Saints 3-2 WBA - Match Thread

[Colinjb]

4 minutes ago, pingpong said:

We're over reliant on bazunu, this must be 9 to 12 points he has got us this season - too many, at some point he will stop saving us and we need all the points we can get if we want to get second. I don't know what the solution is because we can't afford to change fellows the way he is playing. No arguments with the way downes and jander are playing either, but we seem to be missing the extra man a little bit too often.

Will be interesting to see what happens when Charles is back.

 

Satire, quite the artform.

[warsash saint]

17 minutes ago, tdmickey3 said:

 Love the good stuff but don't ignore the awful stuff by pretending it doesn't happen 

Don't worry fella you won't let us forget with your hundreds of posts saying the same thing!!

[Appy]

That was a relief. 
 

Fair play to Quarshie, he makes me yearn for Jack Stephens, Wood not much better. 

[Saint86]

6 minutes ago, Appy said:

That was a relief. 
 

Fair play to Quarshie, he makes me yearn for Jack Stephens, Wood not much better. 

Living in a world where THB wins defensive headers are we? 😂🤣

[Charlie Wayman]

21 minutes ago, Willo of Whiteley said:

So to summarise, excellent first half, the way we switch from snail pace to lightening acceleration was very good and caught Weat Brom off guard. A bit of luck and we could’ve scored maybe another in the first half. Very tidy and composed performance.
My only concern was the defensive pissing about, not as bad as under Russell Martin but still a lot of nerves for the fans when it’s sprayed across goal.

Second half quite aim play was terrible. Once again inviting pressure. Taking off key players so early shows two things: one - basically us saying “we’re not going to attack you anymore”, and two - how inadequate and weak our bench is.
There is almost no one outside of our current starting eleven that I would say could make a notable difference to a game. That is concerning.

The West Brom goals were coming. Basically enticing them in the entire half, several times players left unmarked on the edge of the box, weak defending from set pieces today. Gavin Bazunu made a few good saves in quick succession prior to the second goal, I’m sure some will put blame on him for conceding two as per usual but quite simply he kept us in it for slightly longer.

Fantastic win on the face of it, but it feels very hollow after that second half performance.

That's more or les how I saw it as well

[E_H_Saints]

Unfortunately, we don't have the depth to see games off.  He subs off our scorers to save them for the next match but they track back so much that they help keep our defence in check.  The ones we bring back are pace behind the other, no game awareness  , no leaders and make us look fragile.  

Aribo must go, Romeu shouldn't play again until he is ready, Manning needs to come off with someone better defensively and the manager needs to prioritise to the players and fans that scoring more goals is great but leaking goals must improve.  Otherwise, when our attackers have a dry spell and we need to win games 1-0 or settle for a draw those will be the games we get hammered.  

[JohnnyShearer2.0]

23 minutes ago, Greedyfly said:

No they are not, which is precisely, well some of, my point.  We weren't really pressed by Brum, Charlton, Wednesday or Leicester after HT - a little by QPR, and a lot by WBA.  It's called overreaction and its fucking tragic after the 6th win in 7.

 

Some have been able to put the concerns into a coherent reaction - as I would argue yours mostly is, and I would agree with some of those concerns - but the fucking short-term bias on 45 mins of average footy is fucking jarring when we should be happy with the win first, and then do some actual post mortem afterwards.  The guy has been in charge for 7 senior games - Aribo is the answer to no questions, and fucking Archer is so shit I don't know where to start but with Stewart maybe, maybe even Downs and defo Charles I think we start to have better options across the park.  

They're a recurring theme in the sense that Saints don't smash teams when they should, with the players they have. 

Why slow down or give the onus back to the opposition? Yes, there will be times when the opposition has the advantage or takes control but I'm not liking the retreat they've shown in some games.

6 out 7 of is great, no doubt. I want it to continue as long as possible. 

Edited 8 hours ago by JohnnyShearer2.0

[Greedyfly]

6 minutes ago, JohnnyShearer2.0 said:

They're a recurring theme in the sense that Saints don't smash teams when they should, with the players they have. 

Why slow down or give the onus back to the opposition? Yes, there will be times when the opposition has the advantage or takes control but I'm not liking the retreat they've shown in some games.

