Jump to content

Saints v Burnley Build-up


SuperSAINT

Recommended Posts

I've always been a big fan of Romeu but against Spurs there's no doubt he was ponderous and/or sloppy in possession. He was always a tidy player but I wonder if that's because we used to play patient football under Puel (when Oriol was at his best). Now we play a higher tempo he struggles. I think he looks better when sit deep protecting the back line rather than pressing, because he doesn't recover quickly when going back towards his own goal.

 

Of course, it could also be that he doesn't get a lot of game time at the moment and isn't sharp or used to playing the way we do. I don't think he deserves to be the whipping boy of the forum, but unless he improves he will only be a back up or used when we start sitting deeper.

 

I know it's a bit of a ping-pong argument, but you say against Spurs Romeu was ponderous and/or sloppy - I thought he and Hoj both had good games. Romeu lost possession once when dispossessed, but otherwise looked up to speed - just as he was for the first 10 or so games of the season. Against Spurs, he broke up play, tackled, harassed and made several incisive attacking passes. The whole side wilted and/or sat deeper at about the time Armstrong replaced Boufal, and from that point Spurs (with their tactical changes working) made inroads and looked dangerous......but you can't hold Romeu majorly responsible for that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know it's a bit of a ping-pong argument, but you say against Spurs Romeu was ponderous and/or sloppy - I thought he and Hoj both had good games. Romeu lost possession once when dispossessed, but otherwise looked up to speed - just as he was for the first 10 or so games of the season. Against Spurs, he broke up play, tackled, harassed and made several incisive attacking passes. The whole side wilted and/or sat deeper at about the time Armstrong replaced Boufal, and from that point Spurs (with their tactical changes working) made inroads and looked dangerous......but you can't hold Romeu majorly responsible for that.

 

I’m a Romeu fan, but I have to say his performance tends to follow the number fouls he racks up and this primarily because he’s too slow for the speed of play against the better sides. He was lucky not receive a red due to a second yellow in the Spurs game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thinking that jwp might not be ready if the cut was that bad.

Also think against Burnley I'd want a right back who is decent aerially rather than debutting kwp.

Rest of the team sort of picks itself imo

Also fingers crossed the weather improves. Want no repeat of conditions that clearly suited Burnley in the opening game of the season

 

McCarthy

Valery Stephens bednarek Bertrand

Romeu hojberg

Armstrong Redmond

Long ings

 

Unlikly Valery will get to start at RB, sensibly it should be between KWP and Danso but knowing RH he'll find a place for Vestergard and shuffle Stephens across.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unlikly Valery will get to start at RB, sensibly it should be between KWP and Danso but knowing RH he'll find a place for Vestergard and shuffle Stephens across.

 

Against Burnley I'd prefer either Valery or Danso to KWP. Don't fancy a small fullback up against JRod or Wood if they isolate him at the far post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Storm Dennis set to arrive in Hampshire Saturday afternoon with weather warnings in place for wind and rain, proper football conditions.
Yes. Wet, and very windy. Just like it was when they beat us on the opening day. Perfect for them, awful for us.

 

Can only hope it arrives a bit late.

 

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know it's a bit of a ping-pong argument, but you say against Spurs Romeu was ponderous and/or sloppy - I thought he and Hoj both had good games. Romeu lost possession once when dispossessed, but otherwise looked up to speed - just as he was for the first 10 or so games of the season. Against Spurs, he broke up play, tackled, harassed and made several incisive attacking passes. The whole side wilted and/or sat deeper at about the time Armstrong replaced Boufal, and from that point Spurs (with their tactical changes working) made inroads and looked dangerous......but you can't hold Romeu majorly responsible for that.

 

He did, but he was also the player most guilty of losing the ball in dangerous areas (i.e. when we had men forward and they could break).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He did, but he was also the player most guilty of losing the ball in dangerous areas (i.e. when we had men forward and they could break).

Redmond's sloppy, misplaced pass lead directly to the Spurs pen, far worse and more critical than any mistake OR made. We didn't concede from any of his mistakes (if there were any). Seems to me to be getting blamed for nothing. Scapegoat as already said. Rather have Oriol in the team any day rather than Hojbjerg.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Probably one of the harder teams to break down. They’ll be happy to keep 11 behind the ball and hope for a break away and a set piece or two. They will not be letting us get to much space in behind so we will need to get it out wide and stretch them. Personally I think it’s got draw written all over it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Against Burnley I'd prefer either Valery or Danso to KWP. Don't fancy a small fullback up against JRod or Wood if they isolate him at the far post.

