Re-watched the game!

Just re-watched the game after being savage about it yesterday!
Have to say that I didn't think Perch or Simmo played badly. Apart from set pieces they defended well. I think Perch has come in for some stick yesterday that wasn't justified the only criticism was in the first half when he was brushed off the ball by holt!
Yeah we were always going to struggle on set pieces and Grant Holt won every header for the goals (Bar the first) (Shola's man) and Gosling was at fault for the third!
I was dissapointed we started with Shola as even though I thought he was ok going forward (decent hold up play) I think it played into their hands and defensively he was poor at set pieces. I felt we should have played 5 across the middle and given Ben Arfa a free role.
I think Shola's work rate really lets us down as a team and he is starting to look like Jon Parkin. I really hope Pardew rates best ahead of him.

 

I don't understand why we had so much bloody bother with Holt. He's only 6 foot. The guy is hardly a giant. Perch is only an inch shorter, and Shola is two inches taller.

I know he's a strong stocky bloke, but we had far less problems with the 6ft 7in Crouch when it came to set pieces.

 

Completely agree. I just think we're giving Perch a bit too much stick!
I think (Might be wrong) but watching it Shola was man marking Holt.
I don't hate Shola and I think at times he's really effective, however we picked him for a defensive reason yesterday which I thought was the wrong decision!

 

Agreed. What was wrong with jumping with him as opposed to giving him free headers?

 

Shola's fault imo. He was brought in to provide that height advantage in set pieces but he just didn't bother his ****ing arse to get stuck into the headers with Holt. His laziness strikes again.

 

Yeah completely agree we picked shola to help with the set pieceses, we all knew holt would be the main threat, if he wasn't marking Holt then either the management got it wrong or he shouldn't have played.
However, going forward he did have 5 or 10 minutes of good play.

 

Or the defensive organisation wasn't there? Targetting Shola as being at fault for us conceding four goals is pretty short sighted when picking up all round was horrendous yesterday. Four free headers aren't all Sholas fault.

 

What I'm saying is I think we picked him for a defensive reason. This reason surely would have been to combat their biggest threat from set plays (Holt) he won 2 if not 3 headers for the goals. What I'm saying either Shola wasn't picking him up or Pardew shouln't have played Shola if he wasn't their to combat Holt.
Shola was definitely at fault for the last goal if not the 2nd too.

 

I think second guessing our man marking system is a very lazy way of apportioning blame. I saw one where Sholas man gets away, as a centre forward thats not the worst performance in the world. Defensively we were a mess all round, no leadership, no commitment. You can't blame a centre forward for that.

 

Are you on crack?!

Shola was our best player. He was immense. I think he gave the ball away once in the whole game. He was at fault for the second goal, but since when is he a defender.

 

Shola was decent, but nowhere near our best player. Ba and Cabaye were the only ones who looked like rescuing us.

 

Agree 100% he is bone idle, Sunderland still getting beat by the way

 

I think he's lazy as. One or two touches doesn't make a match. Ba was by far our best player followed by Cabaye. What I'm saying is that he was ok as a centre forward, but I think he goes against our whole persona of working hard as a unit he's lazy and fat now. There has never been a question of his talent but his work rate is crap. Definitely the second and also the last goal were his fault.
Our good spells both this and last season have come when shola is replaced by best who works his bum off.
He was picked to counter there attacking threat with his height and even though he's not a defender that is why he started.

Completely agree this is all speculative btw he may not have been marking Holt but it certainly looked like it for their second and fourth.

 

Shola couldnt have done anymore in that match going forward. He was strong. Held the ball up. Won the ball back for our second goal with a perfect through ball.

He let us down with his lack of marking skills. Get over it. Our defenders should be responsible for this primarily.

 

Are you for real?

He was bollocks for a FULL hour and provided absolutely no attacking threat. Waking up in the last 10-20 minutes is not good enough.

Did he even have a single shot on target during the entire game? He is a STRIKER, you know.

 

He is identical to Kevin Davies in the way he plays. He might not be massive, but he is much better at heading than the likes of Peter Crouch.

 

One of the reasons he started was because we had no big players to mark Holt and Morison, Shola and Demba were supposed to do this.

 

Really don't think he offers us much when playing up top with Ba. Nothing that best wouldn't have done and far less mobile. He was neat with the ball and did well in hold up.
As for the second point again speculative but I think this is one of the main reasons he was picked to help out our defenders at set pieces and he was poor.

 

Best does Shola's job better IMO, and the link up with Ba is a lot better.

 

Haha. You lot dont know a very good shift up front when you see one.

Shola was class.

I think you lot take what Shola does for granted. Name me one other big striker that could have held the ball up as impressively as he did yesterday with also skill to match?

It was like he had glue on his boots yesterday, he was very good.