where Muscat was the only choice I can't find any reasonable logic.

Its up there with Delbridge playing striker chasing a goal. Can't wait for his next nugget of genius. 

Edited by Jovan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Jovan said:

Makes no sense. The only thing that puts it in the maybe its kinda normal category was that is was at 85 mins and even Muscat is capable of not fucking up too badly in 5 mins plus stoppages.

But he replaced Mauk so unless Budzinski really pissed off Joyce to the point where Muscat was the only choice I can't find any reasonable logic.

Its up there with Delbridge playing striker chasing a goal. Can't wait for his next nugget of genius. 

1. I wouldn't put my money on it. Quite capable of giving away a goal and getting a red card.

2. The Budzinski situation needs to be sorted as soon as the season finishes. He's occupying a marquee position, and if he's not even going to get on the field than that's just a waste of an available place in the squad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 25/03/2018 at 1:04 AM, n i k o said:

No way deserved of being nominated a spud. Had a good first half. Started to back track a little to much again second half but by the last 15 we were sitting well inside our defensive half. Been happy with his forward movement with the ball last week and this week. 

 

On 25/03/2018 at 9:55 AM, jw1739 said:

Completely agree. I don't understand the repeated criticism of Jamieson. Last night he defended well and got forward well. Our defence was solid throughout. Delbridge also looked more composed last night and did what he had to do when he came on.

 

On 24/03/2018 at 11:01 PM, Tangerine said:

Really thought that was one of Jamieson’s better matches, surprised he’s getting votes here. No one really a spud. Wazza maybe should get a vote for playing Muscat as a midfielder.

Why? Because he is ineffective, costs us attacks and can't defend. 

Stats for the game which backs up the criticism.

1 tackle, 3 of 11 duels won, no clearances and no interception.

Many of his unsuccessful passes are very poor and many of his successful passes are ineffective.

I am holding off my judgement until the movement of our forwards is more fluid as he may be able hit better and more effective passes, but as for this game I thought he was the most ineffective player on the pitch in both attack and defense.

By contrast Atkinson had one of his best games IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, playmaker said:

 

 

Why? Because he is ineffective, costs us attacks and can't defend. 

Stats for the game which backs up the criticism.

1 tackle, 3 of 11 duels won, no clearances and no interception.

Many of his unsuccessful passes are very poor and many of his successful passes are ineffective.

I am holding off my judgement until the movement of our forwards is more fluid as he may be able hit better and more effective passes, but as for this game I thought he was the most ineffective player on the pitch in both attack and defense.

By contrast Atkinson had one of his best games IMO.

You almost had me fooled there a little cause I don't remember him being that poor. Looking now at the stats it's probably best to clarify a few things. 

1. That 1 tackle he made was the only one he had to make. The stats say 1/1 successful tackles made thereby he has a 100% win rate there.

2. The duels is ambiguous as we don't know what that means. And just as a comparison it says Bort won 0/2 duels!! So I wouldn't look at that stat at all.

3. Bouzanis didn't have to make one save. Not one on target or off target. Shows just how meak they were in attack. The fact that Jamo didn't have to make any clearances or interceptions reiterates that it was becasue of how poor they were and not some shortfall from Jamo this game. 

 

In saying that the stats say that Jamo provided 2 shots assists and also 2 big chances created. 

So for me the stats say, one, that WSW were toothless going forward and didn't trouble our backline much at all, and two, that Jamo performed pretty well with his forward play. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, n i k o said:

You almost had me fooled there a little cause I don't remember him being that poor. Looking now at the stats it's probably best to clarify a few things. 

1. That 1 tackle he made was the only one he had to make. The stats say 1/1 successful tackles made thereby he has a 100% win rate there.

2. The duels is ambiguous as we don't know what that means. And just as a comparison it says Bort won 0/2 duels!! So I wouldn't look at that stat at all.

3. Bouzanis didn't have to make one save. Not one on target or off target. Shows just how meak they were in attack. The fact that Jamo didn't have to make any clearances or interceptions reiterates that it was becasue of how poor they were and not some shortfall from Jamo this game. 

 

In saying that the stats say that Jamo provided 2 shots assists and also 2 big chances created. 

So for me the stats say, one, that WSW were toothless going forward and didn't trouble our backline much at all, and two, that Jamo performed pretty well with his forward play. 

Agree with most, but I vaguely recall Bouzanis making a save (and a good one at that).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO most of the so-called statistics are meaningless because of inadequate definitions. What is a "save"? There were several occasions in the 6-yard box when Bouzanis had to come into action, and on each occasion his handling was first-class.

Likewise the stat. on Schenkeveld. If that sprint to the left in the second half to cut out a good Wanderers attack down their RW was not a "duel" then I don't know what is.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, jw1739 said:

IMO most of the so-called statistics are meaningless because of inadequate definitions. What is a "save"? There were several occasions in the 6-yard box when Bouzanis had to come into action, and on each occasion his handling was first-class.

Likewise the stat. on Schenkeveld. If that sprint to the left in the second half to cut out a good Wanderers attack down their RW was not a "duel" then I don't know what is.

Lies, damned lies & statistics 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, n i k o said:

Could very well be. Stats say no saves made but could easily be wrong. I'm trying to think of when.

 

8 hours ago, jw1739 said:

IMO most of the so-called statistics are meaningless because of inadequate definitions. What is a "save"? There were several occasions in the 6-yard box when Bouzanis had to come into action, and on each occasion his handling was first-class.

Likewise the stat. on Schenkeveld. If that sprint to the left in the second half to cut out a good Wanderers attack down their RW was not a "duel" then I don't know what is.

Maybe what JW is saying is what I was thinking of regarding the save. All I can remember is thinking "Bouzanis has done well there".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, jw1739 said:

IMO most of the so-called statistics are meaningless because of inadequate definitions. What is a "save"? There were several occasions in the 6-yard box when Bouzanis had to come into action, and on each occasion his handling was first-class.

Likewise the stat. on Schenkeveld. If that sprint to the left in the second half to cut out a good Wanderers attack down their RW was not a "duel" then I don't know what is.

Stats in soccer are always subjective. 

Although Wanderers didn't register a shot on target, they actually hit the crossbar and from memory it was at 0:0. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...