6 out 7 of is great, no doubt. I want it to continue as long as possible. 

We've won, 2-1, 3-1, 5-1, 3-0, 3-1 and 3-2.  Of those 6 only one hasn't been a smashing.  We hadn't won by more than a goal in fucking years.  Are you expecting us to win by 3 every game?  In the most competitive second division in the world? 

 

Its short termism based on the last 45 mins of football.  That's it.  Otherwise by most metrics we've smashed teams. 

 

We slow down in the second half due to fatigue (Scienza has played in exactly 14 Championship games - he's fucked at 70 mins - Fellows is young and depends on speed for his game, fucked around 70 mins).  We can't SMASH teams for 90 mins because a) some of them are fucked and our bench is a little light due to injuries and quality and b) because Tonda is still figuring it out.

 

Again, short term bias because we are by most metrics 'smashing' teams. 

Edited 7 hours ago by Greedyfly

[EBS1980]

38 minutes ago, SWLondon Saint said:

For some reason all our recent managers seem to think 3 CB makes us more secure or something but I have no idea what they're seeing. The huge problem with the way we do it is they all want to defend in front of the goal which means on the flanks the wing back is often 1v2, so a midfielder has to drop back there which opens up a ton of space elsewhere to switch it, cross it, whatever really.

Just having 2 CBs and then a FB and winger defending the flanks would make a huge difference. OR if he's determined to stick with the 3 CB then the one on the ball side has to go out wide. But that does not seem to be part of the plan right now and we're getting shafted.

We don’t have a fit right back to play a back 4, until one is back it’ll have to be the 3-4-2-1 formation

[Appy]

11 minutes ago, Saint86 said:

Living in a world where THB wins defensive headers are we? 😂🤣

He won loads at the weekend, so yes. 
 

He wasn’t great tonight but he’s streets ahead of the other two. 

[rallyboy]

The new manager has taken us so far so quickly that we now come away from a home win feeling it should have been by more.

Good progress, onwards and upwards, we'll get better.

[Appy]

35 minutes ago, Willo of Whiteley said:

So to summarise, excellent first half, the way we switch from snail pace to lightening acceleration was very good and caught Weat Brom off guard. A bit of luck and we could’ve scored maybe another in the first half. Very tidy and composed performance.
My only concern was the defensive pissing about, not as bad as under Russell Martin but still a lot of nerves for the fans when it’s sprayed across goal.

Second half quite aim play was terrible. Once again inviting pressure. Taking off key players so early shows two things: one - basically us saying “we’re not going to attack you anymore”, and two - how inadequate and weak our bench is.
There is almost no one outside of our current starting eleven that I would say could make a notable difference to a game. That is concerning.

The West Brom goals were coming. Basically enticing them in the entire half, several times players left unmarked on the edge of the box, weak defending from set pieces today. Gavin Bazunu made a few good saves in quick succession prior to the second goal, I’m sure some will put blame on him for conceding two as per usual but quite simply he kept us in it for slightly longer.

Fantastic win on the face of it, but it feels very hollow after that second half performance.

Hollow? Get a grip, we were poor second half, but after the last year or so, no win feels hollow. 

[S-Clarke]

23 minutes ago, Appy said:

That was a relief. 
 

Fair play to Quarshie, he makes me yearn for Jack Stephens, Wood not much better. 

I'm with you on Quarshie, he scares the living daylights out of me. He's like a rabbit in headlights out there when put under any form of pressure.

Sometimes you can spot a good player - like Fellows, Azaz, Jander, Leo (irrespective of age), but this guy looks like a bit of a dud.

[JohnnyShearer2.0]

2 minutes ago, Greedyfly said:

We've won, 2-1, 3-1, 5-1, 3-0, 3-1 and 3-2.  Of those 6 only one hasn't been a smashing.  We hadn't won by a more than a goal in fucking years.  Are you expecting us to win by 3 every game?  In the most competitive second division in the world? 

 

Its short termism based on the last 45 mins of football.  That's it.  Otherwise by most metrics we've smashed teams. 

Give over.

With the attacking players Saints have, why cant they beat teams comfortably. 

I'd hardly call 2-1 or 3-2 or even the 3-1s smashings. The only metric for me is goals scored and conceded. I couldn't care less for other metrics. 

