| What has Monk & Co done to us??? 16:59 - Feb 1 with 21981 views | UplandsJack |
At game today and oh my god we are SHIT!!!
We are simply unrecognisable to the team of recent times...
We are playing with a back 3 (as Taylor is cooking useless)
And a front 2 of Gomis & Shelvey... Dyer might as well be at
Home the use he is... We are just kicking the ball upfield and
Giving away possession for them to attack again and again...
14% possession is an all time low for us while in PL...
The only suprise so far is that we are still in in ( of sorts) as its 0-0...
Let's hope the 2nd half offers us travelling Jacks a lot more!!!
  |  | | |  |
| What has Monk & Co done to us??? on 14:31 - Feb 2 with 1318 views | LeonisGod |
| What has Monk & Co done to us??? on 13:20 - Feb 2 by C_jack |
In the stadium, that was tough to watch and to a man/woman the majority thought that we were awful in the first half. The atmosphere in the away end resembled that, deathly quiet with very little to sing, chant or even applaud.
How the general opinion can differ so differently with those who watched it on the box is strange, but interesting.
I don't know why, but there's a straight jacket on the team at the moment. We're not scrapping for points or the like so why don't we just go out and play? We're good enough to do that from the start of games, and its so frustrating watching players play within themselves, going against their instinct and skills.
We're nice and cwtch in the table without any chance of going up or down many places, I would be pigging chuffed if Garry just took the chains off from now on and let the players express themselves. [Post edited 2 Feb 2015 13:24]
|
That's how a lot of us watching on the box saw it to be fair. It was just as painful watching from an armchair, but warmer. Then after the match a whole wave of posters came on and announced it as a master class. It was a great result and a good smash and grab, but it didn't look like we got going at all in the first half. The plan was clearly to sit back, but then we conceded possession so poorly it was painful. I can understand the need for that approach away at team in the top 4 when we have a depleted team though, it's just not pretty. i really felt for you guys, although the last 15-20 minutes must have made up for it. |  | | |
| What has Monk & Co done to us??? on 14:38 - Feb 2 with 1288 views | Parlay |
| What has Monk & Co done to us??? on 14:31 - Feb 2 by LeonisGod |
That's how a lot of us watching on the box saw it to be fair. It was just as painful watching from an armchair, but warmer. Then after the match a whole wave of posters came on and announced it as a master class. It was a great result and a good smash and grab, but it didn't look like we got going at all in the first half. The plan was clearly to sit back, but then we conceded possession so poorly it was painful. I can understand the need for that approach away at team in the top 4 when we have a depleted team though, it's just not pretty. i really felt for you guys, although the last 15-20 minutes must have made up for it. |
Thats how I saw it.
I find it crazy that because Shelveys wonder strike went in that means it was a tactical masterclass.
We had one shot on target all game.
Great result but still very concerning tactical approach and game play. We are too good with the ball to play a sit deep and counter attack game. |  |
| |
| What has Monk & Co done to us??? on 14:43 - Feb 2 with 1278 views | bluenile |
| What has Monk & Co done to us??? on 18:12 - Feb 1 by Highjack |
Lego movie? |
I know.................sums him up...................."back to school boy!! where's that cane!!" |  |
| Open the ipod bay doors Hal |
| |
| What has Monk & Co done to us??? on 14:46 - Feb 2 with 1266 views | headcleaner |
if we had been Southampton and they us what would people have said about our performance? damned if we do damned if we don't. all this fretting about style and performances is bi polar. 3 shots on target 1 goal I'd be happy with that. gomis had a decent effort in the first half and we hit the post. I'm sure southampton fans would swap tactics right now.
As for the rubbish argument about if williams had not headed off the line here or hoofed it away there we'd have lost is a classic argument. if my granny had balls etc etc etc
surely goalkeepers are there to make saves and defenders to defend???? I thought we were pretty comfortable throughout and dont think either keeper was called upon too often.
if southampton were still playing I doubt they would have scored yet.. they clearly lack our killer touch ;) |  | | |
| What has Monk & Co done to us??? on 14:48 - Feb 2 with 1253 views | Parlay |
| What has Monk & Co done to us??? on 14:43 - Feb 2 by bluenile |
I know.................sums him up...................."back to school boy!! where's that cane!!" |
Well that pupil has and A+ then judging by the correct opinions. | |
| |
| What has Monk & Co done to us??? on 14:48 - Feb 2 with 1284 views | DafyddHuw |
"What has Monk & Co done to us???"
