mrfahaji

Is this clearly the case? Clasie has played a lot better recently, but yesterday he was playing the holding role when it was actually Davis & Hojbjerg playing as the two. For all his failings (and there were many!) in the first half, Hojbjerg did a lot better second half, when we were at our best. Tadic was pretty anonymous yesterday, but if he is fit I'm not sure how he can't be considered first choice.

Isn't the lack of train station more to do with South West Trains not wanting to staff an extra station, or put on any more trains, or change their timetables? Something typically uncooperative of one of our great train companies?

Well summarised, trousers! Of course, I'd say it's not all about results - style of football & chances given to academy players should also be considered - but if we are only looking at results here it's worth bearing in mind that what made last season so successful was our performance from January onwards (even if we did seem a bit lucky at times).

Yep, he was my MOTM, albeit narrowly over Yoshida, Davis & Rodriguez. He played out of his skin for the entire game and his goal was so important, as until we equalised we had been pretty poor and it looked like being one of those days. Before the game I said if we don't show any more energy over the course of the game then the rotation policy needs questioning, but we grew stronger as the game went on, and that suggests the selection decisions over the past three games were good ones. I'm sure 7 points from 9 was as good as most people could have hoped for, even though the Boro & Stoke games left a lot to be desired. I still think there needs to be a little caution with Rodriguez though. Now we will see if it was just a confidence issue holding him back! Having said that, in the first half it was clear that one of our problems in the first half was not getting enough support to him from the central midfield and Davis was a revelation when he came on. If we are indeed in talks with Parejo and/or Grudelj, it would appear Puel also sees this as area for improvement.

Same. I always worry when a player gets a yellow for a non-foul offence... We were pretty poor in first 15 minutes but have gradually grown into it. Defence looks solid but wouldn't be surprised to see Bournemouth create a few more chances as the game goes on as they play pretty expansive football. Redmond has looked a lot better today, though a couple of times on the right I wanted him to push it past the defender and whip a cross in. Should have done much better with that chance from Bertrand's cross, mind. Hojbjerg was horrific for the first 30 minutes. Fortunately he has improved a bit since then. Not sure what the causality is regarding our lack of potency and J-Rod up front. Does he look bad because we don't have anyone supporting him through the middle (none of the 3 CMs get forward at all), or because he lacks any sort of presence, do we struggle to build attacks?

I haven't been happy with how we've played recently, and I'm not convinced about the selection, but let's just see how it pans out. As someone pointed out earlier, in theory we should have good energy levels which will marginally work to our advantage. If we don't, then I'm not sure what the point is of the rotation, other than the argument of "we lost 2-0 but if we hadn't rotated it would have been 5-0"...

Just to play devil's advocate, it could also suggest that we are taking lots of shots from areas we're never likely to score from... and the reason why we're doing so is because we can't break down defences

Martina got into decent positions and delivered some decent balls but his problem is that he doesn't do anything quickly. I'm not talking about hoofing it forward at the first opportunity, but sometimes you have to put in a cross as soon as the chance presents itself, otherwise the defence gets in position and the forwards are static. As the commentators pointed out, Martina put lots of balls into dangerous areas, but once the defence are well positioned the ball has to be inch perfect to pick out a striker, not just 'decent'. Martina is supposedly third choice, and for that he seems to do ok. But it is frustrating when you can see the ball needs to be delivered and he takes a touch, cuts back, looks up, takes another touch... and then delivers. I don't think we stretched Stoke defensively if I'm honest. There's been plenty of games (e.g. 1-1 Stoke at home, Odemwingie scored for them a couple of seasons ago) where we've put the other team under the cosh and you have to give them credit for defending well, but I didn't feel they had pull out anything out of the ordinary to keep a clean sheet.

I saw that too, it was the Everton game. Got a feeling it was Van Dijk's picture, may have been Fonte or Yoshida though.

In terms of his overall club management he is doing an excellent job. My main concern is about our style of play and whether it's here to stay or just that the players are quite getting it right at the moment (or that they aren't good enough). Be'er Sheva, Middlesbrough and Stoke have all been played in exactly the same manner (maybe Palace too?) i.e. pass it around with no tempo, urgency or creativity, sucking the life out of the game and rarely looking likely to score. Maybe with so many games at the moment this style of play is necessary to preserve energy and maximise points over the period, in which case fair enough. But if this is going to be the way we play out every game then surely it deserves questioning? For some people it's not about where the club are or expectations of where we should be, but rather the simple question of how enjoyable it is to watch our team play.

