Are we a better side without Lallana?

[ottery st mary]

Lallana , Lambert, Ramirez and Puncheon will be first names on the team sheet..

 

With Clyne, Fonte , Yoshida and Shaw at the back...

 

Cork and Morgan in the Middle.

 

Boruc in goal...

 

There is your Ist Eleven at the moment...

 

Good to have Jay Rod , Guly, Davis (MF) JWP AS BACK UP SUBS ETC...

 

Anyone who wants to drop Puncheon or any of the above starting eleven is having a Larf.....

 

 

You can have variations...depending on fitness, form, opposition etc....but this is it when all fit...

Edited 2 January, 2013 by ottery st mary

[david in sweden]

OK then, * how many years will this regular feature in our team have to go without scoring before ** your lordship would consider that fair grounds for comment? He's signed until 2014 I understand ...

 

* for a start it's NA who chooses the team not me, and if the stats. are to be believed..he isn't anywhere near being " a regular " either, and as you pointed out yourself his contract goes out in 2014.

(by which time he will be 32½...ish.) I don't forsee any chance of him getting an extension to that contract - do you?.

 

He is however, some sort of a physical threat when played and despite not having scored is one of the few players we have with height and muscle when we play teams like West Ham and Stoke.

I will return to the "Guly subject" when he scores next time ..whichever year that is (?).......especially as we're supposed to be discussing Adam Lallana on this thread.

 

** thank you for the honour, btw but I noticed I wasn't on the New Year's Honours list this time either...so I'm still plain... " Mr."

Edited 2 January, 2013 by david in sweden

[david in sweden]

 

Do i really need to repeat myself? I thought my previus post was quite clear. Against the top sides and away from home then i dont believe we should start with Ramirez AND Lallana. It leaves us too OPEN and prior to Lallanas injury we'd lost every game expect one. Results seem to support this.

 

 

Aha !!!!!!

now I see what you mean, and you may even be correct in your reasoning, but I can't see NA leaving one of them on the bench every other week - can you ?

....and especially not the team captain...so we have the £12 million guy on the bench instead....is that it ?

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

It is, but not the only one. It would be different if he was playing the full 90 up front week in and week out. Instead he's been mostly left on the sidelines, and over christmas played out wide with defensive responsibilities. He's done his job well. If you disagree, and as others have asked, what did Guly do wrong yesterday? If scoring goals is the only matter that suggests a good performance I presume you feel that lambert and puncheon were poor as well ?

 

Think about it.

 

At the risk of being accused of bias again I thought that the Arsenal LB (Gibbs?) had Puncheon in his pocket all the game, but Puncheon on the whole has done well this season. Despite Puncheon have a bit of a mare and a stand-in RB behind him (Cork of course) we still looked more dangerous down that side - IMO.

[david in sweden]

 

It leaves us too OPEN and prior to Lallanas injury we'd lost every game expect one. Results seem to support this.

 

 

I think a quick look at results will show that (unless I'm mistaken) we have been reasonably successful in only the EIGHT League games where they've played together. Played 8...W3 D2 L3

 

Villa 4-1, Everton 1-3, WBA 0-2, Swansea 1-1 QPR 3-1, Newcastle 2-0, Norwich 1-1 and Liverpool 0-1....(in all the other fixtures one or other has been unavailable.)

 

When we consider our current league record is...Played 20...W4 D6 L10 it does seem that their "partnership " has been reasonably fruitful, and we've done less well in the other 12 fixtures when one has been out.

[Stanley Saint]

No. Guly's played well, but Lallana gives us the extra guile, creativity and danger to break defences down.

[Turkish]

 

 

I think a quick look at results will show that (unless I'm mistaken) we have been reasonably successful in only the EIGHT League games where they've played together. Played 8...W3 D2 L3

 

Villa 4-1, Everton 1-3, WBA 0-2, Swansea 1-1 QPR 3-1, Newcastle 2-0, Norwich 1-1 and Liverpool 0-1....(in all the other fixtures one or other has been unavailable.)

