TOPIC: Barnet manager Martin Allen: We should have been about six up!

"I don't think I've ever been involved in such a one-sided, dominant performance. We were 2-0 down and should have been about six up, and that was in the first 10 minutes.''

A win is a win and 3 points are welcomed as it moved us into the top half. Some say it's a good team that still wins when your not playing well but those stats are worrying as goals against back them up!

They couldn't have been 6-0 up by the time we went 2-0 up as they had only had 3 chances by then.

I would agree with his sentiment though! Even at 2-0 up it was a matter of time before they got back into it.

They must be pretty upset at getting nothing out of a game where they should really have spanked us.

Completely agree with him but I'm not complaining! About time we had some luck.

Crucially though, whether they could or should have been - they weren't. I don't buy it when we lose and our fans bleat about "being the better team" or, worse "deserving " to win based on how many chances we're missed. The team that scores the most goals deserves to win - and that was us!

How we got three points yesterday il never know although maybe he should be complaining about his own players for missing such sitters.

We are the top scoring team along with Orient with 13 goals,but are the team that has conceded most with 14 goals this in all 4 leagues.That game summed it up yesterday.
Ironically Allen got his tactics spot on ,they pushed 3 up against our back 3 and stopped us playing out from the back ,we ended up hitting long balls .I agree with the way Curle wants us to play however sometimes you have to have a plan B ,we really should have switched to a flat back 4 to counter what Barnet where doing.I suppose the result justifies why we didn't change but we where rather fortunate.

Can't change the fact that we won end of.

seabird wrote: Let's see if KC takes note for future reference. Totally agree he needs to have a plan B

Sent from my GT-I9195 using Tapatalk

Or possibly it would work better if we had 3 centre halves playing? Raynes is getting stick but he was basically trying to fight a ariel battle on his own. I still hate Martin Allen though so im pleased for him.

TopDog74 wrote:
Wasn't Plan B more of Plan A?!

CCU wrote:
I thought it was tell Brough to stand on the half way line and not move therefore there was plenty of room for Grainger to stand in so Barnet had plenty room in the middle. Plan C was to bring Osei on as Brough accidentally went back over the line a couple of times.

Well I just hope it shreads their confidence and they fall back into the relegation places. Have hated Barnet since our season in the conference, would be nice to see them sink again.

Champions95 wrote:
Yep - can remember many days watching us play people off the park and get nothing.......we created fewer chances but more in the back of the net; you get points for goals not artistic impression (unless you're Barca obviously who can do both but they have an alien playing for them which helps.... )

I think the turning point was when Raynes lost the ball in the box. their player drew the keeper and a simple square pass to his teammate would have a tap in. instead he hit the side netting. you could see it in his face, what have i done.
It'll take weeks for me to work out how we won that, they hit the bar twice a few deflected shots that were saved and i lost count of how many blocks.
I was laughing when the final whistle went. i can only remember 2 shots by us in the second half
last season we would have been absolutely tanked.

Prawncrackhead wrote:
Yeah, couldn't have happened to a nicer club. The place where Nicky Bailey first reared his ugly cheating ginger head, their behaviour after winning the title against us at Underhill, Paul Fairclough etc etc. My least favourite team in the league.

To finish off that last sentence, until Graham Westley gets another job.

Their fans were always giving it large on our messageboard during the conference season. The following season, when we walked the league and they just survived relegation by the skin of their teeth, I went on theirs to give some back. They banned me for 25 years. In 15 years time, I am going to enjoy rubbing their noses in yesterday's result.

I don't understand why opposition fans don't like fans from other fans coming onto the forum and having a bit of banter. It would certainly help improve this forum. It's not as if we are Manchester United and Liverpool and City fans would over run us. I would welcome Barnet fans on here giving us a bit of a wind up, as I'm sure you did cufcmike. If it's all done in the best possible taste then go for it.

Getting back to the game, I thought Curles thoughts on the game were refreshing. And I like the way he's trying to quell expectancy in the crowd but build confidence in the team. Seems to be working, like the way he gave them credit and admitted we were lucky to see half time 2-2. Curle's thoughts on the Barnet win

My brother in law took my cousin on Saturday who is 7 and I spoke with him over skype yesterday, he loved it and can't wait to get back. That has to be a good sign as he's drifting to the Barcelona's of this World.

Spot on.... Whilst Raynes is a pretty poor defender our formation and team selections aren't helping him. To play one centre back against a Martin Allen side is suicidal. Surely we have watched them and must have known it would be an arial bombardment... to basically pick only one tall defender against them is crackers. We really should have lost by 4-5 clear goals. Whilst i'm delighted our luck was in and we got 3 points, it doesn't excuse a p1ss poor defensive performance and the fact that KC got the team selection and tactics badly wrong for this game. If we don't get some central defenders in on loan we could find ourselves on the end of some big drubbings if our luck turns. Get on the phone and bring in some defenders soon Keith for Christ sake... my heart can't take games like that much longer.

Northumbrian as I've said in other threads defensively the problem is the wing backs don't come back so especially at 2 nil up that should have changed or go to a flat back 4 so you're right the tactics were risky to put it mildly.
I don't think he got his team selection too far wrong as Troy was injured and so was Atkinson and after Miller's leap and header for the goal you can't say he's weak in the air despite not being tall ( We could have done with a Dean Walling in there who wasn't tall). So the only alternative was a Youth team player unlikely to be strong enough or CMW who seems out of the picture due to attitude.
One thing we all agree on is Raynes needs someone within 20 yards of him to share the burden of challenging or to cover behind when he does.

walwynlegend wrote: I thought Miller was weak in the air generally, other than his goal from a set piece... but even Michael Owen scored headers from set pieces. I don't think he is terrible in the air, but those forwards had him and Grainger on toast when it came to winning headers. Curle is playing the continental version of wing backs, where the wings backs don't really defend at all, and are really just wide midfielders.... the wide centre backs are really full backs and the defensive midfielder, Joyce is supposed to drop back into the back 3 when we lose the ball. Nothing wrong with that if you play the right type of players. BUT as you say, we have injuries and that formation really did not fit the way Barnet played. That is where he got it wrong for me. As soon as Barnet got on top with the direct approach we should have switched to a back four to provide some support for Raynes. Tactically it was wrong. He needs to get over his problems with CMW as it is ridiculous that we had no cover on the bench... what would have happened if Raynes was injured in the first minute? Who would have played as the lone centre back? Having said that if he gets a couple of centre backs in then the formation works fine... not with the players we have available currently though.