mrfahaji

Yeah I watched Paul Telfer and Matt Oakley do it too. Most professional footballers can. Picking the right ball at the right time while being closed down in the match is slightly different though. Not quite sure what point you're making...? Le Tissier may have done that on occasion but you make it sound like a regular thing - I don't remember seeing it and saw the pre-match warm up of virtually every home game during Le Tissier's career...

Perhaps controversillay, I actually think Vestergaard IS a better ball player than Bednarek, in the sense that he generally has better ball control and passing range. However, the same could be said about Hoedt, and like good old Wesley, Vestergaard seems to also have his moments of tripping over the ball or making a hospital pass. Added to the fact that he is so slow, positioning is poor and nowhere near the presence in the air that he should be, then I think it was a mistake to start him. However, I don't actually think the basic assessment of him being better on the ball than Bednarek is wrong. Perhaps you've highlighted the main issue we have at home in that Boufal (perhaps also Ings and Redmond) is one of only a few players who are adept in matches where the defence sits deep and we are forced to work in tight spaces. You have to find a way of playing around a side like Burnley if you're not going to go toe to toe with them in the 'battle' (which we aren't, lets face it). The likes of Long, Hojbjerg and Armstrong are well suited to our counter attack approach but not exactly the ideal personnel to play "in triangles" When our not-so-technical players are having to try and do it in horrendous conditions, it's just not going to happen (though I accept this game is hardly a one off). The question is then, what team and tactics would have worked against Burnley? I'm struggling to think. Counter account doesn't work. Quick passing game is not achievable. Long ball and crosses = Burnley bread and butter. Maybe we should have sat deep as well but that's then playing to their strengths too.

You know that this is a deliberate tactic? We intend to pass it between the defenders because Stephens in particular is seen as a key player in picking out long balls forward. You might not like it, but if you want us to stop doing it you will disappointed, unless you want us to change the entire way we play. I agree that at times it looks like a ridiculous tactic, especially when Vestergaard - who is actually half decent on the ball and at passing, hence Ralph's comments - decides to have his usual brain fade moment (reminds me of Hoedt in that regard actually), but there are also numerous occasions where it has paid off. But of course when you get caught out playing that way it's obvious and when it works it isn't, because you tend not to remember the 5 short passes between centre backs before the crucial assist. I think that's one of the areas where our fans get understandably frustrated but with a bit more appreciation of and patience with the approach might end up holding back on the groans.

The sad thing is I reckon Saints fans generally went quite easy on him - valued his eye for goal and generally wanted him to get more gametime. Obviously when he did well he was popular but even when struggling many fans were reluctant to get on his back. Over time his fitness/effort/contribution just got increasingly worse and even the most supportive of fans found it difficult to justify him starting games. His comments are more like someone who was a constant whipping boy of the fans, but it was far from it. He is clearly just a bit of an imbecile.

That’s fine, I understand the negatives, just don’t need to read them every 3 posts on every thread... Although I do share your concerns about January, what if the players we wanted weren’t available or we couldn’t afford them? Better to wait until summer than buying a substandard alternative now?

We look like a team that is well honed for one style of play (pressing/counter), but if the game isn't set up for that we haven't got much of an idea. Unfortunately this happens a lot when we're home to average sides. I do think the conditions played a massive part when we were 2-1 down though. Burnley were organised and pressed at the right times, which required our players to play with a bit more guile and sharpness. But we didn't - players like Hojbjerg, Armstrong and Long will struggle with that anyway but the conditions made it even tougher.

Your endless negative posts are pretty tiresome but you're not wrong with this assessment. The approach in January was clearly "we should survive this season, so let's not bother strengthening. In fact, we can afford to weaken our squad for some quick cash". Of course, that may yet prove to be an ok strategy, but sometimes it feels like we are playing with fire. I'm prepared to forgive it if we scrape by and do some good business in the summer, but I'm doubtful that's going to happen either.

And if they come and attack we will beat them. The way to beat us at home is to appear to be playing for a 0-0 and be ready to capitalise on the one or two (or more) defensive lapses we will inevitably have. It's worked for most unadventurous teams so far.

Might have to retract my previous statement. Nothing Burnley were doing made it hard for us to play simple 10 yard passes to the intended man....

As much as Burnley are a horrible team to watch, you have to give them credit for their defensive approach. They are well schooled at making it so difficult for teams all over the pitch. Of course, conditions like today really help them too, but in much the same way as when we get a result against the big sides they "seem to have an off day", maybe it's less us being bad and them being good today. Controversial opinion I know!

To be honest that has been the attitude of the club judging by what we did in January.

