BOROCHAT
Newest article: Re: Bye bye sweeney gone to AFC Wimbledon by ChudsToday 08:28Today at 08:28:43view thread
Oldest article: Phillips Rumour by HITCHIN CALLING8/2 13:30Sun Feb 8 13:30:37 2026view thread
Next thread: Boreham Wood by bcb199410/5 18:28Sun May 10 18:28:33 2026view thread
Bollocks!
Views: 1868
Absolute f*ck up at the back.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 1158
Oddly enough I think that aberration at the end might just free them up a bit in the 2nd leg…
reply to this article | return to the front page
3 people
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 1235
Just heard Revs post match chat.Actually think TBF sums it up well as others on here here have alluded to.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 1203
Is Campbell out for the season?
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 1161
Was touch and go for today apparently, might as well put on bench at least ,
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 1129
If Phillips looks as burnt out as today, I'd certainly consider changing the side.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 904
It’s all about mentality now bro
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 1504
Hate to criticise this team after the season we’ve had. Couple of moments stood out for the wrong reasons, otherwise it was a pretty assured Boro performance.
As I said below, Phillips didn’t need to play backwards there. Put Pidge in a no win position. The mix up after was avoidable but so was the entire scenario that led to it.
Kemp needed to do much better with that break. Seemed to play for the penalty. Pass the ball, take a shot. No excuses there for being greedy and holding on to the ball for too long. These are huge moments in the context of the tie. Can get away with it across a league campaign, could be very significant over the course of two legs.
Breakspear has been worse but still wanted to be the main character.
Otherwise they were in no way dominant. We did what we do and the goal will hopefully galvanise rather than demoralise. Their keeper is suspect and they’ve got a centre forward at centre back, we perhaps didn’t make the most of that but we’ve got another 90 minutes to turn things around. Up the Boro!
reply to this article | return to the front page
4 people
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 1563
Can someone tell me what happened? I couldn’t see very well from the ET. Piergianni lost the ball then their no. 20 running through fell over. What happened after that?
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 1534
Our players seemed to stop, maybe expecting a whistle. Marschall could have cleaned it out.
Their player just got a poke on it and it rolled in almost in slow motion.
reply to this article | return to the front page
1 person
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 1516
Thanks. I couldn’t see their player coming in. Seems like our players didn’t either!
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 1561
I’d say Pidge can make up for it on Wednesday but that would require at least 1 (one) singular decent delivery from Harvey unfortunately.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 962
The one Patterson took led to a good chance too - White's distribution was pretty poor today, I'd be tempted to let Kemp or Phoenix take them but not sure the 2nd leg of a play off semi is the best time to change things...
reply to this article | return to the front page
1 person
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 1338
Phillips threw him under the bus. Didn’t need to turn around and play back towards our own goal there.
These things happen. It’s a gut punch but it’s only half time.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 1068
Phillips fucked up, then Pidge, then Goode and Pattenden both had chances to hook it and didn't, then Marschall perhaps should have done better to. An absolutely colossal fuck up, with a few seconds to go.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 948
Marschall absolutely HAD to do better.
Dive on the ball, use your body, claim the situation, don't tentatively try to casually pick the ball up FFS.
We pride ourselves on being so strong defensively but that was absolutely calamitous by half the side. Such a disappointing end.
But we only need one goal up there on Wednesday. It isn't over. And even if we lose 5-0 I will be up there at FT on Wednesday applauding and thanking the whole bunch of them for a great season, the best we have ever had in our history in many respects.
reply to this article | return to the front page
6 people
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 873
I don't think there were any particularly poor individual performances but it wasn't a good game and we showed no intent to impose ourselves on the game.
I didn't boo personally but I wasn't happy with the way we approached the game so although I'm not defending those that did, I understand the frustration.
We should be very familiar and aware of what is likely to be served up with this team, it isn't going to be slick, flowing possession based football. Those that don't come regularly certainly wouldn't have been enamoured with the style of football on show (I know a few standing near me certainly were not).
