The Kraken

It also strikes me that many of our players have a reluctance to shoot from distance; even from nearly the edge of the box we prefer to play our way through. This was expecially noticable against Fulham, when it was p*ssing down and a really slippy surface, we just didn't ever want to try our luck with a shot that bounced in front of the keeper. Given we see so few shots I'm inclined to believe its being coached into the players. In the lower leagues Lambert and others were more than willing to chance their arm from distance. I don't think they're anywhere near as keen in the PL.

So you're making a decision that Boruc should play after 3 games (and not impressed in any of them) and that's acceptable, but deciding he shouldn't play after 3 games is unacceptable to do. Most strange. What's the number of games I can make a decision upon? Gazza has had 8 and you've written him off after those, is it 8 or less than that? The rest of your ramble makes little sense. Boruc has for the most part not been travelling to games in midweek. Firstly because we've hardly played any midweek games, and secondly because he's barely been on the bench anyway so wouldn't have travelled in the first place. Since he's been here he's had more than enough time to sort his fitness out given his schedule, and there have been development squad games where NA could have played him if he thought his match sharpness was a problem.

Not at centre-back he wasn't. I'd accept the Arsenal game and as I've said his forways at right back and left back, but at centre back he was instantly better than Hooiveld.

I think I'd spuke if we went down having spent £50M.

We've also had a number of development squad games since then too. If Boruc's "rustyness" is down to not playing games then perhaps tajjuk should be looking to blame NA for not using Boruc in those sorts of games before blooding him in the first team. As you rightly say, at this stage of the season and having been here for so long there is no excuse for any player to be so out of shape and lacking in sharpness.

Yoshida? what's he got to do with it? apart from when he played LB and RB he was an instant improvement on what we already had. Are you really saying that, after it was identified by the coaching staff that Boruc had fitness issues and was put on a weight-loss programme (which he hasn't yet got close to the targets set) that he couldn't have done that since he arrived? That he could only do his fitness work in pre-season? That he couldn't have done extra fitness sessions in the past 3 months? Seems a strage sort of logic to me. And yes, I'm making a decision on him after 3 games. Doesn't seem to different from your opinion of writing off Gazzaniga in favour of Boruc after you've only seen Boruc play 3 times and Gazzaniga single figures too :pointlessrollyeyething:

A forward thinking recruitment policy is one that mixes future potential with experience. As in the way we did with Steven Davis, and as I'm sure was the intention with Boruc. Boruc has sadly turned out to be an expensively overweight and out of form gamble, and perhaps a result of a panic buy and a lack of scouting.

Depends what else he is doing, really. If he's setting up goals and/or working for the benefit of the team in a particular role that's not typically his own (and that he wouldn't be first choice for were it not for injuries) then he's doing a decent job. If you're going to hold up goal scoring as the be all and end all then we also probably need to get rid of Mayuka and start being ready to ship out Rodriguez, what with their combined two league goals between them.

Why does he need a pre-season? He's had months here in training to get into shape, fit and sharp. Compared to the other keepers we have, he does deserve a go. As average as he has been he's no better or worse that our other options. That doesn't affect the point that we should be looking to get someone much better. I don't see enough potential for improvement to justify sticking with him for teh rest of the season.

Seems quite striking that we played the Stoke game with Ramirez out too. As you say, at home its less of a problem to have two such flair players. Away from home and against the better sides we've looked vulnerable all season. I wonder if the Stoke result will encourage NA to try that again.

Why is it acceptable that Boruc looked "rusty"? He's had months to settle at the club, to sort his training regime out, and to work hard in training. You don't see other top keepers starting the season by dropping things left right and centre, and having very erratic kicking (on more than one occasion booting the ball straight out of play, on other occasions struggling to clear the halfway line). Boruc looks a complete shell of the player that made a name for himself at Celtic and on the international stage. With games he'll surely get better (he can't get much worse) but I can't see that it'll be good enough. Not at this level, where you simply can't go on making such basic, numerous errors without getting punished for it. Our goalkeeping signings have been a failure so far; we need to accept that and get someone in who can do a job. Gazza is one for the future, Boruc looks like one from the past, lets get someone in who can put in consistent top performances from the get go.

Taters said that the pitch was noticeably softer than usual, so perhaps the heavy rain had an effect.

