I think West Ham defended terribly in the first half, the space and time given to us shocked me to be honest. Aluko is quick and their back line was slow as ****, a player with real quality would have punished them. Made me laugh that Aluko said in his interview on Match of the Day "Yeah we should of took our chances but on the other hand you aren't going to win games if you don't keep a clean sheet" What a prick. Maybe if he had taken his chances we would of gone into the second half with confidence and a lead to defend.
What's wrong with that? If you concede three goals in the Premier League you're almost certainly going to lose. He's spot on. Especially when two of them are absolute gifts to the opposition. He admitted that we should have taken our chances, of which he was to blame, among others. The criticism of Aluko here is laughable. Of all the players to have a go at after yesterday, Aluko? Really? He was rushed back, trained for the first time on Friday, yet he chased every ball down in that first half. He inevitably tired as the game went on and due to injuries he had to play the full 90. He made clever runs, beat people, and was our only player who looked like making anything happen. He set up Elmo who should have scored, he should have had a penalty but stayed on his feet and then passed to Livermore when he should have had a shot. I know everyone likes a scapegoat but Aluko is the last man to point fingers at yesterday, he was our best player.
He's one of those players who goes through the lower leagues on pace and skills. But he's so inconsistent in the basics like passing and shooting.
If you don't take your chances you are almost certainly going to lose as well, especially against a side doing as well as West Ham. By not taking your chances it piles the pressure on your defence, and as the game goes on the opposition grows in confidence. If we had gone in at half time 1-0 up it changes the whole manor of how we approach the game in the second half and also how West Ham approach it. It gives us something to defend, were as I think we all knew by not taking our chances in the first half, the game was there for the taking for West Ham.
So where's the thread lambasting Elmo for missing the easy chance that Aluko carved out for him? There were only actually two times when Aluko was through on goal. In both instances the chances were of his own making. In the first he was fouled and should have had a penalty. As I say, he was the only man who even looked like creating something. If you want to point fingers after yesterday, look elsewhere, Aluko was the best player on the pitch first half.
Aluko was good in spells but the basic inability to pass the ball within five yards and to read his team mates movements let him down time and time again. Again striker shoots when in the six yard box this guy try's to walk it in the net. He had one good half of a game in the last year. Hopefully someone saw how good he was for the first half yesterday and buys him. He's terrible basic skills he doesn't have and he goes down like a sack of spuds trying to win fouls just as much as Brady
Majority of our team can't pass for toffee so singling out Aluko is unwarranted. Again, Jelavic is our only player who can finish, so Aluko's really not alone on both of those issues. I'd agree Aluko's performances in the last calendar year have been poor and he's much better than he's shown. Once more though, I could say that about a lot of our players. As for him going down trying to win fouls, I wish he had yesterday. If anything, he was too honest. He was fouled in the box, I suspect he would've scored if he wasn't and as he was, we should've had a penalty and Tomkins should most likely have walked.
Hate divers Carmine. They're cheating ****s who should be carded straight up. That's the one flaw in Elmo's game, he goes down like someones shot him if someone gets too close to him
Aluko is worth what we paid for him.....absolutely **** all. Hopefully someone comes in for him very soon, and Bruce holds out for at least 6 shillings