Some may have seen today as an opportunity to assert ourselves on the tie with home advantage, but I honestly don't think Revs takes that into account and would have/will set up exactly the same in the away leg regardless of today's result. We very much look to keep the game tight and win by the odd goal. That isn't going to change now, and nor should it if that is the philosophy that has been drummed into the squad all season, and in fact since Revs first took over
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 860
Pretty good all round, but I thought Matt Phillips was awful. I actually like him as a player but looks like the game time has caught up with him. Badly needed so other credible forward option to help take the strain.
I thought we approached the game correctly and even thought the subs were pretty much right, just unlucky poor game management by the players let us down at the end.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 640
He does a lot of unsexy stuff that aren't necessarily a strikers job e.g. there were a couple of times where he filled in a RB when Pattenden pressed further up and found himself out of position.
Our defence is only as good as it is because everyone is committed to sacrificing themselves.
Pidge has said it numerous times when congratulated on their defensive record - we defend from the front. This is likely why we also struggle to create because largely we sit deep and attack through turning the ball over
reply to this article | return to the front page
1 person
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 552
Like I said, I like him but I doubt he was 100% match fit having not played regularly for Oxford, then he was thrown into back to back games without a break. Just looks a bit jaded to me.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 535
Yep.
But despite that he still works his arse off. You simply cannot fault his commitment, and this from a guy only on loan.
I was saying yesterday that Reid could massively improve his game if he learnt from Phillips, who is quite clearly a superior footballer. If we can secure him for next season, with some more pacey options around him, we will go well.
reply to this article | return to the front page
4 people
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 499
Agree on that 1yr deal perhaps with options , which he might welcome given age.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 477
Did Oxford not release him and we signed him as unattached?
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 464
Pretty sure that's the only way we could given when it was.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 844
The very same people we won't see again throughout next season until another big game comes along.
Don't support us when we need it, just come along and jump on the bandwagon when it suits them.
Fuck them.
reply to this article | return to the front page
1 person
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 734
That's easy to say, and I much prefer the matchday experience when the ground isn't full of those types as well. However, the money and widespread interest has to be good for the club. There is obviously room for organic growth in respect of attendances but I agree that you'd rather that was incremental and consistent rather than the odd sell out because of short term success.
Unfortunately, I think a lot of people expect to be entertained to the value of their ticket and want to feel like they've got their money's worth for a day at the football. We can't just bemoan these people and be glad that they only show up for the big games, they need to feel welcome and taught to embrace what it means to support a team rather than just watch the game.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 865
Watching it back, not sure why Goode didn't slide in and take him out. Even if it risked a red.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 876
Unbelievably heard some boos at full time. Some of our fans are so fickle.
reply to this article | return to the front page
1 person
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 886
I think/hope they were aimed at the ref, rather than our players. He was shit, as he always is, but entirely not on him for that result today.
If anybody booed our players then quite frankly they are a cunt.
Edited by Chuds at 20:04:49 on 9th May 2026
reply to this article | return to the front page
3 people
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 849
I didn't think he was as bad today. Still loved himself, but ok.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 721
He was fine. I didn't swear at the telly at all.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 695
Not even after their goal? 😉
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 712
No. I turned it off. Silent.
Went in the kitchen, poured wine and went and sat in the garden.
Then went to Le Bar, and drank wine.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 663
Yeah, to be fair we just sat there in disbelief, head in hands kinda moment.
Edited by RockyBottom at 00:32:34 on 10th May 2026
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 824
Let them (particularly their #2) get away with cynically stopping our breaks time and again first half without doing anything about it (beyond a mere FK in a non-threatening position), but as I said, wasn't why we lost, and I get not wanting to book people in a big playoff match.
He is a shit referee, always has been, always will be, but was okay today, and wasn't to blame for the result.
reply to this article | return to the front page
1 person
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 863
Not sure why they would be towards the ref as he didn't make any glaringly obvious mistakes or have any big decisions to make?