Absolutely nothing. Apart from sanitation, education, health, crime.But apart from that, nothing. |  | | |
| What has Monk & Co done to us??? on 14:52 - Feb 2 with 1269 views | Parlay |
| What has Monk & Co done to us??? on 14:46 - Feb 2 by headcleaner |
if we had been Southampton and they us what would people have said about our performance? damned if we do damned if we don't. all this fretting about style and performances is bi polar. 3 shots on target 1 goal I'd be happy with that. gomis had a decent effort in the first half and we hit the post. I'm sure southampton fans would swap tactics right now.
As for the rubbish argument about if williams had not headed off the line here or hoofed it away there we'd have lost is a classic argument. if my granny had balls etc etc etc
surely goalkeepers are there to make saves and defenders to defend???? I thought we were pretty comfortable throughout and dont think either keeper was called upon too often.
if southampton were still playing I doubt they would have scored yet.. they clearly lack our killer touch ;) |
You think its a masterclass to have 1 shot on target all game?
Come on now.
We had two chances in the game, both long range efforts from 30 yards from Shelvey. We defended like tojans but was a bit disorganised and seemed to be a panicked effort to clear a lot of the some rather than a systematic clear way to defend.
I agree what someone said that it felt like a sort of cup game with us being the much lower team and nicking a win.
Yes that is fantastic but considering we are separated by a few places and arent that dissimilar in terms of quality i dont feel we had to go to the lengths of setting up our side to play like that and feels as if we are doing this game after game not just away to the good sides. [Post edited 2 Feb 2015 15:19]
| |
| |
| What has Monk & Co done to us??? on 15:23 - Feb 2 with 1240 views | jackonicko |
| What has Monk & Co done to us??? on 14:52 - Feb 2 by Parlay |
You think its a masterclass to have 1 shot on target all game?
Come on now.
We had two chances in the game, both long range efforts from 30 yards from Shelvey. We defended like tojans but was a bit disorganised and seemed to be a panicked effort to clear a lot of the some rather than a systematic clear way to defend.
I agree what someone said that it felt like a sort of cup game with us being the much lower team and nicking a win.
Yes that is fantastic but considering we are separated by a few places and arent that dissimilar in terms of quality i dont feel we had to go to the lengths of setting up our side to play like that and feels as if we are doing this game after game not just away to the good sides. [Post edited 2 Feb 2015 15:19]
|
To be honest, I do think it's a masterclass. Had we set up like this for the Chelsea game, I doubt we would have been 4-0 down at half time.
The game plan was clearly to sit off, maintain shape in two banks of four and plan to still be in the game in the final 30 minutes. We executed that plan very well - it wasn't pretty to watch but it was effective. How many times have we seen teams do it to us?
Just because they had a decent chance in the first 10 minutes doesn't make it tactical ineptitude. You're never going to stop them getting chances, but we largely limited them to longer range efforts and when Fab was called into action, he did his job well.
The only other decent chance they had was Pelle in the closing seconds when he skied it over. Yes, Williams getting back for the double clearance was critical, and well done to him for getting into that position, but I would expect a central defender of his experience to read the game, spot the danger and then quickly get into that position to deal with it. It was great stuff, but that's why Ash is such an important part of our back 4 when he is on his game.
With the tools at GMs disposal, we were always going to struggle to make chances. No Siggy, no Ki, no Montero, no Routledge. The fact that JJS got his goal, hit the post, and Gomis came close in the first half shows we generated 3 good scoring opportunities whilst playing uber-defensive. All the players came out afterwards and said this was the plan before the game, they executed it well and we got 3 points from a game that few of us expected to get anything from.
How is that not a masterclass?
I'd rather not watch it every game, but it's a Plan C for times when we are weakened. It doesn't always work, but credit where it is due for when it does. |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| What has Monk & Co done to us??? on 15:36 - Feb 2 with 1217 views | Parlay |
| What has Monk & Co done to us??? on 15:23 - Feb 2 by jackonicko |
To be honest, I do think it's a masterclass. Had we set up like this for the Chelsea game, I doubt we would have been 4-0 down at half time.
The game plan was clearly to sit off, maintain shape in two banks of four and plan to still be in the game in the final 30 minutes. We executed that plan very well - it wasn't pretty to watch but it was effective. How many times have we seen teams do it to us?
