Player Ratings - wolves (H)

[goldstone]

Stockdale 7. Couple of good saves and sorted himself out after Saturday.
Bruno 7. At least one attempt to make an ass of himself again with some fancy stuff too close to our goal, but overall a good game with one or two sublime moments.
Duffy 8.
Dunk 9. Got his head to everything and some decent runs to carry the ball out of defence. MoM.
Bong 8. Getting better and better. Very close to his pre-injury form. Great cross for the goal.
Sidwell 7.
Norwood 8. His best game for us. Some great distribution.
Knockhaert 8. Some sublime stuff, but still a tendency to hold on to the ball for too long on occasions.
Skalak 7.
Baldock 8. Excellent goal and all-round good performance. Why was he subbed?
Murray 6. Not his night.

Subs:
Stephens 7. OK
Goldson 7.
Pocognoli N/A

Manager 6. His substitutions very nearly cost us two points for the second successive game.

 

[Ninja Elephant]

Stockdale 8 Kept it simple, couple of good saves and generally a calm presence.
Bruno 6 Not at his best, a few misplaced passes but some awesome touches.
Duffy 8 Heads it, kicks it, throws himself at it.
Dunk 8 Another top performance, he has matured so much over the last year.
Bong 7 Cracking assist, did everything asked of him.
Knockaert 9 Mental how good he is, absolutely mental.
Sidwell 7 Did a very quiet and effective job for the team.
Norwood 8 Spreaded passes all over the show, covered a lot of ground and looks a solid player.
Skalak 7 A few glimpses of what he brings, but still looks uncomfortable on the left.
Baldock 8 Finally found some form and playing like a £2million striker. He played very well, long may the form continue.
Murray 6 By contrast, Murray was tosh.

Subs
Goldson 7 Good to see him back on the pitch.
Stephens N/A Can't really rate but he cleared a couple during the final madness.
Pocognoli N/A Also unjudgable but his name makes me happy.

 

[One Love]

Very surprised at the high ratings.

We are used to dominating teams at home but Wolves matched us and probably deserved a point. The stats back this up as well.

So either Wolves are far better than their league position says and the best team we've had here for a while or we just didn't play very well. I thought the latter.

 

[Machiavelli]

Very surprised at the high ratings.

We are used to dominating teams at home but Wolves matched us and probably deserved a point. The stats back this up as well.

So either Wolves are far better than their league position says and the best team we've had here for a while or we just didn't play very well. I thought the latter.

I thought the former. With the probable exception of Brentford, Wolves were the best opponents I've seen at the Amex this season. I suspect they'll get better too, once they've worked out all the different formations that they're expected to play during a game (I noticed three, maybe even four last night). They have a lot of height, pace and power in their squad, looked well organised, and moved the ball around well.
It was a cracking game last night, and Wolves very much contributed to that, with several different passages of play.

 

[Withdean11]

Stockdale - 7.1
Bruno - 7.2
Duffy - 7.6
Dunk - 7.9
Bong - 7.7
Knockaert - 8.0
Norwood - 7.8
Sidwell - 7.5
Skalak - 7.5
Baldock - 7.9
Murray - 6.8

 

[aolstudios]

Stockdale - 7
Bruno - 6.5
Duffy - 7
Dunk - 8
Bong - 7
Knockaert - 8
Norwood - 7
Sidwell - 8 mom
Skalak - 7
Baldock - 7.5
Murray - 6

 

[stss30]

Very surprised at the high ratings.

We are used to dominating teams at home but Wolves matched us and probably deserved a point. The stats back this up as well.

So either Wolves are far better than their league position says and the best team we've had here for a while or we just didn't play very well. I thought the latter.

We weren't at our best but don't forget we failed to win against Wolves even last season so it has to down as a good result and a solid performance for me.

 

[Marshy]

Stockdale 7

Bruno 6
Bong 6
Duffy 7
Dunk 8


Knockaert 8
Skalak 7
Sidwell 7
Norwood 8 Mom

Baldock 7
Murray 6

 

[Marshy]

Very surprised at the high ratings.

We are used to dominating teams at home but Wolves matched us and probably deserved a point. The stats back this up as well.

So either Wolves are far better than their league position says and the best team we've had here for a while or we just didn't play very well. I thought the latter.

Dont see how Wolves deserved a point, bar the final effort they never looked like scoring. Well deserved victory much like Saturday should have been

 

[Sheebo]

Very surprised at the high ratings.

We are used to dominating teams at home but Wolves matched us and probably deserved a point. The stats back this up as well.

So either Wolves are far better than their league position says and the best team we've had here for a while or we just didn't play very well. I thought the latter.

All about opinions. Mine is halfway between yours and those saying we should have won comfortably by 2 or 3 - so I think 1-0 to us was a spot on fair score. Also, lots of Wolves fans opinions I've seen suggest they thought we deserved it - just got to look at the tweets after their manager said there was not much in it to see that. Also seems their local radio comms had no complaints on the defeat. I thought Wolves were very good and that meant we had to dig in and couldn't dominate the game like we did on Saturday...

