Fulham 3-2 Saints - Post match

Watching worse than us Huddersfield playing worse than us Wolves, both being better than us

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Watching worse than us Huddersfield playing worse than us Wolves, both being better than us

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We've just been unlucky in 39 of our last 44 matches.

Deservedly joint bottom as it stands.

Huddersfield look decent so far

Finally the table does not lie. And he's still our manager

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

huddersfield go 2-0 at wolves

they have been very good today to be fair.

We are now completely where we deserve to be.

Huddersfield got a much better manager than us

Bottom three, Ralph. Take your hockey stick to that one.

so much for the '3 worst side than us' in the league....we are off the bottom on goal difference

Bottom three, Ralph. Take your hockey stick to that one.

Time for Hughes to Puck Off?

so much for the '3 worst side than us' in the league....we are off the bottom on goal difference

Some of them have spells of being sh1t whereas we are far more consistent

It won’t be the fashionable view but I don’t think there are grounds to fire Hughes today. We were much the better side – undone by needless individual errors. AFAIC we’ve played better this year than last, but missed chances and mistakes are killing us.

 

 

We are NOT among the three worst sides in the division.

as said, we really are

Watching back the highlights on the official site, a few things I didn't pick up at the ground. What a good save that was by McCarthy from Mitrovic. Gabbi might deserve his place going forward but his tracking back for their first two goals was shocking. Obafemi's cameo looked even better second time around - give him a chance from the start.

as said, we really are

Sure, "the table doesn't lie", but I stand by what I said - we've competed well in most fixtures except City away, and we are playing much better than we were last year. Missed chances and individual errors at the back are killing us - not poor management and tactics (like last year).

I'm no big fan of Hughes but, while I understand why yesterday's result is viewed as a sackable offence, yesterday's overall performance wasn't. Hughes needs to get Hoedt the hell out of there - he's not just making his own errors but exposing others in the process. And he needs to ditch Austin because he provides neither mobility nor the ability to even hold while others get forward.

We have the players to be mid table, and the middle-third looks way better than last year. I don't see the point of jumping out of the Hughes frying pan into an unknown fire.

It's just my opinion, and - unlike you - I don't feel the need to keep jamming other people's views down their throats just because I don't agree with them.

Good summary. Disagree on a couple of ratings.

McCarthy 6 - One good save, but his distribution was poor. His poor passing out from the back directly led to the first goal (compounded by another woeful pass by Hoedt).

Armstrong 9 - Three good strikes on goal is a pretty good return for somebody largely anonymous. His movement was at least as good as Gabiadini's (who missed a sitter after the first shot from Armstrong was parried out to him).

Can anyone tell me why we bought a big slow defender to sure up our back four against powerful strikers only to not play him against the exact type of centre forward that bullied us last year? I am not sure Vestagaard is up to much, but if there was one game you wanted him on the pitch this was it. Mitrovic bullied the **** out of us. He gets himself in the right position and then becomes an immovable object. Obviously he got on the end of things for his goals too, but for me leading the line is just as important.

 

I have no doubts about Austin getting on the end of things, but **** me he wins nothing in the air and fails completely when ti comes to bully centre backs. If you are going to have striker that wins nothing in the air it may as well be Gabiadini. He looks sharp, offers good movement and should be played down the middle not out wide. We bought Elyounoussi to replace Tadic. Why is he not playing? Not good enough? Well why did we buy him then?

 

Going forward we looked decent. Redmond was outstanding, winning tackles and beating players all day long. The biggest issue was the quality of crossing from the side as a whole. It got better as the game went on, but far far to may crosses were simply ****.

 

At the back however it was a **** show. Cedric is just rubbish. His best asset of the game is stopping wingers, but he failed abysmally, not getting tight enough or doing enough. We all know his failings in the air, but if he is getting rings run round him then what does he offer. Not decent crossing thats for sure. I have little doubt people will say Target did alright, but he didn't do anything really, except for one decent cross all day. He can control a football and pass it, but in terms of supporting the attack he is so passive. He just jogs forward then passes it square. Get to the byeline FFS. Defensively he went missing for their first goal and his lack of pace was shown up dreadfully when Kamara just waltzed past him in the second half. Collectively the back four will have us relegated. It was woeful last season and its the same four/five players. They are so average. If a CB gets dragged out wide we are dead. Hoedt's error cost us the third goal. Overall he was not horrific, but he just has too many errors in him and for a big man does not dominate a striker. Bad combination. I am not sure who failed to mark Mitrovic, but Hoedt should be stuck to him like glue.