Happy new year. Especially to normal people like Smirking, Charlie, Diggers, VFTT, Turkey, Sour Mash, CBF, TCM, and plenty of other normal decent posters. Special mention to the Bear and Tokyos, plus poster of the year rallyboy. People such as Les Bender, Swedish Dave, the stain, up and away, dalek, adriansfc; bore off. But I'm sure you're lovely people, so enjoy your new year too. For the rest of you; peace and goodwill to all. xx

Saints, Wigan, Reading. 'Arry is going to spend a fortune in January, and they're only 2 wins off safety already. Plus QPR have already got a number of decent players, they're not quite as sh*te as their results to date suggest. But if we sign a dominant centre back and a first choice winger who can replace Lallana while out and challenge/usurp Puncheon when we have everyone fit, we'll stay up and Villa will go down.

I remember Jon Gittens being the SFC representative in a 100m sprint challenge they started doing on TV at the time. He did alright.

How DARE you say that about a club legend. I bet you don't even go to games. Why don't you go and support Pompey? Most of us have had enough of your anti-club agenda, this is a step too far even for you. Its no wonder the decent posters don't come on here any more. Grizzle grizzle grizzle. Pretty high scores in SWF cliche-bingo though.

I did say we "may" not have dropped points, Diggers. Its no exact science, that's for sure, and I'm not peddling it as such, its just an opinion of mine as usual. The "should" was a response to Charlie, perhaps "could" is a better word. In any case its all speculation.

Of course every team can say that. They might be right too. It doesn't make it any less true. Given some of the goalkeeping howlers, defensive c*ck ups and what not, its a stance I stand by; with different personnel we could very easily have more points on the board right now. And yes, at the start of the season I knew we would struggle. It doesn't mean that I don't think we should be doing better than we are; or that we could have bought better.

Why should we be 10th - 14th? Because I've seen us drop some points this season whereby had we had different personnel within the squad (had we bought differently) we may not have dropped those points. And therefore we would be on more points right now, enough to have us up in a position between 10th and 14th.

Sorry, I just can't go along with that. What we spent is nowhere near enough to justify a clamour for us to be in the top eight come the end of the season. No way. But it should IMO be plenty to have us a few more points away from the relegation struggle; somwhere comfortably between 10th and 14th, if the money had been spent better. I really don't see how you can say that when in recent years Swansea and Norwich have spent far less than that and survived comfortably without even flirting with relegation, and West Ham look like they're going to this season.

You close the gap by buying better than your opponents. The amount spent is no guarantee of quality, but it helps. We spent way more than other clubs this summer but much of it has, so far, been wasted. £7M Rodriguez mostly on the bench. £3M Mayuka on the bench. That's around what Norwich, Swansea and QPR all spent on transfers on their promotion to the PL. Its a hell of a lot of money. £30M is an almost obscene amount of money to spend for a newly promoted club. So, I completely disagree with your assessment. With that sort of spend I expected better, and I can't agree with your assessment that the £30M was well spent (which given you don't think we should be higher up I presume you must think we spent well?)

Yes. I would say its fairly realistic, if Sunderland are still moping about in the lower reaches. What are your expectations of Cardiff coming up and spending £30M? Where do you think they should finish with that sort of outlay. I also think Sunderland should be doing better with the amount of cash they've spent in recent seasons, yet they've perenially struggled because I don't think they've particularly bought well. Same for us; we've spent a lot but not bought particularly well for the short term, hence we're doing worse than I consider we could be doing had we spent differently.

Indeed. I can see the logic for that sort of transfer strategy in the years to come; get young, largely untried players in who can develop and improve with the team. On our first year back in the PL? No way. We needed at least one or two players of top ability to come straight into the side. Worry about the future when we're slightly more secure. I just hope we address it in January; our recent results have papered over the cracks that we've been taken apart by a lot of the better teams we've played.

The Football Supporters Federation have got the ball rolling. http://www.fsf.org.uk/petitions/view/support-safe-standing They've also enlisted something like 12 clubs who are willing to get involved on a trial basis of safe-standing technology (folded seats, barriers every row). That has been denounced by the Hillsborough Families groups, who don't want to even countenance the idea of a return to standing at top-flight football, perhaps without truly understanding the very nature of what they're fighting against.

Nowhere near £30M for what Norwich spent. Even if it had have been, its had a huge effect on them. Not sure if you can say that about our signings. Not yet, anyway.