Not sure why you think I'm being short term. I've been pretty consistent all season in my view that with the attacking players Saints have, Saints should be going for it. 

That was my view under Still and its great to see Tonda getting the team to do it.

[HarvSFC]

I think when the biggest complaint we can all have is that a bit of complacency is kicking in after taking a commanding lead then it's acceptable after the last year. 

The first half tonight and first halves against Leicester and Birmingham has probably been some of the best attacking football I've seen us play in years, consistently. Probably since lockdown football when we had Ings running riot. Said before that you don't need to pass it between your centre-backs 50 times, sometimes heaping pressure on yourselves by playing hospital balls to play good football. Martin didn't invent it, we played good football under Adkins and it was exciting and attacking. This football is good football, it's exciting, attacking and we're unpredictable in the sense that our goalkeeper and centre-backs don't always play it short. Sometimes they go long to beat the press.

The second goal as well must be applauded. Something I've been calling for, for years. We've all seen our centre-backs get closed down and pressed and make mistakes. However, over the years (Onuachu being the worst for it) our strikers have stood off the opposition goalkeeper/centre-backs and not made any attempt to try and force an error out of them. But, Armstrong did close down tonight, forced an error and got a goal from it. So, happy to see that back in our weaponry. 

6 wins out of 7 and Pompey 5 points below 20th in 22nd. Happy days. Up the Saints.

 

[madge]

When we are under a bit of pressure team can so easily play down our flanks. The 3 midfield can’t get over quick enough and we just invite pressure..you have to got to back 4 and 4/5 in midfield and start winning the ball and controlling the game. We got lucky tonight and West Brom are a pretty average team. Loving the attacking play but tonda has to more adaptable.

[vectraman]

8 minutes ago, Greedyfly said:

We've won, 2-1, 3-1, 5-1, 3-0, 3-1 and 3-2.  Of those 6 only one hasn't been a smashing.  We hadn't won by more than a goal in fucking years.  Are you expecting us to win by 3 every game?  In the most competitive second division in the world? 

 

Its short termism based on the last 45 mins of football.  That's it.  Otherwise by most metrics we've smashed teams. 

 

We slow down in the second half due to fatigue (Scienza has played in exactly 14 Championship games - he's fucked at 70 mins - Fellows is young and depends on speed for his game, fucked around 70 mins).  We can't SMASH teams for 90 mins because a) some of them are fucked and our bench is a little light due to injuries and quality and b) because Tonda is still figuring it out.

 

Again, short term bias because we are by most metrics 'smashing' teams. 

So we get tired, but the opposition get more energetic second half 🤔

These are professional athletes - however tired we are, at least 6 of them have to play the full 90, weirdly, same for the opponents…

Every game our second half performance is quite frankly crap. That isn’t acceptable or understandable by any metric. Either we aren’t fit enough, or our tactics aren’t right. 
Yes a win feels good after the last 16 months, but we need to be so much better second half. Whatever the question is, Joe Aribo is proving he is just not the answer either…

 

[saintant]

1 minute ago, HarvSFC said:

I think when the biggest complaint we can all have is that a bit of complacency is kicking in after taking a commanding lead then it's acceptable after the last year. 

The first half tonight and first halves against Leicester and Birmingham has probably been some of the best attacking football I've seen us play in years, consistently. Probably since lockdown football when we had Ings running riot. Said before that you don't need to pass it between your centre-backs 50 times, sometimes heaping pressure on yourselves by playing hospital balls to play good football. Martin didn't invent it, we played good football under Adkins and it was exciting and attacking. This football is good football, it's exciting, attacking and we're unpredictable in the sense that our goalkeeper and centre-backs don't always play it short. Sometimes they go long to beat the press.

The second goal as well must be applauded. Something I've been calling for, for years. We've all seen our centre-backs get closed down and pressed and make mistakes. However, over the years (Onuachu being the worst for it) our strikers have stood off the opposition goalkeeper/centre-backs and not made any attempt to try and force an error out of them. But, Armstrong did close down tonight, forced an error and got a goal from it. So, happy to see that back in our weaponry. 

6 wins out of 7 and Pompey 5 points below 20th in 22nd. Happy days. Up the Saints.

