Each bar shows the two sides' share of that row's total, so it says who had more — not whether it was good, which would need a league-wide distribution this one match cannot provide.
Before I go on, a word has to be said about Bayliss because the reaction to his inclusion was poor. I have made this point repeatedly, and I accept that I am becoming like a dog with a bone, but it feels as though some people decided some time ago that he is not good enough and will now interpret everything he does through that belief.
I do not think Bayliss is one of our best two midfielders. If I were ranking the options, I would probably have Konak, McGrandles and Varfolomeev ahead of him, but that does not mean he has no role in this squad. Those are two entirely different arguments, and he answered some of the criticism with a very good performance.
The accusation that he pulls out of tackles is repeated so often that it has become accepted as fact in some quarters, yet I did not see him shirk one challenge at Deepdale. His work without the ball was good, he used possession sensibly, and he played an important part in ensuring we remained competitive in midfield. He did not score or register an assist, so those who had already made up their minds will probably ignore the performance, but he did his job well.
McGrandles, by contrast, did not have his best afternoon and surrendered possession in a couple of dangerous areas. That does not mean he should be written off either. He has been good this season, just as he was important last season, but players sometimes have difficult games. It should be possible to acknowledge that without making a permanent judgement about their ability.
The eagerness to dismiss players who served us so well during the promotion campaign is strange. Statistics demonstrating Bayliss’ passing and defensive contribution are rejected because people prefer to “believe their eyes”, but their eyes often appear to see only what they expected to see. Cohen and Shaw work with these players every day, manage a Championship club and have just extended an unbeaten league run to four matches. It might be worth considering that they know what different players can offer.
Preston emerged for the second half determined to increase the pressure, and for perhaps 10 minutes they managed it. During that period, referee Stephen Martin contributed to the frustration, again. Harry Clarke pulled Reach back after being beaten for pace, which looked like a straightforward yellow card, but escaped without a caution. Jefferies was later booked for something broadly comparable, and it is that lack of consistency which causes irritation.
Martin also managed to impede two Lincoln players during the same attack, first getting in Hackett’s way and then blocking McGrandles towards the end of the move. It probably did not deny us a goal, but the positioning was poor and it was another example of the basic details not being handled particularly well. None of the individual decisions was catastrophic, although they combined to produce another afternoon on which the interpretation seemed difficult to follow.
The hour mark arrived far too quickly for Preston. Their early second-half pressure had dissipated, City were beginning to establish themselves and the changes altered the feel of the contest. Draper and Varfolomeev replaced Street and Bayliss, giving us more physical presence at the top of the pitch and fresh energy in midfield.
I like Street. He presses hard, runs willingly and gives defenders an uncomfortable afternoon, but I see him as the natural alternative to House. If we want that chasing and pressing role, either can provide it. Alongside one of them, I would prefer the aerial presence of Draper or Ladefoged, particularly when so much of our attacking play involves direct passes and second balls.
That is an observation rather than a claim that the coaches were wrong. They selected a team which went to Preston, won 1-0 and moved up to 16th, so they have emphatically earned the benefit of the doubt. However, Draper gave us an attacking dimension which had been missing before his introduction. Preston’s defence suddenly looked less comfortable, particularly when City began earning throws and corners in advanced areas.
The other influential change came after Daniel Oyegoke went down injured. Jefferies replaced him and, with his first meaningful involvement, cleared the ball off the line following a Preston corner, and it epitomised the spirit within this group. Jefferies is another player whose Championship credentials have been questioned after a handful of matches, yet he entered a difficult away game and immediately made a decisive contribution.
Preston made three changes of their own, introducing Léo Leroy, Jusef Erabi and Delano Burgzorg, but none significantly altered their attacking threat. If anything, Lincoln’s replacements had the greater impact. Ogbene offered direct running on the right, Draper occupied the defenders and Varfolomeev brought his usual energy and aggression.
Our Emily gave Draper her man of the match award, and while I might lean towards one of the outstanding defenders, I completely understand the decision. He transformed our attacking threat and produced the game’s decisive moment, but even before the goal there was one passage which summed him up. He chased what appeared to be a lost cause, battled with a defender and won a corner from nothing. It did not produce a goal, but it demonstrated his relentlessness and refusal to give possession up cheaply.
The winner did not feel as though it had been coming in the traditional sense because we had not subjected Preston to a sustained siege, yet there was an increasing sense that an opportunity was there. They never looked happy defending the Lincoln City way, and I suspect some of their supporters will complain about losing to “teams like Lincoln” or wonder how we can watch that style every week. The answer is ‘with ease’ when it wins football matches.
Ogbene’s direct run and shot forced Iversen to turn the ball out for a throw, giving Coubiș the chance to launch another delivery into the area. It was almost a carbon copy of House’s winner at Bolton, except the ball did not bounce this time. Draper drifted into the right area, climbed above the defender and glanced his header beyond the goalkeeper.
That is what we do. It might not appeal to everybody and it can sound almost clichéd to talk about Lincoln imposing themselves physically, but it is an effective route to goal which we execute extremely well. Every set piece will not produce a chance and every long throw will not cause panic, but the threat comes from the relentlessness. Defend one and we will put another into the box. Clear that and we will compete for the second ball, press again and try to manufacture another opportunity.
I was delighted for Draper because the arrival of Ladefoged should not cause anybody to lose sight of what Freddie could become. He offers something different and still has enormous value to this football club, both on the pitch and potentially in the transfer market further down the line. His first Championship goal was a significant moment and, hopefully, the first of many.
Once ahead, City showed the courage and composure required to see the match out. There was no frantic collapse towards our own goal and no period of overwhelming Preston pressure. Coubiș celebrated winning a goal-kick in stoppage time as though he had scored, which said everything about the mentality of the side. They were determined to protect what they had earned.
Bolton supporters might argue they should have taken something from our visit, and Preston will probably say the same. The fact remains that neither did because they failed to defend our set-piece threat for the full 90 minutes, while we defended our penalty area superbly.
We are now 16th after six matches, although the table remains almost meaningless at this stage. We have taken eight points from the last four league games, winning away at Bolton and Preston while drawing our two home fixtures. The old saying is that winning at home and drawing away brings promotion form. At present, we are doing it the other way around.
I sometimes fall into the trap of looking at opponents and worrying about what they have, rather than remembering what we possess. This performance was nervy in places and not always attractive. We did not dominate the ball or create a succession of clear chances, and had Draper failed to make contact with that throw, the discussion would probably have focused on our lack of quality in the final third.
However, the outcome was not an accident. It was another example of City remaining in a game, defending their box, using the bench intelligently and waiting for their strengths to tell. We learned those things at Bolton, so Deepdale offered no great revelation. It was a continuation of the same journey and further evidence that we are not in this division as tourists.
Preston are among the weaker Championship sides we have faced so far, and the longer their current problems continue, the more trouble they will find themselves in. That does not diminish what Lincoln achieved: we went to Deepdale, absorbed what they offered, scored through a weapon they could not contain and returned home with three points.
Two away wins from two, eight points from four league matches and another clean sheet. We are clearly doing something right. Perhaps that is worth remembering the next time a team sheet appears and does not conform to what we believe the perfect Lincoln City side should look like.
It might sound crazy, but Chris and Tom appear to know what they are doing.
Comments Welcome!