Re-watched the game!

I think Shola was decent going forward not disputing that his cross for ba and winning the ball for the second were good. But mobility wise he's slow and lazy.
He was there partly to help our small defence and he didn't do that job at all.
I really hope we play best instead.

 

Leon Best.

Plus, Leon Best would have actually attempted to score a goal or two. You know, being a striker and all that.


Let's just try and remember what Shola was on the pitch for:

1). To help out defending set pieces with his height
2). To score goals, as a striker

Considering that he let Holt have free reign during set pieces, and considering that he barely had a shot on or off target all match (thus offering zero attacking threat) I'd say he spectacularly failed on both points. 10 or 20 minutes of good hold-up play doesn't make up for being a fairly pointless player for the entire 60 minutes previously.

 

I blame Obertan for the 2nd as just a minute before he should have played Ba in. He's ****.

Ba was the best player.

Perch, played 4, conceded 14. Thank you and goodnight.

 

this if hba wasnt going to play then i wanted best to play, shola was back to his incosistency, and unfortunately obertan is our only natural right winger

 

Didn't think Perch was that bad. As backup yeah he's not great but he's capable of doing a job! I don't think he was culpable for any goal in particular bar the last possibly for that stupid tackle.
Yeah Obertan was poor as was Gosling for 15 minutes in the second half.


Just hope that Pardew sees best as our 2nd best striker

 

And I don't know what Norwich player stepped on his hat before the match, but I really thought in the first half Shola was unusually petulant getting in the referee's face and taking some particularly stupid fouls...I wouldn't have been surprised if he'd gone one step too far and gotten sent off

Sorry Bano, if his feet were like glue, the glue was on the soles of his shoes...as everyone's said, you can commend him for a few good touches and passes, but he was undoubtedly on the pitch yesterday to help defensively, and he wasn't up to the job. Likewise he wasn't a threat to score. Ba probably could have done the job without Shola, but Shola's 'successes' yesterday were purely due to Ba.

 

He seems to love fouling people as much as Davies does as well!

 

Hahaha.

I guess Shola cant please some people.

The lads a centre forward who's primary role is to hold the ball up and bring others into play to relieve pressure at the back. He did very very well.

The fact he was asked to man mark another centre forward is asking a lot..............since when do all big centre forwards know how to man mark to a level of a centre back. He let Holt go for their goal. Get over it.

What do u want? Perfection?

So you would only be impressed if he man marked Holt out of the game and scored himself as well as held the ball up, fended off defenders, showed great skill, set up a goal, closed down the opposition.......etc etc.

Dont ask for much do you lads?

Well played Shola.

 

We had 2 small centre halves, it is abundantly clear that he was playing to mark their big strikers. Then the fact that he was leading the line (playing in front of Ba), he might have been expected to pose some sort of goal threat as well. We conceded all 4 goals from set pieces and he had 1 shot to my recollection.

 

Ba and Ameobi were interchanging. See where Ameobi was for both the goals? He was playing in the whole between Midfield and Attack, and frankly looked better there.

 

Shola might be better behind the striker, but Ba has played his best football behind Best, so Shola has to do Best's job if they play together.

 

Shola was dropping back into midfield and got in the game. I have not witnessed a better Leon Best performance in supporting Ba up front. The only thing he didnt get was a goal himself.

 

The lads a forward, in a 4-4-2 formation, who is there to attack and score goals. He did neither.

You've basically just completely made his role up and assumed that he was there to 'relieve pressure at the back'. That's like putting a plank of wood on the pitch and saying "well his primary role was to stay perfectly still on the floor and do absolutely nothing, so he did it very well". Don't make up roles for strikers just to back up the argument that what he was doing was any good.

Why is it asking a lot? He was only asked to do it during set pieces. In corners, for example, Shola's job was to mark Holt and challenge him for the headers as he has a 2 inch height advantage over Holt. Instead, it was too lazy/scared and did absolutely **** all, which resulted in easy headers being taken on our goal. Any good footballer, regardless of position, should have the ability to go in and challenge for a header. Shola didn't bother his arse. Theres's no magic defensive technique to it. You just have to jump up, get stuck in and make life difficult for Holt.

I'd be impressed if:

A). Ameobi actually made any effort to mark Holt
B). He showed even a slight amount of attacking threat and actually TRIED to score a goal. That's kind of what strikers are there for, in case you forgot.

Instead, we got:

A). Ameobi didn't bother to mark Holt most of the time in set pieces, and put in a lame effort
B). He barely had a shot on or off target during the entire game, and did essentially **** all for a full hour. There was no attacking threat. What's the point in a 4-4-2 formation with two strikers if one of the strikers isn't going to try and actually BE a striker? Any player, like Best or HBA, could have done exactly what Shola did plus actually threatened the opposition goal.