 

McCarthy 8 - could not fault him for the goals and made one great save to stop it going to 3-1 shortly before we scored

Cedric - 3 - cant head, cross and now stopping dribbles is an issue. Jesus.

Hoedt - 3 too many headed goals against us. If he cant win a header why is he in the side? Some good and some bad distribution.

Yoshida - 3 also has to take responsibility for the headed goals. Distribution left a lot to be desired.

Targett - 4 takes the safe option all the time. Still slow as ****. Where the hell was he for the goals? That might be harsh, but I was hoping to see a player that has blossomed after his loan. He hasn't. He is still bang average. Great first touch and keeps the ball well, but that is pretty much it.

Hojberg 7 - he and Mario dominated the midfield. Some very poor passes, but overall very good. The one question mark is when we get done on the break. Are either CM doing enough to protect the CBs?

Lemina - 8 Excellent game. Everywhere and didn't lose the ball all day. Drove into space to make things happen.

Armstrong 6 - Second goal is a beauty, and yes he scored two goals, but he was largely anonymous, which accounts for the middling mark. He moved about, but never seemed to get the ball. If you play in the hole then you need to run the game. It might that Fulham were so deep that there wasn't space.

Gabiadini 6 - lots of movement, usually unfound, looked very sharp and was a problem when he came inside. Annoys the ****s out of me how he jumps for headers but gets underneath them. It looks like He isn't really trying to win them. Just going through the motion. Should have buried the chance in the first half. Not sure how he didn't score.

Redmond 9 - not sure what more he could have done in the game.

 

Obafemi - 7 - came on and made things happen. Looked sharp, but perhaps should have scored after a great first touch beat the defender. Ball was rising a bit.

 

Fans were not happy as you would imagine. Boos when balls went astray after going behind the second and third time. Hoedt was booed after his error. Some fans cheered when Austin was subbed. Getting sacked in the morning sung by most Saints fans after final whistle.

 

Austin 2 - did nothing and shortly before he was taken off it actually looked like he had given up. Just didn't even jump

Bottom three, Ralph. Take your hockey stick to that one.

We've got a deep roster. Everything will be fine...

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sure, "the table doesn't lie", but I stand by what I said - we've competed well in most fixtures except City away, and we are playing much better than we were last year. Missed chances and individual errors at the back are killing us - not poor management and tactics (like last year).

 

I'm no big fan of Hughes but, while I understand why yesterday's result is viewed as a sackable offence, yesterday's overall performance wasn't. Hughes needs to get Hoedt the hell out of there - he's not just making his own errors but exposing others in the process. And he needs to ditch Austin because he provides neither mobility nor the ability to even hold while others get forward.

 

We have the players to be mid table, and the middle-third looks way better than last year. I don't see the point of jumping out of the Hughes frying pan into an unknown fire.

 

It's just my opinion, and - unlike you - I don't feel the need to keep jamming other people's views down their throats just because I don't agree with them.

I am not sure who you think is picking Austin and Hoedt?

3 wins in 21 games is sackable for a Sunday league manager let alone a professional. It's his job to sort out the fitness and the individual errors...if it's not his job to get results then it's no wonder we are in such trouble.

we are in the bottom 3 technically, only out of it on goal difference

No we really are.

Sure, "the table doesn't lie", but I stand by what I said - we've competed well in most fixtures except City away, and we are playing much better than we were last year. Missed chances and individual errors at the back are killing us - not poor management and tactics (like last year).

 

I'm no big fan of Hughes but, while I understand why yesterday's result is viewed as a sackable offence, yesterday's overall performance wasn't. Hughes needs to get Hoedt the hell out of there - he's not just making his own errors but exposing others in the process. And he needs to ditch Austin because he provides neither mobility nor the ability to even hold while others get forward.

 

We have the players to be mid table, and the middle-third looks way better than last year. I don't see the point of jumping out of the Hughes frying pan into an unknown fire.

 

It's just my opinion, and - unlike you - I don't feel the need to keep jamming other people's views down their throats just because I don't agree with them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nile

"The Nile"

I am not sure who you think is picking Austin and Hoedt?

