tajjuk

The first bit is my opinion, the second bit is stats, certainly from an attacking point of view, no one tried more or came close to what Lallana offered attacking wise against Fulham. Looking at stats from previous games, attacking wise he has offered and created on average every game about the same as Ramirez has done in the few games he has played. Defensively he has only been out tackled per game by Clyne and Morgan, he is second to only Morgan in interceptions and he has only committed 3 fouls in 7 appearances. That to me indicates he's doing about as much as he can to protect fox, his primary job is not to protect the full back. Statistically he is rated as out third best player behind Lambert and Ramirez.

He covered Fox fine on Sunday, he also covers Fox a whole lot better than Puncheon covers the right back. whoscored.com had him as our second best player, rated at 8.1, 5 key passes, fouled the most, 2nd most tackles and interceptions behind Morgan. Most crosses, only bad aspects were he only had a 69% pass success rate and he was dispossessed the most times.

The same mediocre Fulham team that beat Wigan at home? that are 9th in the league and have scored as many goals as Chelsea. that one? Also on 'under-strength', do you not think without Clyne, and then losing Richards in the game, Ramirez, Cork we were also 'under-strength'?

he probably did just touch him but yeh Schwarzer dived, Fulham were lucky to get away with that IMO. He was blocking Schwarzer off which was fine, but he backheeled Schwarzer which while he didn't get enough connection to send the big keeper down it seemed at the time to be what got the goal dissallowed. however a few here seem to think Clattenburg was pointing to Lambert as if something he had done got the goal ruled out. Either way was a poor decision and the goal probably would have stood if we were Utd or Chelsea. No need for Puncheon to try the kick in the first place though.

Yeh essentially we have no one better and he is still a good player, he just had an average game yesterday, he still worked his socks off though and his set piece delivery was good. Not sure he should be captain though, maybe Steven Davis or Morgan or the Holy Goalie

No he wasn't, Lallana was average yesterday and gave the ball away, Puncheon was worse, he wasted the ball when in good positions on several occasions, ran into people, always went inside and didn't track back (something he has failed to do all season). Not to mention he missed a sitter and his stupid little kick on Schwarzer when the goal was ruled out. He's had one good game this season IMO.

Forgot abut that although i'm pretty sure it was cleared off the line, thing is if he had actually got a decent connection it would have been a goal but it just hit him.

Maybe because we have had a much tougher run of fixtures than anyone else? Yeh we have conceded a lot of goals but 6 were in the same game and 15 of the 20 have been against Arsenal away, Man City away, Everton away and Man Utd at home. Just as a comparison, Swansea have conceded 7 goals at home to our 8 and they have played Reading, Sunderland and Everton at home, easier games than our. Wigan have also conceded 8 at home, are yet to win at home and lost at home to Fulham. Perspective is what is needed, the reason people are pointing out that 'we're not in the relegation zone' is because to not be in the relegation zone with the fixtures we have had and the goals we have conceded is a positive and shows maybe we aren't as bad as people are making out. Fulham have scored 15 goals in the league, only Utd have scored more yet our 'terrible' defence kept them down to a handful of chances and they only scored because of an own goal and two deflections mainly due to our defensive re-shuffle because of an injury. Our 'terrible' defence conceded 18 shots to an Everton team that had been averaging over 21 in every game, Everton had 33 shots against Swansea! As I said perspective. We need to how we do with our full strength team after a decent amount of games where we aren't playing Utd Arsenal and Everton. We have those games coming up, then we will know how good we actually are.

Don't think Nigel can either, I think he was plainly aware it was an issue and the team weren't obeying him which he why he looked so grumpy second half. This to an extent, Ramirez's creativity was missing, it's something that neither Schneiderlin and Davis do well, they were excellent at getting the ball back on Sunday but too often failed to find a forward player. We also made a few crucial interceptions in Fulham's half (something Morgan has done brilliantly this season) but then slowed the play down and didn't utilise these opportunities. Sadly RL, AL and JP were all a bit off, they all worked hard but the crisp movement and passing we have seen this season wasn't there enough. We were also too long, we had a spell of like 30+ passes in the first half and then gave up and humped it into the box, seeing as we were winning at the time the onus should have been on Fulham to come at us and us keeping possession like that was what we should have kept doing, it would have both tires them out and created some space. Clyne and even Richardson was also a loss, we had no full back outlet on that side so lacked a threat.

:rolleyes::rolleyes: No we have lost 11 points due to poor defensive errors, oh and the fact that Everton, Man Utd, and Man City are all better than us. Nothing to do with substitutions, the substitutions yesterday were all sensible, even more so considering what we had available. I also see everyone has conveniently forgot his substitutions and changes against City that got us into a winning position away at the league leaders.

Also replacing your whole team hasn't worked that well for QPR and their stand out player so far is probably Taarabt despite all the signnings.

