mrfahaji

Although there were problems with this formation, in the sense that we didn't have enough wide options and the middle of the pitch was congested, the benefit of it was that when we did get wide, it was invariably the full backs making the runs, and because they are playing on the 'correct' side, they actually get behind the defence. As soon as you put Tadic and Redmond in front of them, half the time (at least) the ball ends up with them, who cut inside, slow it down and eventually pass sideways or loft ball in the air towards a defender's head. Having said that, I think it was an improvement on Sunday, where we weren't able to offer a central threat AT ALL during the game, and it does at least seem like Pellegrino is trying different things to get it to work. It bugs me that we have two players stood up front not doing a great deal (I thought Gabbiadini was better than on Sunday actually), it would have helped tremendously if one of them were to pull wide to offer an out ball when we're dallying with it at CM. I've also realised why we should be starting Redmond - so that we can't bring him on as the 'game changer'! Once again, it's not necessarily the specific things he does which are bad (although there were a couple today), but rather his general play, and his first thought always to play backwards that annoys me. But then maybe that's the manager's fault for playing him on the left... Tadic's decision to fall over when he could have got the ball for another chance was despicable. It's one thing (not acceptable, but understandable) to try and win a penalty when the ball is gone or the move is dead, but not when something is still on. Awful mentality.

Something ironic about Forster not being droppable...

Exactly this. I think we've scored goals in our last two games in spite of our setup, not because of it. Obviously I want us to get as many points as possible but I do worry a little that these results somehow vindicate our tactics. I know that the goal was a once in a blue moon type (though he nearly scored one like that vs Brentford I think?), but it remains the case that Boufal is the only player who can create something on his own, and also seems to be the only player who actually wants to run forward with the ball.

Agreed. First half had a fair few positives, second half less so.

I think we should put more balls in the air for Tadic to contest with McAuley.

He felt Foster’s glove on his leg and tried to win a penalty. Could have had another chance if he’d have stayed on his feet. Pitiful.

At last, Boufal coming o... oh it’s Redmond.

Jesus, Fraser...

Need to be careful with their new formation.

The reason we are “overplaying” is because we are playing everyone centrally, so while we are having a lot of the ball, there’s not much space and no wide option if they mark the full backs properly. There does seem a bit more effort to play forward passes though, better than last week but as others have said, West Brom are letting us have it. Not dissimilar to the Swansea game. Which finished 0-0.

Imagine if the answer to our problems ended up being the diamond... Not sure it will be though. We’re using the opposite approach to sunday, we are having a bit more joy in the middle of the pitch but sometimes missing the out ball. Our midfielders often looking up, not seeing a pass and turning round. That being said, when we DO get it wide it looks much better because our full backs actually go past the full backs. Known: “they just don’t seem to want to play it forwards at the moment”. Welcome to our season, Martin!

Superb defending from Livermore then, his positioning meant the “obvious” ball to put Long in never appeared.

We’ve hit the post, had a half chance for Tadic and missed an open goal. Cue speculative long range drive from WBA to make it 0-1...

You may be right. I think the next two games will dictate what we can expect, because then we'll have played pretty much everyone bar the top teams. The table is so close at the moment because no-one outside the top 6 (bar Watford, maybe) actually looks good. On one hand it means it won't take much to emerge from that group as the 'best of the rest' but on the other, it means that we can't bank on a group of teams getting cut adrift. This year's kit deserves better.

Also strange that 4-4-2 didn’t appear to work particularly well in the last game, yet we’re going with it again. Could make a difference if Davis plays more centrally and Gabb/Long pull out wide though.

Definitely. I've still got the newspaper cutting that has a picture of Beattie celebrating with the headline "LET'S ALL LAUGH AT SPURS". Though I enjoyed the 1-0 (Delap?) a few weeks earlier just as much if not more, given if was Hoddle's first game back.

