+++ 03/07/20 L1 Play Off Semi Final: Leg 1 - Pompey v OUFC+++

[PottersRightBoot]

The coverage was fair. But it was just so hackneyed and mediocre. And patronising.

 

[tonyw]

So in the US, on ESPN+, our commentary/pundit team consisted of one bloke who had to basically talk to himself for the entire 90 minutes.

Wasn't particularly insightful, but he did come armed with a massive number of random facts about the season past. Frankly, it was a bit like listening to Statto doing the commentary (90s pop culture reference there).....although I don't think it was actually him.

Still, sounds like we were better off than you guys!


Matty Taylor looked like a man who hadn't trained for weeks, and Burgess is an excellent League One CB. Had him in his pocket.

Buuuut, I'm not really sure at this stage that Mackie or Agyei would reliably be able to offer much more. One's still a bit green, and the other is obviously past it.
At least with Taylor on the pitch, you know that if he does find some space once in the game and/or gets a good bounce then there's a strong chance of him putting it away.

 

[RyanioBirdio]

I’d use Mackie to clode the game out.

He gives away needless fouls and lets the opposition punt the ball into the box in that scenario - I’ve seen it happen a good few times this season already. It’s a myth that he’s this canny hold up merchant who keeps the ball safe up the pitch and runs down the clock. He’s actually far more prone to running around and cropping defenders. If Portsmouth are in need of a late goal you do not want him kicking people in the centre circle and inviting their giants into the box for a long ball. Also, in this scenario where extra time can happen rather than it merely being a draw if an equaliser goes in, you do not want to end up stuck with him out there.

If you need a goal he might ruffle feathers and make something happen by getting in their faces. Maybe. But it’s such a myth and a total false economy that he’s a wily old campaigner who shuts down a match.

 

[Grumpy Git]

What got me watching the game last night was Pompey this, Pompey that, as if it was a divine right that they were going to win the lot. Certainly very little about Little Old Oxford who were there just to make the numbers up. Lets hope we can turn them over on Monday then win the final.

I said to my son prior to the game exactly the same. Just because they were in the Prem a few years ago commentator’s seem to think they will win before a ball is kicked. The table said differently!

 

[beyondthefourth]

People having a go at Taylor's lack of match sharpness seem to forget he was only a couple of inches away from getting on the end of a dangerous cross in the first half. He still has the necessary tools, I don't think he's that far away from making the required impact in the second leg. Issue was more that we weren't creating enough for him to feed off of.

 

[Grumpy Git]

They are the biggest team in the league, you know? Too big to be playing in this league. Always the same with Sky, BBC are often worse. Anyone else notice the opening sequence video for the play off games? Oxford are just about featured as a micro second of other teams. Embarrassing for whoever put it together that one of the 4 teams featured is barely acknowledged. Then again, we are only little old Oxford City. . . . . .

We

A lot of confidence that we'll breeze past Wycombe in the final if we make it there. They just won away to Fleetwood 4-1 and missed a penalty as well. Not sure we've ever got close to doing that. Respect due.

Fleetwood had a goalie who screwed up big time. Two goals he flapped at, two he failed to fall on. Having a player sent off after 33 minutes killed the game off, then Madden dived and opened his gob on 84 minutes and deservedly Went.

 

[Pompeyyellows]

They are the biggest team in the league, you know? Too big to be playing in this league. Always the same with Sky, BBC are often worse. Anyone else notice the opening sequence video for the play off games? Oxford are just about featured as a micro second of other teams. Embarrassing for whoever put it together that one of the 4 teams featured is barely acknowledged. Then again, we are only little old Oxford City. . . . . .

Your not wrong there manor

 

[battman]

Did you see the game? It was clown football.

Our game was like a chess match, whilst the Wycombe Fleetwood one was Hungry Hungry Hippos. Who knows which will come out on top, but whoever wins out of us and Pompey will go into the final as favourites.

