Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 51 to 100 of 137

Thread: Saints 1-2 Burnley - Reaction

  1. Default

    I know weve shipped a few goals in recent games, BUT Ralph has to
    explain why he played Vestergaard! He was awful and gave the whole team (& crowd) the jitters every time he got near, or nowhere near the ball.

    ok in the first half, very poor in the second against really shte opposition.

    Missed Redmond and Boufal.

    Obafemi really is poor.

    still looking over our shoulders.

    and the tubby ref, LOL

  2. #52

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by um pahars View Post
    I know we’ve shipped a few goals in recent games, BUT Ralph has to
    explain why he played Vestergaard! He was awful and gave the whole team (& crowd) the jitters every time he got near, or nowhere near the ball.

    ok in the first half, very poor in the second against really shte opposition.


    Missed Redmond and Boufal.

    Obafemi really is poor.

    still looking over our shoulders.
    He explained pre match. In his opinion, Vest is better on the ball that Bednerak and he expected (correctly) that we’d have the lion share of the ball and his (supposed) ability on the ball would help us.

    Who knows if he was right or wrong, none of our CB’s usually tend to cover themselves in glory defensively.

  3. #53

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shroppie View Post
    I don't normally post instant reactions, but here goes.

    I understand why Vestergaard started, but it was wrong. I don't believe his height makes him a better counter to high balls than Bednarek, who is better in every aspect of defending. Hope the lesson has been learned. Would say Vestergaard was a major culprit for the second goal.

    KWP had to be given a chance and was mainly decent. But shouldn't he have been covering the near post for the goal from the corner? JWP is better, but we need him in midfield too. And, btw, thought he had an excellent game.

    Losing first Redmond, then Boufal (who was having one of his best games) was critical.

    Face it, playing creative football in those conditions is a nightmare, and defending balls pumped up into the wind a battle. Why the f*** do we always play Burnley in a rain-sodden gale? I'm convinced that on a dry, warm, calm day we would tear them apart.

    We had good performances today. Armstrong was always looking for the killer pass and was so close several times. Ings was great. Not Long's best game and maybe Obafemi earlier would have been good. Djenepo didn't have Boufal's urgency or commitment. Stephens good on very difficult conditions. Hojbjerg and Bertrand ok.

    Ref was poor. There were plenty of fouls that got nothing and cards weren't given. I thought the VAR pen was nailed-on.

    But the real winner was the weather. For next week we need it dry and calm, Ralph to forget the Vestergaard experiment, Redmond and/or Boufal to recover and KWP to have learned from today

    Bad day, but mainly the weather won. Conditions like today are a real leveller. We are way better than Burnley. If we get another day like today, we need to do a Man City and identify a crowd safety issue and get the game postponed to a decent day.

    Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
    Quote Originally Posted by SKD View Post
    He explained pre match. In his opinion, Vest is better on the ball that Bednerak and he expected (correctly) that wed have the lion share of the ball and his (supposed) ability on the ball would help us.

    Who knows if he was right or wrong, none of our CBs usually tend to cover themselves in glory defensively.
    I'm not sure I buy that, veest offers no confidence when he is on the ball near our goal.

    I saw a lot of mistakes, but mainly it's his decision making. That 2nd goal, he can see he has no one on the LB side and his man has runoff him into the channel.

    Hate to say it but both veest and hoj for me aren't worth either their record transfer fee or a big fat new contract in the summer.

    Also Ings decision making in the first 2mins to leave that ball good job he scores for fun.

  4. #54

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SKD View Post
    He explained pre match. In his opinion, Vest is better on the ball that Bednerak and he expected (correctly) that we’d have the lion share of the ball and his (supposed) ability on the ball would help us.

    Who knows if he was right or wrong, none of our CB’s usually tend to cover themselves in glory defensively.
    That is unadulterated ****ing rubbish. Apart from about five forward passes he got us in a tangle on loads of occasions with little short square or backward passes. My missus can jump higher than him he is an appalling defender. He is so ponderous it's untrue. Ralph got some decent results with a settled back four. Bringing in a debutant and leaving the rest of the four unchanged made sense but bringing in Vestergaard had consequences. it's not his job in a lower table side to be good on the ball. Our defenders need to be less of footballers and more of tough defenders. Win it and play it up to Ings and Long. Cut out the possession because we are hopeless at it and it destroys our tempo.