Think it was probably out of shock and booing the result rather than the team, not knowing how to process what had just happened.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 857
Because he was getting a lot of stick during the game, so I assumed was aimed at him, and partly because in my brain I cannot possibly comprehend anybody booing our players after the season they have had.
But maybe they did. And if they did, I hope they got run over on the way home.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 345
Certainly feeling around me in the middle of the East was frustration at the ref and disbelief at how we had lost that, rather than at the players specifically
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 838
Heard one moron shout out “you’re a bunch of bottlers.” The mind boggles.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 835
Probably gets bullied at work so shouting at footballers makes him feel good
reply to this article | return to the front page
2 people
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 904
I was thinking afterwards if Wildin was playing I don't think that happens. He's always across on things like that to clear.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 1003
Yep. Not trying to pile on Dan by any means but his unforced error was the first in the sequence and therefore the cause of that period of play.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 1268
We need to go up two gears from today and we can do it. But Stockport are a good side and if they play as well as they did in the second half we won't get a look in.
reply to this article | return to the front page
2 people
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 1007
I wouldn't say they are a good side they only played well second half and got a gifted goal. They had a lot of ball second half but no end product up front.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 990
They were the away side, happy to let it drift for an hour and then ask questions. We only had one quality opportunity which was also gifted to us. Leaving with a 0-0 would've suited them well.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 981
They’re a good outfit but it took an error on our part for them to break us down. They weren’t the better team in that game (neither were we).
Calls for us to go gung ho on Wednesday because we have nothing to lose are going to be very disappointed. We can beat them playing our football. Doesn’t mean we will beat them, but as always when people call for the playbook to be ripped up it won’t be and rightly so. It’s what got us here, it’s what may get us to Wembley and beyond.
reply to this article | return to the front page
2 people
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 809
I said at FT that they were definitely the better/most dangerous looking side, who dominated the second half and played some good stuff, yet we had the better chances. Kemp HAS to get his shot away, Pidge had two great chances with his head. 0-0 would have been fair.
But there is no reason for us to go mad on Wednesday. It is good we cannot go up there and just try to sit on a lead, but equally no reason to go crazy. We only need to win 1-0 to take it to ET/pens, so more of the same in staying tight and restricting them, but need to create more and take what we do create.
reply to this article | return to the front page
2 people
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 838
Disagree, the away game at Stockport earlier in the season was some of the best football we've played and really took the game to them. I'd like to see more of the same rather than fade out losing by 1 or 2 goals.
reply to this article | return to the front page
3 people
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 824
It’s not fading out. It’s sticking to our principles. Doing what we’re good at. I’d rather get to 75-80 minutes on Wednesday still in the tie and then perhaps go all out than turn up, play an open game and be out of it by the 20th minute.
Edited by Tucks at 20:11:44 on 9th May 2026
reply to this article | return to the front page
1 person
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 954
Stockport are a good team but we have beaten them twice this season. That sloppy goal we conceded is not like us at all. In a way, the pressure is off us and on them as anything now for us will be a bonus.
In my book, the pressure is definitely all on them not to mess up.
So, using an old cliche "we go again" on Wednesday.
It's not over yet lads and ladies...bring it on!!
reply to this article | return to the front page
3 people
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 883
The Stockport team we beat was quite a bit different to the team they currently have.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 861
Not too different. Oli Norwood played against us in the same fixture earlier this year.
If anything, the only big change is them having a striker as a centre back, who we have to be targetting a lot more
reply to this article | return to the front page
1 person
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 835
But we need to target him the right way. We made it easy for him today just pumping balls to his head. I'd like to see Kemp more central, running at him.
reply to this article | return to the front page
2 people
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 887
I'm conflicted because I do think psychologically the pressure is off us. But practically it says 0-1 in the books.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 1184
Kind of have nothing to lose now. Stockport might be more nervous than us, be interesting to see how they approach the game. Will they try to kill the tie off early on or play safe?
We kept some of their better players quiet today like Barry. Though Norwood who I think was missing when we played them in the league was very good. If they themselves play better than today, which I think they certainly can, then it's a tall order.
