mrfahaji

Wanyama was the ultimate destroyer in that he was athletic and as strong as an ox (not "the ox"). He had a decent touch and sometimes broke forward too, but his passing was pretty poor. Romeu sometimes gets caught out from a positional perspective, particularly when he's facing his own goal, and doesn't have the same mobility as Wanyama. BUT he had put in some heroic performances this year, never shirks a challenge and is also an accomplished ball player. For all our deficiencies this year, it's surprising that the loss of Wanyama is being highlighted when Romeu may run VVD close (or at least be a respectable second) for player of the year if the vote was taken now. I also think Romeu is capable of playing the lone DM in a 3, or even the godforsaken diamond. The problem is that we don't have many (any?!) good options for the two 'shuttle' midfielders, so Romeu is easily exposed unless we play very safe and defensive, thereby sacrificing any potency in attack.

Hallelujah, someone that watched the same match as me, thought I was going mad for a while!

I can't say I agree with much of what I've read from you on here but that is an excellent reply! Touché!

I'll give you that one... I don't think Puel should be sacked, because our team is poor (with a few good players), and that's down to the board. Plus Reed has said that if a manager is sacked then it shows a flaw with those appointing...

I cannot believe people are suggesting we bring in Adkins to replace Puel. Probably the same ones who thought we should have dealt dealt with our striker problems by bringing back Rickie Lambert.

He should have scored a second but I thought he had an excellent debut, our motm was between him and Bertrand in my view.

Seen one replay of since getting home, it looks like it takes a minor deflection but doesn't change path a great deal. Can disagree with any of your summary. How much of "what went wrong" would you put down to tactics/style? I felt it was more about individual mistakes and/or fortune (there were also a few times the ball didn't quite drop for us in the box), but given I agree with your points would be interested to hear your views.

Perhaps. A back trio of Forster, Yoshida and Stephens isn't going to instill much confidence. Centre backs at fault for first goal but they did improve. Stephens' distribution isn't great, makes a world of difference compared to VVD! However, while there are obvious obvious areas for improvement, don't believe all the comments on here about how bad we were. The second goal was a killer, but for most of the game we still showed signs of getting back into it.

There have been games this season that I have been hugely unimpressed with our tactics and style of play. The sideways passing takes any life out of the game. However, I really don't believe that is why we lost today. I feel people are reacting more to the result than the performance. My observations from today were: Gabbiadini looks an excellent acquisition and may well be able to hold the ball up effectively. He has quick feet and close control so the ball sticks to him and he can bring others in. Contrast that to Rodriguez, who was simply awful. The ball regularly bounces off him, he's ponderous and always turns into trouble. I'm not Redmond's biggest fan, and was disgusted with his last minute long shot, but he made a big difference when he came on. James Ward-Prowse is too slow to make a difference at this level. He tries hard but never quite gets there, and he isn't forward thinking enough to have much impact in the final third (although he did well to get a header in near the end). He's also not as brilliant at set pieces as people like to make out. Thought that Bertrand was arguably or best player today. Gabbiadini and Romeu were also decent. Davis was ok but can't shoot for toffee and we lose so much from not having a goal threat from midfield. We've known this for a long time. West Ham were not particularly good today - I certainly didn't see them "bullying" us in a more professional display until the last 20 minutes when they sat back on a two goal lead and we were tiring - just as Swansea weren't that good on Tuesday, but they were both able to score against us without working especially hard for it. This isn't because our tactics allowed them to cut us open at will, but rather because we have a handful of weak links in the team that cannot be depended on for 90 minutes. Stephens & Yoshida weren't too bad but they were poor for the equaliser. The second goal should never be going in but Forster is so slow, just as he was for Sigurdsson's makeshift volley, and the third goal was a bit lucky but nevertheless got absolutely no reaction from Forster who was rooted to the spot. Had Forster been in goal for West Ham at least two of our shots would have gone in. I don't disagree that our style of play could be better at times, and I'm certainly not convinced that Puel is the right manager, but I really cannot believe how many people immediately lay blame for today's defeat at his feet when we have glaring weaknesses all over the pitch, but particularly at GK, CB and CM. the spine of the team. Great. Puel cannot be held accountable for not having good enough players, unless it's for team selection.

I thought Davis was decent today in his overall play. Unfortunately he plays as the most attacking central midfielder and is shocking at shooting. Would make such a difference if he could relied on for at least 5 goals a season. Unfortunately JWP seems like a rabbit in the headlights when he gets in front of goal and Hojbjerg makes Davis look like Aguero!

We have played a lot worse than that this season, and will play a lot worse in future games. I think people are massively underrating the importance of quality players. Most of the good things we did came from Gabbiadini, Boufal, Romeu and Bertrand.

Just home from the game. Obviously a gutting result, and plenty of reasons for concern. But I didn't spend the whole game annoyed at how bad we were. In fact it was more dejection at how we could be 3-1 down despite West Ham barely having any attacks. We weren't bad against Swansea in the second half, and we weren't bad today. However the other team gets a sniff of goal and it goes in. Of course it's going to be difficult to get back into it 2 goals down, but even then we had a couple of chances to make a game of it. Randolph pulled off a few decent (without being incredible) saves that Forster would have conceded.