Just because they had a decent chance in the first 10 minutes doesn't make it tactical ineptitude. You're never going to stop them getting chances, but we largely limited them to longer range efforts and when Fab was called into action, he did his job well.
The only other decent chance they had was Pelle in the closing seconds when he skied it over. Yes, Williams getting back for the double clearance was critical, and well done to him for getting into that position, but I would expect a central defender of his experience to read the game, spot the danger and then quickly get into that position to deal with it. It was great stuff, but that's why Ash is such an important part of our back 4 when he is on his game.
With the tools at GMs disposal, we were always going to struggle to make chances. No Siggy, no Ki, no Montero, no Routledge. The fact that JJS got his goal, hit the post, and Gomis came close in the first half shows we generated 3 good scoring opportunities whilst playing uber-defensive. All the players came out afterwards and said this was the plan before the game, they executed it well and we got 3 points from a game that few of us expected to get anything from.
How is that not a masterclass?
I'd rather not watch it every game, but it's a Plan C for times when we are weakened. It doesn't always work, but credit where it is due for when it does. |
For me it is simply not a masterclass because if that game was played 10 times we would lose far more often than win. Which is probably what Koeman was alluding to in his post match interview.
How many times does a team win with 1 shot on target, that being one from 30 yards out? Not very often id suggest. So if that was the plan then thats a poorly thought out one.
They had enough clear chances to put us away by half time. Fabiański had to pull off some good saves and a "worldy" - most notiably the one from Ward Prowse. They got in behind us a fair few times not to mention have chances they squandered from crosses allowed in and not dealt with. All the while we offered nothing in attack and didnt register a shot on target, did we even register a shot at all? I cant recall.
If we had adapted this way to play this one off game then id maybe look past it. But the gaping holes in out tactics and gameplay, continued to be evident here. For me it will work out as a positive far less than working out a negative in terms of results.
We are inviting teams on far too much to us and as a result our possession stats for the season has taken a nose dive. This has a few knock on effects with the most noticeable being the fact we not look an awful lot less comfortable with the ball these days, that is simply because we dont have it as often in order to get comfortable with it.
Our shape holding preference instead of our pressing is also something that is seeing us get exposed. I think this one result to justify a whole host of matches where these tactics have not seen such a positive result is a little odd.
I dont think Southampton are than much better than us in terms of talent so would rather us play our way rather than adapt our game to combat someone elses. Because that isnt playing to our strengths and its shown over the last month or two.
Id say we are less like ourselves now than we ever have been at any point in the Premier League. Im yet to decide if that is a good thing yet or not. [Post edited 2 Feb 2015 15:44]
| |
| |
| What has Monk & Co done to us??? on 15:43 - Feb 2 with 1209 views | sixpenses |
| What has Monk & Co done to us??? on 13:17 - Feb 2 by Private_Partz |
I agree with this. I have some concerns that our passing and pressing game is not as good as it was and this in turn puts greater pressure in the defence. I also accept that we have had a badly depleted team over the last month of so and I think yesterday's smash and grab was in fact the correct tactic to play. I can recall The Waiter having similar issues because we did not turn up and play pretty football thereby allowing them to walk through us.
If when Ki, Britton, Cork etc are regularly playing and we are still losing our traditional style of play and haemorrhaging points then that will be the time to worry. Let's see how things pan out. We have an excellent points tally and we really should be safe now. There will be plenty of time for surgery if it does all go wrong.
We need a plan B and this is it. I recall we did something very similar in what was arguably one of our best performances away. A two nil win at Aresenal with late goals from Michu. |
Agree about the pressing and passing
Agree about Arsenal - Especially during the second half when we were under intense pressure for a good period, but as yesterday nothing greater than snatching a win against the odds.
Shelvey's goal and miss reinforce that special thing he brings to us and Williams clearances were amazing, Naughton look decent and I think Gomis put a decent shift in and I think will be good for us if he stays.
However I would say we played with much more fluidity at Arsenal we had 56% possession and 12 shots - 10 of which were on target. Would love to see us get back to more fluid passing and pressing as Gomis hopefully fully settles in along with the new players. |  | | |
| What has Monk & Co done to us??? on 15:47 - Feb 2 with 1204 views | C_jack |
| What has Monk & Co done to us??? on 15:23 - Feb 2 by jackonicko |
To be honest, I do think it's a masterclass. Had we set up like this for the Chelsea game, I doubt we would have been 4-0 down at half time.