  5. #55

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Bartonia 2, 000, 000 years ago
    Posts
    7,149

    Default

    Vest is awful can't jump can't run can't tackle . Ings at fault for the first goal bit made amends and why did Hojbjerg take an age to shoot when he had the goal at his mercy? . Manager must take the lions share of the blame for not playing Bednarek and leaving the subs late (as he was in our poor run of form).

  6. #56

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    The metropolis of Wem
    Posts
    7,584

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by derry View Post
    That is unadulterated ****ing rubbish. Apart from about five forward passes he got us in a tangle on loads of occasions with little short square or backward passes. My missus can jump higher than him he is an appalling defender. He is so ponderous it's untrue. Ralph got some decent results with a settled back four. Bringing in a debutant and leaving the rest of the four unchanged made sense but bringing in Vestergaard had consequences. it's not his job in a lower table side to be good on the ball. Our defenders need to be less of footballers and more of tough defenders. Win it and play it up to Ings and Long. Cut out the possession because we are hopeless at it and it destroys our tempo.
    Yep. Agree with this. I don't agree Vestergaard is good on the ball. He's just bad at jumping, heading, tracking, tackling, blocking and reading the game

    Ralph needs another wake-up moment so that never happens again. Cost us at least a point. And with Redmond out for a month or two, and maybe Boufal, goals will be harder to come by, do we need to make sure the defence is doing its job - defending.

    Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

  7. Default

    A disgusting performance from Saints. Only Ings gave anywhere near 100%, the rest might as well have stayed at home. I wouldn't pay them, furthermore, I would fine them a weeks wages for not turning up. Burnley are awful, and yet we never looked like beating them. And the manager must take some blame for his selection of defenders

  8. #58

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Sunny Dubai
    Posts
    10,525
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    We were very poor 2nd half. Also none of our substitutions recently have done anything to improve the team on the pitch, in fact just the opposite.

    WFT was the opening goal all about? Nobody on the near post, one minute Macca is 3 feet off the goal line with 2 attackers nearer the goal than him,
    next moment he's 2 feet behind the line. If he's going to go on walkabout he has to get his defence right first. Complete and utter brainphart by Danny as well.

    The ref was utter dogturd as well. So many fouls unpunished and how Cork got away without a booking is shocking.
    Getting worried by Ralphs substitutions, none recently have enhanced the team ... if anything the reverse.

    But my main gripe is the Handball/Var/Refs not making decisions and hoping VAR will cover. Why oh why do the powers that be think it is ok to review and cancel perfectly good goals for the slightest of accidental touches of the ball against an attacking forward's arm or hand, that nobody has even appealed for, and only spotted after 3 minutes of VAR reviewing, yet when a defenders arm is involved and spectators on the phucking moon are screaming handball, is it not deemed worthy of a penalty?????

    I've said it a million times over the last few years .... most tackles that are awarded penalties aren't actually INTENTIONAL fouls, just as today's and others aginst us this season, may not have been INTENTIONAL, but an UNFAIR ADVANTAGE was gained. That should be the crux of the matter, none of this was his hand/arm in anatural positon etc.

    Feeling really gutted, but not surprised. Just the same as opening day, the worst possible weather coditions to play against Burnley, but hats off to them they know how to defend, I guess they have plenty of practice!!
    Barely any of our crosses beat the first line of defenders. Disappointed with Moussa today, after Boufal showed how to scare them.

  9. #59

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Sunny Dubai
    Posts
    10,525
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ericofarabia View Post
    We were very poor 2nd half. Also none of our substitutions recently have done anything to improve the team on the pitch, in fact just the opposite.

    WFT was the opening goal all about? Nobody on the near post, one minute Macca is 3 feet off the goal line with 2 attackers nearer the goal than him,
    next moment he's 2 feet behind the line. If he's going to go on walkabout he has to get his defence right first. Complete and utter brainphart by Danny as well.

    The ref was utter dogturd as well. So many fouls unpunished and how Cork got away without a booking is shocking.
    Getting worried by Ralphs substitutions, none recently have enhanced the team ... if anything the reverse.

    But my main gripe is the Handball/Var/Refs not making decisions and hoping VAR will cover. Why oh why do the powers that be think it is ok to review and cancel perfectly good goals for the slightest of accidental touches of the ball against an attacking forward's arm or hand, that nobody has even appealed for, and only spotted after 3 minutes of VAR reviewing, yet when a defenders arm is involved and spectators on the phucking moon are screaming handball, is it not deemed worthy of a penalty?????

