Saint Since '51

You're quite right when you say, 'RH doesn't say the midfield (and, as some have said, OR) are crap.' He wasn't talking about the midfield at all, let alone OR in particular. What he said is that when playing 4 at the back, we sometimes suffer from not having what he called the "firefighter" alongside them; he meant the extra centre back.

RH didn't say he was open to selling Hojbjerg. Indeed, he said the opposite. He said he was open to building his team around him.

RH didn't say that Obafemi 'doesn't look after himself'. He said that he didn't train professionally enough - I think he was referring to overall training, not just speed work; things like warming up and warming down professionally.

Chaplow. Anyone reading this thread must be really confused. Was he great or crap? Answer. Passing, control and crossing were poor. Went from disappointing to embarrassing to comical. On the other hand, his effort was excellent. Tackling back good. And he gives us good shape; he keeps his position better than Guly or de Ridder. Also a hand in one of the goals. He's severely lacking in confidence. At least twice he had a chance to run at the last defender and passed to players in worse positions. He got a severe b*ll*cking from Jos for not taking on the last defender once in the first half. I'd keep him in on balance. He's our best option on the right side.

Agree almost entirely with post from Saint Garrett. You may flatter Lambert and Guly slightly - and do Fox no favours - but otherwise spot on. Good report. We were fortunate to weather the last 10 minutes of the first half and go in with our lead intact. But, once we went two up, Nigel sorted out a formation which made it look very unlikely that they would find a way back. Table is looking good! By the way, I sometimes wonder if that chap who wrote Lord of the Flies (William Golding?) was an away Saints supporter. When I go to away grounds where the stewards don't steward, like Hull, it's clear that those with no brains and no scruples fill the void where there should be proper order and indulge their own selfish needs with no regard for others. When there are swathes of empty spaces in rows further back, quite why some people think it's reasonable to arrive in row 6 at 7.45pm and stand in front of people who've been sat in seats since 7.15 I cannot think.

Spiderman played off Guly in first half - strange decision. Reversed at half time, so clearly didn't work. Guly as main striker didn't work; his first time close control is not good enough for him to play as a target man. He also became disheartened by the end. SDR played wide first half and tghen off Guly second half. Then was taken off. Enough said. Tons of possession and lots of corners in the first half, without really creating clear chances. Second half dire; couldn't believe it could get worse after substitutions, but it did. I don't think we had a shot on target second half. Very poor and very disheartening to see how much our play going forward relies upon Lambert. Disappointing that Lallana couldn't step up and play a more influential role.

Game was closer than posts above suggest. We started very shakily and for a while they were quicker and stronger to the ball. It was only in the last 15 minutes of the first half that we started to really get on top. We were much the better side in the second half - Ricky had two or three chances to win it - but it could have gone either way. Someone cleared off our line with about 15 minutes to go and every time they had a corner we looked very shaky. Our goal was fantastic; lovely quick-passing move and very accomplished finish. Couldn't tell you about their goal; someone in front of me seemed to think that paying for his ticket to see the game gives him the right to stand up all match and stop me seeing it.

Well done. Thank-you.

Don't know what second half you were watching if you think they didn't have a shot till the 93rd minute. Were you there? Good win yes. Great entertainment. Great first half yes. But Barnsley will finish in the bottom 6, so get real. If someone had walked in at half time, they wouldn't have thought they were watching the Championship leaders.

Just back from the game. Proverbial game of two halves. First half, we looked so much the better side. Controlled the game, created chances, prevented any real pressure from them. Lallana through on last defender twice and missed a headed chance on the far post. Barnsley poor. No single player outstanding for us. We were good as a unit. Seaborne surprisingly good; Cork excellent for the last 25 minutes. Second half, we played pretty football for 20 minutes, but they had more of the ball and created pressure. Cork told loudly from the bench "Jack, Jack, sit, sit!" - which allowed them onto us and reduced our outs. They became more physical and one or two of ours (including Fonte surprisingly) didn't cope with it. For the last 20 minutes or so, we rode our luck. Sending off looked ridiculous from our end. We sat even deeper and the last 10 minutes was like the Alamo. Kelvin excelled himself. We were lucky to survive. Great game to watch. Good performance one half; great excitement second half. And a win. But not the win of Championship leaders.

Precisely my point. He plays in deep positions, but what he's good at is building from the back when we have the ball; he's not good defensively when they have it.

Point 1. Good defence starts with good shape and closing down in front of the back four. In middle of midfield, Cork is good at this. Hammond and Chaplow better options to Schneido in this regard. Is Schneido's creativity enough to warrant a place? Point 2 Davis is still good enough. Makes some silly decisions, but no gk is perfect. He's as good as we could wish for. Point 3 CB - Of all our defenders, Fonte is the only one from whom we couldn't hope for better. Stick. CB - We all have our favourites, but basically the other centre-back is a matter of picking the least bad option. Not a good situation. RB - Richardson has been a disappointment; Butterfield is a better option, but he's really not exceptional. Adequate at best. LB - Dickson has also been a disappointment; Harding is a real weakness defensively - he's ok when they run at him, but is marking at the far post is woeful. We're vulnerable here. Conclusion 1. With creativity from Lallana, Chamberlain, Connolly further forward, I'd go for Cork and Hammond in middle of midfield. 2. If I were Adkins, I'd be desperate for another top quality CB. Fragile full-backs is one thing, fragile central defence is crippling. Ask Arsene Wenger.