The game plan was clearly to sit off, maintain shape in two banks of four and plan to still be in the game in the final 30 minutes. We executed that plan very well - it wasn't pretty to watch but it was effective. How many times have we seen teams do it to us?
Just because they had a decent chance in the first 10 minutes doesn't make it tactical ineptitude. You're never going to stop them getting chances, but we largely limited them to longer range efforts and when Fab was called into action, he did his job well.
The only other decent chance they had was Pelle in the closing seconds when he skied it over. Yes, Williams getting back for the double clearance was critical, and well done to him for getting into that position, but I would expect a central defender of his experience to read the game, spot the danger and then quickly get into that position to deal with it. It was great stuff, but that's why Ash is such an important part of our back 4 when he is on his game.
With the tools at GMs disposal, we were always going to struggle to make chances. No Siggy, no Ki, no Montero, no Routledge. The fact that JJS got his goal, hit the post, and Gomis came close in the first half shows we generated 3 good scoring opportunities whilst playing uber-defensive. All the players came out afterwards and said this was the plan before the game, they executed it well and we got 3 points from a game that few of us expected to get anything from.
How is that not a masterclass?
I'd rather not watch it every game, but it's a Plan C for times when we are weakened. It doesn't always work, but credit where it is due for when it does. |
Was it part of the master plan to just gift their wingers about two double deckers worth of space, to put the ball in the box?
Or to just return the ball to them as soon as possible, so they could have another go at doing that, time and time again. As opposed to having a chance to counter and try and SCORE a goal for ourselves, coming to the conclusion that when we put 3 passes together, resulting in a shot on goal, the players must have deviated from this master plan?
Or to rely on our front man to be one of our most effective defenders to deal with the endless number of crosses/corners? We were at Southampton for goodness sake, not Real Madrid. Surely the master plan would have required our biggest GOAL threat to be available when we wanted to break up the field?
Another blinder from Garry though, in front of the camera afterwards. To come away with the 3 points was enough to make Dick Turpin blush, but to have the brass to convince, and insist that it was the plan all along is a superb piece of guile.
Overjoyed we won though, if anyone would like to know. [Post edited 2 Feb 2015 15:50]
|  |
| |
| What has Monk & Co done to us??? on 16:10 - Feb 2 with 1163 views | Private_Partz |
| What has Monk & Co done to us??? on 15:43 - Feb 2 by sixpenses |
Agree about the pressing and passing
Agree about Arsenal - Especially during the second half when we were under intense pressure for a good period, but as yesterday nothing greater than snatching a win against the odds.
Shelvey's goal and miss reinforce that special thing he brings to us and Williams clearances were amazing, Naughton look decent and I think Gomis put a decent shift in and I think will be good for us if he stays.
However I would say we played with much more fluidity at Arsenal we had 56% possession and 12 shots - 10 of which were on target. Would love to see us get back to more fluid passing and pressing as Gomis hopefully fully settles in along with the new players. |
Fair comment. Our possession stats were not as good. It was just the nearest example I could think of. Much easier to look for examples of away teams doing this when we are playing at home. We have had loads of possession and come away with nothing.
Having said that I share the concerns about our passing game and I hope it will return ASAP as I think it is the best way forward for success and makes me feel proud to support the team.
St Marys is not an easy place to go at the moment but with a midfield including both Fulton and Carroll I don't think we were up to the task of out playing Southampton at their own game. They are fine young players but not up to the desired level yet IMHO.
I thought yesterday was tactically as good as our setup against Chelsea was poor. [Post edited 2 Feb 2015 16:11]
|  |
| You have mission in life to hold out your hand,
To help the other guy out,
Help your fellow man.
Stan Ridgway
|
| |
| What has Monk & Co done to us??? on 16:46 - Feb 2 with 1118 views | bluenile |
| What has Monk & Co done to us??? on 15:23 - Feb 2 by jackonicko |
To be honest, I do think it's a masterclass. Had we set up like this for the Chelsea game, I doubt we would have been 4-0 down at half time.
The game plan was clearly to sit off, maintain shape in two banks of four and plan to still be in the game in the final 30 minutes. We executed that plan very well - it wasn't pretty to watch but it was effective. How many times have we seen teams do it to us?