    I've said it a million times over the last few years .... most tackles that are awarded penalties aren't actually INTENTIONAL fouls, just as today's and others aginst us this season, may not have been INTENTIONAL, but an UNFAIR ADVANTAGE was gained. That should be the crux of the matter, none of this was his hand/arm in anatural positon etc.

    Feeling really gutted, but not surprised. Just the same as opening day, the worst possible weather coditions to play against Burnley, but hats off to them they know how to defend, I guess they have plenty of practice!!
    Barely any of our crosses beat the first line of defenders. Disappointed with Moussa today, after Boufal showed how to scare them.
    Oh and how did we manage to find a FB even shorter than Cedric? He looked okay on the ball, but easily brushed aside in challenges and probably near post from a corner should have been his position?

  10. #60

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    The metropolis of Wem
    Posts
    7,584

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by davefoggy View Post
    A disgusting performance from Saints. Only Ings gave anywhere near 100%, the rest might as well have stayed at home. I wouldn't pay them, furthermore, I would fine them a weeks wages for not turning up. Burnley are awful, and yet we never looked like beating them. And the manager must take some blame for his selection of defenders
    Give it a rest. There was no lack of effort. Just very hard to play controlled football in those conditions. Was always going to come down to a couple of moments. Both teams scored a great goal.

    They got a freak goal, albeit though a lapse in defending. We hit the bar and other chances didn't fall for us. The ref was awful. We're not a bad team. Move on.

    Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

  11. #61

    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Gotham City
    Posts
    29,862

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shroppie View Post
    They got a freak goal, albeit though a lapse in defending. We hit the bar and other chances didn't fall for us. The ref was awful. We're not a bad team. Move on.

    Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
    We are at home (comparatively)

  12. #62

    Default

    Who was that fat bald fcker of a ref?

  13. #63

    Default

    Vester isnt good on the ball so if Ralph made the change because he thought that then it's a strange decision.
    The amount of times he gives the ball away with stupid passes Ralph should have known better.
    Our tactics of launch it and hope for the best played into their hands.

  14. #64

    Default

    Sean Dyches record against us is seriously impressive. He simply has us sussed.

  15. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shroppie View Post
    Give it a rest. There was no lack of effort. Just very hard to play controlled football in those conditions. Was always going to come down to a couple of moments. Both teams scored a great goal.

    They got a freak goal, albeit though a lapse in defending. We hit the bar and other chances didn't fall for us. The ref was awful. We're not a bad team. Move on.

    Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
    Sorry, I disagree. We were poor

  16. #66

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Was NI now Shropshire..!
    Posts
    8,538

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by whelk View Post
    Who was that fat bald fcker of a ref?
    Don't know his name but he was a fat bald ****er who gave us nothing.

  17. #67

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Bitterne Park
    Posts
    2,293

    Default

    All in all a **** day out. We never looked like winning today, after the winter break and the talk of making our home form more formidable I don’t understand just why we were so poor today - so poor we made Burnley look good tbh.

    Can only assume with their first that Ings forgot his positioning and thought the harsh bend on the ball was taking it into the side netting - why is it always us that embarrasses themselves like that.

    Just like the Leicester game it put the myth of shooting towards the Northam second half being good for us.

    Roll on next week when a resurgent Villa come and do us over too I bet...

  18. #68

    Default

    That felt like a defeat.

  19. #69

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Sunny Dubai
    Posts
    10,525
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wadesmith View Post
    That felt like a defeat.
    Am I missing something here?

  20. #70

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    3,769

    Default

    Ralph looks like he’s heading back to un-forced dicking around. The Vestergaard inclusion was ridiculously stupid. Most of our progress came from two CDs dovetailing well, and ditching the “me to you, you to me, me back to you” crap.

    And I am struggling to remember one Obafemi moment since he broke into the team when he’s looked remotely close to having what it takes at this level.

  21. #71

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Camden, London
    Posts
    10,605

    Default

    Never want to See Vestergard in a Saints shirt again. Ehatbwas Ralph thinking? That he's big? What a bloody Einstein. Cost us the game, tinkering again. Stephens the only player who had a good game. Tactically out thought. And boy can they waste time well.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  22. #72

    Default

    Thoughts:

    Tough Conditions Burnley are a very physical dirty side well drilled plenty of big units / lumps in that team who do not mess about..

    Kyle Walker Peters didn't really see alot but he looks very light weight got bullied off the ball a bit. Needs to hit the juice and weights!
    Vestergaard Slow, Full of mistakes could of easily of costed us 2-3 goals today is terrible sell in the summer and upgrade!
    I think we had a clear penalty shout!

