are we going to have to take a hammering to stop the Raylor experiment?

the old saying goes if it ain't broke don't fix it.

we currently have the best defence in the league and are unbeaten. but its been very clear that having Raylor at left back is not working. he's scored a couple of goals and we have points off the back of his free kicks in a couple of games.

however i think this is masking the fact that but for some very poor finishing QPR would have deservedly thrashed us.

Pardew ain't going to get that kind of rub of the green forever. my question is do we see him changing it before we inevitably get a hiding off someone?

its hard to drag a player off after 20mins in a game but there was definitely a case for it against QPR. I fear we're going to have to take a hammering before he changes things up. he also said we were being over run in midfield and that he should've helped yohan and tiote out but didn't.

he needs to be a bit more proactive. alex ferguson does the same thing too. only changes things after the opposition score...

 

He has to put Santon in at left-back. He simply has to.

 

this^^ We need to play the strongest team possible for the next 2 games as 6pts are completely achieveable.

 

R Taylor for right back as Simmo has been cack
Santon for left back.

Simples.....

 

I didn't see the game on Monday but people on here said Simpson had a decent game.

 

i actually thought simmo showed a massive improvement against QPR he's been dire up until then. hopefully he'll keep on his toes.

 

Trouble is he's(simmo) got no real competition at the minute. I would drop him for a game or two

so that he ups his game.

 

Something most on here forgot before mondays shocker, two awesome freekicks does not a left back make!

We may have kept a clean sheet, but to some extent our inability to retain possesion was down to Raylors inability to distribute with his left peg!

 

I would be amazed if Santon does not start against Villa. He played for the reserves yesterday and, by all accounts, looked good. Raylor was always just a temporary measure.

 

well yes you would think the fact that we signed santon would suggest he wasn't signed as competition to raylor but as 1st choice. hopefully he'll start.

 

Any more details on how Santon played and any highlights worth mentioning?

 

did a thread on the ressies but it's died a death seems people are more interested in fifa 2050 or dancing coppers than our reserves

 

well i'm interested. this thread is alive and kicking. give the low down in brief. any observations on Santon?

 

Santon has to start on saturday. Raylor has tried hard but isnt a LB. Sadly two good free kicks also dont make a RB either and after a decent game under pressure on monday Simpson deserves to stay in.

 

Santon apparently put in a very good 45 minute shift with the reserves, setting up one goal.

I think Pardew wanted to give him a run out in the reserves before starting him in the Prem. The fact that Santon only played 45 minotes might indicate that they wanted to keep him fresh ofr Saturday.

I would start Santon against Villa and expect Pardw to do so as well. As for right back, tell Raylor that simpson played a blinder and will be hard to drop, tell Simmo that Raylor is our leading scorer and would be hard to drop, and then see who shows the most in training.

 

he played for 70 mins and was replaced by Folan

 

Raylor can't defend. Never has been able to, never will be able to.

 

I think Pards is keeping him on purely for his free-kick and set-play abilities.

Whilst I apreciate his concern over the strike force, it is paramount that the team is able to function and retain the ball; Raylor is not conducive to this.

Perhaps bring him on the right-wing as an impact player in the late stages, with Ameobi up front to win a free kick.

 

Although in fairness I think this probably adds to his argument.

Sounds reasonable. Surely the display agianst QPR should make his mind up.

 

There is no reason whatsoever why he wont play Santon on saturday. He hasnt bought him to play him on the bench has he?

Pointless article to be honest.