 

[Scotchegg]

People having a go at Taylor's lack of match sharpness seem to forget he was only a couple of inches away from getting on the end of a dangerous cross in the first half. He still has the necessary tools, I don't think he's that far away from making the required impact in the second leg. Issue was more that we weren't creating enough for him to feed off of.

I think Taylor and Henry will be much sharper with a game under their belt. We didn't play with much fluidity as a team so I would hope that we'll be back on our game on Monday.

 

[Yellows1]

Although it's hard to judge Woodburn too much as neither he, Henry or Taylor made any real contribution, and even Brannagan struggled to get on the ball and control the game.

But if we start with Sykes instead of Woodburn, and play him down the right we can then free Henry up into the number 10 role where he can be so effective. Along with Browne we should then have more pace on both flanks, and Sykes is also better at dropping back to help out Long to counter their sulky little child on the left!!

I also wonder if Mackie may start instead of Taylor? Taylor was very quiet and he's playing up against 2 big lumps. Maybe get Mackie dragging them around and pissing them off for 45 minutes, before Matty comes on to take the glory. (I accept not everyone will agree, just putting it out as an option!!!)

Couldn’t agree more, I thought the same, start Mackie, have Taylor coming off the bench and Brown, it could well pay off

 

[RgYellows]

He gives away needless fouls and lets the opposition punt the ball into the box in that scenario - I’ve seen it happen a good few times this season already. It’s a myth that he’s this canny hold up merchant who keeps the ball safe up the pitch and runs down the clock. He’s actually far more prone to running around and cropping defenders. If Portsmouth are in need of a late goal you do not want him kicking people in the centre circle and inviting their giants into the box for a long ball. Also, in this scenario where extra time can happen rather than it merely being a draw if an equaliser goes in, you do not want to end up stuck with him out there.

If you need a goal he might ruffle feathers and make something happen by getting in their faces. Maybe. But it’s such a myth and a total false economy that he’s a wily old campaigner who shuts down a match.

I agree with the first paragraph. I do not see Mackie holding the ball up effectively and bringing others into play. He is willing to close people down, which supporters love to see, but he is too slow for this to be effective. Defenders have time to control and pass the ball, they are not hurried into mistakes. He also chases lost causes, which drag him out of position. The lack of any outlet often leads the rest of the team to drop deeper, whilst we lose any goalscoring threat up front.

Some quick (and basic) number crunching paints a poor picture.

I have Mackie playing 44% of the total minutes in the league, League Cup and FA Cup this season.
With Mackie on the pitch, we have scored 29 goals and conceded 26.
Without him, we have scored 51 and conceded 22.

In terms of bringing others into play, I have us scoring every 68 minutes with Mackie on the pitch, every 49 minutes without. I see little support for the claim.

We concede every 76 minutes, compared to every 113 without. This supports the point about a lack of hold-up play.

He has scored as many goals this season as Sam Long. Taylor might have had little influence on Friday, but I trust him far more to find a yard of space and take a chance (Ipswich Away). I struggle with any argument to have him leading the line and would start Taylor, Agyei or Browne in the role first.

 

[RgYellows]

With Long - Curtis, one point to mention is that the most dangerous moments came when Pompey worked the ball from right to left. Ruffels had stepped up and Long had tucked in, giving Curtis space. I think @Scotchegg suggested Sykes at RM to drop back and leave Henry in a more central role. I like the idea, as I think one of the main dangers is a penalty or sending off coming from Curtis gettng up to speed and falling over.

Being more conservative with both full backs would avoid a lot of these problems, but is probably only on the cards with Robinson if we take a lead. The other option is Gorrin tracking that space, the booking makes that more difficult.

One cheerful lesson from the League Two play offs is that there is absolutely everything still to play for, and we should not be at all disheartened if Portsmouth had the better of the first leg.

Final point on Wycombe. Lets not underestimate how close they are to the Championship. With a lack of fitness, match practice and team cohesion, teams with a presence at set pieces (and an ability to win them) have been handed a big advantage. Wycombe can slow the game down and use that to their advantage. They might also get to rotate or rest in the closing stages on Monday. If either us or Portsmouth take them lightly, we will lose.

