Crewe (Home) Match Thread (5 Viewers)

mark82

Super Moderator
I knew that's what you meant really ;)

I'm not saying he would've got there if he'd have dived, but it didn't end up in the top right hand corner..it was actually about halfway. I question his positioning, his ability and willingness to save it even if people think I'm wrong. Bottom line is, he's shit and was the only weak link last night again.

FFS. 3 games in and 2 clean sheets. Only Oldham and Doncaster in the entire division have conceded less.
 

skybluepm2

Well-Known Member
FFS. 3 games in and 2 clean sheets. Only Oldham and Doncaster in the entire division have conceded less.

And? Last night we didn't keep a clean sheet. Despite the positives outweighing the negatives by ten fold, is it not permitted to discuss any negatives too? 2 goals were conceded, both of which were avoidable so less of the 'FFS'. If you don't agree, just say you don't agree....
 

mark82

Super Moderator
And? Last night we didn't keep a clean sheet. Despite the positives outweighing the negatives by ten fold, is it not permitted to discuss any negatives too? 2 goals were conceded, both of which were avoidable so less of the 'FFS'. If you don't agree, just say you don't agree....

Just watched the highlights, Burge could have done better for the 1st. That said he's made plenty of good saves the last few games. People have it out for Burge no matter what he does.
 

covcity4life

Well-Known Member
dont turn this into some random burge hating.

we all want to see him succeed because we aint brining a new keeper in anytime soon.
 

stupot07

Well-Known Member
It probably would have went in but he should have at least made an effort.

Having seen it again, I still don't think he'd have got there and he looks like Ricketts was blocking his view so not sure if he saw it until late.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors :)
 

SkyBlue_Bear83

Well-Known Member
Having seen it again, I still don't think he'd have got there and he looks like Ricketts was blocking his view so not sure if he saw it until late.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors :)
Possibly, looks to me as if he thought it was going wide. Like a say, it probably would have went in but if he had made an effort he would have had a better chance to save it than doing nothing at all.
 

letsallsingtogether

Well-Known Member
And? Last night we didn't keep a clean sheet. Despite the positives outweighing the negatives by ten fold, is it not permitted to discuss any negatives too? 2 goals were conceded, both of which were avoidable so less of the 'FFS'. If you don't agree, just say you don't agree....

Yes but we scored 3, I bet they think they could have been avoidable.
 

letsallsingtogether

Well-Known Member
Possibly, looks to me as if he thought it was going wide. Like a say, it probably would have went in but if he had made an effort he would have had a better chance to save it than doing nothing at all.

It was a good goal, not many would have stopped it never saw it till it was too late.
 

SkyBlueMatt

Well-Known Member
That game yesterday was one of the best games I've seen in recent memory. Normally I have no idea when (and if) a goal is going to come from. When we were pegged back both times I just knew it wasn't over we had the ability to go on and win the game. If we had come away with a point it would have been a shame as we were absolutely fantastic, every single one of them. I wouldn't have been as disappointed as some games when we've scraped a ugly 1-0 win.

The way they played was so uplifting. When they received the ball, actually turning and running at the defence. I have no problem with the two goals we conceded, both could have been avoided but they were very clinical other teams wont be so. Its not as if they were clear goal scoring opportunities either. Their first especially was an cracking effort.
 

higgs

Well-Known Member
You score 2 we will score 3 reminds me of when we had Wilson and clarke banging in d goals
 

covcity4life

Well-Known Member
ok the highlights confirm it wasnt that far from him and he should have dived.

lot of humble pie should be served but i will be mature about it.
 

covcity4life

Well-Known Member
lol dont argue the facts rich.

he might not even have needed to dive, outstretched arm could have made the difference.

looked a harder shot to save at the time granted but highlights show it was saveable. hopefully burge and some posters learn from this.
 

skybluegod

Well-Known Member
No chance in hell was burge getting to their first goal, if it's anybody's fault it's Willis, for giving him too much space. Some people want burge to fail, that was almost inch perfect that shot.
 

covcity4life

Well-Known Member
it was quite close to him,a dive should have been made.

no one is saying it wouldt have gone in. what they are saying is it clearly wasnt a 100% goal that didnt require a saving attempt.

want burge to fail lmao. idiotic
 

wingy

Well-Known Member
No chance in hell was burge getting to their first goal, if it's anybody's fault it's Willis, for giving him too much space. Some people want burge to fail, that was almost inch perfect that shot.
Willis had two to deal with,Obrien or Vicelot were a bit slow getting across help out.
Way too easy to getTin for the shot.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Grendel

Well-Known Member
No chance in hell was burge getting to their first goal, if it's anybody's fault it's Willis, for giving him too much space. Some people want burge to fail, that was almost inch perfect that shot.

He should have done better for the second goal.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top