|
Title: Ratings Post by: adje on Wednesday, February 15, 2006, 12:52:24 Evans 6-not a single shot to save-came off his line well and not troubled by crosses.
Smith 6-part of a solid back 4 got forward well O'Hanlon 7-gets better all the time Ifil 8-even managed to play a superb ball down the line to Brown as well as his usual immense tackling Nicholas 7- continues to look more like his old self Shakes 6-little bit disappointing,not many crosses and seemed to be knocked off the ball too easily Gurney 5-completely anonymous Smith 7-missed him when he went off Brown 7-constant threat but should have scored Cureton 7-great finish,looked sharp but still guilty of profligacy Peacock 7-just like Fallon-without the goals.Faallon would have buried at least one of his two chances Migz 6-strangely subdued Roberts 6-should have come on 10 minutes earlier imo Dont want to get too carried away as Gillingscum were by far the worst side I've seen this season.Their no 6 was a pub player!Dont like the way Gillingham had so much posession with 10 men.Result that counts tho'. Title: Ratings Post by: Piemonte on Wednesday, February 15, 2006, 12:53:44 beat you by a minute Adje :D
Title: Ratings Post by: adje on Wednesday, February 15, 2006, 12:56:30 One-nil to the Pie!
Title: Ratings Post by: Tails on Wednesday, February 15, 2006, 13:06:09 Peacock offers more than Fallon IMO.
Title: Ratings Post by: janaage on Wednesday, February 15, 2006, 13:14:40 "Peacock 7-just like Fallon-without the goals.Fallon would have buried at least one of his two chances"
What the fuck is that all about? If Rory was playing Curo would have been as ineffective as he used to be. Peacock and Curo are a partnership ffs. Title: Ratings Post by: Piemonte on Wednesday, February 15, 2006, 13:15:58 my ratings thread is so much better than this one :wink:
Title: Ratings Post by: mbongo on Wednesday, February 15, 2006, 13:19:29 i don't know what everyone's problem is with gurns - he's still pretty good i think. good tackler, strong, good passer, good crosser, decent shot. what's wrong with him? we don't always have to have someone to have a go at you know
Title: Ratings Post by: janaage on Wednesday, February 15, 2006, 13:24:12 He's a poor mans Paul Smith :wink:
Title: Ratings Post by: adje on Wednesday, February 15, 2006, 13:29:21 Quote from: "janaage" "Peacock 7-just like Fallon-without the goals.Fallon would have buried at least one of his two chances" What the fuck is that all about? If Rory was playing Curo would have been as ineffective as he used to be. Peacock and Curo are a partnership ffs. You may be right-all I was saying is that Fallon finishes better than Peacock on the evidence so far.FFS! Title: Ratings Post by: adje on Wednesday, February 15, 2006, 13:32:41 Gurney is the "new Hewlett".That is,he doesn't really contribute,very rarely "troubles the scorer"and cant pass.If he wasn't in the side,I wouldn't"have a go "at anyone
Title: Ratings Post by: McLovin on Wednesday, February 15, 2006, 13:47:47 Gurns has been remarkably poor in the last two games. Should be dropped for Saturday.
Title: Ratings Post by: Barmyarmysteve on Wednesday, February 15, 2006, 15:28:37 Agree with Dave gurney has been poor and should be dropped saturday.Migz or CCP(if fit) could come in for him
|