    The ref was a joke completely biased towards Burnley.

  23. Default

    Woke up with a bad feeling about today's game, then I saw the team and knew we were getting nothing. Our home form is shocking. Give it 3 weeks and we'll be right back in the ****.

  24. #74

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Camden, London
    Posts
    10,605

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CanadaSaint View Post
    Ralph looks like hes heading back to un-forced dicking around. The Vestergaard inclusion was ridiculously stupid. Most of our progress came from two CDs dovetailing well, and ditching the me to you, you to me, me back to you crap.

    And I am struggling to remember one Obafemi moment since he broke into the team when hes looked remotely close to having what it takes at this level.
    Spot on. If I was Che I'd be pretty upset at Obafemi getting on ahead of me. Hope Ralph not believing his hype as the Vestergard error was awful, and worse not to rectify it when he was on a yellow. It's worrying how bad he is at changing things during games.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  25. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SKD View Post
    He explained pre match. In his opinion, Vest is better on the ball that Bednerak and he expected (correctly) that we’d have the lion share of the ball and his (supposed) ability on the ball would help us.

    Who knows if he was right or wrong, none of our CB’s usually tend to cover themselves in glory defensively.
    In which case, Ralph has to take a large chunk of the blame for today’s defeat, as that decision was woeful.


    On the VAR issue, something has to be clarified regarding the linesman flagging and the referee noticing, but deciding not to blow if there’s a goal scoring opportunity, instead waiting to see how it pans out and I presume then going to VAR if a goal is scored.

    Twice today we stopped after the linesman flagged and we didn’t bother defending (McCarthy nonchalantly stopped an effort with his foot as he thought it was offside). Mate mentioned Newcastle scored under similar circumstances, so we need clarity here.

  26. #76

    Default

    At the end of the day we're a side with a few decent players in it, not amazing players, just decent players. We still have huge gaps in quality throughout the side and it will keep getting exposed season upon season, unless we address it.
    The club rested on their hands in January ‘’Oh a good run, it means we’re fine’’ – worryingly the professionals running our club didn’t have the foresight to see that this was just a run, we still had the same fundamental core issues!

    I think this is Boufals last season here – another expensive flop. Not fit for this level I don’t think, flatters 90% of the time. Talented, yes, but not suited for us or this league. Reminds me of Adal Tarrabat

    Our home form is utterly disgusting though, something needs to be done about that. And I don't think playing Vestagaard is a decent fix for that. Horrific football player.

  27. #77

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Beckenham, Bromley, United Kingdom, United Kingdom
    Posts
    213

    Default

    Unfortunately your simple fact is neither simple or a fact. Refs are told to treat hand balls differently depending on whether its attack or defence. If an attacker handles the ball either intentionally or not in the build up to a goal then it's an automatic free kick. If a defender handles then account is taken about the intention, just like it always has been, and as it should be. This stops strikers punting it at defenders arms from 2 yards, and defenders having to defend in the box with their arms behind their backs. I think they've got it about right.

  28. #78

    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Vancouver BC
    Posts
    246

    Default

    Lost this game before kick-off with Redmond out. He is a major loss. You beat Burnley by keeping the ball on the ground and running it past them to create openings. No Redmond then no Boufal - couldn't have been worse for us. Then we lost it for sure in the first minute with that ridiculous giveaway goal - why was Ings guarding the near post and not KWP? Vestergard before Bednarek? Can only think Bednarek wasn't fully fit. Adams should have been on before Obafemi - some muscle and hold-up skills with the ball on the ground. Every time we hoofed it up a Burnley head got to it first - that was very predictable Ralph.

    Weather didn't help. Ref didn't help. And what is it with SMS? Need to lift the curse somehow.

    Only positives from this...KWP was okay and showed some confident touches. Stephens was good. Great goal from Ings.

    Let's just get the 9 points we need quickly. Please.

  29. #79

    Default

    Cedric hasn't been missed then.

  30. #80

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Southampton
    Posts
    7,061

    Default

    Do we ever beat ****ing Burnley? Hate them with a passion.

  31. #81

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    2,474

    Default

    Just watched the game, as ****ed if I can be arsed to watch Saints at 5.30am local time . I was shocked when I saw Vestergaard starting and the performance that followed confirmed my fears. He is a liability. I’ve never seen someone so tall who is so abject in the air . His decision making is terrible and passing poor. I don’t see a premier league player there at all. If Leicester wanted him, we should have bitten their hands off.

