CanadaSaint

Guly's touches are great but he seldom, if ever, performs in pressure situations - they seem to overpower his attitude. And all we have left this season are pressure situations. If we're not going to give the ball to De Ridder early enough that he doesn't have someone right up his arse, we might as well not play him. I'm all for bringing the more versatile Puncheon in.

I really like De Ridder but we need to get him the ball early enough for him to take them on. If we keep playing it to his feet when he's got a defender up his arse we'll never see the best of him. Still, I'd keep him in and leave Guly out for the balance of the season because, although I appreciate his touches, Guly seldom seems to perform in pressure situations.

The "D" on the edge of the box is one of the most lethal places on the pitch. We didn't defend it and paid the price. No use crying over spilt milk, though. We were done by two cracking strikes but we're still top. TBH, right now I'd settle for second in a heartbeat.

I'm not sure anyone would have saved that. It was a howitzer.

I don't know how P*mpey have survived the corners - other than sheer desperation and luck. We have so many people capable of scoring from them. Jos to add to his total in the second half.

For a guy with big legs and a low centre of gravity, I expected his first 10-20 yards to be much faster. That's how he'll get a lot of his chances. I don't think we'll see the best of Sharp until next season when he really will be much fitter. You can't rectify a fitness deficit in a few weeks near the end of the season.

Although I used to really rate Upson I'm no longer anywhere near as convinced. The World Cup hurt him IMO. However, is it my imagination or has Fonte not really been the same player for the last couple of months? He was a shadow of his former self against Blackpool and made a succession of errors. Still, the same could be said for many others but he seemed to escape the post-game criticism for some reason.

Yes, and - as the saying goes - we all know what you find under a pony's tail.

Why didn't you quote the full post or talk about the entire discussion? Because that would strip you of your main modus operandi - "misrepresenting what people post in order to make whatever dubious point you're trying to make, or settle whatever score you're bent on settling." Anyway, I'm much more interested in LSC's answer. Nighty-night.

I don't see any insults in here unless they're in responses to people who sneer without offering a counter opinion, and even then they're pretty mild. Can you offer an example to the contrary? I know you're still smarting about me pulling up the Walsall post-match thread (containing your typically laughable over-the-top posts) six months after the event, but you really have to move on at some point. You also need to rectify your deep-seated habit of misrepresenting what people post in order to make whatever dubious point you're trying to make, or settle whatever score you're bent on settling; it has happened again and again with a whole array of moderate posters. Until then I'll do what most people do - ignore you. You're a different kettle of fish and I'm really disappointed at that response from you. Where, exactly, have I done anything other than argue my case with you, just as you have with me, and where have I insulted you? I have looked back over the thread and I would suggest that your posts are far more "aggressive" than anything I posted. The Adkins comment, for example.

"Massive issue"? Now you're just being argumentative. We certainly aren't where we are by luck, but we are lucky to have someone who has been as successful at scoring goals and as (relatively) injury-free as Lambert. Many teams have worked just as hard as us to sign successful players but nobody knows for sure how they will turn out. We've signed a few duds but Rickie has been a dream. Unless you're a lot dumber than I thought you were, you knew exactly what I meant with the Lambert reference. And the Barca analogies are growing a bit tiresome.

I hope you're right. He certainly took his chances well against Donny and could have had a couple on Saturday. If those had gone in he'd already be a hero.

He absolutely did - on several occasions, and shockingly he did it again just as he started his run up. I instantly said "Nooooo!" to my son because he and I have had the discussion on many occasions that a high proportion of players who don't focus solely on the goal when they take a penalty (and just listen for the whistle) end up missing. Maybe Ricky and Le Tiss did it but it certainly never struck me about them, and I watch for it. There's 192 square feet to aim at, just twelve yards away, and much of it is completely out of the keeper's reach. At this skill level no tricks should be needed.

My bum is squeaking as I read today's posts on this thread. Just thought I'd share that.

