The 8 games at home have been Arsenal twice man utd Liverpool man city Fulham Southampton Spurs We lost 5 and drew 3 The obly shocker out of those 8 games was Fulham last game of the season where every time they shot they scored ! this just goes to prove how the perception of our form can be mis placed. We generally beat the teams we are supposed to and generally lose to the teams we are supposed to ! why people think we should be smashing teams ive no idea, ive said from day one that id be happy to finish 17th in this league , some are expecting us to be top 6 !! delusion needs to be wound in otherwise we will end up looking like those idiots up the road We are Swansea,we are doing great, lets remember every game is a battle for us and on any given day we can expect to get a good beating off ANY team in the prem league, no divine right in this league lads
Can't disagree with that - that Fulham game was awful though. I really just want us to go to Southampton, scrape a point and then batter Sunderland. Get some form ahead of a few winnable games, including the derby. By the way, while I think some of us are raising our expectations too high, I don't think they're "delusional" as such - if you want to see delusion, go to the bloob board.
Maybe Cherry , but there are people that are expeting us to finish top 6 ! which is pure fantasy for me . we are an average team that plays tidy football and has one or two top level pro''s in the side making us better than the usual run of the mill sides . The level of disappointment and questioning of tactics tells me there are more people thinking we should be beating the likes of Arsenal than losing against them, even the match thread had only 13% thinking arsenal would beat us, I think that shows a level of over confidence and delusion that is slightly un healthy for a team like Swansea, we don't take defeats too well on here but when people start beating themselves up over losing to Arsenal and Spurs then I think it shows we are getting above ourselves as supporters . To win against these teams is the exception rather than the rule but a fair few IMO are thinking the other way around
Annoyed me too to lose that game. Not losing it, but the way it happened. Most notacibly, Bony not in the start 11. Laudrups recurrent theme of "our league" is irritating me. Especially since he says that, then goes out and puts up a formation that is clearly hoping to steal a point. Isn't that saying one thing and doing another? Surely, a free game like that would have you starting at home with Bony, instead of apparantly wanting to "play in Arsenals League". I do think Laudrup has a tendency to overthink things. The shortcomings of this team has been, shifting 10 players in a game and then getting hammered. And, putting out a start 11 clearly hoping for a draw against a stronger team, only to be denied by more efficient play. Both these events have happened more than once now. For me, the only way to beat Arsenal, Man U or Tottenham at home, is to believe it possible, start in an offensive formation and gain the initiative by going ahead. Then you can raise a home side storm that can tip the game to your advantage. Not saying you can win everytime, saying that it's where your best chances of winning are.
Opinions seem divided here and I confess I'm somewhere in between. I'm bitterly disappointed about the result because I felt we could beat Arsenal. It's about time we stopped revelling in this "little old Swansea" underdog tag. We are now in our third PL season, have beaten some top teams, can beat any team at our best, and no one in this division likes playing against us because they know they are in for a tough game. We are only a touch away from being a top eight side and with some fine tuning we can be just that. Arsenal punished us yesterday for two defensive lapses but, apart from that, we more than matched them for the rest of the game and they were hanging on at the end, much like Liverpool had to....... My view of the game will be a little controversial. I felt that young Ben generally had a great game (will become a truly top class player) but he went missing for Arsenal's first, which saw the striker having an unopposed strike at goal. Ok, it was a great build up with a cute pass from Ramsey, but the scorer was unmarked and had time to pick his shot. Also, Ben's delivery of crosses quite frankly is abysmal for a player at this level. He's not alone in this. Tiendalli, who had a poor game, was even worse. Will someone please tell me what is the point of having overlapping, attacking full backs if they can't even put a half decent cross into the box? (Ben's goal was something of a one off). And you can add Dyer and Routledge to the list of those who do not have the ability to perform one of football's most BASIC functions. Listen, I'm not talking about players having to make pinpoint crosses whilst on the run or under pressure. That IS difficult. But our lot can't find a decent cross between them, even after they've engineered a situation that allows a team mate time and space to pick his target. What usually happens? We all know because we all see it time and time again. The cross doesn't even cut out the first defender; or it's ballooned behind over the bar; or it's far too long for our strikers to get on the end of; or it's just scooped up in the air as catching practise for the keeper. For professional players, it's PATHETIC!! Remember, the skill isn't picking out an individual team mate, it's all about delivering the ball into a generally dangerous area. Shouldn't be difficult should it? My next gripe is about