  32. #82

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Medals, Trophy Lallana can also earn at Southampton- Andy Durman 16/05/14
    Posts
    31,092
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default

    I haven't been to a live game for a while. I thought we were pretty poor, albeit in awful conditions. Second half we got a lot worse when I thought we would kick on. I thought djenepo was poor when he came on, seems he's a bit of a disappointing buy to be honest. Stephens looked good on the ball and ings took the goal well, otherwise not that many positives where we barely challenged the keeper. Still we should still have enough to stay up comfortably.

  33. #83

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LGTL View Post
    Do we ever beat ****ing Burnley? Hate them with a passion.
    Yep just replaced Stoke as the sh1thouse team no one will miss when thy go down in next few years.

  34. #84

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by S-Clarke View Post
    At the end of the day we're a side with a few decent players in it, not amazing players, just decent players. We still have huge gaps in quality throughout the side and it will keep getting exposed season upon season, unless we address it.
    The club rested on their hands in January Oh a good run, it means were fine worryingly the professionals running our club didnt have the foresight to see that this was just a run, we still had the same fundamental core issues!

    I think this is Boufals last season here another expensive flop. Not fit for this level I dont think, flatters 90% of the time. Talented, yes, but not suited for us or this league. Reminds me of Adal Tarrabat

    Our home form is utterly disgusting though, something needs to be done about that. And I don't think playing Vestagaard is a decent fix for that. Horrific football player.
    Taarabt has just been playing champions League football with Benfica so Boufal probably hopes that happens

  35. #85

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Was NI now Shropshire..!
    Posts
    8,538

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by whelk View Post
    Yep just replaced Stoke as the sh1thouse team no one will miss when thy go down in next few years.
    Thing is, who will go down first. us or them. It's not luck that they keep beating us.

  36. #86

    Default

    When he tries to win the ball in the air, instead of jumping, Vest sort of tries to lean over his opponent. If they're shorter than him, he sometimes wins, but if they jump he almost always loses out or only manages to scoop the ball up rather than out. That we paid the best part of 20m for him is nothing short of astounding.

  37. #87

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Camden, London
    Posts
    10,605

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by verlaine1979 View Post
    When he tries to win the ball in the air, instead of jumping, Vest sort of tries to lean over his opponent. If they're shorter than him, he sometimes wins, but if they jump he almost always loses out or only manages to scoop the ball up rather than out. That we paid the best part of 20m for him is nothing short of astounding.
    I was watching him warm up. He was hitting lofted passes to two guys in a triangle, about 40 yards apart. He skanked it straight out of play two or three times. It's amazing he is actually a footballer.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  38. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DarrenLeTiss View Post
    Just watched the game, as ****ed if I can be arsed to watch Saints at 5.30am local time . I was shocked when I saw Vestergaard starting and the performance that followed confirmed my fears. He is a liability. I’ve never seen someone so tall who is so abject in the air . His decision making is terrible and passing poor. I don’t see a premier league player there at all. If Leicester wanted him, we should have bitten their hands off.
    Really need to question the manager, shocking decision to start him

  39. #89

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by verlaine1979 View Post
    When he tries to win the ball in the air, instead of jumping, Vest sort of tries to lean over his opponent. If they're shorter than him, he sometimes wins, but if they jump he almost always loses out or only manages to scoop the ball up rather than out. That we paid the best part of 20m for him is nothing short of astounding.
    I think he have a mild case of the condition that Richard Kiel had: acromegaly. This would help explain some of the problems he has when trying to play football.

  40. #90

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nordic Saint View Post
    I think he may have a mild case of the condition that Richard Kiel had: acromegaly. This would help explain some of the problems he has when trying to play football.
    That should have read "he may have"

  41. #91

    Default

    Horrible performance in horrible weather against a horrible team. That's twice I've got soaked this season watching us play like complete amateurs against those donkeys.
    I think like most on here we all knew it was trouble when Ralph decided to drop Bednarak, crazy to break up a CB pairing that's looked decent for change. Can't believe Ralph thinks he's good on the ball either, odd. Thought KWP did well, after getting over the initial shock of how tiny he is (how did we find someone smaller than Cedric?) thought he grew into the game after a nervy start, positional play looked good which is a step up on Valery. Stephens passed the ball well and made a couple of great runs. Assuming it wasn't his fault for the 2nd (couldn't really see but thought it was Vest that messed up) thought he did well. Boufal also having a great game until his injury, seemed a turning point, as after he went off we didn't seem to have any creativity.
    Why is it that just when I start to look upwards rather than downwards at the league table, we play like utter clowns?