Sympathies to you, my friend. I'm sure you have many memories to cherish. There will be a lot "up there" watching on Saturday, including my dad and sister!

Fair comment, although I'll await your confirmation of the underlined bit. I was thinking more of Schneiderlin 2, Hammond 1 and Cork 0. And it's a relative thing - Reading don't have any players in double figures. That's more central to my point. Still, I'll back off now because I have too many wise minds taking issue with my viewpoint. But I'm an obstinate barsteward and I'll stick to my view. Hopefully Ricky will play against Reading and this non-weakness won't be exposed again.

LTC, I won't quote you because that takes up cyberspace, although I do agree with much of what you say. Isn't it possible for both of us to be right? I like our midfield more than some but less than a number of others, and criticizing it doesn't mean that I think we're a bad team or that they are bad players or that Nigel is a bad manager. My sole and simple premise is that we don't get the ball forward quickly enough, often enough. It doesn't cost us all the time and it seldom costs us against the weaker teams. However, as I said after the Barnsley game, it can - and on Saturday did - cost us against a better team; I fear it will do so again against Reading. It has also IMO caused us to struggle a bit for that second goal that would effectively kill teams off - even weaker teams. I happily accept that "sideways and back" is very much part of the modern game and I'm quite okay with it because I understand the premise behind it. However, for us it often involves "Kelvin rolls it out, we play it around, we roll it back to Kelvin, Kelvin whacks it", and - even if it doesn't end with that pass back to Kelvin and whack, our opponents have dropped off and taken solid defensive positions. Through this (IMO) failing, we tend to under-exploit the potential of players like De Ridder and Lee, as well as the offence-capable full backs. All of that happens because we don't set ourselves up, or don't have the right skill-set/positional combination, to head forward quicker. Morgan is playing from in front of the back four (farther back than earlier in the season, IIRC), and I think that this inhibits his ability to initiate attacks rather than just get us out of our own half. We're a "front foot" team and the sooner we get the ball up there the better we're likely to do - without hoofing, of course. Yes, we have scored after prolonged passing spells, including quite a few "sideways and back", and that's always great to see; you quoted one involving 36 passes but I can't recall that - only one of (I think) 24 passes which was against (I think) 'Boro. Still, your valid point remains. The "despite our midfield rather than because of it" point (which DD countered only with a sneer, not any kind of alternative viewpoint) was a specific reference to the fact that we don't get many goals from our midfielders at all, compared with our main rivals. Hence the "Thank God we've got Ricky" comment. Without that tremendous talent and his ability to control any kind of ball, we would not be anywhere near as well-placed as we are right now. Anyway LTC, as Alps said somewhere else, opinions are like arseholes - everyone's got one. That's mine. Opinion, that is.

I've just found the article - it wasn't on my news feed. Sounds "guardedly optimistic" to me so I hope he's alright because we are nothing like the same team without him.

Ah, a cameo appearance from the attention-seeking little boy who has had barneys with just about everyone on the forum. As usual, he has nothing worthwhile to say. Shouldn't you be working on growing up?

All they've said about Lambert, unless I've missed something, is that he doesn't need an operation. That doesn't mean it isn't a longer term injury. My concern was based on the fact that the club said very little about the injuries to Lallana, Chaplow and Lee - all of which turned out to be longer term. As far as your second paragraph is concerned, I gave up trying to follow all the different "stories."

Brilliant news. Who said that?

Really? I missed that. What did it say? And did it originate from the club?

It's worrying. Most of our longer term injuries this year (Lallana, Chaplow, Lee) seem to have been characterized by silence from the club. And if it is a pelvic injury, they can certainly take time.

Hypocrisy, my friend, coming from a poster who just called someone an "idiot." It's under "H" in the dictionary. If you want to discuss/debate, I'm up for it. If not, or if you just want to LOL or sneer as you so often do (now that's "sad"), I've got better ways to spend my time.

You really don't have an intelligent opinion on very much, do you? Laughing and sneering is your limit.