CanadaSaint

If we can get one I think we'll get two.

We need some more pace up front because Fulham are vulnerable to it.

When other teams have a good wide threat down their left, one of the biggest factors during our good run - the Clyne/Punch combo - is negated and we struggle. It looked like NA spotted that and brought Punch over to join up with Shaw at the end of the half, but that effectively displaced Rickie, so he needs to change something there.

Shoot, shoot, FFS shoot!

Agree 100%. Whatever flow we're able to create often dies on his foot. And he has a nasty habit of telegraphing a lot of what he does, to the point at which it leads to interceptions and breakaways.

Anyone know what our record is when Steven Davis is in the side?

I am so not liking the sound of this, even though I agree with the idea of keeping player fitness information under wraps.

I'll do an update after tomorrow's games but it's not going to look good - Wigan and Reading both lost games with zero-point targets, and anything Villa get at Chelsea tomorrow would be a bonus. Meanwhile we lost a "six-pointer". Thinking about it, maybe I should leave it until after Christmas.

To be fair I thought we had it just about right in the first half, barring our frustrating (and potentially fatal) reluctance to shoot when the chance or half-chance arrived, although I do have my doubts about Mayuka. He sometimes looks like he has a million pound engine and a 50p brain. I have a lot of time for NA but O'Neill is a canny manager and his half-time adjustments were excellent. We tried to respond to them but Sunderland took away most of our creation space, and some of our most potent tactical threats of recent weeks - our full back/winger combos - were undermined by Sunderland's own wide threats.

I'm not sure that we do need another striker. What we need is for those we've already got to shoot when they get a chance or a half-chance. I love our build-up play but we keep it going 10-15 yards too long. Today it looked as though Sunderland "had the book on us". We had a lot of possession in the first half, so they concentrated on denying us space in the box rather than denying us the shooting opportunity.

He almost looks like a player wondering if he made the right decision to come here - perhaps because he doesn't really fit into our playing style (he's more a cog in the wheel than a focal point), or because he doesn't fancy playing on English winter days. Whatever it is, he needs to start making a contribution - for our sake and his own.

Exactly. In this league you've got to score when you're on top, and in order to score you've got to shoot. As I said earlier, over-elaboration around the box is a killer for us.

I'm really beginning to wonder if Ramirez fits the way we play, talented as he is. He never seems to play the kind of role that allows him to do the stuff we saw on his highlights reel - cutting-in and shooting, taking guys on inside the box etc. Them losing Johnson will help us, though, because he's created a reluctance in us to go for the overlap down the flank.

We really need to do a better job of spotting the moment to convert nice around-the-box build up into a shot, or over-elaboration is going to kill us. At least when we're a goal down the temptation to shoot is greater.

He does seem to be a different guy - enjoying his football, his role and the people around him. He seems to have a special rapport with Clyne, not just in the footballing sense but also in the "close buddies" sense. I hope - and think - he's smart enough to realize that he would be risking a lot to move just when he's finding his feet, meshing-in well and achieving his potential.

You're right - I was hoping we'd get points playing against ourselves! I'll look at it in the morning, but the problem impacts every team so it shouldn't change the relatives. Thanks. Edit: Couldn't go to bed with this unresolved. I've changed the PPG targets in Away matches with Fellow Strugglers to 1.00. The new total is 40.25, and the new table is as follows: 1 West Ham - Target 16.50, Actual 22, +5.50 2 Fulham - Target 17.25, Actual 20, +2.75 3 Sunderland - Target 18.00, Actual 16, -2.00 4 Aston Villa - Target 17.75, Actual 15, -2.75 5 Wigan - Target 18.75, Actual 15, -3.75 6 Southampton - Target 19.75, Actual 15, -4.75 7 Reading - Target 15.75, Actual 9, -6.75 8 QPR - Target 16.75, Actual 7, -9.75 I hope that's right now.