 

It's all very well to have an opinion but not much value without evidence or facts. The players didn't report back to Staplewood until Tuesday so I doubt if even the manager or the coaching staff can be certain yet of who to select at full back. We've heard a little about the seriousness of the cut that JWP sustained but also that it might not be as bad as first reported. Valery, is reported to be ready to return from injury, but whether he's match fit is another matter, and then we have KWP, who's time with the team is very short. Only the club staff can make an informed assessment, which makes speculation rather pointless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Redmond's sloppy, misplaced pass lead directly to the Spurs pen, far worse and more critical than any mistake OR made. We didn't concede from any of his mistakes (if there were any). Seems to me to be getting blamed for nothing. Scapegoat as already said. Rather have Oriol in the team any day rather than Hojbjerg.

 

Yes that was a bad pass by Redmond, which was a shame as he had been terrific throughout. But most of the ones I recall from Romeu were before that, mainly in the first half. To say "we didn't concede from any" is a terrible argument - they led to scenarios where Tottenham went on the attack and could have scored. As I've already said, I don't think it's fair to use Romeu as a scapegoat, and have also said it might be down to a lack of match sharpness (i.e. defending him), but when you witness something happening it's hard to just pretend otherwise.

Edited by mrfahaji
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes that was a bad pass by Redmond, which was a shame as he had been terrific throughout. But most of the ones I recall from Romeu were before that, mainly in the first half. To say "we didn't concede from any" is a terrible argument - they led to scenarios where Tottenham went on the attack and could have scored. As I've already said, I don't think it's fair to use Romeu as a scapegoat, and have also said it might be down to a lack of match sharpness (i.e. defending him), but when you witness something happening it's hard to just pretend otherwise.

 

It's not a terrible argument at all. It shows that the giveaways were not in such critical positions otherwise Spurs would have scored. People are blaming Romeu for the number of goals conceded, yet there is no evidence that he is the cause of these goals, they are just scapegoating, and you agree on this. So often the goals we concede (or penalties) are down to our attacking MFs giving away the ball cheaply when we are committed to attacking. It's been the same for a few seasons now, Redmond, Boufal and Tadic serial offenders, but our CBs and DMs get the blame. I'm not actually convinced that Romeu gave the ball away in a dangerous position at all against Spurs, but then I haven't watched the whole game. I would still rather have him in the side over Hojbjerg who is a liability too often. But we have no options at the moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes. Wet, and very windy. Just like it was when they beat us on the opening day. Perfect for them, awful for us.

 

Can only hope it arrives a bit late.

 

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

 

FFS, the luck is astounding, we play Burnley in August, supposedly the summer that somehow had a day from January dropped in and now we play them again and a storm is arriving just as we play them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not a terrible argument at all. It shows that the giveaways were not in such critical positions otherwise Spurs would have scored. People are blaming Romeu for the number of goals conceded, yet there is no evidence that he is the cause of these goals, they are just scapegoating, and you agree on this. So often the goals we concede (or penalties) are down to our attacking MFs giving away the ball cheaply when we are committed to attacking. It's been the same for a few seasons now, Redmond, Boufal and Tadic serial offenders, but our CBs and DMs get the blame. I'm not actually convinced that Romeu gave the ball away in a dangerous position at all against Spurs, but then I haven't watched the whole game. I would still rather have him in the side over Hojbjerg who is a liability too often. But we have no options at the moment.

 

Was Vestergaard’s giveaway against Palace in a critical position or not?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not a terrible argument at all. It shows that the giveaways were not in such critical positions otherwise Spurs would have scored. People are blaming Romeu for the number of goals conceded, yet there is no evidence that he is the cause of these goals, they are just scapegoating, and you agree on this. So often the goals we concede (or penalties) are down to our attacking MFs giving away the ball cheaply when we are committed to attacking. It's been the same for a few seasons now, Redmond, Boufal and Tadic serial offenders, but our CBs and DMs get the blame. I'm not actually convinced that Romeu gave the ball away in a dangerous position at all against Spurs, but then I haven't watched the whole game. I would still rather have him in the side over Hojbjerg who is a liability too often. But we have no options at the moment.

 

1) I haven't blamed Romeu for the number of goals we have conceded.

 

2) I was at the game. He did lose the ball on a number of occasions. I like Romeu, I would like him to be in the team (if he deserves it), so I wasn't waiting for him to make a mistake so I could criticise him - in fact, rather the opposite - feeling disappointed/frustrated because he was demonstrating why he doesn't play as much!

 

3) See shurlock's response - was tempted to make that exact comparison! Of course you don't want your forwards to give the ball away either, but it's a lot worse for a player to lose the ball in a defensive position when the rest of the team have pushed forward. Surely that is obvious. Sometimes forwards have to take chances to get anywhere, otherwise we end up playing like a Pellegrino side going sideways and backwards purely to keep possession.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) I haven't blamed Romeu for the number of goals we have conceded.