It's a strange one, I don't think our tactics changed particularly, but for some reason things clicked when Gabbiadini first arrived and it felt like he was the piece of the puzzle we had been missing. Sunderland, Watford & the League Cup final stood out. Although those games were all away from home, I don't think we played like a typical away side - 62% possession vs Watford and 54% vs Sunderland, and we all remember how much we dominated the game vs United. It was almost as though our frailties at the back after losing van Dijk meant we had to try and outscore the opposition instead and Puel took the shackles off a bit (or maybe I'm clutching at straws with that hypothesis). Strange, and a shame, that we reverted to type again so soon though, even once Gabbiadini came back from injury.

Always loved the San Siro, was great to see Saints play there. Shame we didn't score - think we would have won if we'd had someone other than Rodriguez playing. Absolutely dominated the first half, but they changed things and controlled it a bit more in the second 45. Goals against us always seem to have an air of inevitability about them, whereas the ones we score always seem so improbable - even penalties! Candreva's was a prime example of that, just seemed so easy. I was stood just a bit further up from where that picture was taken. Hired a car and spent the next day at Lake Como/Lugano, great way to end an amazing trip (save for the train strikes which caused a few difficulties...) Here's to the next one, hopefully we won't have to wait too long...

Yes, in the sense that we are no longer statistically in a drought. But the way we play we could be returning to "Southampton Nil" at any time, nothing has actually been solved.

Not true. A penalty (and it's not like we were about to score anyway) and a goal I'd put down more to individual persistence/skill than a sign of things clicking up front. The two goals we conceded could have been easily avoided if our goalkeeper had done better. The first one was a little unlucky due to the rebounds, and the shot placement, but the second one was appalling. Defensively we were by no means perfect but also wouldn't say we were that shaky. Going forwards we had one or two decent moments but in general looked static and unthreatening.

Why do we always end up playing a Pulis team on the windiest day of the year?!

Sorry but no matter how many times I watch their second goal I can't see any obvious blame apart from Forster. At worst van Dijk could be accused of not being tight enough to Perez in the first bit of the move, when Shelvey picks him out, but given the positioning of the rest of the back four, that would have exposed us to a simple ball over the top. Once the move develops van Dijk continues to track Hayden. Romeu fails to stick with Perez, but even that is harsh. Ultimately it was a good move by Newcastle - a pity that we don't seem capable of putting such a move together ourselves - but we still restricted them to a half chance from a difficult angle. It should have been comfortably saved - if not caught then put out for a corner. I don't remember many poor headed clearances, but I remember lots of good ones. I'm not denying the rest of the points you make, I've been very disappointed that he doesn't seem to have got his head down in the way that Schneiderlin did, for example. There are also moments he looks a bit off the pace, or maybe half-ars£d. But for these two points particularly I think you are looking for things that aren't there.

