verlaine1979

He did good work in the build up and it was a decent finish, but it was also his first goal in 16 months according to the commentator. Moreover, if you think that was a consummate attacking midfield performance, then you're very easily pleased. The only other thing Davis did of note was overhit a simple pass into touch on the left that would've put someone (Lemina maybe) clean through. Bearing in mind Forster's two point blank saves, Palace's attack forged more and better chances than we did.

Lemina was great, and some of Hoedt's passing was superb. Davis also did well in the build up to the goal, and it was a good finish with his weaker foot (credit where it's due). That said, I wouldn't get carried away with the result or the performance. We managed a single goal against what is now historically the worst team to ever begin a top flight season, and didn't exactly dominate the second half. We still have almost no pace in transition, and the likes of Redmond and Davis still slow down the attack the majority of the time looking for the most conservative pass.

Once upon a time maybe, but they're much of a muchness these days in terms of pressing, closing and giving the ball away in dangerous positions, and have been at least the last two seasons. Which just leaves JWP's marginally more productive attacking contribution.

12/13 - 32 games - 2071 minutes 13/14 - 34 games - 2499 minutes 14/15 - 35 games - 2647 minutes 15/16 - 34 games - 2612 minutes 16/17 - 32 games - 2643 minutes 17/18 - 4 games - 350 minutes Total 171 games - 9 goals, 18 assists, a goal every 1425 minutes played Bit unfair to bash JWP for his stats when our most lauded-yet-underrated midfielder's stats are actually worse. What's more, they've occupied very similar positions in their time at Saints, operating as both deep and attacking central midfielders, so the comparison is about as fair as you'll get. I rate JWP's technique striking a dead ball but don't think he's an exceptional player, and nor is he likely to become one having reached this stage in his career (though that's not to say that he wont be a completely serviceable master-of-none midfielder for many years yet). What this does illustrate perfectly though is how some of our players get completely battered on here, while one in particular is regarded as spotless, despite having an almost identical (or even inferior) impact on the outcome of games. It's very, very odd.

Heresy. We finished sixth once, so we're now incapable of being relegated ever again.

Another one of the mysteries. He's like God to some posters on here - responsible for anything good that happens, but completely immune from blame when things are bad. The problem is, the description of him as playing nippy one-twos and always looking for a forward pass is a complete fabrication. He's the key culprit in our slow midfield transition and tendency to shovel it out wide for lack of a better or braver idea.

According to Transfermarkt, his appearances for Lille were split about evenly between left, right and central attacking midfield. Looking back through his videos though, one thing is pretty clear - his first inclination even when receiving the ball wide isn't to drive for the byline, it's to drive towards goal. He also doesn't mind picking the ball up from deep, so no reason he couldn't link effectively with defensive midfield. I hope having Romeu and Lemina providing a solid base behind him will get the best out of him, as he's basically the only hope we've got until January of not being completely one dimensional and turgid in attack.

When we bought him I asked a friend of mine in Paris what he thought - said he rated him very highly, but was mystified when I said he was assumed to be our replacement for Mane. Said he wasn't remotely the same kind of player - much more central, a lot slower, intricate rather than explosive. I think we've done what a lot of clubs do when bringing through unknown quantities, which is stick them out on the wing on the assumption that they can do the least damage there. However, if the player wasn't a winger in the first place, what's the point?

One of the great mysteries of Saintsweb. He could spend the entire 90 minutes squeezing out a dump on the centre circle, and 90% of post-game comments would insist that he'd been one of our better players.

Would be a mistake to say that Watford simply overpowered us, though the difference in strength and pace was significant. Chalobah looked a vastly more accomplished footballer than anyone in our side, while Richarlison and Carillo both showed better touch and movement (especially movement) than any of our attacking players. They looked a better organised, stronger team, but their best individuals also put ours in the shade today. Lemina will add dynamism to the midfield, but we'll still be a comparatively slow, weak side even when he starts.

