We don't have to be Man City to have to play attacking football instead of the turgid stuff dished up at the moment. This current set up is clueless. There are players getting paid enough money to be capable of playing in a certain way if allowed by the management. We have a squad far better than we are playing but is being totally mismanaged.
Yes but ... I'm talking about someone more like SRL & Pelle, Gabbi isn't the right guy when we arent playing well, doesn't win much in the air And none of our AMs are direct enough or have a real shot in them We rely too much on fancy-pants football and as Burnley showed, other teams can applaud our silky skills and then runn up the other end and bosh it in the net I found us highly entertaining up to 70mins but, no cigar I want entertainment, I'm not a results only man, but points win prizes
Disappointed with result, but wouldn't call the football turgid....at least in this game. Plenty of excitement with attacks and crosses into the box. Turgid to me means you lose all interest and start texting your Mum....this was a game you had to keep your eye on. They defended in numbers. Wouldn't put any money on it, but would be interested to see how we do against clubs with more attacking ambition*. *Not criticising Burnley...they played in the way that works for them, but do have to point out how our fans would moan if we played like that. MP2 was positive and put on players to win the game....he could have defended the game out as well.
Don't think our fans would moan if we had the resources of Burnley and get the results they are currently getting Fran. The point is we are well resourced and are looking like we are rudderless with a clueless manager and a director of football who seems bullet proof. From the position we were in a couple of years ago we are in danger of blowing it big time.
They all seem to be of the opinion that the only options are Moyes/Rodgers/Allardyce/Adkins or Eric Black. What a bunch of morons Except for the guy who thinks we should give Ancelotti £200m in January to spend
I’ve said before that, IMO, our inability to break through defences is because we pretty much attack in the same formation as we defend. There is no random, off the ball movement from any of our players, dragging defenders out of position to create space for others. It’s this lack of movement that makes us so predictable and easy to defend against, which is why I briefly became excited, yesterday, when Bertrand was trying to get on the end of a cross, because he was in an unexpected area. One incident highlighted why we aren’t able to hit teams, quickly on the break. During the first half, Burnley made one of their rare visits to our penalty area. We regained possession and launched the ball long, to Gabbiadini in the centre circle. Gabbiadini was immediately surrounded by 4 Burnley players, with no Saints player anywhere near. Effectively we had 9 players back to defend a 6 man Burnley attack, meaning that we would never be able to hit them on the break. In a nutshell, we are too cautious.
I've got no problem bringing Ron back, but I've got no idea why anyone would think we'd have to go grovelling. He's hardly man of the moment.
I actually think Rodgers would do a decent job here, however unpopular an appointment he might be at the start.
Refer to Romeu's interview earlier int he week. All of what you wrote sounds right when you are asking players to defend while they are attacking. If your job is to stay close to the opposition so you can shut down breakways it becomes impossible to move into dangerous positions. Its not actually possible to do both. I've made my mind up about Pellegrino. He will get us relegated. I hope I am wrong but there needs to be a seismic shift for things to turnaround and I cannot see it happening.
We know that, and so should MP2, but he still plays to Gabbi's weakness., which is in the air. Play a good ball along the deck to Gabbi and there's a decent chance he will score. Austin and Long are not target men or in any way prolific and our crossing can best be described as really crap
I think I'd agree with that. I dont think he was popular with the players we had, I know he wasnt popular with the fans for leaving the way he did. I think he's a hypocritical money grabbing twat. I think he would do a better job than Pellegrino and I would take him back if offered the choice.
Archers; as soon as SD brought on two strikers l was worried; it showed intent and suggested the was a Plan B coming into action. We only seem to have a Plan A and not so gooder one at that. What we do lack, along with creativity, is a Plan B; we are so predictable and the pace we play at is so pedestrian.
The board get battered for appointing the wrong type of coach and then fans start wishing for the return of someone who has just failed in his job and would possibly make a short term improvement, but actually played some pretty dire stuff when he was here. Please don't ever make us a community or fan run club.