 

With respect I think our drop off in 2nd halves goes far deeper than a bit of complacency. That's far too simplistic.

[HarvSFC]

On a separate note I must say that I miss the days of three subs. I think players were fitter back then because they had to be. 8 of the starting 11 were expecting to play 90 minutes, and 7 of those outfielders. How many times did we sub Lambert/Hammond off? Not often from my memory. Lallana was the 60 minute man. Nowadays, half the outfielders are only expecting to play 60/70 minutes and it's disrupting the team too much. West Brom in contrast made 3 subs and one of those was on the 89th minute and another on the 39th.

Edited 7 hours ago by HarvSFC

[sandwichsaint]

P7, W6, D0, L1, F21, A9, Pts 18, GD +12.

Let's just enjoy the ride, when did we last see stats like this? Winning six out of seven and scoring three goals a game, not since NA in League One maybe, and probably not then either. Entertainment's back, at both ends of the pitch, and it makes watching Saints worthwhile for the first time in a long time.

[Turkish]

Did someone say we’re won 6 out of 7?

 

[The Kraken]

58 minutes ago, pingpong said:

We're over reliant on bazunu, this must be 9 to 12 points he has got us this season - too many, at some point he will stop saving us and we need all the points we can get if we want to get second. I don't know what the solution is because we can't afford to change fellows the way he is playing. No arguments with the way downes and jander are playing either, but we seem to be missing the extra man a little bit too often.

Will be interesting to see what happens when Charles is back.

 

I know you’re working hard at this angle, and it’s cute for a bit. But please just don’t go down the @Fabrice29 route and loss your head completely. Thx.

[Greedyfly]

32 minutes ago, JohnnyShearer2.0 said:

Give over.

With the attacking players Saints have, why cant they beat teams comfortably. 

I'd hardly call 2-1 or 3-2 or even the 3-1s smashings. The only metric for me is goals scored and conceded. I couldn't care less for other metrics. 

Not sure why you think I'm being short term. I've been pretty consistent all season in my view that with the attacking players Saints have, Saints should be going for it. 

That was my view under Still and its great to see Tonda getting the team to do it.

I don't think it's me that needs to give over because you can't even properly debate what I said. I conceded that the 3-2 and the 2-1 weren't but the others were. If you can't see how we battered Brum with the 3-1 either you've got short sightedness to go with your recency bias.

 

We're not talking about all season, we're talking under Eckert which is an entirely different set-up and method of play then under Still. If you still think we should 'smash teams' by more than 2 goals every game you'll never be happy and there's nothing I can say to change that. We have by every metrics smashed 4/5 of the last 7 teams. It's really that simple. 

I've shown you facts and you're still 'why can't we 7-0 every team'... There's no discussing that

Edited 7 hours ago by Greedyfly

[Patches O Houlihan]

I think when we need to take Scienza and another attacker off we need to be able to switch to a different formation that accepts that we will play in a different style.

Arma's deep runs to collect the ball and set up breaks were clearly communicated to WBA players at half time. Besides Fellows and Scienza being heavily marked, there seemed to always be someone muscling Arma from behind as he dropped back for the ball in the second half.

Cam Archer hasn't learned to do the Arma drop deep yet, and is generally not as good at pressing or reading back passes to put pressure on their defence. We should stick with Robinson, but there is clearly a drop off in quality when he comes on which is fair enough being in mind his age/experience/ current value.

Hopefully in a week or two with a couple of key players returning we could have a few more options

First half same as usual:

                                    Baz

           THB.              Wood              Stephens/Quashie

Fellows              Downes      Jander                Manning

                    Azaz                      Scienza

                                  Arma

From 65 mins after establishing a lead start moving towards this:

                                    Baz

              THB             Wood            Stephens/Quashie

  Mads                Downes          Jander.             Welington

                                   Charles

                                                    Archer

                       Stewart

Also: Robinson, Romeu, Matski, Bragg, New Striker in Jan

This formation has our two more defensive minded FBs, plus a different type of attack to keep their defenders thinking, and a more solid central midfield. Of course we wouldn't always finish the game like this, they'd be variations. But you'd like to hope we could keep Ross fit if he's only playing 25-30 mins per match. Jander and Charles are capable of playing clever through balls for Archer who can play off the shoulder effectively. THB would need to continue to roam forward to offer support, and has been known to play a good long ball forward for Stewart. Wellington and Mads are both much better at stopping crosses coming in. Whilst I could see a benefit in going 433 I suspect we'd end up confusing our centre backs more than shoring things up.

