mrfahaji

Hopefully that means next season we won't be on TV as much and we can have more Saturday 3pm kick offs! You see, there's always a silver lining if you look for it :-)

Wouldn't disagree with many of those, though have to be wary of causality of ratings. For example, I'm not sure van Dijk played worse than last season, yet has probably been given a poorer rating on account of the fact he hasn't won as many games. The one I would disagree on is Cedric. He has been superb this year, whereas last season he was unconvincing, having a good game once in a while.

I'm totally fine with going to the big teams away from home and playing defensively. Preferably I'd like to see a threat on the counter as well rather than an all-out defensive show as yesterday, but I don't think it was a deliberate strategy, more a by-product of a strict cautious approach meaning players didn't take any chances whatsoever. Be ceding possession to Arsenal, we will inevitably tire, and if we don't offer a threat - even if just on the counter attack - they will eventually add more and more players to the attack and probably end up overloading us, or winning a penalty, as so often happens in these games (City could easily have got one for Forster on Sane). I would play Redmond & JWP as the wide players, to help cover their wing backs defensively, and play Boufal (or maybe Tadic) centrally to take advantage of the space in front of their centre backs, hopefully drawing one of them out and then finding space in behind. Because Arsenal don't have a particularly big or powerful midfield, I wonder if Clasie or Hojbjerg could be a viable alternative for Davis as DM. Clasie because he wouldn't be at as big a disadvantage as normal physically, or Hojbjerg because it might be an area we could actually gain an advantage over them. If there's one thing that can be said about Arsenal, is that they don't like it up 'em!

Generally agree, though you could argue that Spurs being a shoe-in for second place (hopefully that means they'll finish third, ha), suggests that teams haven't learnt to counter the press that well! I don't think the tactics yesterday were to "get rid of it" every time we got the ball back, but it did look like the players were so afraid of being caught out of position, they didn't want to overcommit to attacks, so they broke down quickly. Equally when we got into their third and had them on the back foot we opted to then play safe, keep-ball tactics, which meant we forwent the chance to nick a goal. The fact we got a point suggests it was worth the caution, but at times I think we could have afforded a little more bravery with the ball.

Agree that in those games we either had our moments (Bournemouth, Leicester, Hull), or controlled the game (Stoke, Be'er Sheva), but equally the opposition had more than a handful of chances to win the game (Hull, Bournemouth, Leicester, Liverpool x2). I remember the Stoke game being particularly frustrating, but it was part of a batch of 3 games in a week where we beat Boro and Bournemouth, so didn't feel so disastrous in hindsight. Even at the start of the season it was apparent we were going to be in for a lot of 0-0s and 1-0s, because we lost Mane and replaced him with Redmond & Boufal, who are not the same calibre of goal threat even if they may yet prove to be good players. It's more surprising lately that we are struggling though, as now we have Gabbiadini and we did go through a brief period where we looked great going forward!

I'd agree with this. Defensively excellent but there were times we could have done more going forward without compromising our defensive shape. Often it was players making the wrong choice or being reluctant to pass. During most of the second half we gave the ball back to them so quickly when we could have been smarter to either mount an attack or at least keep the ball for longer, but in the last 10 minutes we actually had chance to create some chances. It looked as though the players were afraid to have a go in case it didn't work, but then when playing safe we ended up losing the ball shortly afterwards anyway. Nevertheless, happy with a point. Keeping Liverpool, generally a free-scoring team, to four blanks in four games is impressive no matter which way you cut it.

Yeah sorry, couldn't help it. Thought I had him on ignore, will rectify that now.

You sound reassuringly disappointed.

I'm so angry that we drew with Liverpool at Anfield, can't believe we didn't go for it and lose.

Was that him on the left? Did really good work and then played a hospital ball!

Romeu had to pick the pass earlier, ideally right but left could've been good too.

What have I just seen?!

These kind of games nearly always end up with penalties being the breakthrough.

When Boufal got clear of their player in the corner just now, for me that's the dimension we need to add, because he had the ball for a while, scampered forward a bit, looked up for options, and ended up hitting it hopefully (and unsuccessfully) towards Gabbiadini. No problem being defensive, but when we have chance to either attack or at least keep possession for a bit, we don't.

Note that Boufal has done a couple of good things defensively in the last few minutes

I know sometimes it's the only option, but we hardly ever keep possession when Forster boots it forward, we don't have the players to win the high ball. So frustrating therefore when we pass it all the way back to him only to end with a hoof. May as well take a punt from elsewhere on the pitch if that's the case.

I guess we'll see but recently the problem is we've had those two AND Redmond on the pitch, and the three together just leaves us too open in the midfield.

At least the side has the right balance to it. I'm most concerned that Boufal (or Tadic) won't offer the same defensive cover as Redmond in a game that we will probably be doing a lot of defending in, and one which lapses in concentration or discipline will be punished.

Took me a while... ha oops, shows how much I dislike her that I can't even spell her name right!

Agree. I know how I'd feel about a Teresa May banner being waved at St Mary's...

Good read, and certainly suggests we've had more than our fair share of bad luck. The whole expected goals thing is an interesting take and often useful as an indicator, but I do wonder quite far you can take conclusions and analysis from it. It depends what the debate is - a piece a few weeks back claiming WBA had been incredibly lucky seemed to have merit and be easy to justify, but I'm not sure that Southampton's "shot volume" is necessarily an indicator for bad luck. The clip against Man City (ending with Tadic miss, ugh) is a perfect example of why I think we could end up being good next season. We've produced moments like that a fair bit. Whether or not we can consistently play like that, not just within games but over the course of weeks and months is another matter though. The bit about Davis & Romeu was interesting. I think most would agree that Davis shouldn't be playing as a DM, but mainly because he dawdles on the ball and doesn't have right defensive mentality for that role, not because he isn't attacking enough! But perhaps his tendency to 'recycle' the ball wide is also a legitimate criticism? One area we have definitely been unlucky with this year is the fixture list. The Europa League and League Cup fixture congestion was unhelpful but unavoidable, however to compound it we were absolutely screwed by the TV scheduling at Christmas, then had immense bad luck with the FA Cup scheduling, where we due to face a team still in the competition on the equivalent PL weeks. That would finally have been a period where we had one game per week, and instead we now have another fixture pile up at the end. Not only that, but we have to play every few days against teams gunning for the top 4! Also notice that even though we are playing on Wednesday next week, our game at the weekend isn't on Saturday, but Sunday. TV once again shafting us.

This doesn't make any sense.

I am full of ambition to have everything I've ever dreamed of in return for doing nothing. It's not entitlement, it's not greed, it's AMBITION.

In terms of what we have seen this season, I'm in two minds about Puel, and can see arguments both ways. But what we don't know is what is happening off the field. Some of the reports coming out could just be rumours with little substance, equally they could point to a big problem. I imagine Reed would be quite stubborn in admitting defeat over an appointment, so if Puel leaves it will suggest a major problem and disconnect between him and the players (not just one or two), and therefore it will be the right decision to get rid of him. If we stick with Puel, it doesn't necessarily mean it's the right decision though!

Wasn't he one of the other managers we were tracking? Possibly even interviewed for the job?