Team news, live updates and reaction all here this afternoon:
https://www.gloucestershirelive.co.uk/s ... d-10393773
Cambridge United v Cheltenham Town
Moderators: Admin, Ralph, asl, Robin
Are the BBC sure? Surely Dale Vince is first to everything new?!
-
- Posts: 112
- Joined: 28 May 2012, 19:23
2 things.....
1. Quite agree about the front 4, In theory (of course!) George bustling about being a nuisance & creating gaps for the 3 behind him to exploit could work very well.
2. This particular Forest Green thing is a good initiative (I'm ignoring the AI nonsense for now). All clubs should do it (though I can think of times recently when I thought watching CTFC was actually detrimental to my mental health, especially the 'Buckle' chapter) . Just because it's 'him' (Vincent, obvs) doesn't automatically make it a bad thing..........
https://www.theguardian.com/football/20 ... tal-health
1. Quite agree about the front 4, In theory (of course!) George bustling about being a nuisance & creating gaps for the 3 behind him to exploit could work very well.
2. This particular Forest Green thing is a good initiative (I'm ignoring the AI nonsense for now). All clubs should do it (though I can think of times recently when I thought watching CTFC was actually detrimental to my mental health, especially the 'Buckle' chapter) . Just because it's 'him' (Vincent, obvs) doesn't automatically make it a bad thing..........
https://www.theguardian.com/football/20 ... tal-health
Quite a lots of our players have had a bad time with injuries - Pell, Cundy spring to mind - and tbh if they weren't injury prone they wouldn't be playing at CTFC.

Maybe Garlick should invest in an improved medical unit - to keep as many of our players fit as possible?
Archer's looked good, as has Kins, Miller and Anderson, imho. Broom has been fairly anonymous and Thomas is being marked out of the game - but looks threatening.
We've actually looked fairly self-assured, pinging short triangles with confidence. Cundy worries me and I can't imagine Wilson will be on the bench behind him for many matches.
We've actually looked fairly self-assured, pinging short triangles with confidence. Cundy worries me and I can't imagine Wilson will be on the bench behind him for many matches.
AJ-B for Thomas in the second half to give Power a bit of protection? JT is coming back from a niggle...asl wrote: ↑02 Aug 2025, 14:54 Archer's looked good, as has Kins, Miller and Anderson, imho. Broom has been fairly anonymous and Thomas is being marked out of the game - but looks threatening.
We've actually looked fairly self-assured, pinging short triangles with confidence. Cundy worries me and I can't imagine Wilson will be on the bench behind him for many matches.
Tactics have been poor as much as anything.
And, I know it's only the first game and I'm moaning about them again already, but the very definition of a homer ref. The inconsistency is the only consistent. As always. Terrible. Will barely give anything to us but can't give them free kicks quick enough.
And, I know it's only the first game and I'm moaning about them again already, but the very definition of a homer ref. The inconsistency is the only consistent. As always. Terrible. Will barely give anything to us but can't give them free kicks quick enough.
Last edited by Shade on 02 Aug 2025, 15:47, edited 1 time in total.
- Injury-prone defenders prone to a rick or two.
- Keeper with zero competition for his place.
- Goals dependant on a piece of magic from wingers or striker.
Is that the sort of thing you mean Shade? Broom has just recently come back here - so he'll need time to gel with the midfield and strikers. JT had a niggle - so not at his best.
On the other hand, with the exception of last year, we always do badly on the first day of the season
Bit of a whimper of a start to the season.
Expecting us to go to 442 next game and longer term 352
Wing backs of Aoioki(sp?) and AJB and 3 of the 4 CBs with Kins and Young in front would look very strong
All dependant on us actually being able to cross and hit a good set piece
Expecting us to go to 442 next game and longer term 352
Wing backs of Aoioki(sp?) and AJB and 3 of the 4 CBs with Kins and Young in front would look very strong
All dependant on us actually being able to cross and hit a good set piece

-
- Posts: 2705
- Joined: 15 Aug 2011, 16:40
Felt like an extension of the pre-season friendlies. Bed the new arrivals in, hope to nick a point.
Suspect Cambridge will be sniffing around the playoffs and we pretty much matched them. So, not horrendous by any means.
Oh, and the anti-Flynn Twitter and Facebook meltdowns can get in the bin. If they’d care to identify an available manager, who’d be prepared to come to Cheltenham and do better than Flynn with our budget, then I’m all ears.
Suspect Cambridge will be sniffing around the playoffs and we pretty much matched them. So, not horrendous by any means.
Oh, and the anti-Flynn Twitter and Facebook meltdowns can get in the bin. If they’d care to identify an available manager, who’d be prepared to come to Cheltenham and do better than Flynn with our budget, then I’m all ears.