the pace of our attack. Too often the recipient of a pass just looks to lay the ball back even when there's room to turn and run at the defence. It's as though passing the ball takes precedence over incisiveness. Moving the ball forward at pace gives our game fluency and we all too often lose that by checking back and getting involved in yet another intricate passing chess game. Sometimes I find myself screaming at our wingers. They often receive the ball with over twenty yards of open space in front of them. Instead of pinning their ears back and running at their defender, they just jog up to him with the ball and wait for support to play yet another pass. Why? While this is happening, other defenders are organising, looking for runners and marking their men. Defenders hate being attacked at speed but we just don't do it often enough. Two more quick points. JdG had a reasonable game but his derisory, half-hearted attempt at a so-called tackle was a major factor in our conceding the second goal. I don't doubt this player's ability but I totally question his heart and his attitude. Quite what de Canio would make of him, I shudder to think. For me, he is a liability and a glaring weakness in our midfield defensive capability. Oh yes, I know he is supposed to be an AM but you have to expect better than this, don't you? As for Bony, I don't often question Laudrup's thinking as he's doing just fine for us. But I do on this occasion. It's the "underdog" philosophy again. I understand the need to recognise Arsenal's midfield prowess but dropping Bony meant that we were dancing to their tune from the off. Why not get them to dance to OUR tune? Arsenal don't have the greatest defence and Bony would have shaken them up from the get go. Look at his impact when he did come on and that quite superb set up for Ben. Michu would have dropped to his preferred deeper role and I bet with his energy, he might well have made that tackle that JdG took such care to avoid. We would also have had TWO potent attacking threats, with Leon to come on for either Canas or Shelvey if required. That made sense to me. Just my thoughts and opinions and, as always, I respect the fact that others might well differ.
I can see you r point , but Laudrup thinks it different and who are we to argue really, he has won us the first trophy in 100yrs by playing each team on a different tactical level from the last, his over thinking has probably won us more games than its lost considering we are poor relations in the premier league . Im not sure what people want, an all out guns blazing approach or relying on a a manager to think things through and make the best tactical pan to win the game, his plan may well have been to keep it tight then realease Bony on a tired defence for the last 30 mins to seal the win ? Truth is we don't know , im happy with our approach to these games , I believe we had more shots on target than Arsenal did if not shots attempts so were we as negative in this game as some are making out ? We didn't play badly and were unlucky to lose the game .
Nice comments Ivor but what with the" Arsenal not having the greatest defence " thing ? Once again it needs to be pointed out that Arsenal had the second best defensive record in the prem league .
ah yes , but not 3 or 4 seasons ago. ....and thats obviously relevant to yesterday . good to see some sensible posters who dont over react .
Norway, I think they are a bit like we were when Dorus got his record number of clean sheets. I don't think their back four is particularly strong - not weak but not the greatest. Their possession and midfield play protects their defence but they can look decidedly shaky when they are got at as a unit. Remember how we used to curse when our possession broke down and our defence was asked to do their jobs and failed? I remember posting about it often. Arsenal's defensive strength is in the possession play of the entire team but I think their back four are far from special and Bony definitely rattled them when he came on. As for Laudrup, I absolutely defer to his judgement, as you'd expect. That is not to say that I don't have a point of view that differs from his. He is a man for whom I have the utmost respect and I can honestly say that I can't think of another manager I would rather have. But he is not always right. No one can always be right in what they do. It happens that I think we would have been better served by playing Bony instead of JdG with Michu playing in midfield. We lost the game, so my argument has some merit. However, I fully accept that we might not have reversed the result with my selection and might even have been badly beaten. I don't think so but the maybes, might bes and debate is all part of the interest and fun. Incidentally, despite the fact that we had more possession and made far more passes than them, we still lost. What we gained in those aspects was all for nothing because we lost a lot of our scoring potential by not starting Bony. Just my opinion.
Well I can over react with the best of them mate !... All things considered though the swans are short of being able to beat top sides unless they have a bad day, that's pretty much been the way since we entered the prem league . Its getting harder for us to beat the big teams now because they look at us as a dangerous game and that demands they are focussed 100% if they are not they know they will come unstuck . that's my theory on it anyway, most fans of top clubs know coming to the liberty wont be easy, therefore its normal that the players think the same so make sure they bring the A game , whats your take gunner ?
