If memory serves (which it rarely does) that was when we lost Diarra too. Not saying he's the reason things have gone down the pan, or even if things will pick up when he's back, but it's worth a thought.
Not at all sure that his recovery is going as well as hoped. Since that one outing with the U21s a couple of weeks ago he hasn't featured and according to rumours Diarra himself has contactd Panathinaikos director of football, Nikos Dabizas, and told him that he is keen to join. PS His first game back was a two weeks after the Sunderland match and against Chelsea. Unfortunately the next game, against Spurs, was his last.
I hope (if it's true) that it's because he's not playing... It'd be a kick in the teeth for us to nurse him back to fitness, albeit unpaid, just for him to do one.
No sooner said than this story pops up in a local paper: "Fulham are considering offering a pay-as-you-play deal to Mahamadou Diarra. The Mali midfielder hasn’t featured for the first team since December last year due to a serious knee injury. Diarra’s contract expired in the summer, but he has been training at Motspur Park in a bid to prove his fitness to manager Martin Jol. The 32-year-old made a successful return from injury for Fulham's under-21s against Reading last month. And the Whites are weighing up whether to offer an appearance-based deal to the former Real Madrid star. Boss Jol said: “I don't think he will ever be the player he was when he started at Lyon. That was 100 per cent. I felt he wasn't 100 per cent before but he was so influential with his passing and in the dressing room. We told him play three matches and then we will make an assessment." There are different scenarios like getting players and pay them when they play. “But first we need clearance from the medical staff and his surgeon in Madrid to say he is fit.” Source: http://www.getwestlondon.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/diarra-makes-fulham-comeback-6091593 Guess we'll have to wait and see, although it doesn't sound as though he'll be making the first team for a while.
Parker's arrival has changed the dynamics of the team. Better for him to go to a slower pace league and a team that needs him more than us.
Stoke have lodged a complaint about the referee: " Stoke City have issued a formal complaint over the performance of referee Roger East during the club's 1-0 defeat at Fulham. Insiders insist it is not a case of sour grapes, but a genuine grievance with his display at Craven Cottage a fortnight ago. The complaint was made through the formal channels to referees' chief Mike Riley at the Professional Game Match Officials Board. It follows East's failure to give Stoke two penalties in the first half at Fulham - while a red-card offence was missed when Pajtim Kasami raised a hand to City full back Erik Pieters. Riley is no stranger to complaints from Stoke in the past after frequently hearing from Tony Pulis on his office hotline. And East was the cause of plenty of wrath last season when he showed a controversial second yellow card to Ryan Shotton in the dying seconds of the Premier League game at Aston Villa." Source: http://www.thisisstaffordshire.co.uk/story-19948744-detail/story.html#ixzz2hynbTIuf
Pieters should have been booked for simulation and we should have had a penalty of our own. Sour grapes indeed.
Oh the irony! Of all theam teams to complain - Stoke City? These guys have played on the edge for years, getting away with murder with their jockeying into opposition players relatively unpunished. And yet turned into dying swans at The Cottage. Yes we were fortunate, but the refereeeing decisions broke both ways - if there are goals to be added, then I think Fulham we due a penalty. As for a red-card offence if the Stoke penalty claim would have been given - maybe people should check the laws regarding a DOGSO - not so cut-and-dried.
