R3 vs Western Sydney Wanderers | Sat 3rd Nov | 7:35pm | Westpac Stadium

Should be a good learning curve for Rudan from this one. He made changes and they didn't work, so now we see how he reacts and that is going to be very interesting (ignoring the fact some individual performances were shark on Sat).

I've been wondering if the weather affected our performance more than that of WSW. If that is the case then I would hope Rudan will organise next boot camp based on the weather forecast. Others pointed out individual performance as the key but I also think WSW was more physical on the night. All night they resembled a battering ram while we looked at times more like a primary school swim squad than a football team.

I assume you're replying to me? I thought the comment was harsh on the players I mentioned because:

Krisha is one of our most consistent players.

Fenton being useless for TW has no bearing on his performance for the Nix. He certainly isn't useless for us.

Rufer has been one of the better players across the first three games. Worse then Ridenton is subjective.

Cacace and Singh have played a handful of games sure, but look like A-League standard youngsters to me.

Well, sorry to break the news, but;

Yes, Krishna is a good player. But there is no doubt he goes quiet throughout most games, where he has little impact. The lack of quality in our team does not help this, though. However, when hes on, hes dangerous, and he does manage to turn up with a goal every now and then. But he is inconsistent - if he wasnt, he would've scored more than 4 goals last season as our primary scoring option.

Fenton is pretty useless for us. Not the best defender and can barely make a 10 yard pass. His performances for TW 100% allow us to come to the conclusion that he is not the required standard - because he barely was at a lower level of football.

Cacace IMO is barely A-League standard. Has way too many limitations to be a reliable starter... He constantly gets caught out in defence and struggles to cope with opposition attackers -  as a result, teammates have to help him and this ends up drawing the rest of the team out of shape. I dont believe he would be a standout in the NZFC, in fact I dont think he would even start for the top 2 or 3 teams.

Well, sorry to break the news, but;

Yes, Krishna is a good player. But there is no doubt he goes quiet throughout most games, where he has little impact. The lack of quality in our team does not help this, though. However, when hes on, hes dangerous, and he does manage to turn up with a goal every now and then. But he is inconsistent - if he wasnt, he would've scored more than 4 goals last season as our primary scoring option.

Fenton is pretty useless for us. Not the best defender and can barely make a 10 yard pass. His performances for TW 100% allow us to come to the conclusion that he is not the required standard - because he barely was at a lower level of football.

Cacace IMO is barely A-League standard. Has way too many limitations to be a reliable starter... He constantly gets caught out in defence and struggles to cope with opposition attackers -  as a result, teammates have to help him and this ends up drawing the rest of the team out of shape. I dont believe he would be a standout in the NZFC, in fact I dont think he would even start for the top 2 or 3 teams.

new thread please!

I apologise if this has already been discussed, but WTF was up with dance cam on Saturday??!!

Well, sorry to break the news, but;

Yes, Krishna is a good player. But there is no doubt he goes quiet throughout most games, where he has little impact. The lack of quality in our team does not help this, though. However, when hes on, hes dangerous, and he does manage to turn up with a goal every now and then. But he is inconsistent - if he wasnt, he would've scored more than 4 goals last season as our primary scoring option.

Fenton is pretty useless for us. Not the best defender and can barely make a 10 yard pass. His performances for TW 100% allow us to come to the conclusion that he is not the required standard - because he barely was at a lower level of football.

Cacace IMO is barely A-League standard. Has way too many limitations to be a reliable starter... He constantly gets caught out in defence and struggles to cope with opposition attackers -  as a result, teammates have to help him and this ends up drawing the rest of the team out of shape. I dont believe he would be a standout in the NZFC, in fact I dont think he would even start for the top 2 or 3 teams.

Conan's already replied on Krishna, but I'd add that Krishna is nevery quiet. In the game's he has little impact up-front (where the Nix are on the back foot), you'll see him chasing down opposition players deep into our half to try and get the ball back.

Also Fenton and Cacace are decent A-League quality players and have the same limitations as almost all fullbacks in the league. Scott Galloway, Kye Rowles, Connor O'Toole, Jack Clisby are just a few starting FB's that would be the same level. If Cacace wasn't a reliable starter at this level, I don't think you'd see a former A-League winner and our coach starting him in the first three games of the season.

Conan's already replied on Krishna, but I'd add that Krishna is nevery quiet. In the game's he has little impact up-front (where the Nix are on the back foot), you'll see him chasing down opposition players deep into our half to try and get the ball back.

Also Fenton and Cacace are decent A-League quality players and have the same limitations as almost all fullbacks in the league. Scott Galloway, Kye Rowles, Connor O'Toole, Jack Clisby are just a few starting FB's that would be the same level. If Cacace wasn't a reliable starter at this level, I don't think you'd see a former A-League winner and our coach starting him in the first three games of the season.

I see what you are saying about Krishna, but effort doesn't = consistency. For sure he has had some good runs, and perhaps my original post was a bit hard, but hes still not doing enough for my liking.

