leeham_69

I'm sure i remember a stat from the time that Beattie had scored more goals that season than all the other forwards in the squad combined? Something along those lines.

and maybe that means he's after the Liverpool job!

Just a musing given the lack of activity since the final... what do you think Puel's plans for our formation and lineup are next year? He obviously abandoned the midfield diamond, but with Gab and Boufal in + a full pre season, it's not beyond the realms of reason that it will make a comeback. I personally prefer the 4-2-3-1 as do many others - evidenced by the goals we score when we shape up that way - but that is not without its flaws too. It uses only one of our 3/4 strikers (assuming fitness), and we don't really have an ideal partner for Romeu in the DM positions. Reverting to to the diamond doesn't solve this, but it does remove a position with no specialist (DM) and adds a specialist (FWD) elsewhere instead. Two good goalscorers up front together is a combination not seen for a fairly long time at Saints and they could form a fairly lethal combination. I am a big Austin fan and don't want to see him frozen out of the squad - and from one point of view using the formation that gets as many of your best players on the pitch makes a lot of sense. In the perfect world I'd rather see investment in a really dynamic central midfielder to improve the 5-man midfield but could go either way for me. thoughts?

i have enjoyed his runs off the ball as much as his work on it - one of the signs of a really good striker I reckon. when we move forward, even if he doesn't actually get the ball his movement opens gaps, takes defenders out of play and brings midfielders into the game. Agree with much of the above - he has so much of what the others lack. It's been a joy to watch us actually work the ball into the final third rather than get to the edge of the box and pass it sideways or lose it. exciting times ahead.

Official club statement about the sacking is pretty nicely worded actually. Something had to give. Like many others, would have liked to see a bit more faith in him but that is the way these days - so much money comes from just being in the premier league and it really is getting to the pointy end of the season. The board will not have wanted to wonder "what if" had they gone down.

she'll forget it in a few weeks. he never will.

that would be an interesting poll - should he start the final or not? i'm not sure either way ... on the one hand it's a bit pointless signing someone up for such a short deal to not play them, on the other if he's not match fit it would be madness to start him. On my strange third hand, it was none other than stephens and yoshida who kept liverpool out at anfield. decisions decisions! I think ... 3 at the back is a workable solution but is about as likely as me growing a fourth hand!

Jack Stephens MOTM and cements his place at CB for the next 15 years

he's nearly 28! i think the restrictions are only on people below 21.

interesting formation - you could also stick JWP on the right and ask him to send as many crosses in as possible as 1 attacking outlet, something that despite his much-discussed skill in delivery we haven't seen that much of from open play. you could also, for concerns over a lack of height in the back line (especially defending corners), use Gardos instead of Stephens who would be equally reassured by the formation.

Good possibilities etc etc Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Except that when the counter attack is on, more often than not we pass the ball backwards or sideways and allow the opposition time to set up defensively. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I have wondered for a while if the club's longer term plan was to shift Bertrand to CB as he got older and slower because he is good defensively and positionally. I guess we'll find out sooner rather than later - obviously we lose an attacking threat from full-back if they do move him, but a good full back seems easier to find than a good CB. Part of me reckons it would be harsh to drop Stephens after the win against Liverpool - maybe Bertrand in for West Ham to see how he looks? Or would Stephens be better for a longer run? Such exciting (panic stricken) times!

not only are we unwilling to play the killer ball, we appear unwilling to pass the ball to anybody in the final third who is a) under any kind of pressure and b) facing away from goal. We would create so many more chances if we just tried a bit more and worked a bit harder tracking back when it doesn't come off. currently it's like there's a magic wall built on the edge of the opposition box - neither players nor the ball can seem to pass it without exactly the right set of clues & instructions.

not to mention the bizarre decision to use Forster's head as the face of anything ... one for radio i reckon.

+1 for use of 'subsumed'