Doesn't really work like that though, does it? If it was 2-0 and then they scored I'd agree, but not sure you can extrapolate that if they hadn't scored we'd somehow be winning comfortably.

Sounds like the exact type of goal you would imagine Saints conceding against Burnley in bad conditions. If we thought they might sit back against us originally, imagine what it’ll be like now...

A bogey side in the sense that recently they seem to have had perfect Burnley conditions when they've played us. But really they just play in a way that we struggle against. We like to hit on the counter, they sit deep. We don't deal well we long balls, and that is their bread & butter. In previous meetings, but less so now, our players have not dealt well with matches that are more like battles, and again that's something Burnley enjoy. Whereas some teams can be inexplicably a bogey side or bogey grounds (Goodison...), I would say Burnley are a case where the reasons are quite obvious as to why we haven't fared so well.

1) I haven't blamed Romeu for the number of goals we have conceded. 2) I was at the game. He did lose the ball on a number of occasions. I like Romeu, I would like him to be in the team (if he deserves it), so I wasn't waiting for him to make a mistake so I could criticise him - in fact, rather the opposite - feeling disappointed/frustrated because he was demonstrating why he doesn't play as much! 3) See shurlock's response - was tempted to make that exact comparison! Of course you don't want your forwards to give the ball away either, but it's a lot worse for a player to lose the ball in a defensive position when the rest of the team have pushed forward. Surely that is obvious. Sometimes forwards have to take chances to get anywhere, otherwise we end up playing like a Pellegrino side going sideways and backwards purely to keep possession.

Yes that was a bad pass by Redmond, which was a shame as he had been terrific throughout. But most of the ones I recall from Romeu were before that, mainly in the first half. To say "we didn't concede from any" is a terrible argument - they led to scenarios where Tottenham went on the attack and could have scored. As I've already said, I don't think it's fair to use Romeu as a scapegoat, and have also said it might be down to a lack of match sharpness (i.e. defending him), but when you witness something happening it's hard to just pretend otherwise.

He did, but he was also the player most guilty of losing the ball in dangerous areas (i.e. when we had men forward and they could break).

I've always been a big fan of Romeu but against Spurs there's no doubt he was ponderous and/or sloppy in possession. He was always a tidy player but I wonder if that's because we used to play patient football under Puel (when Oriol was at his best). Now we play a higher tempo he struggles. I think he looks better when sit deep protecting the back line rather than pressing, because he doesn't recover quickly when going back towards his own goal. Of course, it could also be that he doesn't get a lot of game time at the moment and isn't sharp or used to playing the way we do. I don't think he deserves to be the whipping boy of the forum, but unless he improves he will only be a back up or used when we start sitting deeper.

While I do share your frustration a little, the January window is always tricky to get the right deals. If we were in the bottom three I daresay we would have signed some players because anyone would be better than no-one. However, with (hopefully enough!) breathing space between us and the relegation zone, perhaps it's better to only sign specific players. If they're not available, then this season no-one is better than 'anyone'. At some point of course, we do have to see some sort of plan coming together and I very much hope I'm right about the above and we have got a clear vision about our summer transfer targets.

Average at best, but still think he is one of our better, if not our best, current central defender. I really hope that Stephens' recent improvement is permanent rather than temporary...

That's how I feel - from a Liverpool point of view it feels like we have got them at the best time (relative to how they have done so far of course!). From a Saints point of view, also pretty good timing in that we will have some confidence from our recent displays as well as nothing to lose/fear due to league position. Not sure I buy into the idea a point is the best we can hope for either, that's only really the case if your attack is toothless, but ours isn't. My main concern is how important the players we are missing are to us (don't fancy Danso at RB...) And the referee being Kevin Friend of course, his display in the "Filip Djuricic" home defeat against them a few years ago still ranks as one of the worst I've seen.

Because it's Tottenham. Levy clearly wanted a ridiculous fee - which in fairness to him, he got for the likes of Kevin Wimmer and a few others I can't think of right now. I was rather hoping this was a signing as a way of covering our shortage of full backs. But if Cedric leaves that suggests he is the new RB and we haven't improved our cover situation at all. Slightly concerning but not wholly surprising. My friend (Spurs fan) said he seems like a good lad and is technically good but is pretty slow, short and weak. Funnily enough after we beat them 2-1 last season he asked me if Redmond was really fast because he was leaving KWP for dead every time. I had to inform that Redmond isn't particularly fast...

Imagine if we sold Hojbjerg for the same amount that we sold Mane.

If you mean McCarthy’s challenge, I’m ok with that kind of thing. It was aggressive but foot was down and he got the ball.

How is everyone watching? No streams seem to work for me anymore. Can't even get Radio Solent online! Relying on Radio London, at least it's Palace so I can get that!