 

3 wins in 21 games is sackable for a Sunday league manager let alone a professional. It's his job to sort out the fitness and the individual errors...if it's not his job to get results then it's no wonder we are in such trouble.

Fred, I'm not any happier about our situation than anyone else - especially about his decision to keep starting Hoedt and Austin. Fitness is not the issue IMO because we kept pushing hard for the full 95. Our errors aren't physical but mental - and Yes, of course it's Hughes's job to sort it out.

However, there are three big "buts" to the Hughes-Out campaign:

1) We played quite well yesterday, and without two key pieces - Ings (very important for us) and Bertrand (he dovetails well with Redmond, and has covered Hoedt's arse on multiple occasions.). IMO we've been better this season than last, though certainly not points-wise.

2) Most of the people who are hammering Hughes are also saying that we only have a Championship-level squad. They can't have it both ways, but posting anything that doesn't fit the unremitting negativity on here goes down like a fart in church.

3) I'm sure you've read the Hughes Out thread and seen the 'options' - hence the "Hughes frying pan into an unknown fire" comment.

I'll stick with my perspectives on Hughes for now because I think (fear?) we might well be stuck with eachother for a while.

The difference between Hughes and Ranieri is huge. Ranieri told his team to get crosses in to Mitrovic because he would feast on it. And he did. That's a solid tactical call. Meanwhile the tactical advice given to our team by Hughes was - well what exactly? Does he have a clue what he is doing game to game?

The difference between Hughes and Ranieri is huge. Ranieri told his team to get crosses in to Mitrovic because he would feast on it. And he did. That's a solid tactical call. Meanwhile the tactical advice given to our team by Hughes was - well what exactly? Does he have a clue what he is doing game to game?

If you don’t have a player like Mitrovic in your side to channel your energies through, then instantly you have one hand tied up behind your back.

I'm inclined to think it's something of a myth, that Hughes kept us up. Unless I've miscalculated, there were 8 league matches in 2017/18 after Hughes became manager with a record of P8 W2 D2 L4 (8 points out of a possible 24). it appears we stayed up because other clubs had worse results than we did.

The bare stats do tend to dispell the "Hughes kept us up" 'mythology', however, IIRC, he adopted a totally demoralized squad that a lot of fans were wondering where we were going to get another point from, let alone another 8. So, it could be argued that he kept us up by getting those 8 points as it was more points than Pellegrino would have likely got us.

All that said, I'm firmly in the 'Hughes must go' camp as things stand.

The bare stats do tend to dispell the "Hughes kept us up" 'mythology', however, IIRC, he adopted a totally demoralized squad that a lot of fans were wondering where we were going to get another point from, let alone another 8. So, it could be argued that he kept us up by getting those 8 points as it was more points than Pellegrino would have likely got us.

 

All that said, I'm firmly in the 'Hughes must go' camp as things stand.

Yep. It's like some people never actually watched or attended any of the games at the end of the season, they are just going by what BBC or Wikipedia tells them.

A final thought on the team selection.

Sorry, Charlie, but you contributed very little. So what was the point of playing him?

Romeu can be a liability, bur he gives the defence some protection, and whatever pair we choose at the moment needs protection! (As an aside, I'm at a loss to know our best pairing, just like MH is. Vestergaard is too slow, Hoedt shows bad judgement and bad positioning, Stephens I like but is weak in the air, Maya is usually ok, but I think was struggling with Hoedt on Saturday and I've forgotten about Bednarek, but isn't he reasonable?)

If we'd played without an out-and-out striker, with Romeu, Hojbjerg and Lemina, we would still have a decent attack of Armstrong, Gabbiadini and Redmond. As likely to get goals as anyone else - these got two and should have been more on Saturday. And that would give Lemina licence to be more advanced and do his tricks in more dangerous areas.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

If you don’t have a player like Mitrovic in your side to channel your energies through, then instantly you have one hand tied up behind your back.

Yes, compare the #9's on the two sides - Mitrovic and Austin. Which one would you rather have? (Rhetorical question, as I know your answer)

It's quite incredible how the final result can influence people's views of the game. If we had scored the fifth goal instead of Fulham (with everything else in the match the same), I'm sure most people would be praising most aspects of the team.

