I actually thought Stoke played an absolute blinder on Saturday. At the time, I thought they were ordinary, unadventurous and untalented but thinking about the game, I thought they played the perfect set-up against us and Hughes has gone up greatly in my estimation. Here's why: 1) They nullified our full backs - Hardly ever got to the bye-line which is usually one of our strengths. Their wide players put in a real shift and their central midfielders weren't afraid to get sucked out and do a cover job when necessary. 2) They stifled Lallana - Often had 4 players around him and weren't afraid to be drawn out if it meant tackling him early. 3) They used the space that we left open (first half) - This is more of a first half thing. But they worked the game to the extent that the man with space was Charlie Adam - the one man who can pick a pass (as per the first goal) 4) Second half - Squeezed the game to ensure there were no spaces. Crouch was left isolated which meant they had no out-ball, but, led by Shawcross (who organised them brilliantly for the whole second half) they frustrated us through pushing up at the back and leaving no space between the lines. When they did drop deep, the midfield did too so the psace was squeezed out during these periods. It's these types of tactical battles that make the BPL what it is - 2 teams who play with such different styles somehow cancelling each other out. It didn't make for a spectacle and was a generally underwhelming game but I think you have to congratulate them on a point well earned. In terms of my wider point, how would we have broken them down? Surely lots of teams do this to us so why were they so effective in being able to achieve it? Thoughts please!
Yeah they defended very well and we never looked like scoring in that second half. Have to give them credit for that. The only ways to break down teams like that are to get lucky (i.e. wait for them to make a mistake), push more players forward (risking a counter) or be Arsenal and one-touch pass your way through the eye of the needle...
We did break them down in the first half-we scored twice and that shd have been enough to win the game. In the 2nd half they basically played with 5 central defenders & tried to hit us on the break. Yeh, they got their tactics right, but its still 2 points squandered against a team we really shd hav beaten. And its no coincidence that despite 4 goals the game was still shown last on motd.
Yes agree our early goal should have enabled us to go on and win. Credit them for a solid defensive display but we need to be more clinical.
A lot was said on Saturday about possession meaning winning. Man U had 75% possession yesterday? Fulham had 4 shots Score 2-2. Stoke did a job on us. Let's hope we can the same at Hull.
This is why we need early goals (which we got)...the killer was their second equaliser. We would have gone on to win I am sure if they had to chase the game in the second half. Things turn on small incidents...no need to assume that we made massive mistakes or need to change things markedly...we will win a lot of games playing just as we did on Saturday (and lose some as well).
We seem to lack that little bit of finesse to beat teams that park the bus. We have constantly been prone all season to the type of goal scored for their first. Having the possession we had (The same for united yesterday) we should have slaughtered them. To quote a cliché "footballs a funny old game"
Not sure we should have slaughtered them really, we hardly worked Begovic and never cut them open (like they did to us for Odemwinge's goal) which was really the point of my post. Some games, like Sunderland home (and away) we did deserve to slaughter the team, but really don't think we did on Sat!
I meant by the possession we had. Not the way we actually played as a lot of teams are finding out possession means zilch if you don't have the means to open defences. We are too hot and cold for my liking in that department for my liking.
Simple answer we have no one on the bench to change the game. This is why we can't really change anything up.
This is where Gaston would have come in. He was beginning to look like a lively, handy sub MF...then Brown happened JWP seems out of favour as well...no problem with him coming on if needed, but not really the player to stir things up.
According to the fourfourtwo stat analysis we played the most long balls this weekend - 28 unsuccessful long balls
It says a lot about how far we have came when established Premiership teams are setting up for draws against us.
That's the point I have been making. In the past, the opposition set up to neutralise one or two of our players (such as Tiss), but now they have to have a game plan to counteract us.
Indeed it wasn't, but it was shown nearer the end of the programme than one would have thought. A 0-0 was before our game. Saints progress up the pitch generally by patient good passing and movement. This gives the opposition plenty of time to get into position. What we try to do is exploit a weakness, by pulling the defensive structure around. The problem is, we aren't that brilliant at it, and the odd player will lose patience or lose the ball. Or the ball will drop for someone who blazes it off target. I think our tactics are a great ideal, but they don't pay enough attention to the skill levels of the individual players. Lallana and Ramirez can do it consistently, even Davis and Lambert but, for me, the rest haven't demonstrated enough of the closest of close control. As to Stoke's first goal, that doesn't happen when Lovren plays, though Shaw could have prevented it if he hadn't nodded off for a second. Well, he went to Juventus. Plus he was rather up and down with his impact. It's a facet of not having the strongest squad in depth. We look a lot better at full strength, and can call upon Gaston. Agreed. At present, JWP comes on to bring fresh legs to the defensive midfield and provide his free-kick expertise. He's 19. He'll probably end up captaining the side in a few years.
No but it was shown after the trailer for the Football League Show and we all now know that is the dividing line (according to the BBC) between the good games to watch and the crap.
Excellent thread. Very good original post. I'm surprised how many people read the game on Saturday as us playing average/poorly. I also thought Stoke played very well. Hughes absolutely did his homework. Maybe he watched the video of the Chelsea game.
Watched the game live, in between work commitments, and then watched the full 90 minutes the next day. All the different commentators and pundits on both streams thought it was a cracking game. I thought it was OK. Understandably, I always tend to think better of a game if Saints win at home or win/draw away, and it's difficult to be unbiased in one's judgement of a game in terms of entertainment.