 

When we consider our current league record is...Played 20...W4 D6 L10 it does seem that their "partnership " has been reasonably fruitful, and we've done less well in the other 12 fixtures when one has been out.

 

Sorry, maybe i'm not understanding what your point is. As i cant see any WINS or even DRAWs against top sides or away from home. Please can you point them out to me.

[up and away]

I think what is evident is that if we play lallana and Ramirez, ie two flair players, against the better sides or away from home against most top half sides, it leaves us too open. We cant play them at their own game and expect to win, you've only got to look at our away form Pre injury to work that out. At home we can get away with it and when we have a lot of the ball and other teams come to defend. I dont think we can against the better sides. I think against these sides we play one or the other and set ourselves up to be a solid, compact unit and set out to defend well and be difficult to score against. Teams like Saints aren't successful by filling the team with attacking players, we have to be balanced and we will never get results against top sides by trying to outscore them.

 

Good OP, one of the best discussion points in ages. I would go further than what you are proposing in that Rodriquez, Guly, Lallana, Ricky and Puncheon are all droppable, even at the present for the greater requirement, midfield control. Having that midfield control against Arsenal gave us a good attacking base but far more importantly, far greater defensive cover. To gain that midfield control you will often need to go with 5 in midfield to compliment the base of

 

-----------Ramirez------------

------Schneiderlin---Cork------

Shaw---Fonte--Yoshida---Clyne

 

giving

 

-----------Lambert------------

----Guly---Ramirez--Puncheon-

------Schneiderlin---Cork------

Shaw---Fonte--Yoshida---Clyne

 

Ramirez just has too much skill to be left out but he is my only exception of the front 4. If we only need 4 to gain midfield control then Ricky looks a more automatic choice with another attacker to play alongside of him. That said Ricky is too slow to play alongside of Ramirez up front as seen by Ricky's attempts to get onto a Ramirez through ball. You only have to look back at Liverpool where Brendan Rogers packed his midfield to an an extent they severely minimised their own threat while cancelling ours.

 

The first PRIORITY is to get the right players and number into midfield to get the control, then make do with the best attacking options we have with what's left.

[david in sweden]

 

Sorry, maybe i'm not understanding what your point is.

As i cant see any WINS or even DRAWs against top sides or away from home. Please can you point them out to me.

 

......but we haven't had any wins or even draws against top sides .have we Turkish?...(unless you want to count one point at Stoke)...and they've only played in 8 league games together.

.

So...How can you reason that we are better when Lallana and /or Ramirez aren't playing together in the same match? ...as you see from the stats. on #106..

 

11 of our points have come from those 8 games when they both played... whereas we managed only 7 points from the other 12 fixtures..when only ONE of them was there.

Edited 2 January, 2013 by david in sweden

[The Kraken]

The amount of bold and underlining in this thread is giving me a migraine.

 

By the way, Dave; you probably want to include our point against Arsenal yesterday.

[david in sweden]

The amount of bold and underlining in this thread is giving me a migraine.

 

By the way, Dave; you probably want to include our point against Arsenal yesterday.

 

 

TNX.Kraken. These posts to Turkish get a bit frenetic at times - don't they?

[lloydie]

 

Saying 12 months of football sounds quite damning , when he's actually only started about a dozen games and had an hour or so of sub. apps in the that time. Quite unfair.

 

This. 12 months is such a simple (simple minds though, eh?) way of looking at it considering he hasnt been upfront for large parts of his limited playing time anyway! I agree with Turkish in part that we have been more solid as a team, but im not sure that is down JUST to Guly being in the side and Lallana out of it, as Adam's tracking back was also pretty good right up till his injury. I'd put large chunks of it down to Fonte and Yoshida having excellent games alongside corks reintroduction over the past month or so and probably some tactical tweaking on the defence and how we set out to play also having a part to play.

 

When hes fit i think Guly merits his place in the team untill adam can break back in to the side.

