Men's 4XI vs Cheam M2

Hi everyone

So not the happy new year we were all looking forward to, but hopefully not the ghost of Christmas future either. We came up against a young, energetic and pretty well-drilled Cheam side here, and a combination of non-optimal preparation, age, and rust probably did for us in this game.

A very even first half saw possession and fluidity swing between the teams. They probably had the best of the first ten minutes, we responded excellently until they scored a slightly fortuitous goal. We had chances at the other end - a couple of short corners and one or two reasonably presentable openings in the D. But we paid for our profligacy, conceding a break away goal with ten seconds left in the half.

After another even start to the second half, we visibly tired. Lack of pace, some tiredness creeping in affecting skills and decision making, and a subtle but collective slide into miscommunication and a bit of negativity did for us really. We got hit on the break a few more times, there were more unforced errors, and you could see Cheam’s confidence grow. They knew they weren’t going to lose the game, and so played more freely. We were still tied up trying to force things, and it stopped us relaxing and being able to handle the basics.

I don’t feel like we were absolutely dominated though. However, I do feel like they sussed out our game plan quite early, and while we matched them for the vast majority of this game, they outlasted us in the second half. It was like a long distance race where there was never really clear daylight between the two of us, but we couldn’t match their kick into the home straight. Not a bad performance by the 4s, but one short of where we need to be to wholly compete.

Spike

Busy boy today and did his best with quite a large number of shots and crosses. One foray outside the D nearly ended in the usual disaster but the defence came to the rescue. Not many of the goals were saveable, particularly with players arriving at the far stick to tap in. Took a green for the team because apparently we don’t know where to sub on and off from, despite Cheam getting a card in the first half for exactly that reason. Low IQ hockey, and Spike had to take the fall for it.

Maj

Not a bad game given that he had no warm up. And why didn’t he have a warm up, I hear you ask? Because he came to the match wearing a maroon shirt, and had to go home to get a white one. Low IQ haberdashery. And then of course there’s the half hour he takes to actually get ready. Once he came on the rhythm did shift a little bit, but we still looked comfortable. The only issue really was one of pace: their attacking midfielder had quite a lot of it, whereas Maj appeared to have quite a lot of leftover turkey and stuffing still on board. One or two mis-positionings aside, Maj played okay in a game which wasn’t a great match up for us: young and sprightly vs “experienced” and “energy efficient”.

Molly

Same applies really. Had good moments where long passes worked and positioning was solid, but it was hard to plug all the gaps when Cheam did break through. Their game plan was to pull the full backs wide and penetrate through the middle. We mainly kept that in check until our legs - and to a certain extent our heads - went a bit in the second half. Moment of the match for me was when the Cheam coach shouted over to Molly, who is of course well known to them, “Hey Molly. Don’t you ever shut up?!” One of those rare moments in life where every single person in attendance is in complete universal agreement.

Jonno

Yeah, pretty much the same story here. Had more good than bad, keeping a check on their right hand side for most of the game, but like all of us of a certain vintage, susceptible to 18 year olds running past and getting on the end of (and credit to Cheam here) some very effective through balls. Jonno was at his best closing down short corners - he did this very well - but like the rest of the team, we just needed 5% more to compete for the whole match.

Duncs

The lad loves playing hockey, win or lose, an approach likely honed from watching Liverpool all through the 90s and early 2000s. He did Duncs things today, swivelling around like that stoned rabbit from the Magic Roundabout, laying little passes off like a preternaturally regular hen, and giving us more options than a daringly experimental Chinese restaurant. All of this added up to a good game, especially defensively, but he possibly suffered from a lack of fresh legs on the bench, and eventually the Dave Duncan dam finally gave way.

Pringle

Looked very good as a makeshift left back while we waited for Maj’s eternal costume change, and appeared equally sound in the screen. Spent too much time on the bench, I thought, when we needed a large hadron collider in midfield. His long passing game had something like an 80% hit rate, which is pretty good. His short corner injections about the same. The trouble is, against an in-form side like Cheam we all needed to be at 90 or 95. The one consolation was the confusingly hermaphroditic sausage at Cheam’s clubhouse.

