Jump to content

Recommended Posts

21 minutes ago, Stottie said:

I've just looked at Whoscored and Bournemouth led the league last season for fouls committed. About thirty more than the next worst team. Despite our rep for "shithousing", we were fourth fewest.

 

We came away with a point and its a good point, but I don't think we set up properly for this. In a niggly game, I would play Trippier, our most experienced player. We ended up with 10 men last week due to dark arts by Southampton too.

 

It’s not a good point though.

I know as the game went, and as they nearly won it at the end, but it’s not a good point.

We are on our 3rd full season of the takeover, and 4 years since they bought the club into the 5 year ‘Compete for the league’ project. A draw away to Bournemouth is not a result we should be happy with, nor is the performance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, J7 said:

Very poor for the most part. If you want to be at the right end of the league, you can’t be carrying so many average/poor players by PL standard. Longstaff, Murphy, Kelly and the CBs. All should, and hopefully will be soon, on the fringes of the squad. There’s no excuse not to play both Gordon and Barnes.

 

1 minute ago, J7 said:

Very poor for the most part. If you want to be at the right end of the league, you can’t be carrying so many average/poor players by PL standard. Longstaff, Murphy, Kelly and the CBs. All should, and hopefully will be soon, on the fringes of the squad. There’s no excuse not to play both Gordon and Barnes.

Already throwing Kelly in the average/poor category after two games for us and a good career with Bournemouth despite his age? FFS. This game…Great data set.

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, HayDen Traces said:

Today reminded me of watching us under Bruce. No urgency, no real patterns of play, horrible defensive shape, second to every 50/50 and relying on individual brilliance to drag us out of trouble.

 

Horrible. Hopefully we improve quickly.

Yeah. The game was very much like the game against Burnley where we were a goal down at half time, ASM came on and turned the game around for us in 10 minutes. Any sort of decent player on form in that game and we would have won it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, r0cafella said:

Something isn’t right mind, we look like such an average side. 


Agree. Yes it’s just one game, but… we played a flat 4 in defence (at first) and a flat 3 in midfield with the team sitting quite deep and the 3 up top starved of the supply (and the quality, Isak aside - in patches) required to scare them and as the grew in confidence they outplayed us.

 

Away from home we’re tactically second best far more often than not and completely reliant on nicking a goal to get a foothold in the game. In that context taking advantage of set pieces is paramount and ours are just shit. Our wide players are predictable and seldom create that half chance you need, compounded with the flat midfield getting in each other’s way and being incapable of killing the game for 10 minutes, and the issues at the back due to absence…


I saw a starting Xl today who either didn’t know what they were meant to be doing or had no confidence in it. As others have said we need fresh blood and to evolve away from favouritism towards average players who graft. It baffles me that we have probably the weakest options in the top half at RW and it hasn’t been addressed, 3 years post takeover.

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, 54 said:

Was very noticeable how much more fluid our attacking play was when Trippier was on the pitch and how much better we where in possession, he loves to Overlap where as Tino likes to come inside, adds a completely different dimension to our play, and as much as I love Tino, and think he's going to be a great player, Trips still needs to be number one starting right back imo.

Nothing to go with the way barnes and hall were linking up then?

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Vinny Green Balls said:

 

Already throwing Kelly in the average/poor category after two games for us and a good career with Bournemouth despite his age? FFS. This game…Great data set.


Top be fair, he was bought because he’s solid and average and will make decent backup.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Vinny Green Balls said:

 

Already throwing Kelly in the average/poor category after two games for us and a good career with Bournemouth despite his age? FFS. This game…Great data set.

Believe it or not, I’ve seen him play for Bournemouth before. He was a fairly average player at a lower midtable team.  He’s not been brought in as a starter either.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Ronaldo said:


Agree. Yes it’s just one game, but… we played a flat 4 in defence (at first) and a flat 3 in midfield with the team sitting quite deep and the 3 up top starved of the supply (and the quality, Isak aside - in patches) required to scare them and as the grew in confidence they outplayed us.

 

Away from home we’re tactically second best far more often than not and completely reliant on nicking a goal to get a foothold in the game. In that context taking advantage of set pieces is paramount and ours are just shit. Our wide players are predictable and seldom create that half chance you need, compounded with the flat midfield getting in each other’s way and being incapable of killing the game for 10 minutes, and the issues at the back due to absence…


I saw a starting Xl today who either didn’t know what they were meant to be doing or had no confidence in it. As others have said we need fresh blood and to evolve away from favouritism towards average players who graft. It baffles me that we have probably the weakest options in the top half at RW and it hasn’t been addressed, 3 years post takeover.

 

 

 

 

It’s cos we’ve been skint most windows barring the first - this topic has been done up death

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Gawalls said:

Nothing to go with the way barnes and hall were linking up then?

I mean that helped, but Hall came on 10 minutes after Trippier, and the attacking impetuous was already noticeable down that right side. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Ronaldo said:


Top be fair, he was bought because he’s solid and average and will make decent backup.

Not tbf at all, dude. He is still young and was also a bought for his natural attributes and potential.

 

its just staggering how quickly some on here write absolutely everything off in a flash. If ever I wanted to sabotage someone’s party, I’d send a few on here to infiltrate it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Vinny Green Balls said:

Not tbf at all, dude. He is still young and was also a bought for his natural attributes and potential.

 

its just staggering how quickly some on here write absolutely everything off in a flash. If ever I wanted to sabotage someone’s party, I’d send a few on here to infiltrate it.

I’m not ‘writing him off’! 😂 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Crimson Cardigan said:

On the plus side this will quiet the “Barnes was a waste of money” stuff for a while.

:yao: 

 

He'll have one quiet/ poor game and it'll resurface :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, The Prophet said:

Thought it was quite evident we played a 4-4-2 to behind with and looked much better when we binned it off.

 

Baffling why we decided to play that formation

 

Their right back brand new to the league couldn't have had an easier first half. He really struggled when Barnes came on

Link to post
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, r0cafella said:

Something isn’t right mind, we look like such an average side. 

I mentioned it during the match, just feels everything has stagnated a bit at the club. It’s been a really poor summer in terms of recruitment so far. Add to that Howes comments earlier in the summer about England and Mitchell coming in. Genuinely think a couple of top class signings gives everyone a lift again. Whether or not we get them remains to be seen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, The Prophet said:

Thought it was quite evident we played a 4-4-2 to behind with and looked much better when we binned it off.

Aye. Seemed we set up to counter for some reason - looked like we didn't want to get into a firefight with them which doesn't feel a ringing endorsement of Howe's trust in the current state of the squad.

 

4-4-2 can't work with Gordon and Isak though as they're both weak - when you inevitably need to knock it longer, they can't do much more than just get in the way or maybe scrat the odd lucky second ball. We had such a poor platform to try and control the game.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...