I didn't think anybody played particularly badly if I'm honest. With one exception. When you're at the game it's sometimes hard to see who was at fault for the goals if it's to do with marking or tracking a run. Having watched the goals back I don't understand why Yoshida didn't get closer to Mitrovic for the opening goal, he's stood right in front of him. It's one thing zonal marking for corners, but it was like we were zonal marking in open play!

As for Wesley Hoedt... well I didn't think he was too bad actually. The trouble is he consistently makes one or two terrible decisions or errors in games that present the opposition with a chance. I'm not sure whether the "just boot it" argument necessarily holds weight. Our second goal came from an ambitious, not particularly well executed crossfield pass from Hoedt, after all. And we wouldn't have scored the second goal against Palace if Hoedt had just booted it out of play instead of playing a good ball out to Targett. The key thing seems to be knowing when to take risks and when to play safe, and I think this is true for the whole team. There was one time where we had lots of the ball, but no-one ever took a risk and played it down the wings. In the end Hojbjerg plays a terrible and incredibly risky pass that set Fulham breaking down the other end and they could have scored. It's just more obvious when Hoedt does it, partly because as a centre back if he gets it wrong we probably concede a goal, partly because he looks so awkward, and partly because people seem to be waiting in gleeful anticipation for his next mistake. After a brilliant crossfield pass, the guy behind me says "best thing he's done all season. He's sh1t." In the end I felt like I was Hoedt supporter, which I definitely am not, simply because the negativity towards him was ridiculous.

I thought going forward we were pretty good. Mario Lemina was the best player on the pitch. Hojbjerg is a bit dodgy at times but still had a good game. There were times where Armstrong was a bit anonymous defensively but at least he was popping up in attacking positions and actually scored two goals. Redmond had an excellent game, he finally seems to be mixing up whether he cuts inside or goes outside the defender. My only issue with him is that once he gets to the byline he always dinks it to the far post when sometimes he'd be better off just drilling it across the face, because when do we ever win headers?

And then we get to the exception I mentioned earlier. Charlie Austin. In my opinion, there is still a time and a place for Charlie Austin. But it isn't starting the game. Everyone seems to know this, except Hughes. I get that we didn't have many options, and after Gabbiadini's decent display vs Watford I would have been reluctant to move him back centrally again, as when he plays there we tend to lose our shape a bit and end up hitting hopeful balls towards him (as we did for a brief spell on Saturday), but anyone has to be better than Austin as a starter. Unless he gets a chance in the first 15 minutes he's done as a usable resource. I think what the fans get frustrated at is the lack of effort, but I think that's just down to lack of fitness. How can a footballer in his twenties not be fit? It's unacceptable from the management and the player.

As for Hughes: well this wasn't a performance to sack him on. We had possession, we played good football, we were attacking, but every time they got forward they scored. It was like playing a video game where the AI has fixed it that you won't win! But, the crucial thing is that we do keep dropping points from games where we play well for long periods or look the better side. In individual games you have to look past the result, but over a period of time sometimes you have to look past the performances. In addition, I think the specific reasons why we lost are as follows:

- Defensive organisation. Yes, individual mistakes don't help, but we just don't look very solid.

- Starting Charlie Austin. Contrary to opinion, I didn't actually think Mitrovic did a lot, Fulham didn't have enough of the ball for him to. But what he did do showed the difference it makes to have a proper (i.e. not knackered) centre forward.

- Failure to get behind the Fulham defence. For all our attacking play, it was ridiculous how little we got the ball into dangerous positions behind their full backs. The crazy thing is, when we did do it, we invariably created a chance! So keep doing it! But most of the time it was hesitation, pass back inside to a congested area, pass back to CBs, switch sides, start again. It's ok to keep the ball, but you have to be prepared to get behind defenders and put crosses over quickly. Fulham did this, which is why even though they didn't create a lot, when they did attack they nearly scored.

And the concern I have with Hughes is that these things continue to happen and don't look like changing any time soon.

Always enjoy trips to the Cottage, thought the Saints fans were in good voice, although not sure I agree with singing "sacked in the morning" while the game is still going on. And I could really do without people like the guy stood behind me (as mentioned earlier in the Hoedt paragraph). Why is it that the people with cretinous thoughts are also the ones incapable of remaining in place when we score? He landed on me and I twisted my knee in the process, so instead of being able to celebrate our goal, I was instead condemned to crouching down, unable to move until this idiotic oaf found a way of getting back to his feet.