Subs were fine IMO, Lambert was maybe 10 minutes early aside from that they were logical. Hooiveld was the only choice really, Richardson was already the back up and Cork is the versatile player who could have filled in. Puncheon had been below his best most of the game, especially in the second half, too slow in possession and too often just ran into someone. He also wasn't helping Yoshida who was struggling, we were also winning at the time. Lambert was knackered and we were struggling to retain the ball, Guly as Adkins pointed out brought some more energy and played pretty well when he came on. What actually cost us the game was a bit off bad luck and the team sitting too deep in the second half, which Nigel recognised but the team didn't seem to respond. From his post match comments it seems he had words with them about it.

What if we are say comfortably clear of the relegation zone and in mid table? What 'miracle' will we need then? One to get us into the Champions league?. We're 7 games in FFS, were not in the relegation zone, we are 4 pts from mid table. Oh and we have had 4 of the toughest opponents you can probably have in this league (except Chelsea). Oh and several teams around us look terrible. This is a stupid thread and literally makes no point. It might have a bit more relevance in January but it's going to look even more stupid by then if we are doing well. You also moan about people 'attacking the poster not the post' but when you keep coming up with the same threads it's not really surprising is it?

Why exactly? We were by far the better team in the first half, had a goal ruled out and put together some good moves. We were worse in the second half granted and NA is rightly concerned with this as the team were below par. However considering we were missing some good players and had a defensive re-shuffle, we restricted a Fulham side that before this game were amongst the highest scorers in the league to a handful of half chances. Kind of makes this statement "It must be just the other 30,000 of us who thought we looked second rate and prime candidates for the NPL next year if the coaches don't start taking the job seriously" Look a bit silly in my opinion.

This, it was the OS that said he brought Guly on for more pace, Adkins said he brought Guly on because Lambert was playing the no.10 position and we needed some more energy in there. (as Rickie was knackered and we needed the ball back) Whilst Guly seems to have a 'hate club', he has similar attributes/style to Lambert (but not as good) as well as being of similar build and height so still offers than aerial presence. He's also more mobile and quicker than Lambert, especially as a substitute. Was a logical enough decision but maybe 10 minutes too early. Also if he was 'under order from above', why the hell would he be under orders to bring on Guly who was signed in league 1 rather than Mayuka who is a new signing????

My overall feeling after that game was that we were a bit unlucky. Firstly the injury didn't help, Yoshida looked awful at full back, Hooiveld looked like a defender who was short of sharpness and wasn't expecting to play, had either Yoshida been there, or a full match fit Jos I think both goals would have been blocked correctly. Having said that I think Fulham basically had 4 or 5 chances all game and only one decent one (were Jos missed a ball over the top and Rodallega missed). I can only remember Gazza have a couple of saves from a corner and the two goals, both of which had huge elements of luck about them. Aside from that we defended very well, if we keep teams to such a limited number of chances we will keep clean sheets. Positives:- - Fonte: (ignoring the goals), ok he didn't have a huge test and probably would have had a lot more trouble with Berbatov or Petravic, however considering the players either side of him were struggling I thought he was excellent. Clear signs that he might be getting used to this league. - Overall team shape and defence: We looked a lot more solid, whilst Fulham had good spells of possession they barely threatened and resulted to launching aimless long balls, the midfield harried and hassled well (in the first half) and any worrying moments again were created by individual defensive errors. - Set pieces: We looked very threatening from our set pieces, Fox's delivery was excellent and is definitely a plus point for him keeping in the team (I also thought he was a lot more solid defensively than he has been). Set pieces in this league will be very important, (look at Utd v newcastle yesterday) so it's good too see we are threatening. - Davis and Morgan: I thought both were very good, sometimes their passing was a little bit off but they pressed, harries and intercepted very well, especially as they were outnumbered in the middle. They made Ruiz look very ordinary and pushed Sidwell Baird back. They also covered and helped out with both fullbacks. Negatives - Lack of Attacking threat? While we were a lot more solid defensively did it cost us our attacking threat? I'm not sure, we had some good spells of play especially in the first half, the move that ended with Rickie just guiding a shot wide was excellent and the sort of play we have been producing regularly in recent weeks. But it was few and far between, we seemed to go long too often and second half we seemed to run out of ideas. Maybe an off day for our forwards particularly in the absence of Ramirez we were looking to Lallana and Lambert for our creativity and both seemed a bit off. Loosing the full back didn't help, Yoshida looked very uncomfortable going forward and we missed Clyne's driving runs, we had little threat down the right. - Puncheon: Amazed to see people criticise Adkins for tasking him off, I thought he was poor, held onto the ball too long, always went inside, ran into trouble and in the second half was leaving Yoshida exposed. Chaplow was a sensible substitution to help protect Yoshida but as I suspected will offer little in forward threat. It also makes me question whether Mayuka can only play as a central striker, Adkins seems to reluctant to give hima go in Puncheon's spot, his pace should give him the option to go wide as well as inside that Puncheon doesn't offer but Adkins has only ever bought him on up front. - Squad Depth: Not much we can do about the injuries but we looked very much like a Championship team towards the end of the game. I suppose having Clyne, Ramirez, Cork, Boruc, Lee to come in and having Yoshida in his proper position we look a decent first 11, but certainly shows we are short on depth. Would like to see another 2-3 players in January, even if they have to be loans. - Jay Rod: Seems to be getting a bit of stick but have to agree he was poor yesterday, however I think he is struggling for confidence (and pressure of that fee?), touch and control a bit off yesterday but he worked his socks off and his movement was good. I think he needs a goal. Overall considering the injuries and the fact we were a bit unlucky a point is not too bad. I'm also pleased to hear that NA was happy with the performance. We now have a little while off where he can work with most of the squad, get all the players back from injury and have a good next few months.