Jack A

Looked so good in spells, hovering in from the left with the ball glued to his stick like a hockey astronaut from the future, ghosting past Cheam players as if they were maroon and blue mannequins with anger issues. The trouble was we didn’t get the ball to him enough. Jack is one of our real danger men, but he can only do his danger thing if we give him the opportunities. In addition to that, quite a lot of what we did came up the right, and I don’t remember seeing much in the way of big switches from side to side. We know how effective that can be, and how effective Jack can be, so that’s maybe something to think about in training and in game times.

Tom

Acceptable performance from Tom “The Bouffant” Boyd. Plenty of running, plenty of energy, some great leads, and some committed tackling. Like everyone else, you can’t say “the lad laid an egg and that’s why we lost”. We played well, and Tom’s contribution was solid, we just didn’t have quite enough to match them. Not quite enough guile, not quite enough pure talent, and not quite enough good, creative ideas to unlock a pretty stingy Cheam defence. And all we can really do is work hard to try and improve.

Jack M

Same story really. Plenty of industry, some really nice touches to win and maintain possession, but not enough really crafty moments to unbalance the Cheam defenders and get them on the back foot. You can afford to be tidy and efficient at 0-0; even more so if you’re winning. But you also need to be able to raise your game, find something different, and step up a level or two. It’s hard when you’re four-nil down but that’s when you cannot afford to get sloppy. Again, Jack had a nice game, but what we really needed was for Jack to have a nasty game. Also loses marks for not being able to read the words “white-navy-white”. Low IQ comprehension.

Ludders

Had a few moments of magic where his touch was deft and his positioning intelligent. Scored a poacher’s goal, but could have had one in the first half which would have put us 1-0 up. The extra touch made all the difference when what we needed was pure killer instinct. Most effective in the D, Ludders did the running and the chasing, but the threat was only fleeting. More aggression, more anticipation and more ruthlessness required. Ludders, channel your inner Hulk!

Gaz

A stand out for me. Looking like a new man post-recovery Gaz provided us with our most creative outlet, dropping off to pick up the ball, reeling off his Harlem Globetrotter stuff to make the defenders think twice and stand off him, and delivering through balls tastier than a Cheam clubhouse tea. He worked his little ankle socks off too, sliding into midfield at points to try and get things moving. That bought him credit in the bank which was sadly negated by that short corner shot that not only missed the goal but missed the football goal behind the net as well.

Loz

Another Olympic effort once again rewarded only by a dropped baton and a brief glimpse of the girl gymnasts’ changing room. That means no gold medal for Loz today despite his tireless work up front and on the right. When we looked good and when we were competing, Lawrence was invariably involved. But he’s like a sophisticated chef being asked to make Michelin star dinners with a couple of old aubergines and a tin of beans. We need to solve our creative/service issues up front: we know the lad can score like Pringle at a disco night where there’s eight women to every one bloke, but someone needs to drive him to the disco in the first place.

David

A bright spot in an otherwise fairly colourless display, Dave played a number of roles in this game, from tackler and enforcer, to solo breakaway artist. Aside from having a really solid game featuring three or four incredible slalom runs, gaining us 30 or 40 yards at a time, David’s tenacity and pace brought about two golden one-on-one opportunities. Sensing glory, he put the first one just a foot too near the keeper, who had a good game. With the second he decided to go full throttle, smashing it past the keeper with so much venom he came close to ripping a hole in the very fabric of time and the cosmos. Unfortunately, it was two feet wide of the post, the only outcome being a belief-defyingly large dent in the football goal. Anyway, despite those game-changing misses, David wins this week’s MoM. Congratulations!

Tough run coming up so we need to use this chastening but in some ways slightly unreflective defeat to pick ourselves up and learn very clearly what we have to do - improve basic skills, eliminate individual errors, keep energy levels up regardless of the score or the way the game’s going, and make in-game adjustments which combat the way the oppo is playing. There’s not much between us and the top sides in this division, but there IS a gap, and we need to think about how we can start closing it, both as a team, and as individuals.

Anyway, keep your heads up. It wasn’t our day, but with a bit more preparation, a bit more game time under our belts, and a good long look in the mirror, there’s no reason why we can’t bounce back better and stronger.

Spike