[david in sweden]

This. 12 months is such a simple (simple minds though, eh?) way of looking at it considering he hasnt been upfront for large parts of his limited playing time anyway! I agree with Turkish in part that we have been more solid as a team, but im not sure that is down JUST to Guly being in the side and Lallana out of it, as Adam's tracking back was also pretty good right up till his injury. I'd put large chunks of it down to Fonte and Yoshida having excellent games alongside corks reintroduction over the past month or so and probably some tactical tweaking on the defence and how we set out to play also having a part to play.

 

When hes fit i think Guly merits his place in the team untill Adam can break back in to the side.

 

 

me too. I'd go with that.....but will Nigel ?

[Turkish]

 

......but we haven't had any wins or even draws against top sides .have we Turkish?...(unless you want to count one point at Stoke)...and they've only played in 8 league games together.

.

So...How can you reason that we are better when Lallana and /or Ramirez aren't playing together in the same match? ...as you see from the stats. on #106..

 

11 of our points have come from those 8 games when they both played... whereas we managed only 7 points from the other 12 fixtures..when only ONE of them was there.

 

And both of our points against top half sides came when Lallana wasnt playing. So what are you getting at?

Edited 2 January, 2013 by Turkish

[Northernsaint]

Turkish,

 

This is an excellent post. I think that we are a more solid team. Good enough going forward but a ****e site stronger defensively and aerially with guly. I reckon either vs top four at home or top ten away from home we should start with guly on left.

 

We looked brilliant yesterday...

 

Come On You Saints

[DrunkenSaint]

Lallana isn't a winger really, he is much better in that position behind the strikers playing as a attacking midfielder but since he was playing on the left in the lower leagues we sort of think he is a left winger/midfielder. I really think we should only play him on the left if and only if we play a more 433 with 3 central midfielder's so he does not need to track back as much as one of the central midfielder's would cover (when i say 3 midfielder's 3 non attacking ones, like Morgan, Cork, Jwp).

[david in sweden]

 

And both of our points against top half sides came when Lallana wasnt playing. So what are you getting at?

 

I was merely pointing out that we have won the majority of our 11 points in the 8 games ...where AL and GR have played together...whereas we had considerably less from the other 12 games when only one was playing. I think we play well when both are on the pitch at the same time.....they are both very creative as I was lucky enough to observe when I was over and saw them both score v. Newcastle.

The fact that we don't win every game is hardly their fault as neither can be regarded as a striker, but our style is more creative when both play.

 

Are you suggesting that we shouldn't use Lallana in games against top sides in order for us to win points.? ....and only play him against lower sides....because that how your comment above reads...

[JustMike]

 

Sorry, maybe i'm not understanding what your point is. As i cant see any WINS or even DRAWs against top sides or away from home. Please can you point them out to me.

 

Don't you start

[The Kraken]

Are you suggesting that we shouldn't use Lallana in games against top sides in order for us to win points.? ....and only play him against lower sides....because that how your comment above reads...

 

Come on Dave, its not that difficult to grasp. Yes, against the top sides and especially away from home there is definitely a logical case to be made that playing Lallana and Ramirez in the same side could leave us too open. Its a perfectly understandable point of view. Our best 11 players won't necessarily cohesively fit into our strongest side for every single game. The dynamics will change according to who we're playing and where. For example, against Stoke NA dropped our most creative available player to the bench; that worked out pretty well.

 

Against a lot of sides in the league and particularly at home there's very much a case to play Ramirez and Lallana together. Against the better sides and especially away from home there's also a definite case to change things around and play a tighter, more discplined XI.

[Colinjb]

Almost certainly repeating something mentioned in the thread (can't be bothered to go back through) but Guly's work getting back and supporting his full back has been better then Adam's for me. That has helped us remain solid. Guly has impressed me since coming into the side (can't blame him for the own goal v Arsenal, he had to try and divert the ball, there was a man running in behind him who had every chance of tapping the cross in.)

[The Kraken]

Almost certainly repeating something mentioned in the thread (can't be bothered to go back through) but Guly's work getting back and supporting his full back has been better then Adam's for me. That has helped us remain solid. Guly has impressed me since coming into the side (can't blame him for the own goal v Arsenal, he had to try and divert the ball, there was a man running in behind him who had every chance of tapping the cross in.)

 

Spot on.

[Window Cleaner]

Spot on.

 

Guly actually looked pretty good in the tackle on Tuesday, something which you couldn't really say about Lallana. If only Guly could find his scoring boots (at the right end) again.

[The Kraken]

Guly actually looked pretty good in the tackle on Tuesday, something which you couldn't really say about Lallana. If only Guly could find his scoring boots (at the right end) again.

Yep, pretty sure our goal came from a Guly tackle. He also had a decent shot which Chesney tipped round the post. but yes, if he had tucked that one away against Stoke and not conceded the own goal, you wonder if more people would actually be talking about him as a genuine first choice option even when Lallana returns. Just shows how one mistake per game at this level can make a monumental difference.

[Thedelldays]

at least guly will have a pop from distance....no one else bar him and ramirez will do that..at times, we seem to allow the opposition to get numbers back whislt lallana or puncheon turn inside out trying to get space

[Giordano]

In response to the original question the answer is NO, we are not a better side without Lallana. AL is one of our best players. The side (if you mean the first team squad on matchday) is weaker without him. Take AL away for SFC and we are weakened, for sure. So, prima facia, the answer is NO.

 

I understand your underlying point though, and it might actually be a "better" team overall if AL was not playing, at certain times, depending on a number of variables

The variables are mainly:

 

1. What formation NA wants us to play.

2. Who we are playing.

3. State of injuries in the squad.

4. Playing at home or away.

 

Everyone who said that Guly has provided more cover for LS recently than AL had done previously are correct up to a point, but its an obvious and not necessarily accurate observation from which to draw the conclusion that we should play without AL more often - the formations adopted by NA and his instructions to Guly and AL are much more relevant frankly. I'm fairly certain NA tells AL to "make something happen" whereas he is more likely to say that to Guly but also tinged with " but don't forget your defensive responsibilities".

 

Frankly i don't think either are all that good at the defensive side of things but of the two id have to say Guly is better than Adam - basically because he's bigger,stronger and faster. Adam is smarter and has better vision and composure final third and obviously ball skills but on the defensive side- Guly wins. If we are likely to be doing a lot more defending than attacking there is a fair case for Guly ahead of Adam.

[Window Cleaner]

Yep, pretty sure our goal came from a Guly tackle. He also had a decent shot which Chesney tipped round the post. but yes, if he had tucked that one away against Stoke and not conceded the own goal, you wonder if more people would actually be talking about him as a genuine first choice option even when Lallana returns. Just shows how one mistake per game at this level can make a monumental difference.

 

Our goal came from a Morgan interception about 25 yards out, chest down and burst forward into the box, can't remember what caused the ball to be loose though.

[Colinjb]

In response to the original question the answer is NO, we are not a better side without Lallana. AL is one of our best players. The side (if you mean the first team squad on matchday) is weaker without him. Take AL away for SFC and we are weakened, for sure. So, prima facia, the answer is NO.

 

I understand your underlying point though, and it might actually be a "better" team overall if AL was not playing, at certain times, depending on a number of variables

The variables are mainly:

 

1. What formation NA wants us to play.

2. Who we are playing.

3. State of injuries in the squad.

4. Playing at home or away.

 

Everyone who said that Guly has provided more cover for LS recently than AL had done previously are correct up to a point, but its an obvious and not necessarily accurate observation from which to draw the conclusion that we should play without AL more often - the formations adopted by NA and his instructions to Guly and AL are much more relevant frankly. I'm fairly certain NA tells AL to "make something happen" whereas he is more likely to say that to Guly but also tinged with " but don't forget your defensive responsibilities".

 

Frankly i don't think either are all that good at the defensive side of things but of the two id have to say Guly is better than Adam - basically because he's bigger,stronger and faster. Adam is smarter and has better vision and composure final third and obviously ball skills but on the defensive side- Guly wins. If we are likely to be doing a lot more defending than attacking there is a fair case for Guly ahead of Adam.

 

Good post, can't argue with any of that!

