Yes, another for Clarke. But isn't it perverse that with six forward looking players on the pitch across the piece and they having two attacks in 100 minutes, one of which we gave them, Clarke is out in front as MoM? Azaz produced long-range shots but I'm afraid he is way too lightweight against a stubborn back 11 and I can't see any improvement in his time here. Did it REALLY take 78 minutes to see that he wasn't going to make a difference? Or NINETY to bring on our battering ram? I'm sorry, but that defeat belongs to those OFF the pitch more than some on it with the possible exception of Jones.Says a lot about Clarke that he's still MOTM in a game where we did a lot less defending than attacking. Wouldn't have surprised me if it had been him who broke the deadlock rather than a more attacking player.
Hackney did well but definitely blotted his copy book by totally bottling a 50/50 challengeClarke was easily our best performer for me and some are aware I've not exactly been a fan of his. He has started this season superbly and looks excellent.
I thought one or two had good spells but nobody else had a good match overall.
I was encouraged by Hackney in the second half who was better than Morris today.
Latte Lath had no service, in fact those supposed to provide for him crowded him out.
The mistake by Jones sucked the life out of him.
Exactly, freak loss my ass.Not sure about the freak loss quote mind.
Where have you been for the last two seasons?
As for MOM I'd go with Clarke.
Our xg suggests we should have scored at least 1 goal, 1.73.Clarke by an absolute mile.
Azaz and Burgzorg weren't bad though.
I honestly think, if that game was played again, we'd win that game 6 or 7 out of 10 times.
We gave them a gift of a goal, which isn't like us, and we created/had so many chances to score.
20 shots to their 3 for example.
Fair play to them, they took their chance and camped and it worked.