  42. #92

    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Goldfinger's Ranch
    Posts
    1,267

    Default

    RH trying to be too clever. New RB and he swaps out one of the CBs. Completely disrupted the defence. Think that he played Vestergard to counteract Burnley's threats in the air - which they didn't have. Bednarek is a much better defender. Problem is that we have a very thin squad. Having loaned out some of the dross/troublemakers we dont really have much cover. Not convinced by KWP either. There may well be a good player there, but he looked very rusty.

    We really didnt play well second half. Burnley really only had one good chance. Their second goal was a good goal, although we did look a bit open on the RH side. And having seen the Sky highlights on YouTube, it wasnt a penalty. Just wish that they would show this on the big screen instead of all those wretched adverts.

  43. #93

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Taking a back seat
    Posts
    11,227

    Default

    Radio Solent after the game said Bednarek pulled something in training yesterday. No idea if true, but that’s what they said.

  44. #94

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Kraken View Post
    Radio Solent after the game said Bednarek pulled something in training yesterday. No idea if true, but that’s what they said.
    Yet he was still on the bench.

  45. #95

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Taking a back seat
    Posts
    11,227

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Badger View Post
    Yet he was still on the bench.
    Yes I thought that too. No idea if true, it was only the fella on the radio that said it. I just caught it straight after the game.

  46. #96

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    stamping on peoples dreams since 2010
    Posts
    29,451

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Badger View Post
    Yet he was still on the bench.
    Who else have we got?

  47. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by S-Clarke View Post
    At the end of the day we're a side with a few decent players in it, not amazing players, just decent players. We still have huge gaps in quality throughout the side and it will keep getting exposed season upon season, unless we address it.
    The club rested on their hands in January ‘’Oh a good run, it means we’re fine’’ – worryingly the professionals running our club didn’t have the foresight to see that this was just a run, we still had the same fundamental core issues!

    I think this is Boufals last season here – another expensive flop. Not fit for this level I don’t think, flatters 90% of the time. Talented, yes, but not suited for us or this league. Reminds me of Adal Tarrabat

    Our home form is utterly disgusting though, something needs to be done about that. And I don't think playing Vestagaard is a decent fix for that. Horrific football player.
    Good summary apart from your comments about Boufal? How do you single him out? Played well against Spurs in the Cup before being subbed for Armstrong who didn't fire a shot - and played very well yesterday until being clattered by Hendrick - only to be replaced by Djenepo who seems to have lost his early season form; while Armstrong put in a full game shocker. I understand that Boufal can be frustrating, but on song (which is often enough) he looks the most likely to create chances in dangerous areas.

  48. #98

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Ampshoire - where else?!
    Posts
    7,191
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Bit of a strange game - there were moments when the game sort of stopped but carried on. The first goal viewed from the far end looked really weird as not only we searingly stopped but Burnley did likewise except one person.
    We did look like a team that had set themselves in their heads for the break after Liverpool but then found themselves having to play at Spurs when they hoped to be on a beach. Burnley are just one of those teams that our game doesn’t suit playing against, that Vidra(?] who scored was probably their smallest player on the pitch.
    Didn’t think KWP looked as bad as some made out, he was a bit rusty to start but soon got into the game, certainly didn’t look like a fish up a tree like Danso did the other week. Played himself out of trouble against “the bigger boys” with a neat bit of skill a couple of times.

    Now I know I have different view from row EE to that of McCarthy the amount of times today he had players showing for the ball left and right with acres of Hampshire to run into but more often than not he just stood with the ball dithering about what to do.

  49. #99

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hypochondriac View Post
    I haven't been to a live game for a while. I thought we were pretty poor, albeit in awful conditions. Second half we got a lot worse when I thought we would kick on. I thought djenepo was poor when he came on, seems he's a bit of a disappointing buy to be honest. Stephens looked good on the ball and ings took the goal well, otherwise not that many positives where we barely challenged the keeper. Still we should still have enough to stay up comfortably.
    I think when Djenepo first came here he looked raw but effective, but he's now been 'Saints' trained to be raw but ineffective.

  50. #100

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Turkish View Post
    Who else have we got?
    Fair point, but if isn't considered fit enough to start, is going to be fit enough to come on if Stephens or Vetergaard pull up in the third minute with a hamstring injury ? If not, then pretty pointless having him there.

    Perhaps the other option is Danso, but if he can't get a place on the bench ahead of a supposedly unfit Bednarek then not much future for him here.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •