Do Fulham get any credit for that, or were we just bad? As Fran said Poch admitted, we weren't set up right in the First Half, he put that right with some astute personell and positional changes, it is difficult to be critical when you get it right in the end.
It does suggest how important the manager is. MP says he set it up wrong for the first half...which means that ten (let's exclude Boruc) professional players carry on playing in an unsuccessful manner for 45 mins without having the confidence/authority to change things. Not criticising them...just an observation.
http://www.squawka.com/news/2014/02/01/post-match-fulham-0-3-southampton/2014020164019 Not a bad report, pity about the Rickiet at the end!
Agreed, but why is MP making it Wanyama v Cork all the time? Why couldn't Wanyama be used to give someone else a rest. I heard that comment and actually thought he was trying to justify a dodgy decision (or David was). I could be doing him an injustice though.
Fulham played ok first half. Despite Pochettino saying we had set up wrong, that doesn't stop players forgetting how to pass to a team mate.
It's amazing to think that we're getting our results against Arsenal and Fulham without any of our £45m worth of purchases (Osvaldo £12.2m, Wanyama £12.5m, Ramirez £12m & Lovren £8.5m) having any impact. Plus playing football better than anything in recent memory!
Fulham put out there all-defense team and marked Lambert out of the game. We had all the possession and were pinching them high up the pitch but we couldn't find any gaps. And then they were hitting us on the counter. MP pulled Lambert back some into a false 9-ish type deal, so it drew the defense up and allowed Rodriguez and Lallana more space to get in behind. I think we also pulled the defensive line back a tad. It's true that Cork is better in this role as due to his speed his is better able to defend the counter (and get the ball back and counter the counter), plus he also plays farther back than Wanyama who often plays more like a ball-winning midfielder looking to tackle at the earliest opportunity rather than a true anchor guy. I think Clyne and his quickness and ability to beat his man was also part of the strategy. Plus in Wanyama's case he wasn't match fit and had a yellow. And Clyne had fresh legs. But it really wasn't any one thing. It was no more Cork vs Wanyama than Lambert vs Lallana or Clyne vs Chambers. They were pretty basic tactical moves. I mean, all of us saw the problem, we just say things like "Lambert stinks" instead. These are the moves you can make if you have more talent and depth. Basically, we did to Fulham what Chelsea did to us. It does seem to be an ongoing issue with the side though, that we like to play a high line and dominate possession but we actually seem to do better when we open up the game and let the ball go back and forth. It lets us use Rodriguez's speed on counter attacks and Lallana gets more 1v1 chances. It seems like against better sides the press works well because they aren't used to it. Worse sides don't really care about the ball in their end because it happens to them all the time and they just boot the long ball instead of trying to play it out anyway.
Boruc 9 Chambers 7 Fonte 8 Yoshida 7.5 Shaw 8 Schneiderlin 9 Wanyama 6.5 Davis 8 Lallana 8 Rodriguez 8 Lambert 9 Cork 8 Clyne 8
When talking about Lambert don't forget that prior to Rochdale he was primarily a midfielder, and he played many games for us (Bristol Rovers) in a slightly withdrawn role. Marvellous player...it was a privilege to watch him.
If Rickie does go to Brazil, I just hope that all his fans, not just Saints fans, will be proud and rejoice.
