For me Ruiz is too reliant on his left foot, if only he could train so that it he could use his right foot more to make it difficult for the opposition.
Don't forget that the game was flat, there was no atmosphere, pitch not good and they missed a pen. Pulis'words not mine. He clearly didn't see the two assaults during the game either. I wanted the post match interviewer ask him about them. That would have put him on the spot.
In another interview he'd [conveniently] not seen either incident [ala Wenger]. Looking at the Stoke board there are quite a few getting frustrated with him. I was hoping that, after establishing Stoke in the Prem, they would no longer still need to resort to such basic play. Stoke deserving nothing from the game - A real pity - Their fans deserve better. C O Y W
No doubt when Huth gets a 3 match ban he will come out with the same dross as when Shawcross broke Ramsey's leg. 'He's a nice lad, that's not in his character to intentionally hurt another player'
Interesting points- on Dejegah, I wasn't singling him out for slowing up play, more just for the fact he lacks pace- despite being a direct runner. I think it is Ruiz who slows it up and with Berba dropping deep the options are limited to sideways or backwards. I think Petric could be key to getting things going, he plays more on the shoulder and could compliment Berbatov well. Ruiz is heavily left footed, as mentioned above, and I've always thought he looked best on the left hand side. If we shift him out there he gets more time on the ball and the option to shift it left, away from the player and on to his better foot. In the middle he is turning into someone. On Senderos and Crouch, I noticed too that we just dropped off Crouch not long into the first half. I can't think of one occasion Crouch was up against Hangeland- he was on Senderos most of the game. Fortunately Crouch is a sporadic threat so in some ways dropping off wasn't a terrible tactic- he didnt do much with the possession. I think Karagounis has somewhat supplanted Hangeland as de-facto leader and crowd favourite, but in someways this has benefited both players game. Hangeland looked absent toward the end of 2012 but has been back in form recently. He didn't suit captain well but deserved it on the basis of his service. Karagounis isn't a long term solution but you can't help respond to his enthusiasm. I think the senior players recognise there is no malice in it and he is just being Greek. The more I see him the more I think of Lubo Moravcik- not in terms of style but that they both came to the UK late and proven to be very good players- I'd love to have seen him more closely in his prime.
Here is a link to video highlights of the game - http://www.fulhamfc.com/news/2013/february/25/stoke-highlights
Agreed and also the points silkship makes about him. On a general point about 'feet', the whole team is predominantly left footed which is why Jol has limited options and why he so often plays people out of position.
On match of the day they said that without Berbatov we would be in the relegation zone. Now I don't think that is strictly true. We started our season well without him, admittedly with Dembele, but with his arrival we have adjusted our play and the players around to suit him. I am a Berbatov fan but I think without him, Petric, Ruiz, Rodellega etc and a different style of play may well have suited us better. There advantages and disadvantages with having Berbatov and the press to love to portray us as a one man team. Headline "Berbatov makes the difference" He does though give Fulham a more interesting profile. In the past we have worked the wings well but often this season there is never anyone in the box to receive a cross and the ball is held up. Frustratingly we then pass it sideways and then back to the goalie and it all seems a great effort. We will never know, but as much as I like him, my feeling is that we may actually have been better off without him.
On match of the day they said that without Berbatov we would be in the relegation zone. Now I don't think that is strictly true. We started our season well without him, admittedly with Dembele, but with his arrival we have adjusted our play and the players around to suit him. I am a Berbatov fan but I think without him, Petric, Ruiz, Rodellega etc and a different style of play may well have suited us better. There advantages and disadvantages with having Berbatov and the press to love to portray us as a one man team. Headline "Berbatov makes the difference" He does though give Fulham a more interesting profile. In the past we have worked the wings well but often this season there is never anyone in the box to receive a cross and the ball is held up. Frustratingly we then pass it sideways and then back to the goalie and it all seems a great effort. We will never know, but as much as I like him, my feeling is that we may actually have been better off without him.
A perfect example of why I'm boycotting MOTD. I don't agree with the notion that we would be better off without Berbatov. I do see the logic in that we may have a more 'even' style of play without him in the team, but if we'd not signed him - having lost Dembele - on deadline day then we'd have been in trouble. He's not always firing on all cylinders but there's always a chance he'll win you a match, as we saw on saturday. We're not a one-man team but Berbs gives us an edge not many teams around us have.
This has an element of truth as the team showed against Utd at the Cottage. We played some good football. But as Bidley says give us the edge against similar size teams. Not always though! Only when he is interested and playing his role as forward.
Yes, Berbatov is a class apart, but we also have to compromise our play for his advantage - and quite rightly so. Perhaps we could say the same about others, for example playing with Clint did compromise the style of others, but that's football. C O Y W