[pap]

at least guly will have a pop from distance....no one else bar him and ramirez will do that..at times, we seem to allow the opposition to get numbers back whislt lallana or puncheon turn inside out trying to get space

 

One of the most annoying things about Lallana. I know he does so much good elsewhere on the pitch, but when you see a decent attacking move break down on the edge of the box with a workmanlike interception, you can't help thinking the leathering it goal ward might be the better option.

[The Kraken]

Our goal came from a Morgan interception about 25 yards out, chest down and burst forward into the box, can't remember what caused the ball to be loose though.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2013/jan/01/southampton-arsenal-premier-league-match-report

 

From 1 minute in.

 

Guly makes the block tackle from which the ball spins up and Morgan chests down and runs onto.

[pap]

In response to the original question the answer is NO, we are not a better side without Lallana. AL is one of our best players. The side (if you mean the first team squad on matchday) is weaker without him. Take AL away for SFC and we are weakened, for sure. So, prima facia, the answer is NO.

 

I understand your underlying point though, and it might actually be a "better" team overall if AL was not playing, at certain times, depending on a number of variables

The variables are mainly:

 

1. What formation NA wants us to play.

2. Who we are playing.

3. State of injuries in the squad.

4. Playing at home or away.

 

Everyone who said that Guly has provided more cover for LS recently than AL had done previously are correct up to a point, but its an obvious and not necessarily accurate observation from which to draw the conclusion that we should play without AL more often - the formations adopted by NA and his instructions to Guly and AL are much more relevant frankly. I'm fairly certain NA tells AL to "make something happen" whereas he is more likely to say that to Guly but also tinged with " but don't forget your defensive responsibilities".

 

Frankly i don't think either are all that good at the defensive side of things but of the two id have to say Guly is better than Adam - basically because he's bigger,stronger and faster. Adam is smarter and has better vision and composure final third and obviously ball skills but on the defensive side- Guly wins. If we are likely to be doing a lot more defending than attacking there is a fair case for Guly ahead of Adam.

 

F**k you and your insightful analysis, sir.

 

Trippie Trap Trollie has already told us that his six year old says Guly is crap. All discussion should have ended there.

[tajjuk]

Our goal came from a Morgan interception about 25 yards out, chest down and burst forward into the box, can't remember what caused the ball to be loose though.

 

 

Well really it came from a terrible clearance by Sagna, not sure Guly was inolved at all to be honest, think Morgan intercepted it, we broke forward and we should have created a chance from there but whoever was on the ball failed to get it to the completely free Lambert who was on the edge of the box and would have been one v one with the keeper. After the Sagna clearance there was a bit of a melee where Puncheon miskicked and then I think he stabbed it back to Ramirez (not sure Puncheons touch was intentional), who's finish was the only decent bit of play in the whole move.

 

Guly's workrate was excellent, at one point around the 70th minute I think, he was one of the furthest players forward when play broke down but did a 60 yard sprint to get back and make a tackle before Morgan or Davis got back, his workrate was top notch. His attacking play wasn't much though, an ok long shot and a few crosses that were a bit too low. But then he created two goals against Stoke and offered some extra height at the back.

 

I think in the last two games he has shown he's a decent option at this level and brings an alternative to Lallana but Lallana is a far better player and we look far more likely to score when he plays.

[Window Cleaner]

Well really it came from a terrible clearance by Sagna, not sure Guly was inolved at all to be honest, think Morgan intercepted it, we broke forward and we should have created a chance from there but whoever was on the ball failed to get it to the completely free Lambert who was on the edge of the box and would have been one v one with the keeper. After the Sagna clearance there was a bit of a melee where Puncheon miskicked and then I think he stabbed it back to Ramirez (not sure Puncheons touch was intentional), who's finish was the only decent bit of play in the whole move.

 

Guly's workrate was excellent, at one point around the 70th minute I think, he was one of the furthest players forward when play broke down but did a 60 yard sprint to get back and make a tackle before Morgan or Davis got back, his workrate was top notch. His attacking play wasn't much though, an ok long shot and a few crosses that were a bit too low. But then he created two goals against Stoke and offered some extra height at the back.

