When we all look back over a game, it is easy to be blinded by the most recent events. If you are poor in the first half, but smash three in ten minutes in the second, fans leave on a high. If you’re 2-1 up and concede a last-minute goal, it feels like a defeat, but if you’re 2-0 down and score twice in the final ten minutes, it feels like a win. I do think a lot of the negative reaction to yesterday, mine included, is a direct result of the second period.
Five mad minutes – I’m pretty sure that’s how I heard the period after half time referred to. Around me, there was a feeling Burton had come out and got the wind in their sails, but the truth is they hadn’t. They perhaps looked lively for a couple of minutes, but in that period, 45-60 minutes, there was one shot from either side off target. We had 60% possession, and they scored their goal, or rather we scored their goal.
Firstly, the obvious talking point is the red card. I have absolutely no complaints, and whilst replays are not entirely conclusive, my eyes were. My first reaction after the challenge was ‘never a red’, etc, but that was just the Lincoln fan in me being optimistic. I knew as I watched it happen it was a horrible challenge. As soon as I’d said it wasn’t a red, I knew it was. I had a slim hope that Ryan Sweeney might be sent off for pushing Mandroiu over in the melee as well, and perhaps in the Premier League, he would be, but if he had been, it wouldn’t have been fair. Rebecca Welch, the match official, called it right, as she did 95% of the decisions throguhout the game. I thought she was excellent throguhout, by the way – one of the strongest officials we’ve had at the Bank this season.
From the red card, we had a lot to think about – were we going to protect a 0-0? If so, we needed to keep things the same, keep it tight and perhaps just arrange ourselves into a 3-5-1 formation, hoping to hit Reeco up top. The key to that was not conceding – we hadn’t looked like conceding all game, so there was no reason to panic. Our chances of winning the game went as Mandroiu trudged off down the tunnel, but losing it? That was still something we could avoid.
Another corner, another set piece delivered into the box and the game was gone. How many times? We didn’t defend a set piece at the near post against West Ham, we didn’t defend a set piece against Carlisle in the same position, and here we are with a carbon copy, only this time, we stuck the ball in the net ourselves. The replay isn’t great because of the angle of the sun, but Jensen’s reaction suggests maybe Burroughs could have done better. I like Jack, he’s had a decent start to his Imps career so I’m not going to pile in on him, but the question has to be asked – when are we going to stop conceding sloppy goals from set pieces?
It’s actually a good question – how do we have one of the poorest aerial duels won in the division? I tweeted some stats last night, and we’ve won 41.7% of our aerial duels; only Wigan have won fewer (40.4%). We lauded the arrival of bigger players this season, but in actuality, we’ve not been dominant in the air. We load the box for attacks but rarely win first contact, and we’re often found struggling to defend set pieces. If we get a corner, or a long throw, I feel there’s potential to cause panic, but it doesn’t feel like we often make our size work. A point for concern? I’ll let you decide that.
What really disappointed me was the immediate response to going 1-0 down. It felt, perhaps for 20 minutes, as if we were defending a 1-0 defeat. Maybe I’m being harsh here, there’s not a lot we could do against six at the back after gifting them a 1-0 lead, but it felt so frustrating. We brought Haks on, but it felt like perhaps that was as much about launching throws into the box, throws we’ve just explored we struggled to win. In fact, it wasn’t until 82 minutes I felt we made the changes that made us look dangerous, bringing Roughan on to push Burroughs forward and going with Duffy and Haks up top. Indeed, from the sending-off until 82 minutes, we had one effort from Ethan Hamilton. After the changes, we had three – Lasse and two more from Hamilton.
On the face of it, that was that, a poor result against a team difficult to break down. The optimist in me says, ‘sure, we’re the architects of our own downfall‘ with the red card and the own goal. Those saying MK has reverted to negative football forget each game is different, and ‘just getting it forward’ against a team with six at the back is not that easy. Yes, I feel there were other options we might have explored, but as a standalone result, I can see plenty of reasons why we don’t have to panic. No strikers, tough opposition, down to ten men etc. We’re never going to tear a team like that to shreds, and just because Jamie Mackie thought it was boring doesn’t mean Mark Kennedy should be sacked. We’re not Birmingham City.
What did concern me a little was some of the body language and some of the post-match stuff. It was mentioned against Peterborough and was evident again yesterday – some of our players were arguing amongst themselves. Mandroiu sent one ball out of play and blamed Burroughs. Runs went long when balls went short and vice versa, resulting in bickering. I think back now to the penalty against Blackpool, which Tyler Walker should have taken, given he was identified in the post-match as being on penalties, but Ted Bishop did after an argument.
It just seemed yesterday like the togetherness of the squad had fallen away a little, but have there been cracks before this? Maybe it’s perception, maybe it’s the bad run, but it did feel as if there was a bit of a negative atmosphere. When Ethan Erhahon went off, he went straight down the tunnel, clearly upset at being removed. It just didn’t feel like a happy camp at all, which could be an outcome of a single game, but when you throw the same symptoms from the Posh game into the mix, it does give mild cause for concern.
I was also interested to hear the post-match comments from Mark. Up until a couple of weeks ago, he would never call individual players out. Never. He would say ‘individual mistakes’ but never name players. Then, last week against Posh, he named Sean Roughan for missing a chance, which piqued my mate Pete’s interest; he messaged straight away and said, ‘I think Roughan will be dropped next week’. He was. In midweek, it was Jovon who took some personal critique, with undertones around his attitude in the post-match. Obviously, Danny Mandroiu deserved some criticism, but to the extent he got? The whole post-match was seemingly pointed at questioning attitudes, and that is going to be the narrative after the game for supporters. The Mandroiu pile-on probably didn’t need petrol on the flames, but now the accepted rhetoric is that he has an attitude problem. Maybe Danny needs it out there, maybe it will work, but that’s three times in eight days players have been mentioned directly in the post-match comments.
Is it an exasperated head coach running out of patience with players he is keen to rely on? I’m not sure, but what I do know is we need to work hard this week towards getting something at Fleetwood. Mark Kennedy has twice mentioned being in the ‘getting sacked business’ in recent weeks, and whilst that isn’t something I think is reasonable at the moment, given the circumstances around the squad, it has again set a narrative for some. If a wild fan online says it, it can be ignored, but when the head coach specifically refers to it in interviews, it almost lights the touchpaper for those supporters.
I came away disappointed yesterday for a number of reasons. A poor red card, a poor goal and no real reaction between the red card (57 minutes) and the second raft of subs (82 minutes). I get people’s frustration – if the Orient result stands, that is six defeats in eight matches, with our wins coming against a team of kids and a Cheltenham side that hadn’t scored a goal all season. I get the mutterings of discontent, and whilst I won’t echo them right now, I have to say I’m looking forward to seeing some sort of reaction next week.
We need it. The squad needs it. Mark needs it.