On the way back from the game. Maybe Puel should take responsibility for playing JRod who was inept, but he also threw Gabbiadini in who was excellent. Ultimately it wasn't tactics or style why we lost today. West Ham barely had an attack and yet we conceded three goals. What is Puel meant to do about the fact a team doesn't need more than a half chance to score against us?

Excuse my ignorance, but why are people referring to Gabbiadini as "Barry"?

Apparently Bertrand is going to be playing centre back tomorrow? Casts some doubt over the "Puel has been impressed with Stephens and thinks he is better than anyone we could have signed", doesn't it?

They even conceded one against Southampton!

You're right, luckily for us that team is Premier League champions Leicester City I don't think we'll go down, but we are of course at risk of being dragged into it. Who knows, we might turn it round and many of our concerns will prove unfounded, but there at least looks a decent chance of our season getting worse, not better (except from the final obviously), and when the 'best of the rest' is probably Everton, who aren't even very good, that's both sickening (because it's Everton) and frustrating (because we could easily be in that spot with a bit more assertiveness).

I think everyone appreciates there will be people with similar circumstances to yours, and will no doubt wish you good luck that a ticket will somehow find it's way to you! However the OP is a pretty shameful post considering how many people on here are waiting in line with their fingers crossed under the legitimate stages. But then, I suppose you always get some people who think it's acceptable to drive past a queue of traffic and sneak in right at the front of the line, because somehow they deserve to be exempt from the rules that everyone else is trying to follow.

Agreed! If you give it to a family member or friend, that's understandable, but to give it to a random, surely that's no different (well, worse) than letting the next 'random' person in the queue go.

I said "It feels like" because it's how it seems to me. How would I have 'evidence' of someone having a personality trait? The success we have had over the past few years is the reason why I have generally been part of the 'happy clapper' brigade, if there were only two such camps allowed on here. I'm also on the side of Puel being given a better chance and having time to improve our style of play and results - which is part of the reason I am unhappy with the board, as it would good to know whether Puel is good enough, and without the players at his disposal we'll never really know. I have laughed at people who have said things like "the semi final good work undone because of the Arsenal result". I don't even have a gripe with us selling our best players all the time because I understand that is our business model, even if it does make me feel a bit dejected after a while! But, most of us have seen for a long time what areas of the squad has needed to improve. Another striker, someone to replace Fonte when he gets too old, and someone who can make runs/score goals from central midfield. This has been the case since the summer (or longer) and yet we've waited until the last day of January to deal with the first point, the second point became even more pressing once Fonte threw a hissy fit in the summer and we still didn't address it, and still haven't done anything about the fourth. We have seen encouraging signs from the academy players, and there are still some players that we need to wait a bit longer to see how they pan out, but surely it's fair to question the board when they have failed to address the areas that virtually every supporter can see need addressing? If people want to defend the board and say they're not unhappy with them, or they have earned goodwill etc, that's fine, but at the same time I don't think people criticising them are way out of line either.

Alderweireld was a centre back, that episode was a fiasco too. For the last couple of seasons the overriding feeling of our transfer business is that we have failed to do enough rather than failing to find the right players (although there is that a little too). It feels like the couple of seasons that we did exceptionally well has given Reed false confidence that he can do no wrong, as well as the hugely optimistic view that we can just rely on our academy players instead of improving the squad. It's frustrating because we're not that far off being decent, certainly for cementing our place as the 'best of the rest', but instead we are treading water or even slowly declining. There have been positives this season of course, but there's definitely a sense of the board resting on our laurels too.

That's part of the frustration though. Yes we are generally well run - heaven knows the club put out enough statements to convince us of it - but they've dropped a clanger here, and it's not the first time in recent memory. IF the club is as well run as it makes out, then they wouldn't be scrambling around in the dying hours of 31 January trying to get a deal sorted for Jordi Amat.

What are the chances that when Manchester United need an equaliser against Watford, the latter will find one of their players being sent to the sin bin for an innocuous offence?

How many of Yoshida, Stephens, Gardos, Hojbjerg, Clasie, Ward-Prowse, Davis, Rodriguez, Long & Redmond would walk into those teams? I'm not saying these are bad players by any stretch, but they are nevertheless players currently in our first XI, or at least the first substitute option. Equally, how many players from those teams would get into ours? Not many, but certainly a handful would compete for, or earn, a spot. The difference is we have a small group of players that, when on song, play at a very high level. Unfortunately van Dijk is injured, Tadic is woefully out of form, Austin is injured and Boufal has been injured a lot. Even Romeu, who has been fantastic, is prone to lapses when it comes to defensive positioning.

But don't we also save the wages of the player we've sold? Plus, the money the club earns is not limited to transfer fees, Premier League clubs also earn a shedload of TV Revenue nowadays. I'm also happy with the general principle of not spending more than we earn btw, just think that this way of looking at it means there will be more and more leftover.