A final thought on the team selection.

 

Sorry, Charlie, but you contributed very little. So what was the point of playing him?

 

Romeu can be a liability, bur he gives the defence some protection, and whatever pair we choose at the moment needs protection! (As an aside, I'm at a loss to know our best pairing, just like MH is. Vestergaard is too slow, Hoedt shows bad judgement and bad positioning, Stephens I like but is weak in the air, Maya is usually ok, but I think was struggling with Hoedt on Saturday and I've forgotten about Bednarek, but isn't he reasonable?)

 

If we'd played without an out-and-out striker, with Romeu, Hojbjerg and Lemina, we would still have a decent attack of Armstrong, Gabbiadini and Redmond. As likely to get goals as anyone else - these got two and should have been more on Saturday. And that would give Lemina licence to be more advanced and do his tricks in more dangerous areas.

 

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

I wonder if a diamond could work.

Romeu at the base, Hojbjerg/JWP and Lemina as the up-and-downers and Armstrong at the tip.

You could then play Redmond or Gabbiadini, and Ings.

Sacrifices some width but if Redmond / Gabbi / Armstrong drift out intelligently then it could work.

At the back I'd play Vestergaard and Yoshida with Stephens at right back against teams with physical presence up top. Against more technical or pacy teams then Stephens switches to CB and Cedric comes in at RB.

I wonder if a diamond could work.

 

Romeu at the base, Hojbjerg/JWP and Lemina as the up-and-downers and Armstrong at the tip.

 

You could then play Redmond or Gabbiadini, and Ings.

 

Sacrifices some width but if Redmond / Gabbi / Armstrong drift out intelligently then it could work.

 

At the back I'd play Vestergaard and Yoshida with Stephens at right back against teams with physical presence up top. Against more technical or pacy teams then Stephens switches to CB and Cedric comes in at RB.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

Good stuff, Benji.

Just been drawing that on my pad, and it would use our players in the their best positions.

I think we have found Hughes replacement in house, everyone!

Is Benji Puel?

Could provide us with some interesting possibilities.

A few Charlie Austin stats from Saturday's game:

68 minutes played

0 shots

5 completed passes from 10 attempted

1 aerial duel won from 5 attempted

0 tackles

16 touches

Yes, you read that right. SIXTEEN touches in 68 minutes. Absolutely pathetic.

A few Charlie Austin stats from Saturday's game:

 

68 minutes played

0 shots

5 completed passes from 10 attempted

1 aerial duel won from 5 attempted

0 tackles

16 touches

 

Yes, you read that right. SIXTEEN touches in 68 minutes. Absolutely pathetic.

And it's not like you can say that's because we were always defending. Most of the game we seemed to be in the ascendency.

A few Charlie Austin stats from Saturday's game:

 

68 minutes played

0 shots

5 completed passes from 10 attempted

1 aerial duel won from 5 attempted

0 tackles

16 touches

 

Yes, you read that right. SIXTEEN touches in 68 minutes. Absolutely pathetic.

He's finished at this level, those stats just back that up.

A few Charlie Austin stats from Saturday's game:

 

68 minutes played

0 shots

5 completed passes from 10 attempted

1 aerial duel won from 5 attempted

0 tackles

16 touches

 

Yes, you read that right. SIXTEEN touches in 68 minutes. Absolutely pathetic.

Cue somebody pointing out that his goals per touch ratio is behind only Kane and Aguero, or something.

As a team we are where we deserve to be. I still think that the players are good enough but we still keep conceding from winning positions. This suggests a mental problem and I am beginning to think that rather than sack Hughes we should employ a sports psychologist. If we already have one then sack him and get a better one.

I wonder if a diamond could work.

 

Romeu at the base, Hojbjerg/JWP and Lemina as the up-and-downers and Armstrong at the tip.

 

You could then play Redmond or Gabbiadini, and Ings.

 

Sacrifices some width but if Redmond / Gabbi / Armstrong drift out intelligently then it could work.

 

At the back I'd play Vestergaard and Yoshida with Stephens at right back against teams with physical presence up top. Against more technical or pacy teams then Stephens switches to CB and Cedric comes in at RB.

