Usually, after a City game, we walk back up the Sincil Drain and talk about what happened.
‘We’ would be me and my Dad, but yesterday it was a group of friends – Dave, Matt, Dayle, Pete and Alf. Six opinions, six sets of eyes to draw conclusions and pass judgment on what happened. It should have been an eclectic mix of banter, debate and insight. Instead, before we got out of sight of the ground, attention turned to which pub would benefit from our patronage for the early afternoon session we had planned.
Why? Because almost nothing happened on the field at Sincil Bank. It was a blank canvas, left virtually untouched by 90 minutes of action, a bland encounter few will remember in years to come. However, it must be said there is a distinct difference between bland and bad, and as unremarkable as the game was, I don’t think we were ‘rubbish’ as I heard from someone on the way out. It was just a flat game.
A few things didn’t help. I’d argue the midday sun is more energy-sapping than later in the day. The rather flat atmosphere also contributed, and that’s again perhaps down to the early kick off. 12:30 doesn’t give people a lot of time to build up to the game (drink, basically), and while I usually quite like them as I get this write-up done early (not this weekend, as I’ll explain), I do feel playing early robs the game of something. One of the opinions the six of us expressed and agreed upon was that the game felt very much like a pre-season friendly, a symptom of Sky TV snaffling up the game rights this season.
It also doesn’t help that we play football in much the same way as Wigan. We set up a bit differently, them with a four at the back, us a three, but both teams have a three-man midfield. It’s important to remember we do often morph into a four at the back which then almost matches Wigan. They’re so well organised and structured, as are we, and they’re great out of possession, as are we. When two teams who are good out of possession go against each other, it can be a tough watch.
They looked to play a lot through Aasgaard; we tried to get a bit through Tom Bayliss. They were patient in their build-up play but ran into a brick wall when they entered the final third. We looked to get forward quicker, but ran into a brick wall when we got into the final third. Both sides are good at the back, and that meant a tough afternoon for all forward players. It meant a tough watch for those of us in the stands, but again, I stress, not because we were bad. If we were bad, we’d have lost the game, driven down by the trickery of Aasgaard or the constantly dangerous Silko Thomas and Dion Rankine on either flank.
No, we were not bad, because Wigan beat bad teams. We were not quite on it, and we were not quite at our levels in some areas, but we were excellent in some of our actions, mainly those which stopped attacks, rather than created them. It might feel like I’m padding here, but distinguishing between a bad performance and a challenging game to watch is important.
The big news was Bailey Cadamarteri coming in for Jovon, a move that I’ve been waiting for. That’s not to Jovon’s detriment, but Bailey is here to play matches, not sit on the bench, and he was always going to claim a starting spot. My guess is that him and Ben House will now be our starting front two, with the others acting as back-up players, impact subs and starters in the cup. Of course, nothing is set in stone and form will play a part, but Cadamarteri isn’t here to warm a seat next to Michael Skubala on the bench.
Dom Jeffries kept his place, and I think that is fair. Jeffries has made the left wing back spot his own, and there’s an uncompromising air to his demeanour on the field. He feels like a real find, a player with a great engine who has emerged as a key first team player. Reeco might have his work cut out displacing Dom, and with Erik Ring itching to get involved as well, we have impressive competition for places. Jeffries had a real fight on his hands up against Rankine, and he came out of it with credit. Some of the players didn’t look quite at 100% against the Latics, but I felt Jeffries was up there as a possible Man of the Match contender.
Onto the action……
Done.
Okay, that’s flippant, but in terms of real chances, it is hard to think of any that I felt were of note. The xG stats show us on 0.5 and them on 0.8, with one chance for Aasgaard sitting at 0.3. That means there is so little to comment on when it comes to out-and-out chances. I felt that, in the first half, the visitors perhaps shaded it, with four shots but only a tame free kick from Aasgaard to test Jeacock. We had a solitary Tendayi Darikwa effort on target in the first period, a chance that maybe should have been passed rather than snatched at, but the former Wigan man likely wanted to get on the scoresheet. That chance came straight after two of Wigan’s four efforts, 19, 21 and 22 minutes, and that really summed up the whole game for me. It was a contest that only really saw chances created when the opponent had just had one, often us looking to hit them on the counter.
What must be pointed out is the xG doesn’t actually show the good moments we created that didn’t result in a chance, balls flashed across the box, flick ons dropping in just the wrong place. The 0.5 is a little harsh on us, and the other opinion shared walking away from the ground was that on the balance of play, we created more ‘nearly’ moments. That’s certainly the case in the second period.
You must be logged in to post a comment.