Bruce Wayne wrote:Modbury couldn't break through West Adelaide's defence, any shot they had was either 25 yards away, West's keeper didn't really have to make a save. Modbury were weak in defence(unusual considering I remember Modbury having great defenders), they did have a few decent players in the center of midfield but really lacked anything upfront.
yea i agree there coach has changed his formation from what i have herd
Nothing really worked for modbury today. The did not play well at all. Also a few incidents during the game with a couple of modbury and west adelaide players.
What happened to Blue Eagles today?
U12 Modbury v Salisbury 2-2
U13 Blue Eagles v Modbury 2-0
U14 Modbury v Raiders 2-0
U15 West Adeaide v Modbury 0-2
U16 West Adelaide v Modbury 6-0
U17 West Adelaide v Modbury 3-2
champion_101 wrote:U/17 A
Adel City 2 W.T Birkala 1
any other 17 A results
I heard city dropped some 19s for this one.
Why post this about dropping 19's when in the 15's forum you post this
QUOTE....this is a joke of a thread. get over it. city have lost a number of players this year but that is no excuse but who cares about dropping players its part of the game so get on with it/....UNQUOTE
Some people tell me that we professional players are soccer slaves. Well, if this is slavery, give me a life sentence. Bobby Charlton
champion_101 wrote:U/17 A
Adel City 2 W.T Birkala 1
any other 17 A results
I heard city dropped some 19s for this one.
Why post this about dropping 19's when in the 15's forum you post this
QUOTE....this is a joke of a thread. get over it. city have lost a number of players this year but that is no excuse but who cares about dropping players its part of the game so get on with it/....UNQUOTE
sorry i didnt quite make myself clear. juniors i dont see the problem with players dropping but from seniors to juniors i think that is a bit over the top.
champion_101 wrote:U/17 A
Adel City 2 W.T Birkala 1
any other 17 A results
I heard city dropped some 19s for this one.
I allowed one of my players to go down and help the 17s as they only had 11 players, plus he started on the bench. He only came on as one of the 17s got injured.
champion_101 wrote:U/17 A
Adel City 2 W.T Birkala 1
any other 17 A results
I heard city dropped some 19s for this one.
I allowed one of my players to go down and help the 17s as they only had 11 players, plus he started on the bench. He only came on as one of the 17s got injured.
Is that all cleared up for you Shrimper?
Birkalla were also low on numbers due to injuries and guess what, they had at least one U19 player as well, the difference being he started. All clubs shuffle players around, especially at this time of year as injuries mount up, so why do people make such a song and dance about it?
You'll find they ARE U/17, just normally playing at a higher level. That same Birkalla team has players eligible to play in the U/15s but are assigned to the U/17 team for this season.
Clubs shuffle kids all over the place but despite accusations to the contrary, it's rare for an overage kid to play.
Bruce Wayne wrote:Modbury couldn't break through West Adelaide's defence, any shot they had was either 25 yards away, West's keeper didn't really have to make a save. Modbury were weak in defence(unusual considering I remember Modbury having great defenders), they did have a few decent players in the center of midfield but really lacked anything upfront.
yea i agree there coach has changed his formation from what i have herd
Nothing really worked for modbury today. The did not play well at all. Also a few incidents during the game with a couple of modbury and west adelaide players.
What happened to Blue Eagles today?
Im guessing we are talking about the 15s game? I HAVE heard the coach of modbury has changed the formation as the_red_devils has said, dont you think that that would make a difference being so use to using the same formation over the passed years. If Modbury's defence were so weak how come west adelaide didnt score a goal then aye?