 

[sussex_guy2k2]

Stockdale 7 - decent game. A few routine saves. Could be more commanding still.
Bruno 7 - better, but still not quite up there to his usual standard. Some excellent crosses and good defending, balanced out by giving the ball away (and into touch) a couple too many times.
Duffy 7 - good again, but distribution still isn't where it needs to be.
Dunk 8 - very good again.
Bong 8 - continued his fine recent form. Got another assist. Defended well.
Knockaert 8 - another game without the end product he deserved, but constantly threatened and some of the things he did were absolute magic.
Sidwell 8 - probably the best I've seen him play, particularly considering he and Norwood were outnumbered. Still needs to break forward a tad more.
Norwood 8 - excellent at retaining possession. A calming influence throughout much of the game.
Skalak 7 - the best I've seen him play this season. A better end product is the next step. Worked hard defensively though.
Baldock 8 - ran the channels well, got his goal. Needs to hold the ball better still, but he played well.
Murray 4 - unfortunately he just had one of those games. The difference between Saturday and last night was massive.

Subs were all a 6, with nothing really to note.

 

[biddles911]

All about opinions. Mine is halfway between yours and those saying we should have won comfortably by 2 or 3 - so I think 1-0 to us was a spot on fair score. Also, lots of Wolves fans opinions I've seen suggest they thought we deserved it - just got to look at the tweets after their manager said there was not much in it to see that. Also seems their local radio comms had no complaints on the defeat. I thought Wolves were very good and that meant we had to dig in and couldn't dominate the game like we did on Saturday...

Think if we'd got that second goal earlier the floodgates might have opened. We came agonisingly close to scoring several times unlike Wolves who looked decent up till the last third of the pitch but rarely threatened until injury time.

Beginning to think CH likes to keep his defence fully occupied in the last period of the game just to give them a proper workout by his substitutions!

And why on earth substitute AK in the last few minutes when he's our best player at holding onto the ball to run the clock down!?

Bit surprised at the high marks for Stockdale too. Made a few decent saves but his punching was terrible on several occasions and kept us under pressure.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[DarrenFreemansPerm]

Sidwell was magnificent last night, broke up so many Wolves attacks through the middle, blocked two goal bound shots and generally covered the whole pitch. He was my MOTM pick.

 

[Finchley Seagull]

I thought the former. With the probable exception of Brentford, Wolves were the best opponents I've seen at the Amex this season. I suspect they'll get better too, once they've worked out all the different formations that they're expected to play during a game (I noticed three, maybe even four last night). They have a lot of height, pace and power in their squad, looked well organised, and moved the ball around well.
It was a cracking game last night, and Wolves very much contributed to that, with several different passages of play.

Agree with this. Wolves were happy to come and play (unlike Preston and many others coming to the Amex), which made for an open game between two good teams. I thought we played very well overall and were generally in control of the game except for a mad injury time at the end with all those corners. If the game had ended at 90 minutes I think we'd have all said that was reasonably comfortable but that period of injury time made Wolves look more deserving of a point.

 

[Finchley Seagull]

Very surprised at the high ratings.

We are used to dominating teams at home but Wolves matched us and probably deserved a point. The stats back this up as well.

So either Wolves are far better than their league position says and the best team we've had here for a while or we just didn't play very well. I thought the latter.

Out of interest, what do you expect? It's the Championship. Games are often very tight and decided by one goal. I disagree with your thoughts on it as I think we were quite comfortable until injury time against a decent Wolves team. One of the players who came on at half time cost them £6.5 million in the summer so they are obviously a decent team. I'm pleased we won and think we did deserve it. It's all about opinions but, personally, I think you are being harsh.

 

[Machiavelli]

Agree with this. Wolves were happy to come and play (unlike Preston and many others coming to the Amex), which made for an open game between two good teams. I thought we played very well overall and were generally in control of the game except for a mad injury time at the end with all those corners. If the game had ended at 90 minutes I think we'd have all said that was reasonably comfortable but that period of injury time made Wolves look more deserving of a point.

You pick out Preston, but they seemed more ambitious than the then current league leaders when they came to the Amex. Huddersfield's game plan was a Brighton nil, that didn't happen, but a Huddersfield nil did.

 

[Finchley Seagull]

You pick out Preston, but they seemed more ambitious than the then current league leaders when they came to the Amex. Huddersfield's game plan was a Brighton nil, that didn't happen, but a Huddersfield nil did.

Fair point. I only mentioned Preston as they were the most recent example. Agree about Huddersfield. Very unambitious considering the start they had

 

[Machiavelli]

Fair point. I only mentioned Preston as they were the most recent example. Agree about Huddersfield. Very unambitious considering the start they had

Tis Preston 1 Huddersfield 0 at present

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

I thought the former. With the probable exception of Brentford, Wolves were the best opponents I've seen at the Amex this season. I suspect they'll get better too, once they've worked out all the different formations that they're expected to play during a game (I noticed three, maybe even four last night). They have a lot of height, pace and power in their squad, looked well organised, and moved the ball around well.
It was a cracking game last night, and Wolves very much contributed to that, with several different passages of play.

Good call.

I liked the look of Wolves last night, thought they looked dangerous coming forward and when Dicko is fit, they might be more of a threat, as they do have a lot of pace. What might undo them is that there defenders didn't look as comfortable in possession as the rest of their team.

 

[sir albion]

Great to see bong getting back to his best