But we do have some good footballers and if they can get in the game, there's still a chance. Just need to lose the nerves, not worry and play freely. Might see a few changes to the starting lineup or formation.
reply to this article | return to the front page
1 person
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 973
Playing freely is what I've been asking for a lot this season. I understand wanting to set up with a large focus on not conceding, but I don't believe it suits the group as a whole and it does not play to the strengths of some of our better players. (It also wasn't good viewing for a playoff game and possibly affected the atmosphere).
For instance, to create one clear chance today and expect Kemp to take it is unrealistic. Yes, his decision making was poor (he is a L2 player after all) - he hesitated, perhaps looking for a penalty as some have suggested - but it's a numbers game. The more you create the more you score. Hitting the back of the net is a habit.
I don't believe this tie is over. The goal changes very little. We were going to have to score and win up there if it had stayed 0-0. I fully expect Revs to keep it tight again for the large majority and hope to nick a goal. Will of course need a 2nd to avoid penalties but taking the lead might alter Stockport's approach, or they might just try to blow us away (which would usually be the kind of tactic that we would take advantage of, albeit they are a very good side capable of doing just that).
reply to this article | return to the front page
1 person
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 547
Nice sly dig at Kemp! Miaauuuw! Our fucking fans
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 541
Think Kemp has shown he’s not a League Two player with his performances since he came back here. A couple of improvements (which he is capable of) and he can be a top League One player. For me his decision making could improve slightly and when he’s on the right he needs to stay on the right more, only moving inside at the right moments. He’s better as a number 10 and one of our best technical players, especially when things get congested.
I don’t know if Matt Phillips’ legs are up to it with all the football he’s had to play after coming in cold but Kemp as the 10 and Matt on the right is something I’d be interested in us exploring. Wootton may be less comfortable dealing with Kemp’s trickery running at him as opposed to us feeding in to Matt and Jamie to try and hold up. A small change but could pay dividends.
reply to this article | return to the front page
2 people
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 522
Play Sweeney up top from the start.
A centre back as a forward, playing against a forward as a centre back.
It'l bamboozle the fuck out of them
reply to this article | return to the front page
2 people
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 527
Kemp - watch his balance. The only proper player we have in that sense. He was poor for a couple of months mid season, but what a player.
reply to this article | return to the front page
4 people
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 1049
I don't think we can play the same formation and get what we need. But I don't have a better idea.
reply to this article | return to the front page
1 person
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 983
Perhaps pack the midfield, add Dan Phillips and drop Matt. Start Reid up top with Kemp off him.
Or player with two wingers either side of Reid.
There are options, but it's risky.
We have nothing to lose now so we might as well go for it.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 480
I think that might have been the play in the 1st leg. I really don't understand starting Kemp and White when there is going to be a battle in midfield.
I realise you need an outlet, but we were being pinned back yesterday and lost any ability to get and keep the ball up the pitch once the subs were made.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 416
Harvey covers a bit of ground and likes a tackle even if he's not physically the biggest or strongest.
And we had Louis there too.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 557
"Play with two wingers either side of Reid"
Wasn't a fan of 433 when we have played it before.
I think we stick with what got us here, what the players appear most comfortable with now. Keep it tight.
And thwn move 10-15 yards higher up the pitch after half time because they will naturally drop back behind the ball, human nature when defending a lead in a big game.
reply to this article | return to the front page
1 person
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 565
I think its a real shame Campbell isn’t there at the moment as I see him as a major contributor to the attacking line-up. If he started with Phoenix, as they had done earlier in the season, I’d be happy to try it.
reply to this article | return to the front page
2 people
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 549
Yes, him and Freestone are big misses at the moment. And Wildin being out for a period too was a big loss to the squad. Three big players.
Thinking of the potential squad next year, even if we lose a few we have a good base to start rebuilding from.
reply to this article | return to the front page
3 people
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 882
I was thinking with Luther back available an opportunity to go 3 CBs. Pattenden and Early pushed further forward.