Arsenal hammered West Ham as well at home, less goals conceded than we did but looked like Arsenal had a lot of chances plus it wasnt at the Emirates. I think people will start to realise the Hammers aren't as good as people think they are.

11 pages and as far as I can tell absolutely nothing on this media wise bar a few tweets right at the start. Considering the Echo has done two articles already on work stopping at the training already, surely if this was an issue the media would have reported on it?

I haven't seen much from West Ham yet that gives so match credence to the media's belief that they will be comfortably in mid table.

Ego might have been the wrong word, but he has had his sulks, I more meant that I think Mayuka will be happy to do the defensive stuff as he;s desperate to get game time. Going forward yes, tracking back no, Lallana has been bad at this as well but Puncheon has been worse.

Thing is Puncheon has been pretty rubbish at tracking back anyway so i doubt that Mayuka can be any worse. He's younger and keen to play, plus I suspect has a little less ego than Puncheon so I reckon he would be disciplined in the role if Adkins tells him to be.

I'd like to see Boruc start, along with Mayuka getting his first start instead of Puncheon. I imagine the defence will be the same as it was against Everton with Clyne left back. Midfield 3 of JWP. Davis and Ramirez unless Morgan is back.

Interesting read and pretty much spot on. Apply similar thinking to our next ten games:- Fulham (H) Target 3, min 1. West Ham (A) Target 1, min 0 Spurs (H) target 3, min 1 West brom (A) target 3, min 1 Swansea (H) Target 3, min 1 QPR (A) Target 3, min 1 Newcastle (H) Target 3, min 1 Norwich (H) Target 3, min 1 Liverpool (A) Target 1, min 0 Reading (H) Best 3, min 1. 6 home games, toughest opposition Spurs, 4 away games toughest opposition Liverpool, the only place I don't think we could get any points. Ideally from those games we want to be getting 24 pts, anything above 16 will be ok, if we have less than 10 it's not looking good. We also have a very tough January/February which realistically could yield 0 wins, so to avoid being in a rut we need a decent amount of points on the board before the new year.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/19830762 Interesting comments from Holt and I think he has got it spot on. England selection policy is very narrowed and picking the supposed 'big names' when they are unfit or not in form has continually failed to be anything but average. We have in every major tournament got about as far as we probably should have. Leaving Ricky Lambert aside, Nathan Dyer is a good example, he had a good season last year and has started this season brilliantly, yet Milner who isn't a regular for his club and wasn't last year gets in, despite the fact he has done f-all in an England shirt. Whilst Roy hasn't been a 'disaster' as Alpine put it, he has done pretty much the same as every England manager before him and pick the same players who fail to do much, and pretty much restricts his selections to the top 6 unless injuries force him to look elsewhere. Alpine is also correct that Euro 2012 was an opportunity missed, he had 'carte blanche', no expectations, late into the job, no way he was going to be sacked. Yet same old faces, same boring style, same standard england result. The presence of Frank Lampard (34) Steven Gerrard (32) Carrick (31) Cole (31) and Defoe (30 in two days) kind of destroys your point. None of these players are likely going to be able to play in Euro 2016, it's debatable that a 34 four year old Gerrard or a 36 year old lampard at 2014 is a good idea. Yet they are part of our qualifying team, if the team was full of sub-30 year olds then maybe, but if the likes of Carrick and Defoe are going to be part of the team for 2014, despite never really doing that well there is no argument that a 30 year old Rickie Lambert couldn't be part of that team. Teddy Sheringham went to the world cup in 2002 at 36, he started his international career at 27 and didn't become a regular until he was 29-30 yet went on to win 51 caps. There are quite a few similarities in style between Sheringham and Lambert in my opinion and seeing as like SHeringham, Lambert has no real pace his game won't really diminish with age, in fact at the age of 30 he is clearly getting better, there is no real reason to think that he still couldn't be good (or even better) at 34.

It is trolling though isn't it, there was no value in this discussion the first 10 times you posted it. You do know a lot of other team don't sell our EVERY game don't you. We will get close to 30k I reckon for this game which over 90% of capacity which for non high draw opposition and a TV game is very good. end of. I love as well how you keep dragging the villa game up, saying how we always sold out against Villa, except Villa when we went down were quite good they finished 6th the year before we went down, whereas now they are rubbish so are less of a draw. Maybe our 'floating' fans actually watch football.