 

[DavidB]

I think Browne should play there. He’s definitely our biggest threat wherever He plays. We could bring Taylor on later and then put Him out wide

 

[RgYellows]

Browne is my third choice because we have no one that can play on the wing like he does. Henry and Sykes/Woodburn/Forde lacks pace.

I also like Taylor, but only as a striker. Having Browne, Henry and Sykes behind Taylor gives us plenty of goals, some pace, and some hard running too.

If Taylor can't play, it is a gamble to put Agyei in, but one I'd take. That said, Browne is clearly a threat as a striker and the Pompey CB would not like to face him.

 

[Shosho]

I would be starting Browne up front before Mackie.

could then move Woodburn to his more influential left...Ruffels would have to be on it though

 

[oxfordfan1]

I agree with the first paragraph. I do not see Mackie holding the ball up effectively and bringing others into play. He is willing to close people down, which supporters love to see, but he is too slow for this to be effective. Defenders have time to control and pass the ball, they are not hurried into mistakes. He also chases lost causes, which drag him out of position. The lack of any outlet often leads the rest of the team to drop deeper, whilst we lose any goalscoring threat up front.

Some quick (and basic) number crunching paints a poor picture.

I have Mackie playing 44% of the total minutes in the league, League Cup and FA Cup this season.
With Mackie on the pitch, we have scored 29 goals and conceded 26.
Without him, we have scored 51 and conceded 22.

In terms of bringing others into play, I have us scoring every 68 minutes with Mackie on the pitch, every 49 minutes without. I see little support for the claim.

We concede every 76 minutes, compared to every 113 without. This supports the point about a lack of hold-up play.

He has scored as many goals this season as Sam Long. Taylor might have had little influence on Friday, but I trust him far more to find a yard of space and take a chance (Ipswich Away). I struggle with any argument to have him leading the line and would start Taylor, Agyei or Browne in the role first.

He's crap on a par with obika

 

[christenedinjericho]

In regards to Wycombe and just how close they are to having one chair leg in the Championship...and in remembering a little while back when we had a bigger than half proportion of our fans saying noooo we can't go up - my how taste and outcomes change. If that lot get up and we don't - you original noooo's to the left had better get used to the sh*te we'll receive. Think about it.

So, Karl on behalf of the yes's please get our boy's over that line on Monday and then let the team do the talking at Wembley to give the majority of our 'younger' fans (probably aged between 1-40 to remember our last foray) an experience of (hopefully) visiting and taking in some of the UK's fantastic old and new stadiums as this chance may not come around again too soon.

And for my fellow over 40 pluses and that's not just the trouser size - I now believe most of those waist size beauties would fancy a taste of Loftus Road as well.

Coyy's.

 

[Bath Yellow]

Whether its us which we hope, or Pompey make it to the final will be in for a hard game. Watched some of the other game. Two pub teams playing Sunday league football.

 

[ttg17]

I agree with the first paragraph. I do not see Mackie holding the ball up effectively and bringing others into play. He is willing to close people down, which supporters love to see, but he is too slow for this to be effective. Defenders have time to control and pass the ball, they are not hurried into mistakes. He also chases lost causes, which drag him out of position. The lack of any outlet often leads the rest of the team to drop deeper, whilst we lose any goalscoring threat up front.

Some quick (and basic) number crunching paints a poor picture.

I have Mackie playing 44% of the total minutes in the league, League Cup and FA Cup this season.
With Mackie on the pitch, we have scored 29 goals and conceded 26.
Without him, we have scored 51 and conceded 22.

In terms of bringing others into play, I have us scoring every 68 minutes with Mackie on the pitch, every 49 minutes without. I see little support for the claim.

We concede every 76 minutes, compared to every 113 without. This supports the point about a lack of hold-up play.

