OUAFC 0 3 Cashmere Technical - not the accurate result I don't think, Cashmere pulled away with two late goals after being frustrated for a large portion of the game. Varsity had only 5 regular starters on the field, and I think once they're up to full strength they could get a few results, but time will tell.
7 actually; Catto, Rathbone, Nimmo, B. O'Farrell, Tapp, T. O'Farrell and Scahill all regular starters, and Durkin also is a borderline starter.
Cashmere the far better team. The stats on Bet365 supported this with Tech having a far larger amount of 'dangerous attacks'. Varsity did ok in patches, but also simply not good enough defensively at times. Both late goals were terrible defending from Nimmo and then O'Farrell
Rathbone and Durkin are bench players when the side is full strength, so 5 starters. But regardless, I agree that both late goals were poor defending efforts. And the 'dangerous attacks' are determined by a scarfie-aged guy who clicks a button when the ball gets out of the centre circle. So I really don't think that's a brilliant argument.
Put a full strength side in front of sides though (which they will have for the rest of the season), and they'll do some damage. Happy to be called out on this in a few months time, but i'm pretty confident on this :)
Who starts at right back over Rathbone? Every time I have seen Varsity, he has started. Even if not, thats 6 not 5.
Well actually, theres 'attacks', 'dangerous attacks' and 'in possession'. Dangerous attacks indicating a good attacking opportunity. Cashmere had something crazy like 6 or 7x the number of reported dangerous attacks than varsity, so even if they are getting half of them 'wrong' it still is a good indicator of one team being completely dominant. And whats the age of the bookie got to do with it? Do you have to be a certain age to know whats happening in a game of football?
The guy playing left back today. But really not worth splitting hairs over.
Yes I understand how it works, I just disagree as to how dominant Cashmere were. Not blighting his age at all and I never talked about his game observations, that's not his job. I'm just saying if that is what you're relying on to gauge how a game of football is going, then you won't get the big picture of a game. Take today's Cavvy v Mosgiel game, I was keeping an eye on it and Mosgiel had a vast amount of 'dangerous attacks' comparatively at the start of the second half (that was the only time I checked), but were losing 2 0.
I just think you're overstating how good that Cashmere team was today, they struggled to stay onside and relied on naive mistakes in possession from Varsity to actually get decent opportunities. This varsity team will learn from that, and their returning players will make a huge difference, but I think they gave it a pretty good go with all the unavailabilities they had. But your opinion is your opinion, so all power to you dude.
Right, not sure who comes in at left back because once again the games I’ve seen Arnon has been left back and Rathbone right back, I believe.
Cavy and Mosgiel were dead even on there with both having a number of dangerous attacks. From what I’ve heard from sources at the game was that Cavy were far more clinical. Which is represented quite well in the stats.
Actually I think Cashmere were rather poor today, which I think is more of a negative reflection on Varsity considering they lost 3-0.
Well i'm telling you the first choice right back is Arnon and the first choice left back is Conor Spear - but whatever.
Well when I checked at around the 55 minute mark Mosgiel had far, far more dangerous attacks to their name. I'm not trying to break down what happened in the game, i'm just saying it's not an entirely accurate way to judge how a game is going. My point is more related to the fact I think all three Southern sides, once at full strength, will pose problems in ways the three sides last year couldn't. Mosgiel are lethal on the break, Caversham are industrial but very effective and Varsity play possession based football that wears teams down when effective.
Your views on Cashmere are fair enough, I just don't agree - they went to the long ball early, got constantly caught offside, couldn't get Lyle on the ball and if they weren't so physically imposing defensively I think they would have faced a few more issues. The fact Varsity pushed the boat out in the last 15 minutes and conceded twice was the price you pay for having a positive mindset. I would rather lose 3 0 whilst trying to get back into the game than lose 1 0 and stay compact. If you can't see the positives for Otago football of a side with the average age of 19 who play, at times, gorgeous football then I hope you do soon!
I don't know if that is the truth as I was also following the game and it was pretty much bang on even for the majority of the game.
I think we both agree that Cashmere weren't brilliant yesterday, however, we disagree in our views on Varsity. They offered next to nothing going forward, and it was always a matter of time until Cashmere scored. I absolutely see the positives IF Varsity can play nice football in this league, but I just feel you are trying to sugar coat their performance. Are you involved with them in some way, perhaps?
And also, Cashmere are physically imposing defensively - that's a fact - so there is no point saying what the case would be otherwise? This league is a step up.
Cavy is the only team I can see improving on Queenstowns performance last season of finishing 5th, including a win away to Ferrymead? and being wrongly disallowed a goal in the last minute away to Cashmere that would've given them a draw. Tech also got two draws against Mainland opposition which I think is something the three teams this year may struggle to achieve.
I'm not affiliated with any clubs in Dunedin, I have been around the traps for a while and I have been really encouraged by sides trying to play football in the right way - that is why I am plugging them.
I agree the league is a step up, but I am really confident that all three sides will put up much more of a fight than the Southern sides did last year. Yes there were a couple of positive results, including the Queenstown win, but that was the sole victory against a Mainland side.
If football in the region is to improve, there need to be more of those 'one-off' victories (like Queenstown v Ferrymead last year), and less of the 10-1, 5-1 scorelines that Queenstown and Tech were on the end of.
Queenstown were (I think) the only semi-combative side last year, Tech fell away once their squad fell apart and were lucky to sneak a draw with Coastal and Nomads at that (last second equaliser against Coastal, saved a penalty against Nomads), and Southland were totally off the pace.
I will be interested to see how Cavvy actually get on, they've brought back some old heads but Horner and Henderson aren't getting any younger, and Ferguson has broken a collarbone (for what sounded like an attempted hit job on Ben Deeley).
Probably not much more to say than that, but i've enjoyed hearing different views on the games, it helps an old bugger like me see football matches in different ways. I like that there is clearly plenty of interest in this league, and long may it continue!