Just because they had a decent chance in the first 10 minutes doesn't make it tactical ineptitude. You're never going to stop them getting chances, but we largely limited them to longer range efforts and when Fab was called into action, he did his job well.
The only other decent chance they had was Pelle in the closing seconds when he skied it over. Yes, Williams getting back for the double clearance was critical, and well done to him for getting into that position, but I would expect a central defender of his experience to read the game, spot the danger and then quickly get into that position to deal with it. It was great stuff, but that's why Ash is such an important part of our back 4 when he is on his game.
With the tools at GMs disposal, we were always going to struggle to make chances. No Siggy, no Ki, no Montero, no Routledge. The fact that JJS got his goal, hit the post, and Gomis came close in the first half shows we generated 3 good scoring opportunities whilst playing uber-defensive. All the players came out afterwards and said this was the plan before the game, they executed it well and we got 3 points from a game that few of us expected to get anything from.
How is that not a masterclass?
I'd rather not watch it every game, but it's a Plan C for times when we are weakened. It doesn't always work, but credit where it is due for when it does. |
Nail.....................on.................head........................brilliant post!  | |
| Open the ipod bay doors Hal |
| |
| What has Monk & Co done to us??? on 16:49 - Feb 2 with 1110 views | Parlay |
| What has Monk & Co done to us??? on 16:46 - Feb 2 by bluenile |
Nail.....................on.................head........................brilliant post! |
So you think our plan was to have one shot on target all game! a shot from 30 yards at that... AND WIN.
Really?
Come on now. | |
| |
| What has Monk & Co done to us??? on 18:03 - Feb 2 with 1066 views | acejack3065 |
| What has Monk & Co done to us??? on 16:49 - Feb 2 by Parlay |
So you think our plan was to have one shot on target all game! a shot from 30 yards at that... AND WIN.
Really?
Come on now. |
We went for a point and took three. That was the dream scenario from our game plan yesterday. The fact was we were never going to be able to play an open game with such a depleted midfield.
We frustrated them throughout, kept it to 0-0 and took our chance which is what the entire point of football is. We grew into the game after soaking up pressure.
If we had set up to try and play an open and expansive game Southampton would have picked us off like Arsenal did to Villa.
You said that we would lose that game more often than not. Maybe or maybe not but one things for sure, the only way we could have won yesterday was by deploying the tactics that Monk and Co stuck too. There is no way we could have ever out-footballed them with that XI. |  | | |
| What has Monk & Co done to us??? on 18:06 - Feb 2 with 1059 views | perchrockjack |
So we dominate a game ,play pretty passing football have 10 shots on target 75% possession and lose 2-1.
Not for me ta | |
| |
| What has Monk & Co done to us??? on 18:07 - Feb 2 with 1055 views | Parlay |
| What has Monk & Co done to us??? on 18:03 - Feb 2 by acejack3065 |
We went for a point and took three. That was the dream scenario from our game plan yesterday. The fact was we were never going to be able to play an open game with such a depleted midfield.
We frustrated them throughout, kept it to 0-0 and took our chance which is what the entire point of football is. We grew into the game after soaking up pressure.
If we had set up to try and play an open and expansive game Southampton would have picked us off like Arsenal did to Villa.
You said that we would lose that game more often than not. Maybe or maybe not but one things for sure, the only way we could have won yesterday was by deploying the tactics that Monk and Co stuck too. There is no way we could have ever out-footballed them with that XI. |
Didnt Huw state not so long ago that this playing for a point mentality needs to be knocked on the head? That being under Laudrup.
As someone said earlier, they are southampton not Real Madrid and we are good enough to play them our way not changing our game to play them.
Its not like these tactics have only been adopted in this game, its been the case for the last few months which has contributed to our difficult patch. | |
| |
| What has Monk & Co done to us??? on 18:07 - Feb 2 with 1058 views | Starsky |
| What has Monk & Co done to us??? on 14:52 - Feb 2 by Parlay |
You think its a masterclass to have 1 shot on target all game?
Come on now.
We had two chances in the game, both long range efforts from 30 yards from Shelvey. We defended like tojans but was a bit disorganised and seemed to be a panicked effort to clear a lot of the some rather than a systematic clear way to defend.
I agree what someone said that it felt like a sort of cup game with us being the much lower team and nicking a win.