He has scored as many goals this season as Sam Long. Taylor might have had little influence on Friday, but I trust him far more to find a yard of space and take a chance (Ipswich Away). I struggle with any argument to have him leading the line and would start Taylor, Agyei or Browne in the role first.

Really good post. The numbers don't lie.

 

[m]

Our game was like a chess match, whilst the Wycombe Fleetwood one was Hungry Hungry Hippos. Who knows which will come out on top, but whoever wins out of us and Pompey will go into the final as favourites.

Is this is why - if we progress - we can't take Wycombe lightly.

You may rather choose to play chess, but sometimes it just has to be Hungry Hippos.

?

 

[m]

I agree with the first paragraph. I do not see Mackie holding the ball up effectively and bringing others into play. He is willing to close people down, which supporters love to see, but he is too slow for this to be effective. Defenders have time to control and pass the ball, they are not hurried into mistakes. He also chases lost causes, which drag him out of position. The lack of any outlet often leads the rest of the team to drop deeper, whilst we lose any goalscoring threat up front.

Some quick (and basic) number crunching paints a poor picture.

I have Mackie playing 44% of the total minutes in the league, League Cup and FA Cup this season.
With Mackie on the pitch, we have scored 29 goals and conceded 26.
Without him, we have scored 51 and conceded 22.

In terms of bringing others into play, I have us scoring every 68 minutes with Mackie on the pitch, every 49 minutes without. I see little support for the claim.

We concede every 76 minutes, compared to every 113 without. This supports the point about a lack of hold-up play.

Interesting, and there's something in it, but a little simplistic.

The majority of the time will see Mackie subbed on when we are already not in the ascendancy.

Some chicken and egg to consider.

 

[OUFCwaffle]

what you on about?? .....you kneeling leftie

Racism has nothing to do with political opinion. If you don't understand that then you are part of the problem.

They are kneeling to ensure that people keep on talking about it and keep calling out people like you on your boll-ocks.

You are allowed to be a conservative voter and enjoy capitalism and be strongly against racial discrimination.

What you are unintentionally saying by disagreeing with BLM is that black lives do not matter. And that people like Rob Hall, Malachi Napa, Shandon Baptiste, Damien Batt and more do not deserve equal opportunities in life purely based on the colour of their skin.

Mods feel free to move my comment as it is clearly unrelated to the subject but I would have felt guilty by not speaking out.

 

[unification]

Just a comment but I honestly feel the match threads have become too complex, it’s been over complicated, JUST SAYING......

Picking this up from earlier in the thread, I tend to agree that three threads for each match is a bit much in my view?

We appreciate the work you do to keep us reprobates in check, @Eaststandboy, but haven’t you given yourself an extra task to do by having to set these up every time and straight after the final whistle in the case of the post match chat?

 

[Isle of Wight Yellow]

Picking this up from earlier in the thread, I tend to agree that three threads for each match is a bit much in my view?

We appreciate the work you do to keep us reprobates in check, @Eaststandboy, but haven’t you given yourself an extra task to do by having to set these up every time and straight after the final whistle in the case of the post match chat?

Yeah it’s definitely much better, and cleaner, to have one match thread per game, started before the game, for buildup, match discussion, and then post match. It’s fun coming on here and reading the buildup, peoples predictions, and then the after game chat all in one thread, just clicking through it. Also three threads per game is going to make it super cluttered!

 

[Northstandboy]

Yeah it’s definitely much better, and cleaner, to have one match thread per game, started before the game, for buildup, match discussion, and then post match. It’s fun coming on here and reading the buildup, peoples predictions, and then the after game chat all in one thread, just clicking through it. Also three threads per game is going to make it super cluttered!

I often want to look at key moments from granted after to guage opinions but have to talk through 10+ pages to get to the match chats then go through the pages since kick off to find what I want.

Let's give it a try, is not hard at all, anything up to 5 mins before kick off is the build up, then the match thread, then anything after the game is post match. All linked and not much extra work.