 

I think in the last two games he has shown he's a decent option at this level and brings an alternative to Lallana but Lallana is a far better player and we look far more likely to score when he plays.

 

Puncheon's back pass was intentional and beautifully executed, no doubt about that, right place, right weight,right on the ground. Looked easy but it was well done all the same. As for the initial ball from Morgan he needed to slide it forward but it looked to me as if RL wasn't quick enough so Morgs had to try and push it across and back around the defender so that it would be in RL's path and not in too far in front of him.

Edited 3 January, 2013 by Window Cleaner

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

F**k you and your insightful analysis, sir.

 

Trippie Trap Trollie has already told us that his six year old says Guly is crap. All discussion should have ended there.

 

My dear Pulp, it comes as no surprise to see that you too are a fully paid member of the Guly fan club - indeed I find this news comforting.

[pap]

My dear Pulp, it comes as no surprise to see that you too are a fully paid member of the Guly fan club - indeed I find this news comforting.

 

Not really. Right now my major interest is watching previously respected posters implode.

 

You may qualify. I just need to find out if you were previously respected first.

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

Not really. Right now my major interest is watching previously respected posters implode.

 

You may qualify. I just need to find out if you were previously respected first.

 

I just checked and no sign of any implosion as yet - sorry to disappoint.

 

As a big fan of Gods gift to football how would you rate Saturdays performance on the traditional 1-10 scale? I'm going with 5/10 by the way.

[tajjuk]

Puncheon's back pass was intentional and beautifully executed, no doubt about that, right place, right weight,right on the ground. Looked easy but it was well done all the same. As for the initial ball from Morgan he needed to slide it forward but it looked to me as if RL wasn't quick enough so Morgs had to try and push it across and back around the defender so that it would be in RL's path and not in too far in front of him.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gOOmSjBi7S0

 

Didn't realise it was Morgan, it is actually Guly's tackle that wins the ball. Morgan and Cork press Podolski back who passes to Koscielny, who tries to clear but gets tackled by Guly and the loose ball falls to Morgan. so.....

 

Yep, pretty sure our goal came from a Guly tackle. He also had a decent shot which Chesney tipped round the post. but yes, if he had tucked that one away against Stoke and not conceded the own goal, you wonder if more people would actually be talking about him as a genuine first choice option even when Lallana returns. Just shows how one mistake per game at this level can make a monumental difference.

 

Kraken was correct.

 

It then looks like Morgan tries to bend it round Koscielny with the outside of his boot to feed Lambert but seems to stumble as he does it.

 

Puncheons's 'pass' is just an attempt to control the ball IMO, he looks surprised that Ramirez is there but does well to get out of the way.

 

Terrible all round play though from Arsenal cause the goal from good pressing, Podolskis poor pass, Koscielny should have cleared, then Sagna should have cleared and then Vermaelen should have cleared from Puncheon.

[timayes]

I found myself asking a similar question to my mates a little while ago - I think Lallana was a luxury we could not afford back then - he offered little protection to Foxy, who lets be honest is no Cole or Evra and that was obviously an issue. Now that Shaw has come in, and performing as well as he is, along with the rest of the back four being somewhat more cohesive, I think we are able to afford the luxury of having a Lallana in the team.

 

Are we a better side without Lallana? I would say not, but given the performances against Stoke and Arsenal, WTF do I know?

[Turkish]

 

I was merely pointing out that we have won the majority of our 11 points in the 8 games ...where AL and GR have played together...whereas we had considerably less from the other 12 games when only one was playing. I think we play well when both are on the pitch at the same time.....they are both very creative as I was lucky enough to observe when I was over and saw them both score v. Newcastle.

The fact that we don't win every game is hardly their fault as neither can be regarded as a striker, but our style is more creative when both play.

 

Are you suggesting that we shouldn't use Lallana in games against top sides in order for us to win points.? ....and only play him against lower sides....because that how your comment above reads...