You miss the last 4 months where we have struggled to get A-League quality footballers to sign with the club, to the point where we required 4 (?) signings in the final week before the deadline. I genuinely believe that the 4 fullbacks you stated are all better players than both Fenton and Cacace at this point.

Oh yeah, and if you think Rudan is content with him starting then why did we sign Way (a left back)? Thats right, because hes not sure about our current one!!

We want him getting the ball in dangerous areas, attacking and scoring. 

I don't want a team with 3 CBs and 2 DM to be relying on our main striker to provide cover defence! He shouldn't be thinking about defence at all, except for shutting down the play up front

I apologise if this has already been discussed, but WTF was up with dance cam on Saturday??!!

I think you'll find he signed way as cover for Cacace if he gets injured. Given Doyle is now playing CB we needed an option in that space. I doubt it has anything to do with not trusting or having confidence in Cacace.

With a squad that is still gelling together, I fully expect to get games when things click together, and games when they don't.

When our set up works well against a particular opposition, we seem to have excellent players (game against Jets is a case in point). When we get taken to the cleaners, we seem to suddenly have a team full of no-hopers (against WSW?).  The truth lies somewhere in the middle. 

To beat a good opposition it helps if your team has that special chemistry that comes from a season of playing together. We do not have that, and we also played in a different (slightly) lineup than against the Jets and Brisbane. 

I have no issue with a loss against WSW, it could have easily stayed at 0:1 or even 1:1 if luck was with us. It wasn't to be.

As I said, drawing against Brisbane showed our weakness - we should have buried them in the first 2o minutes.

Fair enough, but most of the boys were poor against WSW/ We never looked like it from the first minute.

The two changes completely unbalanced our midfield and attack.

Nichols was box to box, but also wing to wing - he was charging around the place, often quite close to a player with the ball, which closed down the passing options. Sarpreet tends to drift into spaces which means the opposition have to keep an eye on him - and meaning there wasn't always somehow a spare WSW player to shift the ball to, leaving Mandi, Rufer and Nichols in a tight group while they galloped off upfield.

It also meant that Mandi and Rufer were pushing up a bit into the space vacated by Nichols, and all it took was a simple ball to have both of them on the turn - I can't recall how many times I saw both Rufer and Mandi heading towards our goal, chasing down a Wanderers player, in this game. Rather than shielding the defence, he did more running in this game, that's got to have a big impact on Mandi's overall ability to last out a game. 

With the midfield out of sorts, Burgess was having to cover Cacace more often - meaning Roy was often by himself up there, with a weird mix of midfielders and attackes slightly out of position and exploitable as a result. Williams so far doesn't seem as adept at Burgess at surging forwards with the ball at defenders, but he's much better at occupying a defence and pinning them back with his presence - he and Roy keep defenders occupied, which gives space for Singh, which gives space and time for Mandi and Rufer.

It was troubling, because it showed that our team really starts from the front and if you make small changes to the forward line - the defence is exposed. 

Last night reminded me a lot of last season - we didn't look like a coherent unit, which is weird because we did for the first two games.

I think we will come good this next game. I cant see us being as woeful as before.

I actually think we've been poor in all three games. I don't think we know how to score.

The roster is full of compromises and Rudan has decided the best thing to do is to set up with 5 players providing defensive shape and holding space: Taylor, Durante, Doyle with Rufer and Mandi in front of them. In theory, this 5 should be difficult to bypass, but the back 3 are so deep there are massive spaces behind and either side of the midfield 2 which makes keeping the opposition out very difficult.

Our formation for the first 2 games had the 5 'holders', 4 'runners' and a play maker. Like Balbi mentioned, taking the play maker out left 5 static shape holders and 5 runners. Who was going to pull the strings? None of the 5 'runners' selected possesses the ability to control the play. 

A lot is being asked of the wing backs. In a back 5, you would want your wing backs to be 2 of your best players, but instead we have a developing kid and a partially restored fiat that's just been taken off the blocks. You can use player proximity to protect weak full backs in a back 4, but wing backs in a back 5 have to do it all themselves. Neither of our wing backs have the athleticism to do the job, but I must say I admired Fenton's effort. To compensate, we drop our strikers deep and wide when we don't have the ball. This makes it so easy for the likes of Risdon and Elrich, who were able to play forward in any manner that they wanted. Ask yourself, why were we the only team who looked like we were playing into the wind?

This isn't angst btw, just my observation and it comes as no surprise to me as this is a new team with a new coach who hasn't been able to sign the players he wants.

The solutions to the problems mentioned above all create other problems. It's a balancing act that Rudan can only really solve with better players

I actually think we've been poor in all three games. I don't think we know how to score.

The roster is full of compromises and Rudan has decided the best thing to do is to set up with 5 players providing defensive shape and holding space: Taylor, Durante, Doyle with Rufer and Mandi in front of them. In theory, this 5 should be difficult to bypass, but the back 3 are so deep there are massive spaces behind and either side of the midfield 2 which makes keeping the opposition out very difficult.