Match build up threads started to pop up from some users in the last few months anyway and had post's. So the only change is a post match thread and some locking of threads.

 

[bazzer9461]

I would be starting Browne up front before Mackie.

could then move Woodburn to his more influential left...Ruffels would have to be on it though

Start Woodburn on the bench and start Sykes as Sykes has pace if they start Williams as well as Curtis then we will be worrying about their pace so let’s give them pace to worry about as well.

 

[RgYellows]

Interesting, and there's something in it, but a little simplistic.

The majority of the time will see Mackie subbed on when we are already not in the ascendancy.

Some chicken and egg to consider.

And I am always happy to.

I appreciate the point that it is simplistic (I have a job and some other hobbies after all. Okay, I have a job).

However, allow me to defend the worth of it. There are two main points I'd draw attention to, and any non-geek can look away now.

Firstly, if Mackie is subbed on when we are not winning, then that should mean our goals for/against without Mackie is worse. Teams that are 3-1 up and called Man City don't need to pile in and score more goals (and they didn't). Plus, the team without Mackie has taken a 3-1 hit in the very crude measure I used, which makes his record look better by comparison.

Secondly, I dispute the use of Mackie primarily to come on and change a game. At this point I'll add that I'm not Opta. I've checked these but they should be used for broad ideas rather than as an exact science.

Mackie has played 15 minutes or less (therefore probably bought on as a late sub) 12 times this year (I assumed a game ran for 96 minutes, to acknowledge that a player brought on in the 90th still has time to score). We have not scored in that time during any of these 12 games. Only twice have we been losing (Sunderland home, Peterborough away). In those two games, we scored none and went on to concede one more against Posh, so I would agree with the sentiment that he doesn't change a game, but he isn't asked to very often. He performs well enough in helping close out a game with an appearance in the final minutes but I have nothing to benchmark against.

I have him playing 60 minutes or more 21 times this season. That accounts for 85% of the time he has been on the pitch. In those minutes, our record is scored 28, conceded 24.

In the same games, I have 360 minutes without Mackie on the pitch. In that time, we have impressively scored 15 and conceded 1. This includes West Ham, where we were 1-0 up and went on to win 4-0. It includes Newcastle, where we were 2-0 down (and went on to lose 3-2). Millwall, where we were 2-0 down and drew 2-2. Bristol Rovers, where we were 1-0 up when Taylor got injured in the first half and lost 3-1.

This might support the idea that we are just far better without him on the pitch. But it certainly gives rise to the question of whether Mackie tires out a defence and Taylor/Agyei/anyone else reap the benefits.

But this is a really difficult area to unpick. The key games (for me) were West Ham, Millwall, Newcastle, Lincoln, and Hartlepool, which together account for 11-1 of the 15-1 differential. I think at this point, it's best for each individual to rely on what they saw with their eyes and gauge how much we benefited from these teams being tired out from having to deal with him for over an hour.

For me, the answer is - not much. We were chasing Newcastle and Millwall and had to attack. Three of the teams highlighted are in higher leagues, and really shouldn't be tired out by any lower league player.

If the plan is to use Mackie to tire out a team and take advantage in the closing minutes, that would only make sense to me in games where we can be sure of drawing by the time he comes off. Accepting a losing position on the basis we can turn it round at the end would be absurd. The only 60+ minute appearances I have us drawing when Mackie comes off are Accrington and Gills away. In both games, we failed to win.

In the games where Mackie plays less than 60 minutes, we have scored 36 and conceded 21 without him on the pitch. I think we are a very good team when we have a striker that can score goals, and should not take the risk of overthinking our game plan.

 

[werthersoriginal]

Racism has nothing to do with political opinion. If you don't understand that then you are part of the problem.

They are kneeling to ensure that people keep on talking about it and keep calling out people like you on your boll-ocks.

You are allowed to be a conservative voter and enjoy capitalism and be strongly against racial discrimination.