 

2) I was at the game. He did lose the ball on a number of occasions. I like Romeu, I would like him to be in the team (if he deserves it), so I wasn't waiting for him to make a mistake so I could criticise him - in fact, rather the opposite - feeling disappointed/frustrated because he was demonstrating why he doesn't play as much!

 

3) See shurlock's response - was tempted to make that exact comparison! Of course you don't want your forwards to give the ball away either, but it's a lot worse for a player to lose the ball in a defensive position when the rest of the team have pushed forward. Surely that is obvious. Sometimes forwards have to take chances to get anywhere, otherwise we end up playing like a Pellegrino side going sideways and backwards purely to keep possession.

 

We are actually in agreement mostly, it is the other posters on here who are scapegoating. Yes, you would consider it worse to give away the ball in a dangerous position for instance just outside the penalty area, but in practice we are conceding goals (and that's all that matters in the end in football) because we are giving it away when we are attacking and our defenders have (over) committed to support the attack. I wasn't going to respond to Shurlock comment but the bottom line is that it didn't actually cost us a goal. Vestegaard shouldn't More by luck than judgement. It's irrelevant to the argument, Vestegaard is not the one being scapegoated, if all things were equal he shouldn't even be on the pitch, total liability. In the end what I say is true, Romeu is being scapegoated, his errors are not costing us goals (as a generalisation, I'm sure someone will find an example where it did) ) whereas others who do cost us goals are not being criticised. Just because Redmond had an otherwise brilliant game does not get away from the fact that his sloppy lay off actually cost us the game. I want Romeu in the team, he is a far better player than Hojbjerg, for instance, but PEH is all action, balls out and so doesn't get criticised. Bottom line is that we really need big upgrade in MF next season, we are weak there both in terms of quality and quantity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What are the chances this will be off because of storm Dennis? Travelling to the game from Sussex

 

Well, I normally get the train coming from Sussex way and my bigger concern is trees on the line, again.. I'll certainly be checking beforehand. It might be just as well we're playing at 12.30. Might take a toothbrush in case I get stranded in Soton..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What are the chances this will be off because of storm Dennis? Travelling to the game from Sussex

 

 

Chichester? - slightly inconvenient.

Camber? - quite a bit more inconvenient

Burnley? - best wait for HS2

 

Or you could listen to the wireless about the time you intend setting off and see if they think it is/will be off - more reliable than conjecture by us lot.

 

HTH

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chichester? - slightly inconvenient.

Camber? - quite a bit more inconvenient

Burnley? - best wait for HS2

 

Or you could listen to the wireless about the time you intend setting off and see if they think it is/will be off - more reliable than conjecture by us lot.

 

HTH

 

Thanks Victor. That is information/advice of the highest order

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unlikly Valery will get to start at RB, sensibly it should be between KWP and Danso but knowing RH he'll find a place for Vestergard and shuffle Stephens across.

 

But we wouldn't have been stupid enough to get rid of Cedric if we had no Premiership quality backup, surely. Perhaps it was just a loan and we can recall him, - hey ho.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RB is quite a problem. KWP is an unknown and untried quantity. Danso wasn't very good in that position. Valery can't be very fit after a nasty long-lasting virus. JWP would be an ok call, if he's fit, which I don't think he is, and anyway I'd prefer him in midfield.

 

Please not Stephens. We need him at CB just as much as we don't need Vestergaard.

 

I've got a strange feeling we could see Armstrong filling the gap.

 

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RB is quite a problem. KWP is an unknown and untried quantity. Danso wasn't very good in that position. Valery can't be very fit after a nasty long-lasting virus. JWP would be an ok call, if he's fit, which I don't think he is, and anyway I'd prefer him in midfield.

 

Please not Stephens. We need him at CB just as much as we don't need Vestergaard.

 

I've got a strange feeling we could see Armstrong filling the gap.

 

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

 

Burnley's a game i wouldn't have a particular issue with Vestergaard coming in for. He is quite useful when teams lump crosses into the box.

That said i can't see why we couldn't utilise valery for an hour and then KWP for final 30 (or the other way round)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Burnley's a game i wouldn't have a particular issue with Vestergaard coming in for. He is quite useful when teams lump crosses into the box.

That said i can't see why we couldn't utilise valery for an hour and then KWP for final 30 (or the other way round)

I see your point but Valery/KWP loses us an attacking sub, which Ralph always likes.

 

Interesting dilemma, anyway.

 

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RB is quite a problem. KWP is an unknown and untried quantity. Danso wasn't very good in that position. Valery can't be very fit after a nasty long-lasting virus. JWP would be an ok call, if he's fit, which I don't think he is, and anyway I'd prefer him in midfield.

 

Please not Stephens. We need him at CB just as much as we don't need Vestergaard.

