Last night, the Stacey West team and I had a live podcast event held for Patreons only.
The first part was Chris and I talking about the game in front of a sold-out event, and all I had on my mind at kick off was ‘please, God, let this be entertaining’. How disappointed was I?
Fundamentally, we didn’t really do anything wrong – our passing accuracy was better than any other game in 2025, we had decent possession, and we only conceded 0.54 of xG, 0.42 of which came from their goal. However, we didn’t really do anything right either – of our 11 shots (I’ve watched them, they did happen) only one troubled the keeper, and our own xG of 1.4 was comprised of 10 really low numbers, and 0.74 for Lewis Montsma’s effort.
That moment, which seems to have appeared prematurely in a match report, was the game in a nutshell. We did alright, but when it came to the final execution, it just lacked. I know we weren’t brilliant yesterday, but it was a game we should absolutely have won, even with the lack of attacking moments and a fairly drab performance. What surprised me was how little Shrewsbury went for it – they seemed happy with a draw, as if collecting points at this stage of the season, when they’re 12 from safety with 12 to play for, was a good thing. Did we get sucked into that? Probably not; our lacklustre performance was of our own making, but that’s what it was – lacking. It wasn’t ‘atrocious’ or whatever other adjectives the vocal minority roll out after a mediocre performance. We just didn’t do much in terms of attacking intent, against a team that many hoped we’d put five past.
The team selection had a couple of notable points, Lewis Montsma came in for a start, with Tom Hamer dropping to the bench. Erik Ring got a start in the absence of the injured Jovon Makama, both with points to prove for next season, but neither able to really do so. Conor McGrandles and Tom Bayliss held the midfield, Ethan Hamilton warmed the bench and Sam Clucas remained in the stands watching on. That’s certainly a point of discussion among the fan base – we were asked about it last night and a thread on Vitals has seemingly blown up a bit this morning as well.
In fairness, City began the game brightly, asserting control almost immediately. In fact, the opening ten minutes belonged entirely to the Imps, who moved the ball confidently and pressed with intensity. Joe Gardner, in particular, caught the eye with his tenacity, direct running, and sharp counter-pressing—a performance full of promise from the young winger.
The breakthrough arrived in the fourth minute, and it was one of real quality. Tom Bayliss—playing in one of the two deeper midfield roles— took a pass on from Gardner. He advanced forward after a clever run from Reeco Hackett created space. Bayliss shifted inside onto his stronger foot and bent a measured finish beyond the Shrewsbury goalkeeper. It was a brilliant goal, understated in celebration due to Bayliss’s past ties with the visitors, but it lit Sincil Bank up.
That was meant to be the spark that lit the firework. It was meant to be the moment that started the rout. I had my mate Pete with me, he’s not always at games, and he said he felt it had four or five nil written all over it. We’d been slick and controlled in the opening ten minutes, and at that moment, it felt as if the floodgates could open. City looked in complete command, while Shrewsbury appeared flustered and passive. Football, like our live podcasts, rarely follows the script.
The next eighty minutes were fairly low-key, and that’s being generous. After the goal, we didn’t go for the jugular. Instead, it felt like we stood around scratching our crotch and waiting for dinner. Of course, that caused people in the stands to start getting angry, perhaps a little too much. I try to ignore it now; I remember some of the same voices dissenting when we drew 0-0 with Tranmere the day we secured the League Two title. I’ve had my ears fitted with a (metaphorical) misery filter, so when the same voices have the same moans every single year, I ignore them. It’s a blessing, believe me.
The game’s turning point—if one can call it that in a match that remained sluggish—came in the 23rd minute. A routine corner wasn’t cleared, and in the ensuing scramble, George Wickens was bundled into by a Shrewsbury attacker. There were few appeals, the referee waved play on, and Aron Pierre tapped in the leveller. Replays confirmed what many on the ground felt in real time: it was a foul. Wickens was clearly impeded. But the goal stood.
That’s a fact, in my opinion (of course, a fact is a verifiable statement, while an opinion is a belief or subjective judgment. While someone might believe a statement is a fact, it can only be definitively called a fact if it can be proven true or false with objective evidence) – the goal shouldn’t have stood. If the game ends 1-0 but with the same performance, people are satisfied.
There’s no doubt in my mind it’s a foul, and I felt the referee was poor not just for that, but all game. Quelle surprise, he’s a National League referee who was taking control of his first League One match. I’ll be honest; I’m not a fan of that. I can see how stepping up one league is okay, but in the last four months, he’s been in charge of Maidenhead, Forest Green, Wealdstone and Eastleigh. By all means, stepping up a division to Bromley, Harrogate, and Salford, but jumping two divisions in three weeks is too much, and it showed inconsistent performance.
From that point, the tempo evaporated. City had seemingly eased off, deflated by the goal, and we gradually lost our edge. Shrewsbury, to their credit, gained a foothold but never truly threatened again. In fact, the match fizzled out so dramatically that even I grabbed my half-time refreshments on 38 minutes so I wouldn’t miss any of the interval, and when I came back, neither side produced anything of substance.
In terms of performances in the first period, nobody really stood out. Tom Bayliss, Sean Roughan and Tendayi Dariwka all had decent games, and Joe Gardner could perhaps be added to that list for endeavour, but they weren’t really outstanding, they just weren’t bad. Erik Ring barely got a kick, and Lewis looked a little rusty, two players who needed to make statements. They did, but they were the sort of statements they’d hope to avoid.
Doubtless, that will be reflected in the widget below.
You must be logged in to post a comment.