What you are unintentionally saying by disagreeing with BLM is that black lives do not matter. And that people like Rob Hall, Malachi Napa, Shandon Baptiste, Damien Batt and more do not deserve equal opportunities in life purely based on the colour of their skin.

Mods feel free to move my comment as it is clearly unrelated to the subject but I would have felt guilty by not speaking out.

I wouldn’t bother trying to reason with her ... she’s not the sharpest poster on here

 

[arthurturner]

And I am always happy to.

I appreciate the point that it is simplistic (I have a job and some other hobbies after all. Okay, I have a job).

However, allow me to defend the worth of it. There are two main points I'd draw attention to, and any non-geek can look away now.

Firstly, if Mackie is subbed on when we are not winning, then that should mean our goals for/against without Mackie is worse. Teams that are 3-1 up and called Man City don't need to pile in and score more goals (and they didn't). Plus, the team without Mackie has taken a 3-1 hit in the very crude measure I used, which makes his record look better by comparison.

Secondly, I dispute the use of Mackie primarily to come on and change a game. At this point I'll add that I'm not Opta. I've checked these but they should be used for broad ideas rather than as an exact science.

Mackie has played 15 minutes or less (therefore probably bought on as a late sub) 12 times this year (I assumed a game ran for 96 minutes, to acknowledge that a player brought on in the 90th still has time to score). We have not scored in that time during any of these 12 games. Only twice have we been losing (Sunderland home, Peterborough away). In those two games, we scored none and went on to concede one more against Posh, so I would agree with the sentiment that he doesn't change a game, but he isn't asked to very often. He performs well enough in helping close out a game with an appearance in the final minutes but I have nothing to benchmark against.

I have him playing 60 minutes or more 21 times this season. That accounts for 85% of the time he has been on the pitch. In those minutes, our record is scored 28, conceded 24.

In the same games, I have 360 minutes without Mackie on the pitch. In that time, we have impressively scored 15 and conceded 1. This includes West Ham, where we were 1-0 up and went on to win 4-0. It includes Newcastle, where we were 2-0 down (and went on to lose 3-2). Millwall, where we were 2-0 down and drew 2-2. Bristol Rovers, where we were 1-0 up when Taylor got injured in the first half and lost 3-1.

This might support the idea that we are just far better without him on the pitch. But it certainly gives rise to the question of whether Mackie tires out a defence and Taylor/Agyei/anyone else reap the benefits.

But this is a really difficult area to unpick. The key games (for me) were West Ham, Millwall, Newcastle, Lincoln, and Hartlepool, which together account for 11-1 of the 15-1 differential. I think at this point, it's best for each individual to rely on what they saw with their eyes and gauge how much we benefited from these teams being tired out from having to deal with him for over an hour.

For me, the answer is - not much. We were chasing Newcastle and Millwall and had to attack. Three of the teams highlighted are in higher leagues, and really shouldn't be tired out by any lower league player.

If the plan is to use Mackie to tire out a team and take advantage in the closing minutes, that would only make sense to me in games where we can be sure of drawing by the time he comes off. Accepting a losing position on the basis we can turn it round at the end would be absurd. The only 60+ minute appearances I have us drawing when Mackie comes off are Accrington and Gills away. In both games, we failed to win.

In the games where Mackie plays less than 60 minutes, we have scored 36 and conceded 21 without him on the pitch. I think we are a very good team when we have a striker that can score goals, and should not take the risk of overthinking our game plan.

Mackie is good for team spirit off the field. He gets on the pitch, usually in the closing minutes, to get paid and to perform his shithousery to see the game out.

 

[RgYellows]

Mackie is good for team spirit off the field. He gets on the pitch, usually in the closing minutes, to get paid and to perform his shithousery to see the game out.

Two issues I have here.

Firstly, Mackie plays too many minutes.

Second, the talk of a senior pro wage for team spirit makes me nervous. We lost £4m last year. According to our accounts, we owe more than £17m to various parties and we own less than £3m of assets. Our biggest revenue stream has fallen off a cliff. Mous plays a valuable role off the field, and on it too.