We use cookies - they help us provide you with a better online experience.
By using our website you accept that we may store and access cookies on your device.

previous 6/10 next 8/10  Saldus 0 - 4 Cesis (381569377)

Fairly good weather for football had drawn a crowd of 7000 to Saldus Stadium. Mirko Kamm was the appointed referee with assistance provided by Ossi Mallinen and Robertus Veld. Saldus tactics involved an interesting 4-4-2 combination. Starters: Bikšāns - Zapāns, Kandavnieks, Vašers, Chirkov - Zeinis, Kozlov, Zarubin, Zīds - Burka, Mellups.

A 4-4-2 alignment was the formation of choice for Cesis. The following players took the field: Lapskalns - Nużyński, Namdaris, Kolesnikov, Jirgens - Tikhonov, Pimenov, Fabriciuss, Volframs - Breģis, Rumin.

The terraces were silenced after 3 minutes when Cesis's V. Tikhonov put the guests ahead 0 - 1, following an attack on the right. After 5 minutes, an incisive pass through the middle gave A. Breģis a chance to increase the lead for Cesis, and he did not disappoint. The score was then 0 - 2. After this, you could see that the players of Cesis were more interested in killing time than scoring more goals. The teams went for the halftime break at 0 - 2. Cesis had most of the ball, with 55 percent of possession.

The home crowd was not impressed when L. Rumin came in from the right, shooting hard to score after 63 minutes. Cesis were now up 0 - 3. After 73 minutes, a mistake by the home side's left defence allowed I. Fabriciuss to get through. He outclassed the home side's keeper, adding another goal for the visitors. 0 - 4. 74 minutes into the game, Cesis worked the left side industriously creating several opportunities to add to their lead, but just couldn't apply the finishing touch. Cesis enjoyed most of the ball, as they maintained 53 percent of possession.

Most important Saldus player was E. Mellups. O. Bikšāns on the other hand, had a terrible day. The most dominating Cesis player was without a doubt V. Tikhonov. On the other hand, G. Namdaris's play was disheartening. The match ends 0 - 4.

Rating details

Midfield disastrous (very high) wretched (very low) 4 5 1/20 2/20
Right defence wretched (low) poor (low) 6 10 2/20 3/20
Central defence poor (very low) poor (low) 9 10 3/20 3/20
Left defence wretched (very low) poor (very low) 5 9 2/20 3/20
Right attack wretched (low) wretched (very low) 6 5 2/20 2/20
Central attack poor (very low) disastrous (very high) 9 4 3/20 1/20
Left attack wretched (very high) wretched (very low) 8 5 2/20 2/20
 
Indirect set pieces
Defence poor (low) poor (very low) 10 9 3/20 3/20
Attack poor (very low) poor (low) 9 10 3/20 3/20
 
Team attitude (Hidden) (Hidden)
Tactic Normal Normal
Tactic skill (no tactic) (no tactic) (no tactic) (no tactic)
 
Average midfield disastrous (very high) wretched (very low) 4 5 1/20 2/20
Average defence wretched (high) poor (low) 7 10 2/20 3/20
Average attack wretched (very high) wretched (very low) 8 5 2/20 2/20
Total average wretched (low) wretched (high) 6 7 2/20 2/20
 
 
Server 095