 

But our two points against top 10 sides have come when they HAVENT played together. We've also lost every away game bar the one against the bottom team, when they've played together. So does this not suggest to you that awaty from home and at home against better sides, we are better with one or the other, not both?

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

All Im saying is I cannot concede how you cannot see that Guly adds something to the team, to say otherwise is nonsense. Should he start every game ? Probably not

 

Will Adam start ahead of him ? Probably

 

But he is definately the best option we have to balance the front four right now, and if you couldnt see his value yesterday and against Stoke then there really is no point discussing, you have made up your mind, and cannot see any positives at all.

 

If you cannot see how a forward player can effect the game without necessarily scoring a goal whats the point ?

 

 

And if you cannot see that there is nothing inheritantly wrong, or out of order, in pointing out that a forward player of ours has failed to score in a year, then I don't know what the point is in speaking to you frankly.

 

Let me ask you, were you happy to see him miss a open goal at Stoke when we were 3-1 up? How about at least one decent late chance to equalise v Sunderland the week before? When push comes to shove this player just doesn't deliver and its costing us points we can't afford.

 

If Guly is indeed the best (sans Lallana) option we have on the left, then that is a pretty damn good argument that this is the area of the squad that most needs strengthening I'd say. Or do you disagree with that too?

[Turkish]

And if you cannot see that there is nothing inheritantly wrong, or out of order, in pointing out that a forward player of ours has failed to score in a year, then I don't know what the point is in speaking to you frankly.

 

Let me ask you, were you happy to see him miss a open goal at Stoke when we were 3-1 up? How about at least one decent late chance to equalise v Sunderland the week before? When push comes to shove this player just doesn't deliver and its costing us points we can't afford.

 

If Guly is indeed the best (sans Lallana) option we have on the left, then that is a pretty damn good argument that this is the area of the squad that most needs strengthening I'd say. Or do you disagree with that too?

 

Why was Guly so unimpressive, in your opinion, on tuesday?

[egg]

Why was Guly so unimpressive, in your opinion, on tuesday?

 

I think he's been asked that about half a dozen times now Del, but he won't/can't answer.

 

The best he's come up with was that Puncheon was apparently better and that Guly didn't score.

[pap]

It's typical Chapel End Charlie stuff, tbh. I don't think I've ever seen him concede a point. My take is that he wandered in here with what he thought would be a popular opinion, has once again made a fool of himself, exacerbating the situation with the usual personal insults that tend to pop up when he's under the cosh.

 

I'm only really hanging about this thread until he speaks for the entire forum. He's used this power before. I want to see how it's done.

[david in sweden]

 

But our two points against top 10 sides have come when they HAVENT played together. We've also lost every away game bar the one against the bottom team, when they've played together.

So does this not suggest to you that away from home and at home against better sides, we are better with one or the other, not both?

 

what is better..the number of goals scored /conceded? You lay the blame for our low points tally on the EIGHT occasions when AL/ GR played together...when neither of them is a striker !...and so why haven't you blamed our strikers; Lambert, Puncheon (and occasionally Rodrigues) for not scoring more in those games that we lost?.....it's hardly AL/GR fault when they miss shots.

 

In my earlier post I quoted a few stats. you haven't bothered to mention e.g. that we conceded 14 goals in the first four games ...before Ramirez was even selected until game 5, and at a time when Yoshida hadn't even started and Jack Cork was still injured. Quite a few of us attributed the revival of form to the return of JC....and the QPR away win .......a game when AL and GR both played

....and then they also both played in the Newcastle game and both scored .....and most of us agreed that we deserved to win the Norwich game.

After the defeat at Liverpool (how often do we win there ? ) ....Lallana was injured in Reading game and hasn't played since..

 

Teams at the bottom end of the table seldom win against top sides...that's why they're bottom ...(except for the ineptitude of a Chelsea side who couldn't score once...despite their 24 shots v QPR).

How you play depends on the team on the day..we were leading in both Manchester games, but our defence let us down, we were clearly better than Wigan..but they managed to score twice and we lost, yet we gave Arsenal a point when we were worth all three....when they had scored 14 in their last 4.