[die Mannyschaft]

Cricky we go from top 6 team performance to bottom 6 in 2nd half. Some of those substitutions!

[Viking Saint]

It does seem to be a weirdly recurring theme at our club that each manager seems to have a player whose obvious faults they seem totally blind to. Aribo has offered absolutely nothing every time he's come on and yet TE perseveres with him. Bragg or Matsuki have offered so much more in the short cameos they've had and would surely do a much better job in the middle, yet we're consistently getting 'can't be arsed Aribo' who looks like he's deliberately trying to throw games.....

[Greedyfly]

30 minutes ago, saintant said:

With respect I think our drop off in 2nd halves goes far deeper than a bit of complacency. That's far too simplistic.

And then doesn't give us any reason why... Very odd.

 

I think it's down to fatigue, complacent attitude, still a bit shot shy, lack of proper options on the bench to replace the attacking threat up front, missing Charles and missing Stewart maybe. 

 

Oh sorry, also a fucking manager that's managed SEVEN senior games... Winning 6

[Whitey Grandad]

1 hour ago, Sheaf Saint said:

For their second goal he was so weak - he absolutely should be claiming that.

And that run of 3 saves - first one was straight at him, second one was off Manning's boot, only the third one can you claim is a good save.

Their second? Have a look at it again and then try and say that he should have claimed it. He absolutely couldn't. 

You usually make some good points but this isn't one of them.

[Greedyfly]

38 minutes ago, vectraman said:

So we get tired, but the opposition get more energetic second half 🤔

These are professional athletes - however tired we are, at least 6 of them have to play the full 90, weirdly, same for the opponents…

Every game our second half performance is quite frankly crap. That isn’t acceptable or understandable by any metric. Either we aren’t fit enough, or our tactics aren’t right. 
Yes a win feels good after the last 16 months, but we need to be so much better second half. Whatever the question is, Joe Aribo is proving he is just not the answer either…

 

Yeah no it's not and I've now stated on at least 2 occasions why I think we've struggled in maybe TWO of the last 7 games. Not gonna repeat it again. 

 

 

[Patches O Houlihan]

3 minutes ago, Greedyfly said:

And then doesn't give us any reason why... Very odd.

 

I think it's down to fatigue, complacent attitude, still a bit shot shy, lack of proper options on the bench to replace the attacking threat up front, missing Charles and missing Stewart maybe. 

 

Oh sorry, also a fucking manager that's managed SEVEN senior games... Winning 6

Our front four; Arma, Scienza, Azaz, Fellows.

That has to be one of the strongest attacking groups in the league right now, possibly in the last few years if they can keep the pace of the last seven games. There is a massive drop off currently behind these guys. The more they tire, and the more of them you take off, the less of a threat we present, and the more pressure gets put on the defence. 

I think it's that simple. 

If you ask Scienza and Fellows to pace themselves for a whole match I don't think you see the first half play we've been seeing.

[Greedyfly]

1 minute ago, Patches O Houlihan said:

Our front four; Arma, Scienza, Azaz, Fellows.

That has to be one of the strongest attacking groups in the league right now, possibly in the last few years if they can keep the pace of the last seven games. There is a massive drop off currently behind these guys. The more they tire, and the more of them you take off, the less of a threat we present, and the more pressure gets put on the defence. 

I think it's that simple. 

If you ask Scienza and Fellows to pace themselves for a whole match I don't think you see the first half play we've been seeing.

Could not agree more. So by that metric I'm happy crushing a team for 60 mins or so and with a few more coming back, getting up to fitness maybe extending it to 70+mins or at least managing the game more. 

 

But it's this suggestion that Tonda should be right on it the moment Scienza and Fellows drop off (I keep mentioning them because they seem to a) rely the most on pace, b) on releasing pressure on our back line, and c) I think they drop off more than Azaz and Arma because of their attributes and how they play the game).

 

Let's see how he continues to do and maybe we can all enjoy the thumping we are dishing out.. 