Phillips and White sitting with Kemp in front and then two up top.
reply to this article | return to the front page
1 person
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 825
Probably suits the available players more than my thoughts to revert back to the 4-2-3-1 formation. I don't particularly like this system, but I don't think we've tried it with M. Phillips as the lone striker. I don't think we will or be able to play our most natural wingers in Chem and Phoenix so Reid and Roberts will work just fine, but my hope would be using Phillips as the focal point and getting players around him, allowing Kemp to find pockets of space and float a bit more. We lost any ability to hold the ball up at the top of the pitch when Phillips went off today. He might not be a little bit out of form, minus the goal at Doncaster, but what he offers in retaining the ball and just outright quality with the ball at his feet far exceeds Reid's abilities in that position. I like Reid getting into those inside channels or driving from wide/deep
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 882
Jasper and Sax were left out to dry too much today and Sax would've got mugged more than once if he wasn't absolutely rock.
reply to this article | return to the front page
1 person
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 1492
That's the absolute worse goal we've given away all season. 4 of them and no one deals with it.
What a sickener.
Terrible way to lose such an important game.
If Stockport had scored a normal goal I couldn't have begrudged it too much as they looked a bit better than us but to give it away in the last minute like that. Unbelievable.
Have to go there and win now then!
reply to this article | return to the front page
6 people
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 1682
I feel like we haven’t conceded a goal this stupid since playing in the conference.
Now Stockport can stick 11 behind the ball on Wednesday night. Fun times.
reply to this article | return to the front page
1 person
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 974
Josh Mcquiod own goal Colchester away in 2016/2017 when we bottled playoffs is right up there
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 1469
We only need one. I’m still hopeful. I thought we played quite well today against a very good team. Just a complete lapse of concentration right at the end
reply to this article | return to the front page
2 people
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 1432
They enjoyed more possession but threatened very little. Defences dominated.
Our subs (the exact 3 I wanted) didn't make an impact this time.
We only have to score 1
We've done that a lot this season.
And keep yet another clean sheet.
Penalties anyone?
reply to this article | return to the front page
2 people
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 1474
That's not how Stockport play.
But I can't see us scoring more than them there.
So, so annoying
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 1720
If the Stockport players wanted a Stevenage shirt so badly why don't they just go to the shop rather than trying to rip them off the players?
Edited by fragiletension at 17:07:02 on 9th May 2026
reply to this article | return to the front page
1 person
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 1480
OH DEAR, OH DEAR, OH DEAR, poetic justice that, should not have been in the play offs in the first place, now lets hope the other hatters can finish the job at their place 🙂
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 890
Why bother? Why go to the effort of registering on a Stevenage fan site just to make such a stupid comment? Have you REALLY nothing better to do?
Funny how Luton fans seem to think the season only counts for the last game rather than 46! Funny how Luton fans conveniently ignore the appalling decision to award them a penalty - a worse decision than awarding our goal. Funny how Luton fans fail to mention that the penalty taker touched the ball twice!
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 966
Ffs what a knob you are. All those millions and you can’t get in the playoffs!!! Nick and Eric must be fuming of what you must have become.
Any news on your new ground 5 years after you should have been there???
Pleaty must still have his suit ready!!!
Anyway see you next season
reply to this article | return to the front page
1 person
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 542
Is Nick Owen still alive??
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 1025
Fuck off luton shit still crying cos your still in.league 1
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 1283
Pot Noodle and a wank this afternoon was it?
reply to this article | return to the front page
2 people
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 570
Sounds like a good afternoon, I didn’t even get the Pot Noodle.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 1301
Imagine being in the Premier League two years ago and not being able to make the League One play-offs having had forty six games in which to do it with all that parachute payment money.
reply to this article | return to the front page
5 people
Re: Bollocks!
Views: 1424
We're just enjoying the ride, pissing off a lot of teams on the way.
Roll on Wednesday
reply to this article | return to the front page
1 person
Previous thread: Today by Chuds9/5 20:45Sat May 9 20:45:00 2026view thread