 

I really can't continue this post .....if you don't see it... I can't explain more, but the facts just don't fit your theory of not playing AL / GR in the same game.......it's far more complicated tah that.

 

If you want to blame anyone else......try Gazzaniga. I'm not criticising him because he's new, or young and untried, (and he does have talent)....but he's not PL quality and gifted Swansea a point when we'd all but won that (home) game ....and fumbled the shot that gave Norwich their point (again at home) ...four home points lost.

I'm not going to blame Guly to the same extent..at least he tried to stop Walcott's shot....but there was another 2 (home points) lost........and none of those were the fault of AL/GR.

 

If you really expected us to win?? at ...Man.City, Arsenal, Everton, WBA and Liverpool.....then I'm disappointed ....because I know you're smarter than that, and you're blaming the wrong people.

 

There are many varied reasons why we are in the position we are, and why we 've lost games but I scarcely see that you can lay the blame at the feet of our two most talented midfielders??

 

END OF.

Edited 3 January, 2013 by david in sweden

[Turkish]

FUlham won at West Brom, Villa won at Liverpool, Swansea won at Arsenal as did Wigan last season. You make out it's impossible to win there. I dont expect us to win there but we've lost at them all and taken one point from a possible 18 against the sides you mention. This point came when we didn't play with both Lallana and Ramirez.

 

I'm not quite sure what you're getting yourself at it for. Can we afford to play openly with a striker AND two attacking midfielders who dont really track back away from home and againt top clubs? Results suggest we cant. No amount of highlighting and underlining is going to change that.

Edited 3 January, 2013 by Turkish

[Thedelldays]

FUlham won at West Brom, Villa won at Liverpool, Swansea won at Arsenal as did Wigan last season. You make out it's impossible to win there. I dont expect us to win there but we've lost at them all and taken one point from a possible 18 against the sides you mention. This point came when we didn't play with both Lallana and Ramirez.

 

I'm not quite sure what you're getting yourself at it for. Can we afford to play openly with a striker AND two attacking midfielders who dont really track back away from home and againt top clubs? Results suggest we cant. No amount of highlighting and underlining is going to change that.

after the everton game...I was sure we cant play them both away from home at times....

 

we dont have to either...

[pap]

I don't really think it's about blame, although I'll agree that the thread title is provocative. You'll often see a different dimension to a team when key players are lost. Bryan Robson missed out on Mexico 86, and we faltered against Portugal, but then picked up afterward. Doesn't mean Robson was crap.

[Turkish]

I don't really think it's about blame, although I'll agree that the thread title is provocative. You'll often see a different dimension to a team when key players are lost. Bryan Robson missed out on Mexico 86, and we faltered against Portugal, but then picked up afterward. Doesn't mean Robson was crap.

 

Quite. It's not about blaming people, simply asking the question that are we a better side, well at least better equiped to deal with playing better sides without Lallana. It's since developed into a discussion about Lallana and Ramirez. The fact of the matter is we've got more points against top 10 sides without one or both of them, than with them.

[pap]

I think your point is fine without the specific comparisons, and perhaps a little diminished by them. The top teams argument is a good one, but most Saints fans have heralded the re-emergence of Cork into the squad and I think that one thing most of us can agree on is that we've seen both our play and players develop. I've never got the Guly hate; I've mumbled a FFS at the fella a couple of times myself, but then I do that with loads of Saints players. Especially this season

 

Clyne is looking like a good buy; Shaw has seemingly solved our left-back problem and I'd wonder who'd think Punch the billy big boll*cks now? Lallana is a fantastic player; still got some improving to do, but has improved loads this season already. The chap's clearly got skill and technique. I just wish he had a bit more confidence in his ability to get them in from a distance. Different league; better defending, etc, granted.

 

If only we knew someone who was excellent at banging them in from all over the pitch and was mates with Cortese, eh?

[mitch01]

Saw the thread title, no need to read any posts. The answer is 'no'.

[The Kraken]

Saw the thread title, no need to read any posts. The answer is 'no'.

 

Brilliant. Simply brilliant. Thanks for the insight; I'm convinced.