Here are my thoughts on the game: After sitting through one of our worst performances of recent times versus Watford, I’m glad Sunday didn’t plunge to such depths. There were some positives, but unfortunately the bright spots are overshadowed by the things that aren’t working. I wasn’t sure about the starting line up, as it meant we were going to be outnumbered in the middle, but the main thing was that we did SOMETHING different. When the game kicked off, you could see straight away that there was a massive gap between CMs & CFs. Our tactics seemed to surpass this problem by only playing diagonal balls and exploiting the wings, which worked for about 20 mins before Newcastle wised up to it. Once they closed off these routes we struggled. The problem we had with this formation was that we continue to neglect getting to the by-line and whipping crosses over in favour of coming back and cutting in. Without a ‘linking’ player between the lines, an inside ball to Romeu or Lemina was invariably a backwards or at best sideways ball. On top of this, our strikers were horrifically isolated as none of them dropped deeper to pick up the ball, we weren’t providing them with crosses, and we didn’t have enough movement to effectively mount attacks through the middle. It’s great that Gabbiadini scored, I am a fan of his and firmly believe he should be starting. But his ‘performance’ was not that great – in the first half his touch was wayward and he was largely anonymous. If Austin put in the same performance he would be criticised for his lack of mobility. I’m not actually lamenting Gabbiadini here though, but rather that our tactics don’t play to his strengths. Even his goal was a result of him deciding to go it alone. Redmond actually put in a couple of good crosses early on, one of which Tadic should have scored (though were we that surprised Tadic didn’t score a header?), not to mention a good pass leading up to Gabbiadini’s equaliser, but his general play is so frustrating and typical of our play. Whereas Lemina’s first touch always seems to take him away from danger or into the right area, Redmond’s first touch always takes him backwards. It’s insane. Is he a product of our system? Or is he one of the reasons it’s not working? On the other side of the field we have Tadic, who plays a similar way - I generally find Tadic less frustrating because his slow build up is normally a result of looking for an eventual forward pass, but he had a chance to whip in a cross in the first two minutes of the match and chose to turn back. The ball eventually found its way back to Yoshida. Just cross it man! As much as Redmond drives me up the wall, I barely remember Tadic touching the ball in the last 20 minutes, it’s no wonder Puel always took him off. The other problem we have is our lack of forward movement. It’s a bit of a chicken & egg scenario though – are we being told to pass sideways, so therefore we don’t bother making forward runs? Or do none of our players run forwards, so the only option is then a sideways ball? Look at Newcastle’s second goal, it happens because they have several players running forwards – it’s not really a difficult concept – which puts defenders on the back foot and creates more space. We, on the other hand, are so static. Overlapping fullbacks are pretty much our only source of forward play. Except, when Boufal came on, we had a player who presumably ignores the advice from the manager and starts running at people. And what happens? We start to look a threat, because the defenders hate it. The penalty came as a result of us breaking forward at speed. Yes, Boufal’s touch was abysmal, but sometimes you make your own luck. The loose ball falls to Long who is also charging forward and it ends with a penalty. I can see why Boufal is a concern, because he wants to pull out a trick even when it’s totally unnecessary, and that has to go from his game, not least because it can slow things down. But his ability and desire to beat a man and also to drive at the defence means he offers more than Redmond. I thought Cedric did ok, Yoshida was fantastic, I don’t understand the level of criticism van Dijk is getting, Bertrand looks disinterested, Romeu and Lemina both did well battling in the midfield but Lemina has an extra dimension to his game, Long showed some good glimpses and Davis improved our play when he came on. We can’t go on having such a liability in goal though. If my heart is in my mouth every time the ball goes near Forster, surely the players don’t have much confidence in him either. The second goal was totally his fault – people are criticising the defenders but aside from Romeu tracking back a bit better I’m not sure what more they could have done, it was an excellent move from Newcastle and we restricted them to a half chance from distance. The first one I have a little bit of sympathy with Forster, but the situation stemmed from him being so slow to get up in the first place. Although we scored 2, I don’t think this formation was a success, but 3-5-2 could still work, as it would give an extra man to link midfield and forwards, and it would do away with the two players most guilty of stopping play to cut inside. As for our prospects for the season, being relieved to have drawn with an “ok” Newcastle at home is not a good sign at all. The atmosphere was predictably flat again. Totally understood why no-one could muster any encouragement against Watford because we were so poor and devoid of ideas, but at 2-1 down on Sunday we had been a bit unlucky and were still in with a shout. Yet even the Northam was pretty quiet. I sang an entire verse of OWTS at the top of my lungs at one point (when the Northam started to sing it), thinking “soon at least one person in my block will join in with me”, but they didn’t. Sad.

There's nothing wrong with defenders passing it around, passing it from side to side etc. You do have to be a little bit patient at times. But the problem we have is that we never switch it up a gear, and too often when we DO have a chance to try a more attacking pass, we hesitate and then miss the opportunity, opting instead to go for a 'simpler' sideways/backwards ball.

I agree that Newcastle would be an attractive club for an investor, but I don't really understand why anyone would wish for a Sheikh Mansour. Man City might play great football, but it's a shallow victory when you've simply bought your success. City fans used to play on the fact they were the real club of Manchester, and now look at them. An empty vessel of club that represent what's wrong with the modern game. I was going to say it's better than having your club ruined by a Tan or Allam, but is it really? Either way you lose connection with the club that's felt part of your upbringing, your community, and your life. Maybe it's better to feel like you need to fight for your club rather than have your club outgrow you and leave you behind.