Agree with most of this. We certainly did not play the kind of passing game which Adkins says he wants. Chaplow and Hammond were not creative forces and Chamberlain hardly ran at defenders at all. Generally, our close control was often poor and even short passing regularly astray; our standard ball seemed to be high to Lambert or down the channels for Guly - and often missed the target. Distribution from Davis and Jaidi was particularly poor. Jaidi had some jittery moments at the back too. H'pool got the ball forward quickly and looked to head or knock it on first time for fast runners to push onto. Not what Jaidi likes. Having said that, defence from Butterfield and Fonte was excellent; Harding was less solid defensively, but had a good second half going forward. In fact, second half was an improvement; Lallana came in off the wing more and we occasionally passed through midfield to put in runners going between their defenders. Stats which show 7 shots on target flatter us. We had lots of possession; we got balls in the box and created tension. But we created very few clear-cut chances and I can't remember their keeper being really stretched. Sorry to report that we didn't deserve to win and we could easily have lost.

To watch a football match???????

Huddersfield started with more muscle (esp their No19, Alan(?) Lee up front) and energy than us. We were bullied and hassled off the ball constantly for the first 10 minutes and it was no surprise that they got an early goal. Huddersfield played good, quick passes on occasions, but mainly relied upon balls in the air and Seaborne and Fonte looked like ballet dancers in a bar fight - footballers trying to look class in a brawl. Who is to blame for this? Added to this, the back four and Kelvin were like the Keystone Kops when they tried to play it out from the back. It was a bit like a game of Chicken (how close can I get to giving away a goal before you actually score). Adkins is correct; we tried to play football in the wrong areas. Who is to blame for this? As a result of the chaos at the back, our footballers (Chaplow, Lallana, Guly) never got a look in, while Puncheon seemed unwilling to take on the full-back and Sir Ricky, who can mix it, never had the appetite for it. All in all, a woeful performance. Better in the 2nd half - but how much was this because Huddersfield were just protecting their lead. Milles off promotion material.

'Nuff said.

I salute his principle of not considering resignation just to avoid compensation - and he is apparently short of sleep. However... ...he waffled. ...he repeated himself over and over again. ...he didn't control the interview - eg by refusing to answer again questions which he'd already answered. Not a good first impression for me.

Curbishley? Phil Brown?

Read the official statement. They are "evaluating candidates". They DON'T have anyone lined up.

"While we have commenced our careful evaluation of candidates and longer term requirements..." ...no-one lined up.

Wotton may be the Huxford/Walker/Case type of defender we need right now, especially as " skill " seem to be at a premium in L1. Huxford!! Blimey, how old ARE you?

Because the view is better at the back - just like the cinema. And, since you mention the cinema... ...Would you think it reasonable for someone to stand in front of you there?

Fine. That's a deal. I'll sit. You stand. No problem. If it's free when I arrive, I'll sit behind the goal, towards the back. My choice, as you say. And it's all seating after all. And I have bothered to get there at 2pm. I promise not to moan at anyone "creating an atmosphere". I shall, however, moan at anyone selfish enough to come late and stand right in front of me. And you can stand anywhere you like that's free when you get there - so long as it's not in front of me. The sides are usually pretty empty.

Yesterday, it gave the miserable jobsworth stewards the ultimate sanction against the 100 or so people who did want to stand up. Have a word with yourselves. 700 fans there 100 wanting to stand up... ...(in front of the other 600?) All-seater stadium. Geddit? You have a word with yourself

Just back. One of our better performances this season. We didn't look a good footballing team, but we did look stronger (3 CBs + Harding at the back, Hammond in midfield and Lambert helping out at corners and defensive free-kicks). Mind you, Stockport were poor and we still didn't win. I can't agree that we "controlled the game". We did have lots of possession, but hey had as many corners and more shots on target than us for example. Either side could have scored two or three. I don't think we can moan for conceding late; we should have made more of second half possession and tied it up. How many shots on target did we have. 4? Ref had a poor day. Upset both sets of supporters. (Though I've never heard a crowd moan more than theirs). Penalties looked identical. Difficult to be sure from 100 yards away, but both seemed to be attacking headers onto defenders' arms held high. Lots of steady performances. Thomas had the best game I've seen him play this season at right back. Trotman, Hammond, Lambert all strong. Lallana better than usual. I agree Mellis wasn't good. He's out of position there. It's a bit much to expect him to play like a winger. He did have good energy. But I agree, he was knocked out of possession too often. Best you can say about him is that he was 5 times better than Thompson would have been. I'd leave him there; there was something of a pattern emerging in the second half down the right. Worst player, for me, was Saga. Doesn't contest and hold it up; doesn't burst off Lambert's knock-ons; doesn't threaten from crosses; has no pace; had one chance for a 20 yard lob and missed by 5 yards. Has no function whatsoever.