Pretty much. And that when it's not our day, playing uninspiring football, nobody will change it. Basically the same as the performance at Bromley on the last day of last season.RS1978 wrote: ↑02 Aug 2025, 16:11- Injury-prone defenders prone to a rick or two.
- Keeper with zero competition for his place.
- Goals dependant on a piece of magic from wingers or striker.
Is that the sort of thing you mean Shade? Broom has just recently come back here - so he'll need time to gel with the midfield and strikers. JT had a niggle - so not at his best.
On the other hand, with the exception of last year, we always do badly on the first day of the season![]()
-
- Posts: 1896
- Joined: 03 Dec 2009, 09:22
- Location: Cotswolds
Found the game on sky eventually!
1st 1/2 CFC just nicked it; a couple of chances for us; one decent save. 2nd 1/2 poor; woeful defending for the goal - an open a goal as could be! Corners and the odd free kick aimless; ref a little one sided I thought; CFC bias. CFC showed more skill in controlling and using the ball; when in good positions our forwards tended to lose the ball, lacking that control edge/skill?
Still all teams locally didn't fare well; hopefully an improvement in the next game, but too soon for definitive judgement.
1st 1/2 CFC just nicked it; a couple of chances for us; one decent save. 2nd 1/2 poor; woeful defending for the goal - an open a goal as could be! Corners and the odd free kick aimless; ref a little one sided I thought; CFC bias. CFC showed more skill in controlling and using the ball; when in good positions our forwards tended to lose the ball, lacking that control edge/skill?
Still all teams locally didn't fare well; hopefully an improvement in the next game, but too soon for definitive judgement.
Not sure what the Cambridge fans watched today, but they’re banging on about they completely dominated and it should’ve been a rout. Lmfao. I think they may have illusions of grandeur. As for us, it’s weird because our lads showed commitment and effort, but the movement off the ball was very static, miller looked lost and like he had lead boots on. The referee was next level bad. Just a very poor game from two poor (on the day) sides. I’m optimistic the team cohesion will get there though. There were a few nice passages of passing let down by the end product.
I hope that the cohesion comes quickly as we've got Chesterfield, Franchise, then Bromley and Barnet - those last two look like the sort of teams that we were bullied against last season, so hopefully Pell and Blackwell will be fit by thennitram82 wrote: ↑02 Aug 2025, 19:30 Not sure what the Cambridge fans watched today, but they’re banging on about they completely dominated and it should’ve been a rout. Lmfao. I think they may have illusions of grandeur. As for us, it’s weird because our lads showed commitment and effort, but the movement off the ball was very static, miller looked lost and like he had lead boots on. The referee was next level bad. Just a very poor game from two poor (on the day) sides. I’m optimistic the team cohesion will get there though. There were a few nice passages of passing let down by the end product.
I think this season might be tougher for JT and Archer - JT was double-teamed most attacks - and opponents will have detailed plans to stop them now. With Dulson and Taylor gone, Angol, Bickerstaff and Miller need to hit the ground running against Chesterfield and Mk.
So CFC is Cambridge rather than Cheltenham?theidlerich wrote: ↑02 Aug 2025, 19:13 Found the game on sky eventually!
1st 1/2 CFC just nicked it; a couple of chances for us; one decent save. 2nd 1/2 poor; woeful defending for the goal - an open a goal as could be! Corners and the odd free kick aimless; ref a little one sided I thought; CFC bias. CFC showed more skill in controlling and using the ball; when in good positions our forwards tended to lose the ball, lacking that control edge/skill?
Still all teams locally didn't fare well; hopefully an improvement in the next game, but too soon for definitive judgement.
Not long back, a game of two halves but nothing really between the two sides in the match and sense was whoever scored first would win it. Unsure if there is a slope on the pitch but both teams shooting towards away end seemed to have the better of it. First half Cambridge had zero threat and just appeared to be kicking it long which we dealt with very easily. First half we were winning all the second balls and playing some fairly decent football but didn't take our chances, could have gone in 2 or 3 goals up if we did. Second half complete role reversal, Cambridge seemed to win all the second balls, stopped kicking it long and were were working really well off their forward with runners coming from deep but I don't think they managed more than one or two shots on our goal the entire game. Not sure if it was fitness or just tactics but the levels seemed to drop second half, a lot more static defending and much more aimless punts.
Overall a game we could have won but equally can't have huge complaints we lost either. Never happy losing but it wasn't a terrible performance but the final thirty minutes give some room for concern particularly about coaching and tactics.
Final thought - I am far from clear what our best team is other than three or four who you would think are guaranteed starters. That could be a good thing or a bad thing depending upon how you look at it.
Overall a game we could have won but equally can't have huge complaints we lost either. Never happy losing but it wasn't a terrible performance but the final thirty minutes give some room for concern particularly about coaching and tactics.
Final thought - I am far from clear what our best team is other than three or four who you would think are guaranteed starters. That could be a good thing or a bad thing depending upon how you look at it.