Jump to content

U23 Development League 2021/2022


BOF

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, HalfTimePost said:

Yeah I don't disagree, he grew into it though and is playing out if position isn't he, usually a CB? 

Just felt he looked better than the others who were all quite invisible. Gap between Caleb and the other 10 was significant though, not a lot covered in glory. But a young side against a good academy

There was a few times the ball came loose and he went into centre back mode and stayed back rather than press it down. But like you say out of position. They do lack the leadership a Revan or Keisler gave them last season. Bogarde isn't a right back. Their inexperience in the final third showing at times by wanting to go for glory. But that'll come.

Caleb started a bit flat and lazy too I felt but has grown into it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, lexicon said:

Swinkels is really struggling at LB - definitely not his position.

Yeah not had a great second half. I felt he really grew into towards the end of the first but he's found it tough this half.

Zito has looked good. Is he a RB naturally or a CB?

Been quite a tough second half for everybody. Lindsey has had a really tough half and Iroegbunam has looked better but still not what I'd hoped.

Fulham are a good side though so it's a good result and we have a lot of players not often in this XI with all the loans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Decent point.

Fulham were the better side and had a lot of chances - I think we struggled with them down our left where it's really hard for a 6'4" centreback to play at left back against a quick agile winger - in midfield some of the decision making was poor and too often they ran into dead ends instead of moving the ball along. 

I thought Chukwuemeka looked threatening throughout.

Will have been a good game for the development of some of these.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its not really about winning games at this level is it? You could have a team of 22 year olds and probably walk the league. Its about the development of the players. Great to see a young team out there. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

Decent point.

Fulham were the better side and had a lot of chances - I think we struggled with them down our left where it's really hard for a 6'4" centreback to play at left back against a quick agile winger - in midfield some of the decision making was poor and too often they ran into dead ends instead of moving the ball along. 

I thought Chukwuemeka looked threatening throughout.

Will have been a good game for the development of some of these.

Do you know the ages of Fulham players? Were they much older then ours? I am wondering why they looked so much better all over the pitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lucky to get a draw. I thought Chukwuemeka played well and Iroegbunam was much improved in the second half, others can improve hopefully, although I don't think Goodridge and Reddin were helped by the fact they had central defenders playing behind them so they couldn't link up with the fullbacks in the way you'd normally expect, and Thorndike wasn't really linking up with them in the same way you'd see Carney Chukwuemeka and Aaron Ramsey linking up with the wide players last season.

I think Swinkels was probably played at left back to see how he'd do with Tuesday's game against Wycombe in mind, given we will probably be reluctant to play Patterson in that one due to his young age.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we will improve once the likes of Chrisene and Shakpoke return to fitness and the likes of Feeney, Barber, Patterson, Barnes, Pierre Burchall and so on starting getting integrated into the U23s as the season goes on. I'm sure we will see some of the second year scholars like Reddin, Sewell, and Tommi O'Reilly improve as well, last season I remember some didn't look great to begin with but went on to have very good seasons.

Edited by useless
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, useless said:

I think Swinkels was probably played at left back to see how he'd do with Tuesday's game against Wycombe in mind, given we will probably be reluctant to play Patterson in that one due to his young age.

I think they've learned they can be reluctant to play Swinkels at left back too. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes I'm not sure what they're going to do about that, a shame Chrisene seems to be injured, will probably have to be either Swinkels or try another defender at left-back. Bridge would be another option but not sure if he's fit at the moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...
Â