Thumbheed

Yeh, he was definitely involved in some nice bits of play (although I felt that was partly down to West Ham downing tools by that point imo), but thought he turned back a fair bit when Id have exoected him to push forward and just wasn't as intense as I'd expect him to be considering he's not played much. Compare that to say Isak who came on as chased down everything as well as being positive with the ball anytime he had it, I just thought it was a good, but subdued performance from him.

Thought he had a really strange cameo appearance tonight- didn't do anything wrong per se, and was involved in a couple of good moves but he just doesn't seem as intense or as positive as I'd expect/hoped he'd be.

Take back anything I've ever said about this lad, didn't think he'd have it in him to adapt but he's proving me wrong. Clearly learning to make better decisions and coupling that with a really good work rate too - just needs a goal or 2 to boost his confidence. Really pleased for him.

Still have to pinch myself that we've managed to sign a player of his calibre and reputation at this point in our journey when there's only about 10 players of his ilk out there.

If he works on his composure in front of goal then he's a 10 goal a season midfielder.

Honestly think having a conventional winger makes such a difference to how we play, hope Howe sticks with it. Really pleased for the lad, it's his place to lose as far as I'm concerned.

He's the perfect proponent of how much difference top class technique can make to a team. His first touch is pure silk. Loved his reaction when Willock skied that cut back from ASM

Of course we should be trying to improve on what we have, that goes without saying and is not as insightful as perhaps you think it is, but correct me if I'm wrong but aren't these the very samw players who've had us playing champions league form for the best part of 15 months now? They've very much earned their right to play I'm a top 4 team as that's exactly what they have been doing. Milner, Henderson, Fletcher even Park Ji Sung have all been mainstays in some of the best teams in PL history. It's not outlandish to say the likes of Willock and Longstaff can have similar impacts, they certainly have done so far.

You'd assume he would be if Ekitike was.

As you say he's often doubled up on which makes his job exponentially harder and yet he's still able to produce at times, so how do you factor that in when discussing 2 dimensional stats? And yeh totally agree his influence goes beyond what he does with the ball. I remember Jonas having the exact same impact, strong dribbler who would drag opposition teams shape and create space for Barton to produce - which he did. Jonas was often slated whilst Barton got all the plaudits. Not getting around the fact he's been poor this season, but of those 18 games only 9 were starts and he's often been subbed on in the latter stages of the game. I'm not actually his biggest fan myself, but I can't discount how important he was under Bruce and that's contribution alone shows how good a player he actually is.

Why do teams double up on him if he's not a threat? Edit: Aye one for the ASM thread

I'm not his biggest fan but to compare him to Lua Lua is crazy, especially when he single handedly saved us from certain relegation twice. Also there's a reason there aren't many dribblers of his calibre around and that's because it's arguably the most difficult skill to master. There's certainly charges to be made against ASM but not being isn't one of them.

I absolutely think this is a directive from Howe and the team. I wouldn't say overcomplicate though, I just think they've tried to improve his decision making and it looks to have gone the other way.

He needs a club that will let him do his thing like HBA had at Nice. I really want it to work out for him here but he's clearly been told to pass a little more and its just completely taking away his natural game.

Isak Halaand Kane Lewandowski Vlahovic Osihmen Benzema Lukaku That's a pretty short list of genuine out and out strikers - feel like we're very lucky to have snagged this lad and £60m will look an absolute bargain when you look at the prices the others could demand / have demanded

I did think Isak and ASM should have started because there was always going to be space to exploit for them both but I don't really think it'd have changed too much of a difference results wise. We created 4 good chances without them and that's more than you'd normally need (or even get) in these types of games. Ultimately though, as I've said in a different thread, better players will make better runs, have better touches, make better decisions and passes as well as cross and finish better and it will be the culmination of those micro actions which will get us over the line in these games in the future.

I think I'll start worrying when we start to play badly, but until then I'll put results like this down to not yet having the quality of players that make the difference. Did well for the most part, created good chances but as has been the case for most the season we're just not clinical or decisive enough in the final 3rd.

The type of game where you end up loving your club just that little bit more. Wasn't to be, but absolutely no shame in that loss. We were hindered by the point in time of our journey, not the quality of our play.

I'd had no problem letting him go, but not getting a replacement in always seemed irresponsible to me. Same feelings with Wood.

WOAT imo

Playing in the right would make so much difference to his game imo.

Feel for the guy. His story arc is a bit tragic tbh. Gone from being our most important and popular player to our biggest liability and it's not necessarily his fault either. Can't fault his application at all but it's clear that he's got weaknesses in his game that are bring exposed by Howe's footballing philosophy and so far they're outweighing his strengths.

Aye I thought he was very good tbf, but I just felt there was not as much urgency to get the ball from the defenders like there is with Bruno and times where he did, he'd take the easy option rather than what Bruno would do and turn out to open up play more and it was those little things which made the biggest differences imo.

Rewatched the game and felt it was the middle where we came up short even though they all played well. As much as I like Longstaff and felt he would be suitable for that role at the base of the midfield, I cant quite help but think it's the little things he can't do which make the biggest impact on the rest of the team, such as his inability to beat a man and open up more angles or him only really playing the way he was facing - just little things like that can stifle how the rest of the team perform imo and it showed yesterday.

I wanted to see him out wide a bit more because Dan Burn was seeing far too much of the ball in the final 3rd.