mrfahaji

Hasn't Silva been linked with Tottenham? Whenever I've seen him play for Portugal - which admittedly, isn't a lot - he's looked pretty poor and I've never seen anything to match the hype.

It's almost like every club has made some good and some poor signings. Who'd have thought it.

It's almost like every club has made some good and some poor signings. Who'd have thought it.

Well it works whichever way (except one) you look at it: Either King leaves, and Defoe is his replacement. Or King stays and Defoe plays instead of him. Or King stays and Defoe sits on the bench. They're not adding 15 goals to their side in any of those scenarios. Of course it's good to have back up strikers who can score, as we know all too well. If they both play, then there's more of a case. However, when I read a Bournemouth forum last season (admittedly, before King went on his amazing run), most were criticising Howe saying that Wilson shouldn't be playing and that King is excellent when played through the middle but significantly worse when played out wide. If that is correct, then the only way of getting both of them in the side is to play them both through the middle, which may compromise the team's shape etc.

Ah ok, fair enough. I'd also question who he is going to replace in the side, because it's one thing buying a 15-goal striker when the one thing you've been missing is someone to put the ball in the net, but if he's going to play instead of King, you've bought a 15-goal striker to replace a... 16-goal striker.

Have a feeling whelk's post was a sarcastic one...

I do also wonder if Puel was 'encouraged' to play Rodriguez to keep him in the shop window, and show that he was still a Premier League player. When he popped up with a few goals, especially the wonder strike against Bournemouth I bet the directors were rubbing their hands. It was a risk, as it could equally have demonstrated to potential suitors that he was no longer up to it (e.g. I blame Rodriguez for not seeing us score in the San Siro, boo!), but in the end a risk that paid off.

I think "massive failure" is overdoing it. I was with you for most of the season on Puel, and think it's possible that he might've done ok this season as well. However, do you not think it is telling that the club decided to get rid of him? Perhaps pointing to some issues behind the scenes? And even the most ardent supported of Puel would find it hard to argue that we stuttered our way to 8th place. I made a joke on one thread that 1pt from our last two games could feasibly be enough, and maybe we'd draw it 0-0. And that's what happened. I guess the way I look at it, in terms of points/position, is that scoring more points means winning more games, and that's why I enjoy. Would you rather, in a given week, Saints lost but went up a position because the team above us lost by a bigger margin, or Saints win but dropped a place because another team won by more that week? Scoring more points might not guarantee finishing higher up, but it does give us a better chance of it.

It wasn't beyond the realms of possibility. However, if there was dressing room unrest I think it was more likely to be a step backwards, or at least, in true Puel-style, sideways. I don't think the club would have taken his sacking lightly, so let's just trust they've done the right thing and hope Pellegrino is the right man to take us forward. I'm positive based on the things I've read about him as a person, but less so purely on his one good season with Alaves.

Everton will either not take the Europa League seriously, as Koeman has demonstrated he likes to do, in which case they will probably have another decent season, but will have fans questionning why they didn't go for it more in Europe. If they do get through then the Thursday games will probably be detrimental to their season, added to the fact it's difficult to replace a top class and reliable goalscorer, no matter how many possible options you bring in. They had quite a few games last season where Lukaku bailed them out, in the same way that Bale scored so many last minute goals out of the blue for Tottenham in his final season. You can replenish the squad with 3 or 4 players, but not many players are going to replicate those moments.

All true, although of all the facets of a keeper's game that have developed, surely standing in the goal and saving a shot from 12 yards is one which has changed the least? Perhaps the mental/tactical side of it has improved, and I suppose players are in general more athletic regardless of position, but if you compare a standard top division goalkeeper now to one 20/30 years ago, I imagine that 'shot stopping' would be one of the smaller differences, compared to other skills - most obviously ability to play as an outfield player.

I'm sure people can be coached to take better penalties (though in a shoot out there is a lot more that comes into it). However, what I'm not sure about is that Le Tissier is necessarily the ideal coach. Sure, he might be, but equally he had an abundance of technical ability that certain things probably just came easily to him. I recall him saying that he would often aim for the right corner and then if the keeper started going that way, he'd just adjust his foot and put it in the other corner. Not sure Gareth Southgate, David Batty, Darius Vassell or our very own Nathan Redmond quite have that level of mastery, composure and confidence in their locker, no matter who coaches them and how long they practise.

Maybe I should make more effort to read F365, rather an amusing read.

Quite. When he came back from injury the season before I felt he gave the defence a lift, and they had confidence in him - that he was a good organiser even if he didn't pull off many saves. In that sense he deserved credit for our excellent defensive record. Unfortunately the defence seem to have lost confidence in him now, perhaps due to his mistakes but also because of his uncertainty. For a big lad his hesistancy of coming out for crosses is astounding. There was a game towards the end of the season where you could almost tell someone had told him to be more commanding, which although positive, also led to a few heart-stopping moments!