^ Are you davidinsweden in disguise? Are you daaaaavidinsweden in disguise?

Cielito Lindo. Definitely Mexican.

Meanwhile, at the Under Armour design studios: "Are you sure you want to Clear All?"

Just our luck to be playing them at Christmas time.

If no-one wants anyone other than VVD, who's going to buy those 6-8?

Maybe at the extremes this works, of course I'd rather we were in the top half than fighting relegation regardless of style. However, if the choice is between 9th playing soporific football and 11th playing exciting football, is the first one necessarily better? At the time, throwing away a lead because we've been attacking might be frustrating, but at the end of the season wouldn't you rather look back at some genuine highs and lows rather than thinking "well overall that was good because because we won a couple of more 1-0s than we lost"? I'm not saying this is the way everyone should feel, or even whether I feel it myself. Just making a case for the opposing view.

Agree with most of this Shurlock, the bit in bold particularly pertinent. When Martina was subbed, the commentator said "I'm surprised, he's been putting in some good balls", but the problem is he takes so long to deliver them, the defence are all back in place and the attack is static. In the end he might get the ball into the right area, but unless it's inch perfect we're not scoring from it. Only thing I'd say is, regarding your opening line - obviously people would be happier with a win, but even against Middlesbrough there was a feeling of "good result, but questionable performance". A draw away at Stoke isn't a dreadful result but the way we went about it left me thoroughly annoyed. As much as 'papering over the cracks' became a bit of a joke on Sunday, a last minute 1-0 winner last night probably would have been in a similar vein.

Hard to comment about him 'losing the dressing room' unless there are obvious signs or reports about it. Just because he is boring in interviews doesn't necessarily mean he can't inspire the team (Pochettino managed it, after all). I'm undecided whether it's the manager's tactics that bring out the worst in our players or that we simply don't have good enough players to make the system work. At the start of the season Hojbjerg looked a class act and never gave the ball away, now he does it all the time! Steven Davis has never been the best shooter in the world but he has often been a key cog, bursting with energy and making key forward passes. Now he looks like a thoroughly average player that would struggle to get in any PL team. Our style of play doesn't suit Long at all, who now looks a shadow of his former self. However, our system relies on attacking full backs and we are currently utilising a 3rd-choice RB who never does anything quickly. Control, touch, check back, look up... chance gone. Rinse & repeat. JWP and Clasie have never established themselves and when they play together we have no energy or threat from Central Midfield. And finally we are depending on second rate strikers to get goals. Austin is good, but even he is not in the top bracket. Pelle was on a similar level to Austin and then we had Mane, who when he could be bothered was unplayable. Boufal is getting there and looks to have great potential but I'm not sure he is a 'goalscorer' in the same way. I know that Reed wanted us to get back to more of a Pochettino style, but reports were (and you'd like to think this is why Puel was appointed) that Nice played exciting football. It could boil down to the fact that in France, playing possession football is a lot more effective as you do break through eventually, and games are more open for an entertaining passing game. Try and implement the same game here and teams say "go on then, have the ball. We'll just snuff you out as soon as you start getting close."

Hughes: "Go out there and get stuck in, Marko. They'll be on the ground crying in no time." Arnautovic: "I dunno, they look pretty trim, boss." Hughes: "Yeah? Against Karate?"

It's pretty sickening and pathetic to be messaging him things like that on twitter. That being said, I'm a long way from being convinced he still has what it takes. Missing yet another open goal from a yard out (what's that, four for the season?) is not helping matters. It was easier to score that one today, it made the previous ones look like half chances.

Whenever I see Gylfi Sigurdsson play I wonder if he's ever been a consideration. Realise he might not be available or affordable, but strikes me as the perfect example of the sort of player we need. And have needed for ages.

A point at Stoke under normal circumstances is a good result, but when the opposition goes to 10 men mid way through the first half, that's not a chance that comes along very often and we have to make the most of it. We spent most of the game in their third and failed to create anything of note. Sometimes a team defends well and deserves credit - indeed Stoke have come to St Mary's before and done so - but this was a sickenly inept performance in the attacking third.

God we are so sh1t at attacking

For a team spending 90% of the play in their third, we don't seem to get many players in the box

Thought as much, hence the emoticon. RIP Rolland, I too am a big fan of our badge, hope that we don't 'modernise' it to something bland.