 

I've got a strange feeling we could see Armstrong filling the gap.

 

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

 

Whatever we go with you can bet that Sean Dyche will have done his homework. If and when they get out of their half they will target our RB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Valery is more likely. He got the call for the U23 run-out last week, ahead of KWP.

 

https://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/18226446.southampton-boss-talks-yan-valery-kyle-walker-peters/

 

And Hasenhuttl explained it will be a while until Valery can play 90 minutes.

Saints' boss added: “He is still improving and getting his fitness back, but he is far away from playing 90 minutes or something like that.

“If you are that long out then it takes time, but we have a break and maybe he can be an option in the next games.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RH: "JWP is back for the first time on the pitch today. He handled it well. It looks good and hopefully he can play at the weekend"

 

RH: "We hope JWP can play in his normal No.6 position as KWP is now ready to play at right back. And Valery is available too" (significant that he mentioned KWP first?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RH: "JWP is back for the first time on the pitch today. He handled it well. It looks good and hopefully he can play at the weekend"

 

RH: "We hope JWP can play in his normal No.6 position as KWP is now ready to play at right back. And Valery is available too" (significant that he mentioned KWP first?)

Better news. Sounds like Valery may not have recovered well from the U23 game. If, as rumoured, it was glandular fever, it'll be a while and he has to take care.

 

Looks like KWP to start. Looking forward to seeing what he can do. And if JWP is playing and Valery on the bench, gives us more options than I was expecting.

 

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, with it looking like JWP will be available, the starting 11 pretty much picks itself these days...

 

McCarthy

 

KWP

Bednarek

Stephens

Bertrand

 

JWP

Hojbjerg

 

Redmond

Armstrong

 

Long

Ings

 

Which leaves the bench looking something like: Gunn, Valery, Vestegaard, Romeu, Djenepo, Boufal, Adams/Obefemi (or maybe sacrificing one of the defenders to include both Adams and Obefemi?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RH: "JWP is back for the first time on the pitch today. He handled it well. It looks good and hopefully he can play at the weekend"

 

RH: "We hope JWP can play in his normal No.6 position as KWP is now ready to play at right back. And Valery is available too" (significant that he mentioned KWP first?)

That is good news. Was almost certain JWP wouldn't make it for this one. On balance though would do us a favour if this did get called off as conditions must surely suit Burnley more than us.

 

Sent from my moto g(7) play using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, with it looking like JWP will be available, the starting 11 pretty much picks itself these days...

 

McCarthy

 

KWP

Bednarek

Stephens

Bertrand

 

JWP

Hojbjerg

 

Redmond

Armstrong

 

Long

Ings

 

Which leaves the bench looking something like: Gunn, Valery, Vestegaard, Romeu, Djenepo, Boufal, Adams/Obefemi (or maybe sacrificing one of the defenders to include both Adams and Obefemi?)

 

Yup think this is pretty much it, with Djenepo, Boufal, Obafemi and Adams the attacking options off the bench.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Weather for Saturday looks grim. Really grim.
Yep. As discussed extensively above.

 

Now promising 50mph gusts and torrential rain all day. Will suit Burnley's subtle game perfectly.

 

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

Edited by Shroppie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, with it looking like JWP will be available, the starting 11 pretty much picks itself these days...

 

McCarthy

 

KWP

Bednarek

Stephens

Bertrand

 

JWP

Hojbjerg

 

Redmond

Armstrong

 

Long

Ings

 

Which leaves the bench looking something like: Gunn, Valery, Vestegaard, Romeu, Djenepo, Boufal, Adams/Obefemi (or maybe sacrificing one of the defenders to include both Adams and Obefemi?)

No need to sacrifice a defender, just leave out Vestegaard.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

...0ea14f73428441ce339e9c32704b6f78.jpg
Surprised. I would've thought a gash right down to the bone would've needed a bit longer than a week to fully heal. Especially if it's anywhere near the joint as any flexing can reopen a wound. The stitches have probably only just come out.

 

Great news regardless that it seems to have been no worse an injury than that - even if he sits out this one as a precaution.

 

It might be Romeu's kind of game anyway: physical, ugly, a lot of heading.

 

Sent from my F3311 using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surprised. I would've thought a gash right down to the bone would've needed a bit longer than a week to fully heal. Especially if it's anywhere near the joint as any flexing can reopen a wound. The stitches have probably only just come out.

 

Great news regardless that it seems to have been no worse an injury than that - even if he sits out this one as a precaution.

 

It might be Romeu's kind of game anyway: physical, ugly, a lot of heading.

 

Ward-Prowse now has that to his game. His defensive stats are impressive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

View Terms of service (Terms of Use) and Privacy Policy (Privacy Policy) and Forum Guidelines ({Guidelines})