1-1 v Maidstone

[sponge]

Slightly fortunate draw but the boys battled hard. Pathetic turnout from the Hill - outnumbered 10-1 by Maidstone. What has gone wrong with our club ?

[refsworstenemy]

Might be to do with the match being moved to Worthing. There has to be a good 5 or 6 grounds nearer to us than Worthing, although I am sure there is some reason behind the choice.

[brightonmike]

Tell the team "they were fortunate" to get a draw !!!
Maidstone are a highly driven and very aggressive side, (and I don't like 'em!), we competed well for most of the match, and had the front players to get through them too.
I think this game will make us stronger, maybe even a 'turning point'.
Sadly Clay Lamont ended up in hospital, with a bad ankle injury - get well soon.

[jeffstones]

Poor turnout by both set of fans.The change of venue didnt help and im certain there would have been 300 if it was at Leylands Park.Some of our fans did tun up at Burgess Hill unaware of the change and i understand quite a lot of Hillians were waiting outside also unaware.As for the match,we should have won and your goalie was the main reason we didnt.

Best of luck for the rest of the season.

[orue]

Brightonmike wrote "Maidstone are a highly driven and aggressive side".
I was sat up in the stand and heard their chairmen get up from his seat in utter disgust at Maidstones tactics which were as follows, 20 mins into the game their number 3 demolishes our number 9 into the hoardings leaving him unconcious for minutes,the ref does nothing, by the way this very players pen pic in the programme describes him as having a huge appetite for the physical side of the game, "dirty bastard then!. 85 minutes their number ? elbows our player not 3 yards from the ref,1 broken nose and claret everywhere and the ref wasn't going to send the player off until he saw the blood. Generally Maidstone were a nasty, vindictive side who were a disgrace to their club. Highly driven is one thing but what I saw last night was more than that. If that bunch of hooligans is their managers idea of focused and channelled competitiveness, then I suggest they prepare themselves for the reputation that will follow. The ref was not good enough for the game last night.This is not sour grapes in any way,Maidstone did deserve to win and whilst we were under the cosh for large parts of the game, there were a couple of chances when we could have nicked it. I feel sorry for the lads that they have to face them again.

[orue]

Brightonmike wrote "Maidstone are a highly driven and aggressive side".
I was sat up in the stand and heard their chairmen get up from his seat in utter disgust at Maidstones tactics which were as follows, 20 mins into the game their number 3 demolishes our number 9 into the hoardings leaving him unconcious for minutes,the ref does nothing, by the way this very players pen pic in the programme describes him as having a huge appetite for the physical side of the game, "dirty bastard then!. 85 minutes their number ? elbows our player not 3 yards from the ref,1 broken nose and claret everywhere and the ref wasn't going to send the player off until he saw the blood. Generally Maidstone were a nasty, vindictive side who were a disgrace to their club. Highly driven is one thing but what I saw last night was more than that. If that bunch of hooligans is their managers idea of focused and channelled competitiveness, then I suggest they prepare themselves for the reputation that will follow. The ref was not good enough for the game last night.This is not sour grapes in any way,Maidstone did deserve to win and whilst we were under the cosh for large parts of the game, there were a couple of chances when we could have nicked it. I feel sorry for the lads that they have to face them again.

[waspexile]

Sponge, Lost me and a friend last night. he was on call and had to be near home (although seriously considering a wireless laptop in the stand!) and i would have been just about on time if match at home, but Worthing? No chance.

Bad news so many fans from both sides turning up at the Park - but i guess very little you can do at short notice.

[tim]

I'm sorry orue, but you've got that totally wrong pal, The Stones team that night were not partically agressive, apart from the two incidents you mentioned, and I think that you would normaly have more than two contentious issues in any match. Your boys went unpunished for some nasty stuff, thats football.
Craig Roser (3) is not a dirty player, he is strong in the tackle and holds his ground, and is a competitor.
As for the sending off, your player was holding his shirt and kicking him. No excuse if he diliberately elbowed your man he will get his punishment.
The Jury is still out on that one, some say he was trying to free himself of your mans attention. I was behind the goal therefore did not see it.
To say Maidstone are a disgrace is crazy, as both teams played some good passing football on the deck during a very enjoyable match.
I suggest you re read your post and tell me if you really believe your comments are a fair reflection of that match.

[brightonmike]

"not partically agressive"
Well you spelt 'not' correctly. I'll be following Maidstone's results: hoping to see that they have been 'ironed out'.

[tim]

Very cleaver, picked up on a couple of typo's then 'not particularly aggressive' happy now!
The points have been missed completely by you
Enjoy following our results, I will not bother with yours!

[refsworstenemy]

Not having watched the game I have no animosity towards Maidstone football club and wish them all the best, but certain people may want to consider whether their comments might be better appreciated on their own club's message board and that as an ambassador for their club they might provide a better reputation for that club by not deliberately provoking other supporters.

[Deleted]

I was there and there were some "hard" tackles and this was unneccessary. Stones have some class in the team and won't be at this level for long so why they had to be so violent was a mystery. Well hearing the managers outpourings through the second half gives me part of the answer. Shame, stones fans at both matches have shown they are good supporters, bit of banter, etc.

I was about 5 metres from the first elbow incident, stones number 3 did raise his elbow and swing it into Lukes chest with enough force to throw him backwards into the hoarding, 15 minutes later in full view of the ref he elbowed Luke again when Luke was walking past him. There were a couple of late challenges from both sides which I attribute to the ref never having control of the game.

As to we were lucky, the stones goal was lucky it came from a dropped ball by Andre who appeared to be under no pressure at all, this is a great shame as he was magnificent all night even when under real pressure.

We did have some chances to win and could have gone home with 3 points, stones had more chances and controlled the game more but football is about goals, as we know to our cost this year.

Upfront looked good again, with 3 in attack, midfield did enough and held off a lot of pressure at times, defence looked in good shape with Andre in good form.

This match was about attitude and we again showed real spirit otherwise we would have been looking at a seriously embarassing result.

Not sure about the 4-3-3, I prefer 4-4-2 but with everyone playing well it does mean we keep some of the opposition back and take the pressure off defence.

Tim and Mike leave my spellling out of it.