There were many times when Earing picked up the ball and there was no one in any space to pass to and there was little or no movement. No one coming short, no one making diagonal runs or trying to take defenders with them. Which would explain why there were times that the game was slowed down.
There were a few times he run the ball forwards and would probably have been better off having a pop.
Yes I agree with this. This shows exactly how difficult it is to play against 10 men that are behind the ball hanging on for a point. Space was at an absolute premium and the crowd were getting restless which is why I always felt we’d played well in general.
My whole argument stems from two things :-
I did say this wasn’t an exclusive list but just a generalisation of the types of comments I hate.
And
I rate Earing. He passes the ball well and is technically proficient. But I was just of the opinion that on Saturday he took too long to move the ball and spent too long with it at his feet not being decisive. That is in part due to the lack of space and / or movement but also, again, in my opinion because his skill set didn’t allow him to force an opening and because of this I didnt see him as the game changer.
Ultimately yes he carried and moved the ball arbitrarily on how quickly but it was the ability to beat a man at pace and change the game that won us the game and made the difference.
That’s just my opinion and ok I accept it may not be others 
Frigging hell, are you literally telling people what they can and can’t have an opinion on now.
Yes you actually did, you said…
You cannot say he had a greater impact than Comley.
That is absolutely and literally stating that someone with a different opinion to you, can’t say it.
Ridiculous. Just accept that on here your opinion is no more valid or invalid than anyone else’s, no matter how many games you played centre-half for the Pen and Wig over 40’s in 1995/6, or what stat apps you’ve got.
Halle-friggin-leugha. Try and keep that sentiment for the rest of the season’s match threads 
I’m not getting involved with Mr Dunning-Kruger again. 
“You cannot say” was really not meant as literally as you make out. I thought that was simple.
Na let’s keep matchday threads to discussions on the offside rule. Much more enjoyable.
Ah right, my bad. Taking a simple statement at literal face-value on a match thread, and failing to read into the deeper subtle, and non-binary inference 
…yeah. How thick of me.
Agreed
Tea time at yours…with a guest appearance from EL-N.
Think Earing made a difference by taking the ball up the Hutchison and allowing him to stay further forward (where he was more effective) rather than having to keep coming deep for it like he did when Comley was on. And if Hutchinson was not the best option, Earing has it in his locker to choose a better one.
Not knocking Brendan as he does do a lot of good work in breaking up the opposition play, but there was less of that needed against a 10-man Crawley than when they still had 11, and he is not a ball carrier or play maker as capable of getting us onto the front foot.
Gosh 
Shows commitment to the team, that.
I thought Hutchison was playing well and it seemed Earing took over and Hutchinson was quiet. Thank god he woke up for the threaded pass. Maddox was poor and though White thighed one in he cost one and nearly another. He was linking well with Bennett and thought that was a strange substitution. The sending off was massive because i thought they were the best team at the Bescot and were slicing us apart. The ref was easily the best here for years
At the risk of entering discussion 
I think this is true to a degree, although i don’t think Hutchinson went quiet, but it does emphasise my point that it was far easier to be getting on the ball deep when Crawley sat off and let us have it and far harder to find space and create nearer the penalty box where they were keener to engage.
Hutchinson was constantly on the move and asking for the ball in tighter areas and it took real patience to try and pick the right moments to take a risk and the right moments to keep it moving by playing simpler passes moving Crawley around.
This is where I’d agree that Earing was effective in his patience I just felt he needed to do that quicker and be braver. Ultimately as you say it was Hutchinson who eventually made the move to change the game.
I think that’s harsh on Maddox. He was working very hard to move the ball and find spaces to move it to. I think he was more than capable of doing what Earing came on and did but it was a sensible sub in as much as it was fresh legs and fresh ideas without disrupting the balance of the side.
Without wanting to annoy anyone I called the Knowles wide and Bennet off at half time. Bennet doesn’t do for me what he seems to do for everyone else 
and I felt Knowles had more threat to his play and was more likely to stretch Crawleys defence.
Completely agree. They looked a very complete side, strong agile and kept possession well and were tactically ahead of the game for 30 mins. Apart from the obvious GK, Joel Lynch has vast Championship experience, Nadesan has genuine pace, Teddy Jenks is an England youth international and Nichols is a league 1 player all day long. They will finish mid table comfortably.
One thing that didn’t help us on Saturday was the size of our pitch.
I think it is now (after Flynn narrowed it in the summer) the minimum specification.
Traditional Flynn ball would prefer a small pitch. Keep it compact, tight and difficult to play through. But now we are playing with a bit more flair, with marauding full/wingbacks you worry it might stymie us. Our improving form now means a point at Walsall is a good point rather than two dropped. Thereby placing an even bigger onus on us to break sides down.
One of the (many) faults of the Bescot design is the inability to make the pitch as big as it could be.
Really interesting. Was going to suggest it probably suits us defensively, but we’ve only conceded one more goal away (9) than at home.
It’s been discussed so many times, but the whole design of the Bescot is poor, from location, number of stanchions to pitchsize. Oh to knock it down and start afresh.
The only way I can think of making the playing area bigger is to knock the walls down and narrow the walkways infront of the seating areas and extend the playing surface.
My point with Bennett is that i like him at the back more as White is a liability there and more useful further forward. Maddox looked lost in the first half. Yet in other games has been great. Just needs consistency. Gordons trapping and running was great but jeez needs to shoot hard and low. Too be honest they were all doing it
Id like to think it doesnt make much difference in league two, but having just googled it our pitch is actually one of the smallest going.
By not just a few metres either. I believe ours is the minimum size allowed.
It is. It’s more the size the FA recommend for under 15’s and 16’s than adult. Which has undoubtedly helped some of our sides over the years and Flynn consciously narrowed it by two yards this summer (back to its width in the first couple of seasons at Bescot).
There will have been times though where a bigger pitch would have helped us. Having the choice would be nice, but guess there’s not much we can do now.
Was better for the villa ladies though- makes you think what we’re the real reasons for the pitch size
A conspiracy theory plucked out of thin air.