You may not think their back 4 is strong but the stats don't lie , they have the second est defence in the league last season How they achieve it is irrelevant ,what I was pointing out that the myth that they can be got at is not an accurate one nowadays, they are good defensively because like us they control midfield, laudrup saw this as key to getting something from the game,not playing bony upfront. Michu has proven to be very handy at playing up front for us and seems a bit strange that all of a sudden he wasn't up to the job of leading the line, bony may well of added another dimension but we may have conceded more in the midfield area and that would have negated the supply to him a lot more . 6 of one and half a dozen of the other Ivor . Did we lose our scoring potential or did we gain more control in which to feed michu ,who was below par by the way, tactically I thought it was fine , as mentioned by others our final ball is where to lay blame if anywhere not anything else, that is just my opinon of course
Gunner, I don't think that anybody's overreacting. We lost a tight game against a very good team; one that we might have drawn... or better. We are merely discussing the pros and cons of the game at our level. We can never influence what our manager and team does, nor would we want to if truth be told. But it is interesting to swap opinions about all aspects of the game, which includes the opponents. I contend that your back four, as a unit, is possibly the weakest part of your side. Your midfield is the strongest and you have decent firepower up front. With that in mind, I believe we made a tactical error with our team selection. We set up to nullify and combat (I use that word in its loosest context in respect of de Guzman) your strongest unit, whereas, playing at home I believe we should have set out to exploit your weakest unit. Bony certainly helped do that when he came on and I believe that he would have made a difference had he started. Good game, nonetheless, and good luck for the rest of the season, bar one obvious game.
Good points ivor . But I beleive that laudrup thought the best way to get something from this game was to be conservative. I wanted us to start with bony but I can totally understand the reasons for not doing so.
Don't need hindsight to realise that playing Michu upfront is a bad idea. Would have thought last season from February onwards and every time we've done it this season would make that blindingly obvious to everyone, including Laudrup. Apparently not. Even if the plan had worked and we had completely blanked out Arsenal's midfield (which we didn't because Ramsey scored) then we had no outlet for our control. Our dominance would have been worthless because we had no attack to do anything with it. This is the point people keep missing. To do one thing we relinquish our ability to do another. Better to retain some of both than all of one.
Good posts as ever Ivor. Seemed you looked at the game as I did. I was extremely dissapointed more with the way we played & approached the match, than the eventual loss.. I can take defeat if we had gone about the game in a differnet manner. I don't think that is us getting above our station. It's about having believe that, yeh you maybe Arsenal & top of the league, but your at our place now & your gonna know it!!
Blindingly obvious you say? Wigan (H) 2-1 Man City (A) 0-1 Liverpool (A) 3-1 Chelsea (H) 1-1 Southampton (A) 1-1 Newcastle (A) 2-1 Liverpool (H) 0-0 West Brom (H) 3-1 Arsenal (A) 2-0 Noriwch (H) 3-4 <---- Graham Started Middlesboro (H) 1-0 Spurs (A) 0-1 Man Utd (H) 1-1 Reading (A) 0-0 Fulham (A) 2-1 <----- Graham Started Aston Villa (H) 2-2 <----- Graham Started Arsenal (H) 2-2 <----- Graham Started Chelsea (A) 2-0 Everton (A) 0-0 Arsenal (A) 0-1 <----- Graham Started Stoke (H) 3-1 Chelsea (H) 0-0 Sunderland (A) 0-0 So a 23 game run, of which we lost 4 games. Graham only started 5 of those games 2 of those 5 were losses Yes, BLINDINGLY OBVIOUS to someone who remembers what he wants. Facts are interesting aren't they.
See that's what I thought. All of a sudden playing Michu up front is a totally **** idea , im not saying its his strongest position but I am saying that he is good enough to operate up there. Other people keep referencing an apparent weak defence by Arsenal so therefore Michu up front should have done well right ? or at least well enough so Laudrup could combat Arsenals superior midfield . Nothing wrong with thinking we can do well at home against these teams but why should a certain selection make all the difference ? its not cut and dried that if we played with bony we would have smashed them!
How many of those games did Shechter or Moore start upfront? I notice that you seem to think the phrase "from February onwards" means to go backwards in time from there too. After Graham's departure at the end of January Michu was an almost permanent fixture upfront. We won just three more league games, and one of those was with Shechter there. He scored just six goals from February onwards compared to sixteen before, and one of those was against Bradford. Playing upfront doesn't suit him, and it doesn't suit the team. Attempt to excuse Laudrup's stubborness and rank stupidity for continually using him there if you like, but the facts and figures speak for themselves. Might be an idea for you to work out how many goals we've scored with him leading the line as opposed to Bony this season too, but I don't think you'll like the answer very much.
One thing that Ivor touched upon is pace of attack. I totally agree with this and its an area we need to improve on if we want to break into the top eight. When Man U and Arsenal break from defence they break at pace and in numbers.
I think Tiendalli was in part responsible for slowing our attack down but I can forgive him that as it was his first top level game .