There's no pace or physical power in this team, and our technical players just aren't good enough to make up for it. Utterly, utterly bullied throughout the whole game, by a team who look better on the ball too.

Watford look a lot more powerful than us - several runners in their midfield able to carry the ball forward. Looks like a cut-price re-run of some of the first Mouinho-era Chelsea/Arsenal games with us in the role of the Wengerian powderpuffs.

He's more than three times as productive in attack than Davis - how much better do you want him to be? And it was only last season that Davis ended up being shunted regularly back into central midfield - he's played an awful lot of games for us as the central attacking midfielder with Tadic directly alongside on left or right.

I don't really have a horse in this race, but it's funny to think that the only thing holding Stephens back from being good is actually being good at the two most fundamental aspects of his position...

Not saying it'll necessarily make a difference, but the Tadic/Boufal/Redmond experiments were all previously done with Romeu and Davis at CM/DM rather than Romeu and Lemina. Having more of a presence behind that three might make us harder to play through and more able to regain possession.

So you can't conceive of any reason why a player who arrived at the end of the window, carrying and injury, and who was never given the benefit of a guaranteed few starts to play himself in, might not be showing his best in the odd substitute appearance and low intensity cup match? Equally, you can't think why a manager of a team with quite a fragile backbone might deliberately pick 'senior' players who have done okay under predecessors in order to play percentages and reduce the risk of being perceived as failing early in his new job? Then again, you insist on calling him 'Davo', so you're not really likely to provide much in the way of nuanced, thoughtful analysis, are you?

If anything, I'd say Boufal is vastly more tenacious in his will to win the ball back than any of our attacking players. Just as some players in our squad benefit unjustly from lazy national stereotypes, so others are punished for them.

Wasn't it him that got clumsily sucked into the ball for the one-two that put Griezeman through for the first? Again, arguably not a lot of shame in being made to look lumpen by one of the nippiest attackers in the world...

Why get carried away over the fine margins of last season? We lost our last game, and it was essentially out of our hands whether we finished 8th or 14th. Would you fundamentally revise your opinion of the club's strategy if a couple of goals hadn't been scored on in the last twenty-odd minutes of the season and we'd wound up dropping 6 places?

The idea that there was a consensus that we only needed to strengthen at CB and DM is revisionist nonsense. Despite losing Fonte and VVD last season, we wound up struggling more profoundly up front than at the back. History suggests that high 30s/low 40s in goals scored is an eminently relegatable attack, so we're really counting on these defensive additions being the difference.

I honestly don't know. We've got a scouting and analytics department that loves to pat itself on the back, so I suppose I'd like us to bring in someone I've never heard of, but whom our scouts and analysts believe has a reasonable chance of making it in the league. I'm not asking for or expecting a guaranteed impact - just a chance of improvement, which we wont have unless we bring in new blood. Also, not to labour the point, but its not as if all the great players have already been found - Kante, Mane, Mahrez - all emerged in the PL in the last three years, without Europe-wide battles for their signatures at the time.

Guff. Plenty of people have been asking for an upgrade at #10 for a couple of summers now. Moreover, it's hardly asking the earth for the club to bring in 3 reasonable signings (and there's no way Bednarek counts towards that).

I think what people are asking the club to do is at least try to resolve the problem with our attacking midfield, rather than just throwing their hands up and saying it's too difficult to find anyone. Of course we can't buy the handful of players out there who are proven to be the best performers in this position, but we can't buy the best centre backs or defensive midfielders either - our whole transfer model is about finding the players who'll eventually show up on the radars of bigger clubs once they're playing for us. You're right though insofar as Boufal was presumably an attempt to do this last year, so its very frustrating that he seems to barely get a look in.

Even odder then that the only reason other managers were mentioned is that Davis continuing to be picked by consecutive Saints managers was held up as evidence that he must be great (rather than simply the only player available).

He's a striker, so his goal return is going to diminish the further away you pay him from goal. He won't get more than a couple playing as a second striker/attacking midfielder - his technique isn't good enough, and his pace will count for less.