Barnet - Brief Synopsis

About how I saw it except I actually thought Gosling looked our best threat, needs to play as out and out winger for me though.
Monkhouse, not impressed one bit so far with him,

He said yes a striker to which we replied and a midfielder but it was more of an exchange of shouting across the car park than a proper conversation otherwise we could have asked him how we expect to sign this striker or anyone else if we can't compete with clubs who could only dream of the level of support we enjoy.

(Duplicated post fron gasheads.org)
Just got back myself (2am) and vowed not to go to another away game until things pick up (well apart from Forest Green because I've already got a ticket).

My take on the game from the above:
1. Agree terrible first half, tactically inept in my view. With White and Taylor leading a line, against 2 mobile 6'3" defenders, we played about 20-25 long punts straight up the middle. Every single one came back with interest. I accept that Puddy was thrown in at the last minute, but he and McCrystal were the worst offenders for this non sensical approach. Pre-season, we have been playing these balls to the wing (either deep or across the back), but we didn't play any balls wide to advanced positions - which was a big mistake in my view. Also need to say that Puddy was at fault for both goals - 1st one was an Akinde nutmeg, 2nd came from him parrying a shot, which looked to be going wide from my view, straight to the feet of the oncoming forward. However, we were also weak in the back line (McCrystal in particular lookig slow, nervous and error prone). Defending from the midfield in front of the defence was also pretty poor. We made Barnet in general and Akinde in prticular look good.

2. Second half picked up, particularly once Brunt came on. It does not make sense to me why he didn't start and he troubled their defenders much more - without really troubling their keeper (who looked comfortable all night). I have to say, Jamie White is disappointing so far, he had two chances and put both over the bar, but otherwise was pretty anonymous. We also improved with Parkes coming on at half time (although he made the odd mistake himself). What I couldn't understand was i) why Trottman was substituted and not McCrystal. Trottman performed OK, but McC continued to be edgy in 2nd half. Also (in my view) Gosling posed more of a threat than White and it should have been White off for Brunt and not Gosling.

3. I've seen far worse teams than this for Rovers, there is more energy than in many, but as stated, we still lack the cutting edge. Similarly, I think there is technical ability in many, but some glaring exceptions. I do worry about DC's tendency to chop and change (players, tactics, formation). I accept that you don't want to be predictable, but I sense he tinkers too much. I personally think we would have been better adopting the 3-5-2 that has given us width so far.

4. Agree that Lee Brown looked good and made a number of good breaks as the game wore on. What he lacked was the support of others around him - we do lack a tricky winger to torment the right back and Lee Brown'w ability to beat the man and put in a cross or shot is not enough. Monkhouse was OK in my view, without being spectacular. Sinclair was busy, but had much less impact on the game than previously. Mansell got caught in posession or gave the ball away far too often and put us on the back foot many times. Tom Lockyer was solid until Akinde elbowed him and put him out of the game. Leadbitter was good defensively and his pace prevented another Akinde goal when he chased back and got a last ditch block in. Finally, Matt Taylor looked better as the game went on - 1st half, he was simply asked to do the impossible in winning an arial battle against defenders 6" taller than him.

5. If we are going to persist with direct football, we need a bully up front (like Akinde played tonight). This is not Ryan Brunt, but Brunt could work with such a player as could Matt Taylor. I would bench Jamie White and we need to work out how to use him if he is going to play. If we are going to play 4 at the back, I would suggest Leadbitter at RB, and put Tom Lockyer in front of the defence to shore up a vulnerable area. On the basis of tonights showing, Trottman and Parkes should be in in front of McCrystal. We need a tricky winger as well in my opinion - i.e. not kill two birds with one stone by getting a

Great support (in numbers) for a Tuesday night (just under 800 I think), but patience is wearing very thin. On the basis of the last couple of seasons. the quantity of support has absolutely no bearing on the team - so I'm not sure how much more I'll bother with a 400 mile round trip.

Two other things to say.

Barnet looked robust and very well organised. They were working to a plan and anyone thinking Martin Allen would not be for us should think again. This guy is organised and knows how to get a team to perform at this level and above.

The Ref was shocking and it seemed to me as though he thought he would teach the big team a lesson. Two handballs in the penalty area missed (one a very good shout) and he allowed Akinde far too much leeway (I am not sure how objective my view on the ref is, bearing in mind how angry I am).

McChrystal was the main culprit for hoofball last season. Playing 352 means that the centre half has at least two options to pass to. Plus the full backs can push on and squeeze the opposition. Why on earth did he change it?

Let's hope Mildenhall is back on Saturday.