Totally agree

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So, it's unanimous....

Me for manager. I've got to get my fence fixed this week but I can start after the United game.

So, it's unanimous....

 

Me for manager. I've got to get my fence fixed this week but I can start after the United game.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

So, it's unanimous....

 

Me for manager. I've got to get my fence fixed this week but I can start after the United game.

Goa has big plans for you.

Goa has big plans for you.

First morning I'll be calling him in for a meeting. My way or the highway, Goa San.

As a team we are where we deserve to be. I still think that the players are good enough but we still keep conceding from winning positions. This suggests a mental problem and I am beginning to think that rather than sack Hughes we should employ a sports psychologist. If we already have one then sack him and get a better one.

Cedric's comments after the match would confirm it's a mental issue. Hardly positive thinking to say that they expected to lose from a winning position.

Bookies have us at around 5/2 to go down. I honestly feel this is a giveaway. Of the other candidates, I'd say only Fulham are on a par with us in terms of general ineffectiveness at this level. The rest either have more quality, or are better managed and motivated. We are on course for around 24 points, and even the most optimistic supporters surely can't see us getting more than this. The result will be a humiliating relegation finishing bottom by some margin. What money we did have to improve the squad has largely been wasted and there is no more available. We have a manager who consistently selects players who cannot do the job required of them.

We have a board that gives a 3 year contract to a journeyman when no manager since Chris Nichol has lasted that long at the club.

My attitude may be criticised , fair enough. But make no mistake, this season will be among the worst in SFC history.

We need some sort of miracle like when Hoddle replaced Jones and solidified us at the back and got us winning again.

Just can't see it though. We just amble from one ****up to another and get worse and worse.

True. By the end of the year, with our fixture list we will be rock bottom and on the way to being adrift.

I expect Hughes to get the bullet when we need to win 8 of our last 10 games. I just cant understand why we don't act until it's virtually too late. We're marketed as an established PL club and blunder on like a first time promoted club just happy to be there (like Fulham who have, er, just appointed a new manager)...

No point in making loads of changes if players are ok fitness wise. All much of a muchness anyway so might as well stay consistent if we can.

Obafemi or Ings in up top. Bednarek in for Hoedt. Gunn foe McCarthy. Vestergaard is a no against Vardy imo. Stephens at right back if you want but that's about it for me.

No point in making loads of changes if players are ok fitness wise. All much of a muchness anyway so might as well stay consistent if we can.

 

Obafemi or Ings in up top. Bednarek in for Hoedt. Gunn foe McCarthy. Vestergaard is a no against Vardy imo. Stephens at right back if you want but that's about it for me.

There's our problem.

We need something, anything, that can give us some sort of spark. If somehow Hughes stumbles on a formation and lineup that somehow solidifies us at the back, gets our midfield moving and helps our forwards score them we need to ride that to safety.

I don't care what that 11 is, as long as they start winning and putting a bit of pride back in Southampton FC.

It's quite incredible how the final result can influence people's views of the game. If we had scored the fifth goal instead of Fulham (with everything else in the match the same), I'm sure most people would be praising most aspects of the team.

 

I didn't think anybody played particularly badly if I'm honest. With one exception. When you're at the game it's sometimes hard to see who was at fault for the goals if it's to do with marking or tracking a run. Having watched the goals back I don't understand why Yoshida didn't get closer to Mitrovic for the opening goal, he's stood right in front of him. It's one thing zonal marking for corners, but it was like we were zonal marking in open play!

 

As for Wesley Hoedt... well I didn't think he was too bad actually. The trouble is he consistently makes one or two terrible decisions or errors in games that present the opposition with a chance. I'm not sure whether the "just boot it" argument necessarily holds weight. Our second goal came from an ambitious, not particularly well executed crossfield pass from Hoedt, after all. And we wouldn't have scored the second goal against Palace if Hoedt had just booted it out of play instead of playing a good ball out to Targett. The key thing seems to be knowing when to take risks and when to play safe, and I think this is true for the whole team. There was one time where we had lots of the ball, but no-one ever took a risk and played it down the wings. In the end Hojbjerg plays a terrible and incredibly risky pass that set Fulham breaking down the other end and they could have scored. It's just more obvious when Hoedt does it, partly because as a centre back if he gets it wrong we probably concede a goal, partly because he looks so awkward, and partly because people seem to be waiting in gleeful anticipation for his next mistake. After a brilliant crossfield pass, the guy behind me says "best thing he's done all season. He's sh1t." In the end I felt like I was Hoedt supporter, which I definitely am not, simply because the negativity towards him was ridiculous.

