Hi
As a supporter since 1962 (jeez is that 50 years coming up ?!) I dont now get much opportunity to see the lads these days but caught the Rovers game, so this is my first sighting of PDC and his ways.
What I noticed was that the G man was doing especially well in spotting opportunities to get behind the Rovers defence,
most of which were missed/not taken up by the team. Thus the occasion when he got through to take the shot in the 2nd half was for me creditable, and I didnt feel that his failure to score was particularly reprehensible, nor did I feel he blew an opportunity to pass to someone better placed.
However, what I did then notice was PDC's reaction which was so massive that I knew he was going to take him off right away. (I also noticed that the miss early in the first half produced what seemed to me to be an excessive reaction from PDC).
Taking him off was for me a big mistake, as it was clear that he stood a good chance of getting behind the defence
again before the end of the game. This was particularly important because we needed an outlet from any pressure that would be put on us without forcing Caddis to have to go up the other wing too many times. (And given that Magera seemed to be a pretty hopeless donkey, the middle wasn't much of an option either).
Sure enough, his replacement, the E-man, showed none of that defence-opening nous, and sure enough our outlets dried up and we got caught out in the end.
I also noted that each time our goalie got the ball, the G-man hared up to create masses of space on the left which was wasted because the keeper didnt seem to have the nous to aim the ball at him.
So for me, while it's all well and good saying 'ah PDC he's Italian and emotional', that doesn't mean it's a good thing that he gets into a red mist and fails to see the 'obvious' ie. the above. To me, that ultimately doesn't bode well.
Would be interested in others' views on this. Apologies for the language used to write this - I coudnt find a way to do it differently.
Lander's agent I reckon. Disagree. Both chances should have been taken , especially the first.
