Might be reading to much into this but I think omitting Britton against West Ham and installing an inexperienced Amat into the starting line up might have been just enough to put the hierarchy over the top toward Laudrup . Am I just way off or did anyone get that feeling also . Without Britton in the line up yesterday against Palace I'm not sure we would have got a point , superb Leon.
Why start another thread about Laudrup , he's gone now & probably forgotten us . Leon MOM yesterday without doubt imo , never gave up lost causes as ever
Leon is the man. We could have done with him off the bench in Naples. Perhaps Monk should have played Amat in midfield against Liverpool, or Jazz, or Lucas, or Kenji Gorre, or one of the new Scottish lads etc.
Britton was on the bench yankee , I just got the feeling people in high places didn't like Amat starting this game as a defensive midfielder .This isn't just about Laudrup matt , sorry if it irkes you but I really think this one choice might have carried a lot of weight in decisions made days later.
Roofjack, Laudrup made a tactical and logical decision. Knowing West Ham to be a strong, physical side, he was looking to match them with the more physically imposing Amat. It was a sensible enough decision and might have worked. It didn't, but at least Laudrup was thinking on his feet and trying a plan B. But not all the fault was Laudrup's. Several players had a 'mare including the centre backs. Williams hates playing against strong, robust strikers who have a bit of ability. Carroll is one and Grant Holt positively salivates at the thought of playing against him. Mistakes were made that day which in no way were Laudrup's fault. Everybody in football, everybody who watches football, knows that Nolan feeds off Carroll..... everybody it seems except our defenders and midfield. Nolan was given the freedom of Upton Park and helped himself because no one bothered to mark him. Add the fact that Shelvey decided to go walkabout from his position on the post (something he has done before that also cost us) and you can see why we lost. It isn't as if Laudrup hadn't warned them. He'd been preaching all week about West Ham's physical, long ball game; he even geared training to cope with it. But we were poor on the day and couldn't crack 10 man West Ham at the end despite Laudrup constantly shouting at the wingers to give our attacks width. But, of course, it was ALL Laudrup's fault. As for being the final straw, I think the board had probably decided long before then that they wanted him out in favour of a yes-man. Just my opinion.
You can put a ten foot man out there and if he is totally inexpiernced to the position , it going to fail unless your lucky . Weve played years against teams without an "Amat " in front of defence and we did ok. Personally I would like a "Britton "in that position to pick up the scraps after the big guys jump for it. Britton would have brought so much more to the game than a simple "Jumping and physical " Capability. I don't think it went unnoticed to people in charge either that Laudrup put one of "His " inexpierenced and out of position players in instead of " our man Britton " who was born to play there,. I feel somehow Laudrup was sending Huw a message by playing Amat in that position against West Ham , and Huw sent a message back lol .
Putting Amat into the West Ham game in that position just wasn't the Swansea Way , sort of speak . Don't remember Laudrup every playing a man out of position if a man who normally played that position was available. Can you? Maybe someone in the know might know if there was a reason for Britton not starting besides tactical.
We can and have played well without Britton but when things are going against us he will continue to chase and keep hold of the ball. Other players tend drop their heads or get nervy and careless passes. I don't want to continue with the Laudrup thing but if Canas stays I think he could prove to be similar and a very good signing.
All I am saying is to playing an inexpierenced Amat in Britton's position , while Britton sat on the bench is highly unusual. If he put someone else like Csnas there I would have said nothing . Whatever was done , it certainly didn't work . A guy like Britton that plays that position for us is like the 4 middle squares on a chess board, hugely important in all directions