Here you go: Chelsea (H) – Hazard, through his legs (and not in the way that, say, Sane's was through his legs) Palace (A) – Benteke, miskick. Tomkins, slow to throw himself at ball. West Brom (H) – Phillips, slow to get down. Burnley (A) – Barton free kick, slow to react. Swansea (A) – Sigurdsson, slow to get down. West Ham (H) – Obiang, slow to get down. Noble, slow to react (admittedly was difficult but he's still a statue even when the ball is in the net). Man Utd (LC) – Ibrahimovic, slow to get down. Lingard, slow to get down. Ibrahimovic, ball straight at him. Man City (H) – Kompany, straight at him. After watching virtually every goal we conceded, it is true that Forster (and Saints in general) did seem to get a fair bit of bad luck in that a lot of the shots we faced seem to be well placed or unstoppable. E.g. although technically it would have been possible to keep out Robson-Kanu's or Lukaku's strike, I think it would be harsh to include them. Equally I chalked off Giroud's header, as although I felt Forster could have made a better attempt at a block, it probably would have been a goal no matter who was keeper. A lot of the ones above are arguable, but there is a common theme that Forster's reactions don't seem to be very good, particularly when the ball is placed low. A natural problem for being such a giant I guess, but on the flip side maybe he should be better at keeping out shots in the top corners, like Kane's header (which I haven't included). I haven't included every placed shot either, just ones that I felt at the time AND watching again, that he was slow for. Son scored a couple of placed shots in the corner at St Mary's but on reflection they were taken with aplomb and only a couple of keepers may have had the spring and anticipation to turn them away.

I think our most exciting period was around the cup final, when we beat Sunderland and Watford, scoring 10 (11) times in three matches. It felt like Gabbiadini was the piece we had been missing and I genuinely thought we were set for a great campaign this year as a result. Unfortunately when Gabbiadini got injured, whether causal or coincidental, the season went back to being a damp squib, and even when he returned it felt we were going backwards, or at best sideways.

Seems odd that you're quoting that as a flawed stat yet claiming number of clean sheets is reliable evidence...

True, to an extent. Not sure statistics are reliable when looking at small samples or marginal differences (e.g. if one keeper has saved 24/31 shots, doesn't imply he's done better than a keeper has saved 21/29), but when the stats are for the entire season and they also support what people were seeing - a lot of people were complaining that Forster never saves anything before the statistics started cropping up - then I don't think they should be dismissed as meaningless. For me, Forster conceded quite a lot of goals that in isolation were not obviously his fault. Yes, he could have done better on them, but they weren't howlers. The problem was that there were so many of those, that eventually fans started thinking "isn't our goalkeeper actually meant to save these once in a while?" and then as a result people (including me) started honing in on every time he failed to do so, even if in isolation it seemed harsh. It doesn't seem like there's been any moves to seek a replacement and therefore we're sticking with him for another season, so I hope he turns his form around. Currently he is one of the weak links in the team and it's quite concerning if that doesn't change. His reported wages are also something of a problem, and a possible reason why no-one is looking to take him off our hands!

Ha, was just about to comment on the same thing. I would say that without the ball Puel was more similar to Koeman, but with the ball more similar to Pochettino.

As you say, like FFP, that's just another problem. Nothing is done about the teams already spending ridiculous amounts. If Arsenal can afford it, I don't see why they should be victims of a rule just because of the timing of its introduction.

Oh I love the principle of a team salary cap. But I'm not sure there's any chance of it unless it was a UEFA (or FIFA) wide thing, as each nation would want to remain competitive. Then there's also the legal challenge, I'm not quite sure of the specifics, but I think the NFL players claimed that it is an artificial restriction of their ability to get paid what market forces allow. And that's the NFL, a standalone entity, I imagine it would be more complicated in Europe. The draft is a brilliant concept, but it works because of the college system in the US, rather than teams developing their own youth players, and because the NFL (and I imagine the other sports, I only really know about NFL) has a constant set of teams. There's no 'pyramid', there's no relegation. I don't even think the playing field needs to be 'level', it just has to be a bit more even. Plus with less money going on players wages there might be just a little bit more to go to other areas of the game that need it. All a bit wishful thinking though, the Premier League have the power and they see the biggest clubs dominating as the best way to boost the global appeal of their 'brand'. (also my post about closing football down was a joke really, just expressing my disdain at the point we've reached...)

I know that a lot of the rumours out there are complete rubbish, but if there's any truth to Andre Gray wanting/expecting a new £100,000pw contract at Burnley, it might be time to officially close down football as a thing.

I did wonder if someone might respond to my admittedly flippant remark by citing John Terry as an example. Of course it doesn't render him useless as a player - Fonte wasn't exactly quick - but I would prefer to sign someone who does have pace. Having spoken to a Middlesbrough fan in my office, while he says Gibson is one of only two or three players of 'Premier League quality' in their squad (of which Adama Traore is strictly not one), he wasn't exactly falling over himself to praise Gibson. Not sure Maguire is blessed with pace either, but he does seem to have something extra about him that I don't see with Gibson in the same way.

I don't like to slag someone off for posting potentially interesting info, but if it is indeed total nonsense as some claim (and I must admit, I've yet to see anything unusual come to fruition), it does make you wonder - why do it?!

No thanks. No pace.