BOROCHAT

Clueless

By Stevenage fanToday 21:00Today at 21:00:16

Views: 284

WTF was that ?

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Clueless

By Copes (CDawg)Today 21:15Today at 21:15:28In response to CluelessTop of thread

Views: 212

Ummm in case you didn’t notice we’re 2nd,

So you aren’t allowed to be critical or concerned about our recent performances.

reply to this article | return to the front page

3 people

Re: Clueless

By Pete (PeteH)Today 21:17Today at 21:17:44In response to Re: CluelessTop of thread

Views: 204

I mean, the stats suggest we had lots of shots on goal.

The trouble was that, for a long time, the only one on target was the goal – and even that was down to dire keeping.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Clueless

By Balders (BALDOCKBORO)Today 21:41Today at 21:41:46In response to Re: CluelessTop of thread

Views: 111

We never troubled the keeper, really poor in and around the box. (Howler for Pidge's goal aside)

Dominated possession comfortably and completed 3 times the passes Walsall did, but it was all so bloody predictable and slow in the build up.

Spin it across the back, get it out to the flanks, wait till they've got their backline sorted and we are outnumbered 4 to 1 in rhe box, then pop a cross in.

Sweep up and repeat.

Goode at fault for the goal as much as, if not more rhan TAH, Charlie should have taken charge and got rid.

Edited by BALDOCKBORO at 21:42:22 on 2nd December 2025

reply to this article | return to the front page

2 people

Re: Clueless

By SFCfoxToday 21:44Today at 21:44:12In response to Re: CluelessTop of thread

Views: 106

I'm glad Goode made an error for once. He's been different gravy for the first 4 months of the season.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Clueless

By Balders (BALDOCKBORO)Today 22:01Today at 22:01:51In response to Re: CluelessTop of thread

Views: 43

He has, ever present and usually so calm and dependable.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Clueless

By SevToday 21:22Today at 21:22:35In response to Re: CluelessTop of thread

Views: 173

A step in the right direction 😀

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Clueless

By SevToday 21:03Today at 21:03:14In response to CluelessTop of thread

Views: 261

A team of players that looked like they've never played together, which to be fair, they probably haven't. Defensively woeful. Clinically woeful.

Oh well, bring back the first team for the big game up next!

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Clueless

By RockyBottomToday 21:17Today at 21:17:59In response to Re: CluelessTop of thread

Views: 201

Half of that team were the first team....

Against a Walsall second XI, including youngsters making competitive debuts and two ageing forwards.

Overall a shit night in what should have been a great opportunity to progress.

reply to this article | return to the front page

1 person

Re: Clueless

By SevToday 21:24Today at 21:24:06In response to Re: CluelessTop of thread

Views: 169

Were they? Pidge and Goode.

Marschall, Butler, Wildin, White, Houghton, Kemp, Reid and possibly Roberts are more often than not the first team.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Clueless

By RockyBottomToday 21:27Today at 21:27:31In response to Re: CluelessTop of thread

Views: 160

Freestone has started most games recently, Campbell must have played more than not, he seems to absolutely love Lubala for some reason.

reply to this article | return to the front page

1 person