 

I thought going forward we were pretty good. Mario Lemina was the best player on the pitch. Hojbjerg is a bit dodgy at times but still had a good game. There were times where Armstrong was a bit anonymous defensively but at least he was popping up in attacking positions and actually scored two goals. Redmond had an excellent game, he finally seems to be mixing up whether he cuts inside or goes outside the defender. My only issue with him is that once he gets to the byline he always dinks it to the far post when sometimes he'd be better off just drilling it across the face, because when do we ever win headers?

 

And then we get to the exception I mentioned earlier. Charlie Austin. In my opinion, there is still a time and a place for Charlie Austin. But it isn't starting the game. Everyone seems to know this, except Hughes. I get that we didn't have many options, and after Gabbiadini's decent display vs Watford I would have been reluctant to move him back centrally again, as when he plays there we tend to lose our shape a bit and end up hitting hopeful balls towards him (as we did for a brief spell on Saturday), but anyone has to be better than Austin as a starter. Unless he gets a chance in the first 15 minutes he's done as a usable resource. I think what the fans get frustrated at is the lack of effort, but I think that's just down to lack of fitness. How can a footballer in his twenties not be fit? It's unacceptable from the management and the player.

 

As for Hughes: well this wasn't a performance to sack him on. We had possession, we played good football, we were attacking, but every time they got forward they scored. It was like playing a video game where the AI has fixed it that you won't win! But, the crucial thing is that we do keep dropping points from games where we play well for long periods or look the better side. In individual games you have to look past the result, but over a period of time sometimes you have to look past the performances. In addition, I think the specific reasons why we lost are as follows:

 

- Defensive organisation. Yes, individual mistakes don't help, but we just don't look very solid.

- Starting Charlie Austin. Contrary to opinion, I didn't actually think Mitrovic did a lot, Fulham didn't have enough of the ball for him to. But what he did do showed the difference it makes to have a proper (i.e. not knackered) centre forward.

- Failure to get behind the Fulham defence. For all our attacking play, it was ridiculous how little we got the ball into dangerous positions behind their full backs. The crazy thing is, when we did do it, we invariably created a chance! So keep doing it! But most of the time it was hesitation, pass back inside to a congested area, pass back to CBs, switch sides, start again. It's ok to keep the ball, but you have to be prepared to get behind defenders and put crosses over quickly. Fulham did this, which is why even though they didn't create a lot, when they did attack they nearly scored.

 

And the concern I have with Hughes is that these things continue to happen and don't look like changing any time soon.

 

Always enjoy trips to the Cottage, thought the Saints fans were in good voice, although not sure I agree with singing "sacked in the morning" while the game is still going on. And I could really do without people like the guy stood behind me (as mentioned earlier in the Hoedt paragraph). Why is it that the people with cretinous thoughts are also the ones incapable of remaining in place when we score? He landed on me and I twisted my knee in the process, so instead of being able to celebrate our goal, I was instead condemned to crouching down, unable to move until this idiotic oaf found a way of getting back to his feet.

enjoyed your post. Very good summary. You are right about Hoedt. Some of his distribution is top class as does help us offensively and you certainly do see his mistakes more than others due to who he is etc. Individually and collectively the back four make too many mistakes and are not strong enough. They don't get the right protection in front of them. In my eyes the side plays decent football, but there is a lack of quality throughout that really is noticeable against decent teams.

enjoyed your post. Very good summary. You are right about Hoedt. Some of his distribution is top class as does help us offensively and you certainly do see his mistakes more than others due to who he is etc. Individually and collectively the back four make too many mistakes and are not strong enough. They don't get the right protection in front of them. In my eyes the side plays decent football, but there is a lack of quality throughout that really is noticeable against decent teams.

Thanks - once I posted it I did think "hmmm that looks much longer than I expected, doubt anyone will read". Ha. Agree about the defence - it's like they all make little mistakes here and there, or aren't quite good enough in certain areas - each one is forgivable and wouldn't necessarily be costly, but when you add them all together it is the difference between winning and losing.