 

Agree with your change of formation post too, again something I'm hoping Eckert will figure out especially when we have Stewart/Downs (meh) and Charles back. It's a shame we don't have an u21 we could start utilising in that respect, much like Bragg. Maybe if we're still flying high in January we can convince a signing or two on the hope of premier League football.

[Football Special]

1 hour ago, beatlesaint said:

I’m afraid the constant introduction of Aribo isn’t doing us any favours.

He looks like he has no intention of winning any 50/50s, just drifts around, don't understand him as he's a strong lad but has no desire to battle for the side 

[SaintBobby]

Couple of points.

1. Yes, the starting XI is way better than the finishing XI. But I don't mind this. When we have got in trouble in this division it's been when we've had about 45 squad players all of whom are a 6 out of 10. That's just dirge. This season we have some 8,9, 9.5 out of 10 players...and we replace them with 6 or 7/10 players. That's how it should be, really.

2. The substitutions today. Gees. Not the choices. But the timing. We had Fraser and Robinson ready to come on and standing there for what felt like an hour when we were 3-0 up. Suddenly it's 3-1. We might have wanted, say, Edwards now rather than Fraser. Same thing happened as 3-1 became 3-2 with Romeu and Aribo coming on after an age of standing there. Why the f**k does it take so long to make subs and do you have to proceed with the plan if the score changes in the meantime?  

[James G]

6 hours ago, JohnnyShearer2.0 said:

Give over.

With the attacking players Saints have, why cant they beat teams comfortably. 

I'd hardly call 2-1 or 3-2 or even the 3-1s smashings. The only metric for me is goals scored and conceded. I couldn't care less for other metrics. 

Not sure why you think I'm being short term. I've been pretty consistent all season in my view that with the attacking players Saints have, Saints should be going for it. 

That was my view under Still and its great to see Tonda getting the team to do it.

I think 4231 would be better for the team, and less running around.

[JohnnyShearer2.0]

6 hours ago, Greedyfly said:

I don't think it's me that needs to give over because you can't even properly debate what I said. I conceded that the 3-2 and the 2-1 weren't but the others were. If you can't see how we battered Brum with the 3-1 either you've got short sightedness to go with your recency bias.

 

We're not talking about all season, we're talking under Eckert which is an entirely different set-up and method of play then under Still. If you still think we should 'smash teams' by more than 2 goals every game you'll never be happy and there's nothing I can say to change that. We have by every metrics smashed 4/5 of the last 7 teams. It's really that simple. 

I've shown you facts and you're still 'why can't we 7-0 every team'... There's no discussing that

Blimey, someone is getting awfully upset just because you deem that I'm unhappy about Saints having won 6 out of 7.

Nowhere have I said that I am not. Bringing in the old you can't debate fallback is poor. I've tried to engage but you seem intent on scoring points. Also its nice of you to go back and add additional reasoning to your post regarding fatigue. That works both ways for teams.

Simply put, I don't see why Saints cant score a lot of goals in this league and when the opportunity comes they should go for it. Not sure why you cant accept that. Why fall back? Why not try to score a couple more against Charlton or Brum? 

Again I never said Saints should smash teams 7-0 every game. So a bit odd you know how I think. 

 

[JohnnyShearer2.0]

40 minutes ago, James G said:

I think 4231 would be better for the team, and less running around.

Yes agreed. Tonda has found a way to get goals and set up attacks which we haven't seen for long time. 

Definitely needs to find that balance and maybe a change in formation will help.

Charles coming back will help AND if Stewart was ever fit, Saints could switch their game up. Hopefully Archer will get some confiwith a goal soon or Jay gets his timing right on shooting. Signs are there which are very promising. 

[Sheaf Saint]

6 hours ago, Whitey Grandad said:

Their second? Have a look at it again and then try and say that he should have claimed it. He absolutely couldn't. 

You usually make some good points but this isn't one of them.

It was a free header 3 yards out in the centre of the goal, and he didn't even get anywhere near it. Yes there was a player backing into him, but not forcibly enough for it to be considered a foul. By the time the ball hit the back of the net he had just fallen to his knees. Just another example of his total lack of physical stature and command of his box.

It was utterly pathetic, and your continued defence of him despite the clear evidence of his inadequacy is starting to look increasingly bizarre.