Thanks for remembering, Ottawa. I've re-tooled it a little, given the way things are shaping up. I've moved Norwich and Swansea from the Likely Strugglers group to the Fairly Solid Four, with Sunderland and Fulham making the reverse journey. Sure, I could have moved Newcastle down but I just can't see them struggling all season. Likewise, I could have moved West Ham up, but they are a possible candidate for a bad run that would pitch them right back into it. We can debate "who goes where" until we're blue in the face but it doesn't matter that much because the whole point of this exercise is that it's a relative measure. So the groups become: Elite 4 - Arsenal, Chelsea, Man City, Man United Pretenders - Everton, Liverpool, Newcastle, Tottenham Fairly Solid 4 - Stoke, West Brom, Norwich, Swansea Likely Strugglers - Villa, Fulham, QPR, Reading, Saints, Sunderland, West Ham, Wigan As a reminder, the PPG targets for the Likely Strugglers are as follows: vs Elite 4 - H 0.00/A 0.00; vs 4 Pretenders - H 1.00/A 0.00; vs Fairly Solid 4 - H 2.25/A 0.25; vs Fellow Strugglers - H 2.75/A 0.50. TOTAL = 40 Here's the latest "Strugglers Table", up to date following Sunderland's win over Reading: [TABLE=width: 750] [TR] [TD]Position[/TD] [TD]Team[/TD] [TD]Target Points[/TD] [TD]Actual Points[/TD] [TD]+/- vs Target[/TD] [TD]GD[/TD] [TD]vs Likely Strugglers[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD][/TD] [TD][/TD] [TD][/TD] [TD][/TD] [TD][/TD] [TD][/TD] [TD][/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]1[/TD] [TD]West Ham[/TD] [TD]15.50[/TD] [TD]22[/TD] [TD]+6.50[/TD] [TD]1[/TD] [TD]P6 / W4 / D1 / L1 / PPG 2.17[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]2[/TD] [TD]Fulham[/TD] [TD]15.25[/TD] [TD]20[/TD] [TD]+4.75[/TD] [TD]0[/TD] [TD]P6 / W2 / D2 / L2 / PPG 1.33[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]3[/TD] [TD]Aston Villa[/TD] [TD]15.25[/TD] [TD]15[/TD] [TD]-0.25[/TD] [TD]-11[/TD] [TD]P6 / W2 / D1 / L3 / PPG 1.17[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]4[/TD] [TD]Sunderland[/TD] [TD]17.00[/TD] [TD]16[/TD] [TD]-1.00[/TD] [TD]-4[/TD] [TD]P6 / W3 / D2 / L1 / PPG 1.83[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]5[/TD] [TD]Wigan[/TD] [TD]17.75[/TD] [TD]15[/TD] [TD]-2.75[/TD] [TD]-13[/TD] [TD]P6 / W3 / D1 / L2 / PPG 1.67[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]6[/TD] [TD]Saints[/TD] [TD]18.75[/TD] [TD]15[/TD] [TD]-3.75[/TD] [TD]-10[/TD] [TD]P6 / W3 / D1 / L2 / PPG 1.67[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]7[/TD] [TD]Reading[/TD] [TD]13.25[/TD] [TD]9[/TD] [TD]-4.25[/TD] [TD]-12[/TD] [TD]P6 / W0 / D2 / L4 / PPG 0.33[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]8[/TD] [TD]QPR[/TD] [TD]15.75[/TD] [TD]7[/TD] [TD]-8.75[/TD] [TD]-16[/TD] [TD]P6 / W0 / D4 / L2 / PPG 0.67[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] I found the update quite sobering. While our recent results have helped a great deal, we clearly still have a very long way to go. I expected us to be farther ahead of Reading but this table shows the whole point of this approach. Sure, they've played 6 games against Fellow Strugglers but five of those games were away from home; so, while their record against the Strugglers isn't good, they haven't dropped that many points against their target because they only need to average 0.50 PPG in those away games in order to be on track for survival. The table also shows that QPR aren't as detached as many of the pundits are saying - a good run would move them up quite quickly. Our good results against the Fellow Strugglers are great - and crucial, but we really need to pick up some "above budget" points from the higher teams. St. Mary's must - with help from the fans - become a fortress, and we must do some solid business in the window. I've checked the table several times but it's quite a complex exercise, so please forgive (and tell me about) any errors.

tfft

Rickie's control and layoff in the build-up to the goal were absolutely superb. Yes, I think we're THAT much better than the bottom three, and probably a few teams above them. But we're a side that needs to score that vital second goal, and we need to work on that.

You could well be right. Sunderland strike me as a decent side with attitude problems. The same players turned it around completely after Bruce was fired so they obviously weren't playing for him. They've been heading the same way with O'Neil but it looks like they had a rocket at half time, so then we see a different team. It all magnifies our challenge, doesn't it?

It's quite striking that Chris Hughton is so vocal on the line, constantly telling his key midfielders when to press and when to drop - and that they listen and respond. Yes, it's kind of annoying to hear but I often wonder whether Nigel needs to be more forceful with our lot during games, especially when we seem to be losing our way a bit. If it's not coming from the players themselves it has to come from somewhere.

Tactically we got it wrong IMO - our midfield defended far too deep in the first half and we didn't adequately recognize the importance of their attacking full backs. It was almost as though we were setup to avoid a hammering, which is paying them too much respect. Morgan was barely in it in the first half, better in the second. Davis frustrates the hell out of me with his telegraphed passes that are so easy to intercept. I'm starting to become concerned about our fitness levels.

The good thing is that we can make some adjustments at half time that could change this around, because - despite how that half looked - we can play with them. But we need to be far more effective in midfield. Morgan really needs to step up.

We need to start competing higher up the pitch - it's like we've been set up to avoid getting whacked.

It has just dawned on me that the combined Liverpool right wing/Saints left back contest is younger than Jamie Carragher.