Yes that is fantastic but considering we are separated by a few places and arent that dissimilar in terms of quality i dont feel we had to go to the lengths of setting up our side to play like that and feels as if we are doing this game after game not just away to the good sides. [Post edited 2 Feb 2015 15:19]
|
Sorry to be pedantic but Swansea had 3 clear cut chances... Gomeeez went close in the first half, Shelvey hit the post and then of course hit the winner.
The fact whether they were on target can be misleading. I'm sure that The Gomis chance and the Shelvey post strike, both technically not on target... We're better than some of Southamptons on target efforts. |  |
| It's just the internet, init. |
| |
| What has Monk & Co done to us??? on 18:10 - Feb 2 with 1047 views | Parlay |
| What has Monk & Co done to us??? on 18:07 - Feb 2 by Starsky |
Sorry to be pedantic but Swansea had 3 clear cut chances... Gomeeez went close in the first half, Shelvey hit the post and then of course hit the winner.
The fact whether they were on target can be misleading. I'm sure that The Gomis chance and the Shelvey post strike, both technically not on target... We're better than some of Southamptons on target efforts. |
Its not misleading. Shelvey had two long range shots and Gomis had a snap shot from an angle. That will not be enough to win 95% of the time. The keeper had 1 shot to save all game and we scored from it. | |
| |
| What has Monk & Co done to us??? on 18:13 - Feb 2 with 1042 views | perchrockjack |
you ve just wasted a few minutes of your life starsk | |
| |
| What has Monk & Co done to us??? on 18:17 - Feb 2 with 1034 views | Private_Partz |
| What has Monk & Co done to us??? on 18:07 - Feb 2 by Starsky |
Sorry to be pedantic but Swansea had 3 clear cut chances... Gomeeez went close in the first half, Shelvey hit the post and then of course hit the winner.
The fact whether they were on target can be misleading. I'm sure that The Gomis chance and the Shelvey post strike, both technically not on target... We're better than some of Southamptons on target efforts. |
We went there for a draw and we had the added bonus of a win. Despite all their possession they only real misses for them was the shot the Fab saved with his foot early on and Ashes clearances at the end. All the other efforts were easily saved by Fab and I would have been disappointed if any of them went in. They might not have been in target but there was not that much difference in real chances created. | |
| You have mission in life to hold out your hand,
To help the other guy out,
Help your fellow man.
Stan Ridgway
|
| |
| What has Monk & Co done to us??? on 18:19 - Feb 2 with 1021 views | Parlay |
| What has Monk & Co done to us??? on 18:13 - Feb 2 by perchrockjack |
you ve just wasted a few minutes of your life starsk |
And you have wasted a posting space here, what a nothing post. | |
| |
| What has Monk & Co done to us??? on 18:20 - Feb 2 with 1016 views | Parlay |
| What has Monk & Co done to us??? on 18:17 - Feb 2 by Private_Partz |
We went there for a draw and we had the added bonus of a win. Despite all their possession they only real misses for them was the shot the Fab saved with his foot early on and Ashes clearances at the end. All the other efforts were easily saved by Fab and I would have been disappointed if any of them went in. They might not have been in target but there was not that much difference in real chances created. |
If we went there for a point then thats awful. | |
| |
| What has Monk & Co done to us??? on 18:21 - Feb 2 with 1010 views | perchrockjack |
only stats that matter are goals score v goals conceded..
Everything else is meaningless crap for pundits | |
| |
| What has Monk & Co done to us??? on 18:22 - Feb 2 with 1009 views | pencoedjack |
| What has Monk & Co done to us??? on 14:46 - Feb 2 by headcleaner |
if we had been Southampton and they us what would people have said about our performance? damned if we do damned if we don't. all this fretting about style and performances is bi polar. 3 shots on target 1 goal I'd be happy with that. gomis had a decent effort in the first half and we hit the post. I'm sure southampton fans would swap tactics right now.
As for the rubbish argument about if williams had not headed off the line here or hoofed it away there we'd have lost is a classic argument. if my granny had balls etc etc etc
surely goalkeepers are there to make saves and defenders to defend???? I thought we were pretty comfortable throughout and dont think either keeper was called upon too often.
if southampton were still playing I doubt they would have scored yet.. they clearly lack our killer touch ;) |
Put it this way I felt a lot better today than I did after the Spurs game ....
Fuk there are posters on here than moan for the sake of moaning. |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