Puel out Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Also makes a good list of suggested baby names? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think by now most are in agreement that our transfer policy is to buy promising young players on the premise we can re-sell them for profit some years later. In theory, this works as both a drawcard insofar as we may be able to sign players looking to make the leap to a big club from a lower league that we otherwise wouldn't, but as we all know it can also create a hole where we either fail to replace key players adequately, or the gambles we take on those replacements don't work out. Now I don't really want to start yet another thread that discusses the merit of this system - it has been flogged endlessly (a sign of frustration at our lack of info coming from the top I am sure). But I was curious about the ages of players we sign and the players we sell, and whether any definitive pattern emerged. Here's most of our signings since the PL in order of age we signed them: Boruc - 32 (34 at transfer) Pelle - 29 (31 at transfer) Davis - 27 Long - 27 McCarthy - 27 Osvaldo - 27 (28 at transfer) Pied - 26 Austin - 26 Forster - 26 Bertrand - 25 Soares - 24 Lovren - 24 (25 at transfer) Romeu - 24 VVD - 24 Tadic - 24 Clasie - 24 Gardos - 24 Boufal - 23 Cork - 22 (25 at transfer) Wanyama - 22 (25 at transfer) Mane - 22 (24 at transfer) Redmond - 22 Juanmi - 22 (24 at transfer) Clyne - 21 (23 at transfer) PEH - 21 Ramirez - 21 (25 at transfer, excludes loans) Gazzaniga - 20 Schneiderlin - 18 (25 at transfer) misc: Lallana - 25 at transfer Chambers - 19 at transfer Shaw - 19 at transfer So - here's what I suspect with the caveat that it really is hard to draw definitive conclusions across the last 7 or 8 years what with different managers, different leagues, different chairpersons etc. I am musing that we in fact sign three kinds of players, or we sign players with 3 different intentions depending on your POV: Promising up and comers (aged Successes: Clyne, Wanyama, Mane Potentials: Redmond, Hojbjerg, Boufal Probable failures: Juanmi, Ramirez Core squad (24-28, signed with the intention of building the team around) Successs: Davis, Forster, Austin, Romeu, Tadic, Soares Failures: Lovren (who chucked a hissy and wanted to leave), Osvaldo, I would argue Long Possible failures/yet to be seen: Long, Gardos, Clasie, Pied Cheap "older" players (29+, signed with the intention of either doing a job for us on the cheap OR being sold at a profit if someone is willing to pay) Successes: Pelle, Boruc, Ricky (arguable) Unknowns/arguable failures: S. Taylor Also interesting to note that obviously players transition between these ages - at which point the club makes a decision. Do they go from exciting young player to core player (which results in increase in what we have to pay em) or flog 'em? When core players get old, do we carry them into their twilight (meaning we have to pay for less games played), or try and flog 'em? I would also argue - possibly optimistically - that this means VvD was signed as a long term prospect (what with 6 year contract + captaincy etc) ... but probably he has surpassed expectations and as such is an inevitable exception. Anyway hopefully this will facilitate some robust discussion. I reckon it's actually in theory a good system - sign very exciting young players, mix them with dependable workhorses, repeat etc. The problem is obviously the inherent gamble and this season we've been unluck with all kinds of players - perennial injuries to boufal, gardos, austin, mccarthy + the continued underwhelmingness of redmond, clasie, forster, hojbjerg (in flashes). We'd probably be OK if we had problems to one of the young/core age groups, but currently both are in a bit of strife. I'm bored at work - how's your day?

tell me about it - the handful of 6:45 AM games we get are the highlight... and today's game v norwich wasn't even televised

From that article: "Playing in his favoured position, and without a rigid gameplan, Gabbiadini thrived." "In the end, a top-level club simply couldn’t afford to build a team around the forward. It’s a familiar story, with Gabbiadini having also been on Juventus’ books without making an appearance. You get the sense that Gabbiadini’s next move will be the defining one for his career. It’s not yet clear where the Italian international will end up, but West Bromwich Albion look to be favourites for his signature." So on one hand he does sound like our kind of purchase in that he's a formerly-promising youngster who's not exactly fulfilled promise... on the other hand he's an inconsistent, unreliable inside forward - the likes of whom we already have plenty. While i do tend to agree we need an out-and-out forward, I think if we land this guy it suggests that the bosses think our problem is from the link from midfield to our forwards - hard to disagree with that, particularly as I have thought Rodriquez has been looking pretty good on the ball of late (when he actually gets it). An injection of quality attacking play from anywhere on the pitch would improve us. Better to buy a quality player in a less-important position than a panic buy striker who won't actually be an improvement on what we've got? I reckon it is. Get more quality players on the pitch and the overall quality will improve - I reckon that's what contributed to Long's success last season as much as anything.

I suppose something to consider if/when he goes is not just the fee we receive (Which is not likely to be all that much - if someone's handed in a request because they don't want to be here it seems unlikely anything above about 8mill will be refused) but the wages it would free up? Surely he's one of our highest paid players? That means we've got it in the bank to line up either a very high quality replacement, or a number of players, without significant takings from the savings account.

who would be a better manager, CP or the decomposing corpse of a recently deceased legend? (Poll please mods) Cheers for the lol

On an unrelated but similar thread, managed to catch a very rare live PL game on free-to-air TV this morning, the Bournemouth Arsenal game. Boruc still in goal, and looking in far better physical condition than he ever did for us - nice haircut too. Think Forster is just down on confidence, much like the rest of the squad - only trouble is when your GK isn't performing at his peak the mistakes and flaws are magnified for obvious reasons.

Next game probably worth naming Charlie on the bench in a sling, just in case?