|An archive of match day threads originally posted in the General Discussion forum.
West Ham star ESCAPES FA punishment for appearing to hit Raheem Sterling due to ‘inconclusive’ television footage
I was with you until you started having a go at individuals. When nearly every player looks bad it's down to two things. One being we didn't carry out the orders from bilic or he had't told them in the first place OR we were simply outclassed by a team who cost many times the cost of ours.
Man City were not 'excellent' last night. We MADE them look excellent because of how monumentally rubbish we were.
Yes, they have a very expensively assembled squad, however, they have also been humbled themselves by some decidedly average teams, and have been given a game by supposedly worse teams than us.
We were so bad, even Palace would have been made to look world beaters if we had played them and played how we did last night such is the performance we put in.
Absolutely shameful. I'm not going to give Man City praise for last night. It was down to how extremely **** we were, not how good they were. What makes it more galling, is it was the second time in a month that our players and manager have given up and been scared and bottle jobs against this mob. Nothing, not a thing was learned from the previous game.
Still fuming at the ineptness of what I watched last night.
Think they made us bad, so would have to disagree. We cannot handle teams who so relentlessly pressure is on the ball with pace, and move so quickly and seamlessly into good positions once they get it back. It's an under appreciated skill and one that completely exposes us.
Granted, they had the ease of doing this due to us being able to out no pressure on them when less gifted ball players had it, and setting up with not enough due care about their strengths
If the size of your stadium allows it you must have a standard size pitch of 105 x 60 metres.
Only if your stadium won't take that size are you allowed to have smaller.
The Boleyn was wide enough to take the 60m width but wasn't quite long enough to take the 105m length, so a dispensation was given for 100.5 x 60 meters.
So the pitch at the OS is 4.5 metres longer than at the Boleyn, minimally longer, no difference in width, that's it.
So nobody is having to cover significantly longer distances because the pitch is hardly any larger and it's exactly the same size as at any other stadium that's large enough to take the standard size pitch
Last season we were very definitively a counter attacking side. We allowed out left back to get forward at will because we had a centre back at right back who shifted across and we had a player in the team who could suck players in and take them out of the game to create space for our other attackers (and midfield) to get forward.
against the top sides we tended to use Sakho - and simultaneously sat deep and in numbers but pressed their defence into errors with pacey forward players. In some games we brought Carroll off the bench and used the two of them in tandem.
Against teams that attacked us it was effective - against teams that sat deep we struggled to break them down and score.
This season we've been much more effective against the teams we would expect to beat - but we don't seem to know 'how' we want to play against the top six.
I still have no idea what the plan was last night. At times our attacking players pressed furiously. Other times they stood off and let Man City advance unchallenged to the halfway line. Initially we seemed to sit deep - then pushed up high, then reverted to deep. Antonio went wherever he wanted in an attacking sense but left a hole for man city to walk through when they got the ball back. Were Feghoili and Lanzini told to support their full backs or press - they seemed to do neither. And the least said about Obiang and Noble the better.
I remain of the view that the big man makes us incapable of a high press game and his impact is reduced significantly if we go with a counter attacking style. We don't seem to know how to use him against the top sides resulting in a mish mash of styles that change throughout the game.
We looked no closer to solving that last night. Although it would not have changed the result last night I could see Bilic reverting to Sakho for games like this if he was fit and let Carroll dominate teams outside the top six (horses for courses).
Wasn't Obiang also at fault on the other side, when his return pass to Feghouli was short and allowed Sane or Jesus to get all the way into our box.
We really have Midfielders with glaring deficiencies starting for us. Kouyate as a midfielder doesn't seem to be aware of runners peeling off behind him and consequentially doesn't track them. Obiang looks to be uncomfortable creating with the ball at his feet. Both Noble and Obiang don't seem to be able to find and spread the ball out to our Wings quickly enough. Feghouli hardly had a touch yesterday, and ironically it took the introduction of Snodgrass to find Antonio out wide but, worryingly Snodgrass had to move infield to find the ball he ended up encroaching into the Fernandes' space - thereby nullifying the effectiveness of Fernandes.
Long term, we really need another quality creative/controlling midfielder to feed the ball to Lanzini, to transition from our midfield to our forwards.
After the last game I was told on here that Obiang was the best defensive midfielder in the Prem. The revisionism is breathtaking.
We played later badly and lost..... One game.
Some perspective might help.
I think it's made worse by the fact that none of our midfielders are making that extra effort to run back behind the line of - our - play(I'm not talking about getting behind their defenses) and present themselves as an option for the man with the ball to make a safe pass back(in a sense, going backwards to go forwards). No one was doing what Lanzini was doing for us when he sat deeper.
A gameplan is irrelevant if the players ignore the gameplan. Apparently, part of the gameplan was to not overplay the ball in dangerous areas.
Except it's 68 metres wide, so thats 8 metres wider than the Boleyn, which is a big difference.
I thought that was a foul our way. Cresswell was chasing back after giving the ball away and it looked like Sterling held him back so he couldn't get back. He ended up on the floor.
The information I can find is that the Boleyn was 70 yards wide - which equates to 64m. I can't find any premier league team that has a pitch as narrow as 60m.
Didn't we win last season at Man City and at Arsenal? And didn't we get a point at Old Trafford? From what I can see, their pitches are roughly the same size as ours.
We're doing rubbish this season because we've largely been rubbish this season.
It's a 'FIFA rule' according to DG on Twitter. Apparently we have pitches the same size at Rush Green to the players to get used to.
Pretty sure they aren't marking De Bruyne, Sterling, Silva, Sanchez and Ozil in training though
That's it in a nutshell. Add that we had better players last season with more than 600 premiership games experience between them. That makes a difference in both games and preparation.
Our May loan releases and summer transfer window chickens are coming home to roost against the better quality teams.
I don't think the size of the pitch matters. What would screw you up is the massive gap between the pitch and the crowd which makes it hard to judge distances when hitting a pass. If you brought the advertising hoardings closer to the pitch like they do at stadiums with running tracks abroad its easier to judge. Its like standing on a tee on a very open golf course, always harder to know what club to use.
The same player who could've gone down against Spurs yet didn't? You lost 4-0 midweek yet are trying to shift the blame on to Raheem Stirling? Words fail me.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests