Saints 1-2 Newcastle- Match Thread

[CB Fry]

3 hours ago, rallyboy said:

It's a bit worrying if some people honestly believe that Prowsie didn't want it as much as Targett, or Romeu didn't want it enough as, well, anyone, or that Forster would have had a clean sheet if only he'd wanted it a bit more - it's tired nonsense peddled by lazy commentators.

Winning second balls is not as simple as wanting it more - it's primarily a blend of judgement, timing, positioning, technical ability and anticipation.

Hopefully Ralph will be taking the practical approach of working on tactics, training and player-improvement, the areas that will actually change games.

I've no idea what you for for a living but are you saying that your level of effort/energy/commitment is exactly the same on every day you work, regardless of task/challenge/desired result. You've never tried harder or less hard in any situation?

Really?

I worry that you writing off that notion, that fundamental element of human nature as "lazy" is, in itself, lazy.

[Dark Munster]

6 hours ago, derry said:

The last two matches have been examples of some of the early season clusterfucks. Villa 62% possession Newcastle even worse 68% possession. Possession is based on the number of passes counted. We have inflated our possession percentage by painfully slow buildup short passing backwards and sideways and even when we are in the final third regularly bailing out and passing back even as far as Forster. Our pedestrian buildups allowed opponents to mass in front of their penalty area, waiting until they win possession and immediately attacking our centre backs especially Villa. The higher our possession the slower our attacks and the more consolidated the opponents defence.

Don’t worry. This probably is Ralph’s cunning plan to save ourselves for the City match. 

[Toadhall Saint]

1 hour ago, Chez said:

Interesting. Goal apart, I didn't really notice him or any of their players. It was all us. I will have to take a look at a Newcastle game in the next few weeks.

Agreed thought we played well upto the 18 yard box and lost to a good ish goal and a fluke.

[Teddeer]

1 hour ago, sadoldgit said:

The long ball worked for them because there were very few players in the box and the ball in was perfect and found a player who puts those away.  Lumping it into a crowded area works occasionally as does trying to thread balls through a packed defence but it isn’t the same as their first goal. They were much stronger in the air at the back. As for KWP. He has scored and provided assists from left back and I really don’t see the problem playing him there. For me he is excellent and a real threat on either flank.

The issue is not playing KWP left back it is playing an out of sorts Tino at right back. Perraud has been very good so should not have been dropped recently to accommodate Tino. The majority seem to agree with this.

[Mystic Force]

When the emphasis is for us to attack I think KWP is fine at LB, the kind of runs he makes and then ability to cut in like an inverted winger is awesome. But if we need to defend on the left or the opposition sets up to block the inside channel then he is less effective and does not have the same chance to beet a man on the outside. I agree than Tino is not providing enough right now, and the negatives of KWP at LB is not offset by utilizing Tino over Perrud in the other slot.

[Toussaint]

6 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

We find it hard to break down teams who put everyone behind the ball, most teams do, that is why teams do it. Our style is better suited to teams who come out and attack us allowing us to operate in more space. Newcastle were very happy to give up possession after their second goal. It is frustrating watching the ball being rotated whilst the players try and find an opening but is lumping the ball into the “mixer” any less frustrating watching countless crosses getting headed away? We all want to see shots peppering their goal, but when you have got 10 we’ll drilled players in the way it really isn’t that easy. 

This is precisely the reason we do much better against the superior teams.

[Chez]

3 hours ago, CB Fry said:

I've no idea what you for for a living but are you saying that your level of effort/energy/commitment is exactly the same on every day you work, regardless of task/challenge/desired result. You've never tried harder or less hard in any situation?

Really?

I worry that you writing off that notion, that fundamental element of human nature as "lazy" is, in itself, lazy.

funny how no ones mentions a lack of effort when we win. Lose a game and suddenly "disinterested", "don't want it as much", "lack of effort", "not fit enough" become immediately visible to the naked eye of football fans.

[Chez]

8 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

We find it hard to break down teams who put everyone behind the ball, most teams do, that is why teams do it. Our style is better suited to teams who come out and attack us allowing us to operate in more space. Newcastle were very happy to give up possession after their second goal. It is frustrating watching the ball being rotated whilst the players try and find an opening but is lumping the ball into the “mixer” any less frustrating watching countless crosses getting headed away? We all want to see shots peppering their goal, but when you have got 10 we’ll drilled players in the way it really isn’t that easy. 

spot on. A game against Cardiff at SMS a few years ago now comes to mind, where we peppered their box with crosses, mostly from deep, but their two big CBs won header after header and we failed to score. If we had gone long, Burn would have eat that stuff for breakfast. We went for the tika taka approach and it largely failed, but we did create a couple of chances. It is tough to break teams down. Even City fail, every now and then, and they have the best players in the business to create chances.

As you say, with more space, the likes of Broja are more of a threat. 

[CB Fry]

5 minutes ago, Chez said:

funny how no ones mentions a lack of effort when we win. Lose a game and suddenly "disinterested", "don't want it as much", "lack of effort", "not fit enough" become immediately visible to the naked eye of football fans.

Except that's not quite true. It's not unheard of to describe a victory as "....and we barely got out of second gear" or "we did just enough". And the reverse definitely is true when we lose a noble defeat "we did all we can, worked our socks off" etc

If effort was an irrelevant metric and everything revolved around skill and technique then surely Mario Lemina would be the world's greatest footballer.

As Alex Ferguson said, hard work is a talent.

As far as yesterday goes you could see Newcastle playing with a verve and energy that we lacked but that's mainly because they worked us out.  We ran out of ideas mainly because of the way Newcastle played.

[macca155]

10 hours ago, trousers said:

Maybe Shane Long is the answer....?!

Ha.... be less own goals 

[macca155]

23 minutes ago, CB Fry said:

Except that's not quite true. It's not unheard of to describe a victory as "....and we barely got out of second gear" or "we did just enough". And the reverse definitely is true when we lose a noble defeat "we did all we can, worked our socks off" etc

If effort was an irrelevant metric and everything revolved around skill and technique then surely Mario Lemina would be the world's greatest footballer.

As Alex Ferguson said, hard work is a talent.

As far as yesterday goes you could see Newcastle playing with a verve and energy that we lacked but that's mainly because they worked us out.  We ran out of ideas mainly because of the way Newcastle played.

Old saying .... hard work beats talent that doesn't work hard 

Or something like that.

You can hear Nigel Adkins saying that.

[Chez]

10 hours ago, CB Fry said:

Except that's not quite true. It's not unheard of to describe a victory as "....and we barely got out of second gear" or "we did just enough". And the reverse definitely is true when we lose a noble defeat "we did all we can, worked our socks off" etc

If effort was an irrelevant metric and everything revolved around skill and technique then surely Mario Lemina would be the world's greatest footballer.

As Alex Ferguson said, hard work is a talent.

As far as yesterday goes you could see Newcastle playing with a verve and energy that we lacked but that's mainly because they worked us out.  We ran out of ideas mainly because of the way Newcastle played.

Interesting point.  `Not getting out of second gear' or `we did just enough' doesn't necessarily mean there wasn't enough work rate. Often the use of those terms is just indicative of a lack of flow/chances/goals created. Besides, those phrases are very subjective and don't take into account what an opponent is doing to prevent us scoring. 

Of course effort matters too, but just because you don't win doesn't mean you haven't worked hard. Working hard ain't enough. Fergie didn't say hard work equals talent.

You are stating that they had more verve and energy. Neither of those are work rate.  Maybe they looked faster (they didn't) but even that does not equal working harder. They didn't play with more verve or energy by the way. They struggled to retain possession, did very little and won because defensively they were rock solid. 

I watched Nigel Quashie completely down tools away at QPR shortly before he left the club. Believe me, I know a lack of effort when I see it. There was absolutely no lack of effort last night from what I could see. I didn't see anything to suggest Newcastle 'wanted it more'. Just a lack of quality and/or method to unlock their defence.

Edited 12 March, 2022 by Chez

[aintforever]

1 hour ago, CB Fry said:

Except that's not quite true. It's not unheard of to describe a victory as "....and we barely got out of second gear" or "we did just enough". And the reverse definitely is true when we lose a noble defeat "we did all we can, worked our socks off" etc

If effort was an irrelevant metric and everything revolved around skill and technique then surely Mario Lemina would be the world's greatest footballer.

As Alex Ferguson said, hard work is a talent.

As far as yesterday goes you could see Newcastle playing with a verve and energy that we lacked but that's mainly because they worked us out.  We ran out of ideas mainly because of the way Newcastle played.

Newcastle had a game plan that worked but it’s bollocks to say they ‘wanted it more’. We had them on the rack for much of the first half then just ran out of steam and ideas, and still created more chances.  We had twice their possession, more shots, more on target and twice their corners.

[ErwinK1961]

1 hour ago, macca155 said:

Old saying .... hard work beats talent that doesn't work hard 

Or something like that.

