MERTHYR v Hungerford

Cutlan, willo, Howe, tubbs, Colborne, Newall, jones, m griff, Prosser, Leahy, Traylor. Subs: leek, Newman, Harris, welsh.

0-0 at H.T chances at both ends

Good attendance today 513 - hope they see some goals! (for the Martyrs)

Three Subs. Howe, Leahy and Jones off. Newmauin, Leek and Harris on. Big change!! 50th min

Three Subs. Howe, Leahy and Jones off. Newmauin, Leek and Harris on. Big change!! 50th min

0-0 F.T - another replay !

Replay on Monday night

F-t 0-0. Replay Monday

Poor today .. Shame we couldnt manage a win for the 500+ , Prosser had a mere

Today's team:-

Cutlan;
Newall,Thomas,Colborne;
M.Griffiths,Jones,Williams,Howe;
Leahy,Prosser,Traylor;

Subs:
Leek for Jones after about 50 minutes
Newman for Howe after about 50 minutes
Harris for Leahy after about 50 minutes
Welsh

After the 4-0 win in midweek it was an unchanged starting eleven, with a complete midfield on the bench. I don't know what the formation was in midweek, but today we had three at the back, with Marcus Griffiths and Jack Howe as wing backs, and either Joe Leahy or Ian Traylor dropping deeper as required.

In the first 15 minutes there were plenty of corners for both sides but little threat to either goal, apart from a goalmouth scramble for us which ended with the ball going just wide of the post.

On about 20 minutes Hungerford came closest to a goal when we seemed unable to get a tackle in on a player as he ran into the area, and Giles Cutlan just kept out a close range shot when it hit his legs.

After about 30 minutes the Hungerford keeper made a double save, pushing away a 20-yard drive from Luke Jones and blocking the follow-up shot from Ian Traylor. But overall the first half was fairly even.

Only 5 minutes into the seond half there was a fairly risky move so early in the game when we brought on 3 subs at once - Matthew Harris, Kris Leek and Ryan Newman forming a complete midfield as we switched to 4-3-3 with Marcus Griffiths moving up front and Steve Williams to right back as Joe Leahy, Luke Jones and Jack Howe were the players replaced.

The new midfield drove us forward for a time as we had probably our best spell of the game. About 5 minutes later Ryan Prosser was unable to take advantage of a blocked clearance from the Hungerford keeper, and 5 minutes after that Matthew Harris saw a 25-yard shot come back off the post.

After about 70 minutes there were appeals for handball by a Hungerford defender, but the linesman, who was well placed, gave a corner.

Hungerford did manage a few off-target shots and they came more into the game as we seemed to run out of ideas in the last 15 minutes or so. A couple of minutes from the end Hungerford had the ball in the net after Giles Cutlan couldn't hold onto a shot, but it was disallowed for handball.

A very good attendance, with a few there from Hungerford, who were possibly the best team to visit Penydarren Park this season so far. Difficult to choose a man of the match, but it wouldn't be Ian Traylor, who played as poorly in the second half as I've ever seen from him. Although the first half was OK we seemed a bit lacklustre up front in the second.

good game today fair play to hungerford they played football but that brought best at times out of us .
i like luke jones and id play him off prosser myself he a good game today .

Merthyr Imp wrote:Only 5 minutes into the seond half there was a fairly risky move so early in the game when we brought on 3 subs at once.

What a difference to last week. We met a team that wanted to play attractive football from the kick off. Unfortunately, it started with three of our stronger players on the bench.

The visitors lacked any really penetration until they introduced their substitutes which caused us a few headaches in the closing stages of the game.

We seemed to have a few strong appeals for penalties turned down (there was a debate about whether a ball striking someones hand in the penalty area should be classed as intentional!?!) but the officials were a lot better than last week which helped contribute to the overall quality of the game.

I'm sure that another replay, especially with so little recovery time, is the last thing that the team wanted after a tough fourteen days.

There's an image going up on the web site that I think clearly shows the hand ball incident.

yes fair play to Hungerford they came to play football and gave us a good game,although we were far from our best.The pairing of pross. & joe just didnt come off for us but we must not forget how young they are,we also had a few players who struggled but you have to bear in mind the two physical games they played last week plus they are working so it is far from easy.The ref.i thought had a decent game apart from the two penalties he missed.

The lino had a far better view than the referee but he gave nothing, yet they were clear penalties to me and I had a similar view to that of the lino. I agree it was a good game - Hungerford came to play and looked a useful side. We had our chances, particularly those which led to their keeper making an excellent double save in the first half and Matthew was very unlucky with the shot that came off the post in the second. I've no problem with the 11 we started with. They did very well at Fleet last Tuesday and deserved the chance to do it again. The substitutions came at the right time and for a while it worked but Hungerford came more and more into it, adapted to the conditions and were unlucky not to nick one. My MOTM for us today was Badger.

The conditions I refer to is the state of our pitch. The ball was bobbling and bouncing all over the shop. Short, sharp passes were bouncing up off the surface and hitting our players in the chest and even face on occasions and the ball was very difficult to control and dribbling almost impossible, hence Traylor's impotence in the 2nd half in particular. We have played much better away from home this season where the surfaces are truer and reliable. Fleet's wasn't the best with the slope, but at least the surface was, by and large, flat and our lads could pass with confidence and deserved their chance yesterday. That's why I think we stand more than a fair chance tomorrow as hopefully we'll have a pitch more conducive to our game whereas the PP pitch is quickly becoming a liability.

There have been numerous postings of late about the state of the pitch,From the bank it looked fine the grass had been mowed in impressive squares but it seems playing on it is a diffrent issue.what is a bit alarming is that nothing has been done to improve the surface.Back in the summer we were contributing to a fund to improve the pitch i believe so that we were able to host under 21 internationals.I do not know if this is still ongoing.On the other hand perhaps we do not have the equipment to flatten the surface or if we have perhaps the ground has been to hard to roll.Is there anyone who can make an official comment on this issue

I think it was mentioned at a meeting that the club had to buy some second-hand equipment for the field last season.
Shep has mentioned the state of the pitch himself. As did the Hungerford committee after the game on Saturday. So it seems that there is a cost problem re the pitch. And, of course, finances are a key factor to the club.
Probably the ground has been too hard recently for a heavy roller. But Shep has commented that Merthyr can play better football away.

Old Sod wrote:...hence Traylor's impotence...

For once - lost for words!!!