Our formation for the first 2 games had the 5 'holders', 4 'runners' and a play maker. Like Balbi mentioned, taking the play maker out left 5 static shape holders and 5 runners. Who was going to pull the strings? None of the 5 'runners' selected possesses the ability to control the play. 

A lot is being asked of the wing backs. In a back 5, you would want your wing backs to be 2 of your best players, but instead we have a developing kid and a partially restored fiat that's just been taken off the blocks. You can use player proximity to protect weak full backs in a back 4, but wing backs in a back 5 have to do it all themselves. Neither of our wing backs have the athleticism to do the job, but I must say I admired Fenton's effort. To compensate, we drop our strikers deep and wide when we don't have the ball. This makes it so easy for the likes of Risdon and Elrich, who were able to play forward in any manner that they wanted. Ask yourself, why were we the only team who looked like we were playing into the wind?

This isn't angst btw, just my observation and it comes as no surprise to me as this is a new team with a new coach who hasn't been able to sign the players he wants.

The solutions to the problems mentioned above all create other problems. It's a balancing act that Rudan can only really solve with better players

With a squad that is still gelling together, I fully expect to get games when things click together, and games when they don't.

When our set up works well against a particular opposition, we seem to have excellent players (game against Jets is a case in point). When we get taken to the cleaners, we seem to suddenly have a team full of no-hopers (against WSW?).  The truth lies somewhere in the middle. 

To beat a good opposition it helps if your team has that special chemistry that comes from a season of playing together. We do not have that, and we also played in a different (slightly) lineup than against the Jets and Brisbane. 

I have no issue with a loss against WSW, it could have easily stayed at 0:1 or even 1:1 if luck was with us. It wasn't to be.

As I said, drawing against Brisbane showed our weakness - we should have buried them in the first 2o minutes.

I think Ernie summed it up pretty well - I don't think this is a team that can come back from a 1 or 2 goal deficit. We are good when we scrape a goal and defend like our lives depend on it. Unfortunately, without a proper no.9 and Krishna shouldering most of the burden, I think we are going to really struggle to score this year.

After the music fiasco, which is still happening under the guise of "Dance cam", are the Nix going to get that creepy Nack Tinsley (deliberately mispelt as he couldn't pronounce players name's correctly) do "Kiss Cam"?? They were bad enough at the eggball without being dragged into a football match - we're here to watch the football, not watch Dance Cam. Give us our during the match replays back please.

I actually think we've been poor in all three games. I don't think we know how to score.

The roster is full of compromises and Rudan has decided the best thing to do is to set up with 5 players providing defensive shape and holding space: Taylor, Durante, Doyle with Rufer and Mandi in front of them. In theory, this 5 should be difficult to bypass, but the back 3 are so deep there are massive spaces behind and either side of the midfield 2 which makes keeping the opposition out very difficult.

Our formation for the first 2 games had the 5 'holders', 4 'runners' and a play maker. Like Balbi mentioned, taking the play maker out left 5 static shape holders and 5 runners. Who was going to pull the strings? None of the 5 'runners' selected possesses the ability to control the play. 

A lot is being asked of the wing backs. In a back 5, you would want your wing backs to be 2 of your best players, but instead we have a developing kid and a partially restored fiat that's just been taken off the blocks. You can use player proximity to protect weak full backs in a back 4, but wing backs in a back 5 have to do it all themselves. Neither of our wing backs have the athleticism to do the job, but I must say I admired Fenton's effort. To compensate, we drop our strikers deep and wide when we don't have the ball. This makes it so easy for the likes of Risdon and Elrich, who were able to play forward in any manner that they wanted. Ask yourself, why were we the only team who looked like we were playing into the wind?

This isn't angst btw, just my observation and it comes as no surprise to me as this is a new team with a new coach who hasn't been able to sign the players he wants.

The solutions to the problems mentioned above all create other problems. It's a balancing act that Rudan can only really solve with better players

Without being disrespectful LG, the game is not too worried about tragics like you because you will continue to be a supporter whether or not there is a dance cam or some tosser mispronouncing names. They are trying to attract a new demographic to games and other sports have shown that supporters do like dance cams, kiss cams etc. I'm with you, they do nothing for me but we are dinosaurs who predominantly go to the game to watch the bloody game - youngsters think a little different to us.

you know the games up for professional football when the words demographic, kiss cam and dance cam come into. Dinosaur or not, the lunatics have taken over the asylum and a great sport is being sacrificed on the altar. 

you know the games up for professional football when the words demographic, kiss cam and dance cam come into. Dinosaur or not, the lunatics have taken over the asylum and a great sport is being sacrificed on the altar. 

I think you'll find he signed way as cover for Cacace if he gets injured. Given Doyle is now playing CB we needed an option in that space. I doubt it has anything to do with not trusting or having confidence in Cacace.