You can hear Nigel Adkins saying that.

Hard work beats talent if talent doesn’t work hard.

[davefizzy14]

Dissapointing. We gave two poor goals away like Ralph said. He said we didn't deserve to lose. We had the chances, Che so unlucky with  volley against the bar. Stuart Armstrong classy and another goal. KWP best player on the pitch again. Hopefully we can bounce back on Sunday - COYR

[Charlie Wayman]

21 hours ago, Chez said:

I have no problem with Armstrong getting more game time. He started brightly, before his form and confidence dipped and it can easily return.

However, there is still a lot of football to play, not least an FA Cup match, which although incredibly tough, is still winnable.

Broja is the ideal player for a team hitting teams on the break - as we will be against City. Maybe he's not ideally suited to games where opponents drop men deep and limit the space behind for him to play in. I have to say I am surprised just how quickly some on here (no saying you specifically) seemed to have turned on him after a few under par performances. 

What you say is true and probably he is the right player for the City match but without in any way wishing to join the chorus against Broja, it seems to me that it maybe is no longer in the Club's interest to keep playing him in preference to AA, who cost us a relative fortune but still has questions to answer over his abilities at this level. Broja's loan made sense to help get us where we are now but may be becoming counter productive for the run in simply because it is unlikely we can move above 9th anyway.

[Chez]

6 minutes ago, Charlie Wayman said:

What you say is true and probably he is the right player for the City match but without in any way wishing to join the chorus against Broja, it seems to me that it maybe is no longer in the Club's interest to keep playing him in preference to AA, who cost us a relative fortune but still has questions to answer over his abilities at this level. Broja's loan made sense to help get us where we are now but may be becoming counter productive for the run in simply because it is unlikely we can move above 9th anyway.

we could easily drop 5 places. Not sure how much per place it is these days, around £2.5m a place perhaps, which is £12.5m.  For a club of our size that's a big chunk of cash. A new CB perhaps, or indeed the funds to get another Broja through the door. AA needs to earn his place. Broja is a Saint at this time. We pay him, so lets make use of him, not least to try and win the cup this season. next season will look after itself, and without Broja maybe we are not as good and have less chance of wining it.

 

[macca155]

19 hours ago, Chez said:

we could easily drop 5 places. Not sure how much per place it is these days, around £2.5m a place perhaps, which is £12.5m.  For a club of our size that's a big chunk of cash. A new CB perhaps, or indeed the funds to get another Broja through the door. AA needs to earn his place. Broja is a Saint at this time. We pay him, so lets make use of him, not least to try and win the cup this season. next season will look after itself, and without Broja maybe we are not as good and have less chance of wining it.

 

I think dropping 5 places is unlikely but your point is well made. Broja is clearly a better player than Armstrong and his goals will earn us a few million. Charlie Wayman's point is equally valid, somehow we need to engineer some return on Armstrong's fee, and we know he'll be here next year but keep Broja ticking over.

I think the Watford match is probably the ideal game to start Armstrong with Broja to come on early enough to make an impact.

[SNSUN]

On 11/03/2022 at 13:10, trousers said:

No offence but.... please stay the f*** away from St Mary's this weekend.... 😂

I'm here. But I've brought my wife here today and she's my good luck charm...

[Chez]

1 hour ago, macca155 said:

I think dropping 5 places is unlikely but your point is well made. Broja is clearly a better player than Armstrong and his goals will earn us a few million. Charlie Wayman's point is equally valid, somehow we need to engineer some return on Armstrong's fee, and we know he'll be here next year but keep Broja ticking over.

I think the Watford match is probably the ideal game to start Armstrong with Broja to come on early enough to make an impact.

Villa to newcastle places are all up for grabs. That is 6 spots. A rise of one or a fall of four is a possibility.

I'd start Broja, as he is the guy that will help us beat City, and dropping him after a couple of quiet games is a little harsh. But Armstrong did look sharp, so maybe he will get the nod. Hope his confidence has returned. Needs a goal probably to regain it fully.

 

[SNSUN]

27 minutes ago, SNSUN said:

I'm here. But I've brought my wife here today and she's my good luck charm...

My wife has pointed out to me that she was at the Wolves game. 🤪

 

Fuck it we'll win today. It's Watford not Bayern Munich.

[Holmes_and_Watson]

4 hours ago, SNSUN said:

My wife has pointed out to me that she was at the Wolves game. 🤪

 

Fuck it we'll win today. It's Watford not Bayern Munich.

I was surprised when Lewandowski popped up to get Watford's second... 🙂