Argyle v Pompey match thread

think the result can be taken a number of ways.

shrews fans last season on the opening day were no doubt displeased as they drew at home to a side with 8 new players & many making league debuts.
shrews got promoted.

fast forward a year & we beat effectively pompeys youth side with two late goals.

if pompey had 52% possession i would say thats right as they would have been chasing the game in the main part of the 2nd half.
we are never going to be a side that keeps the ball we dont have the players..........

Tringreen wrote:

The Red Star wrote:

The record books will show a 3 nil win against higher league opposition and you can only ever beat the team played against you. Your team will go into your first league gain with added enthusiasm, so for you last night it was (unfortunately) a job well done.

We looked good enough last night for me to remain optimistic for the season ahead. A goalkeeping howler and a pen saw us off, as well as a better team

Struggling to beat a team of kids does not fill me with optimism.

Mate, I would have come on here gloating had we won, but hard to gloat when we lose and you win. Hopefully Saturday will allow me to gloat

The administrator at Pompey has given the go ahead for them to sign a whole new team, including the traillists who did so well pre-season. Those players won't be cheap! I see the league isn't watching them like a hawk then brent.


[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

They should be putting money in our buckets!

so argyle couldn't sign anyone whilst in administration due to an embargo yet portsmouth can sign as many players as they want on monthly contracts.Right or wrong?

i would say its wrong but,if we had a poll on here most would want us to splash the cash,some one wanted to pump milions in to our club not so long ago,if your still out there get your money out,what ya waiting for ?

I thought there was positive and negative to take out of it, that's from someone who's normally considered one of the positive ones.

On the bright side, we looked far more threatening when we did have the ball. When Pompey did have possesion, they did little with it by and large. When we had it, we spent a lot of the time in their third and generally looked a lot more threatening.

Slightly more negatively, we were a little wasteful at times once we did get to the final third. if we'd been a bit quicker thinking and more canny with our time and space we could have won by more. Improvment needed for League 2 I reckon- but that's not to say it won't come. Saturday will be interesting.

GreenSam wrote:

I thought there was positive and negative to take out of it, that's from someone who's normally considered one of the positive ones.

On the bright side, we looked far more threatening when we did have the ball. When Pompey did have possesion, they did little with it by and large. When we had it, we spent a lot of the time in their third and generally looked a lot more threatening.

We were playing school boys FFS!

Don't worry Freathy...

We all know the first round of the cup is really just about fitness.

tcm wrote:

what is hand ball?is it any thing to do with cravats?

Eh ?

Freathy wrote:

GreenSam wrote:

I thought there was positive and negative to take out of it, that's from someone who's normally considered one of the positive ones.

On the bright side, we looked far more threatening when we did have the ball. When Pompey did have possesion, they did little with it by and large. When we had it, we spent a lot of the time in their third and generally looked a lot more threatening.

We were playing school boys FFS!

Yes, and that's why if you quoted all of my post you'd notice that I said we should have been more clinical and could, perhaps should, have won by more.

What I did like was the fact that we played some good passing football at a decent tempo in their final third and looked as if we had some nice ideas. Where we lacked was the killer touch.

GreenSam wrote:

Freathy wrote:

GreenSam wrote:

I thought there was positive and negative to take out of it, that's from someone who's normally considered one of the positive ones.

On the bright side, we looked far more threatening when we did have the ball. When Pompey did have possesion, they did little with it by and large. When we had it, we spent a lot of the time in their third and generally looked a lot more threatening.

We were playing school boys FFS!

Yes, and that's why if you quoted all of my post you'd notice that I said we should have been more clinical and could, perhaps should, have won by more.

What I did like was the fact that we played some good passing football at a decent tempo in their final third and looked as if we had some nice ideas. Where we lacked was the killer touch.

But that's like the 12 yr olds in the park, dribbling it around the 7 yr olds for fun - of course it's gonna happen!

Unless you're playing Barcelona's kids, to play passing football at tempo in the final third against a team of 17-18 yr olds, should be academic shouldn't it?

Saturday, against a normal side will show more or less where we are, in real terms.

Aldershot are rated as even more of an outside bet than Argyle for promotion by the bookies, so we might get a draw.

Czarcasm wrote:

GreenSam wrote:

Freathy wrote:

GreenSam wrote:

I thought there was positive and negative to take out of it, that's from someone who's normally considered one of the positive ones.

On the bright side, we looked far more threatening when we did have the ball. When Pompey did have possesion, they did little with it by and large. When we had it, we spent a lot of the time in their third and generally looked a lot more threatening.

We were playing school boys FFS!

Yes, and that's why if you quoted all of my post you'd notice that I said we should have been more clinical and could, perhaps should, have won by more.

What I did like was the fact that we played some good passing football at a decent tempo in their final third and looked as if we had some nice ideas. Where we lacked was the killer touch.

But that's like the 12 yr olds in the park, dribbling it around the 7 yr olds for fun - of course it's gonna happen!

Unless you're playing Barcelona's kids, to play passing football at tempo in the final third against a team of 17-18 yr olds, should be academic shouldn't it?

Saturday, against a normal side will show more or less where we are, in real terms.

I get the point that we shouldn't expect anything less, but when we were in certain situations on the pitch, our players seemed to have ideas (clever passes etc) that are good regardless of the opposition.

When we were trying to form attacks, it was the ideas and style that was good. Those ideas and style would have been impressive whoever we played.

What you rightfully say of course is that it was obviously much easier to impliment those ideas and style against a youth team. I think some of what I saw on Tuesday night is cause for encouragment even though it was against teenagers. It was possible to be a lot worse than we were. I don't deny for a minute that those ideas and that style (which I do think was good regardless of crap opposition) will be trickier to satisfactoraliy excute against Aldershot-but I don't think that should mean that the fact that we're doing them at all shouldn't be praised. I think it should. We could have at least been a fair bit worse than we did on Tuesday night had we not been so creative in some of our thinking in the build-up, and as adept in some of our passing. Some of the passes/passing moves we pulled off were difficult in their own respect and required at least a degree of mental and technical ability-poor opponents notwithstanding.