Southampton's fanbase appear to be under the impression that passing the ball sideways in your own half and hitting 80 per cent of your shots into Row Z equates to "attractive" football. We think you'll enjoy this week's OV...
"I hate West Ham. Missed our first goal because even though I followed signs to the right stand I was then redirected to go a different way by stewards. Terrible area, terrible club, terrible style of football. We were far better than them but they won because of there style of football and their ability to know where to put the ball to be effective."
- bender
"So we lost to a Neanderthal football team. So what. The linesman missing offside was a game changer. I think they wouldn't have scored the second if they hadn't been gifted the first. They had one game, win the ball and hit it up front. They won, but I can tell you this, If my team played this way I would give up going. They had more than a bit of luck, even the second goal hit Yoshida and fell right for Cole. We played as a team against a massed defence and created good chances. Boruc had no chance with the second and third goals. Apart from the first didn't have a save to make."
- Tamesaint
"Quite apart from the hoofball which is awful, West Ham do actually pose different threats. They are only Premier side that plays two genuine wingers, and they get more aerial threat in than most from wide positions. We struggled to cope with Cole today, as limited as he is, and should not have allowed the space and time for the cross on the third one. Their wingers kept our full backs occupied in the first half- note how much more Luke came into the game after Jarvis went off. Fair play to Big Sam."
- Forester
"Shame really, but I thought West Ham outplayed us and were tactically better frankly. Ugly hoofing footy or not, Big Sam had studied how to beat Saints; park a bus rapidly at the back as Saints are slow coming forward into the last third (even on a break), put in loads of crosses and high balls, which we always look nervous at clearing, and go for quick breaks and sucker punches as we expect teams to try and play through the midfield as we do. Also, never give up as this is a team that can't hold a lead at the moment... and seems to have nothing to play for except for 3-4 seats on a plane to Brazil in the Summer. We were out muscled, out thought tactically and frankly we give the ball away too much (or just kicked it out of play too often - Boruc)."
- SaintRobbie
"I do dislike West Ham for three reasons, all related to their fans apparent sense of entitlement. It started with their sense of outrage at Sheffield Utd over the Tevez incident when to the impartial they looked guilty as. Followed up with their David Blaine like misdirection over Billy Sharp when we played them in the Championship (there's a photo of a hand around his throat FFS). And finally Kevin Nolan for bumming goalkeepers - it may be within the law but I think it's blatant obstruction. I don't like Nolan, I guess he's a Savage like player that everyone else thinks is a ****, until he plays for you. Undoubtedly effective in Big Sam's system (I forgot BFS as reason number 4!)."
- Alain Perrin
"Disappointing ....of course. The first West Ham goal was a crime, it must have upset the players mindset after we dominated the first 20 mins. and conceded to a clear off-side goal. 25 shots ....only 5 on target. Worse than poor when you look at those stats. but without going back throught he commentary texts, I'd say that a lot of those weren't from our "strikers " and when defenders and midfielders can't even get a shot on target we have to start asking bigger questions, considering we dominated a poor West Ham side who just got lucky on the day."
- david in sweden
"I see that the West Ham fans are trying to suggest that we have no grounds to criticise their hoofball because we play, on average, the joint highest number of long balls per game (70) in the division, while West Ham play 67 making them a whopping one place below us on that stat. The important thing to remember is that we're not collecting the ball outside our area and hoofing it in the general direction of the striker like West Ham, Sunderland and Villa generally do. The majority of our long balls are down the channel from one of our full backs, or from a deep midfielder/defender taking the ball over the halfway line and playing a diagonal into the area. We're not afraid to play a long ball, but it generally won't come from deep inside our half unlike West Ham's."
- SuperMikey
"From where I was watching, we dominated the game but with little cutting edge. We limited West Ham to about 4 chances, 3 of which were converted to goals. So what I want to know is, if we perform so badly when playing the ball on the floor against one of the more 'powerful' sides, what is our plan B? Today was an embarrassment, makes me wonder what is the point of turning up for a game. Make no mistake, West Ham were awful but they played to their strengths correctly. What are ours?"
- Saint_Tony
"You have to give credit to the old fox Allardyce for doing his homework on us and coming up with a strategy that largely worked to their advantage. The possession figures of nearly 70% don't mean a thing unless it translates into possession in or around their penalty area. And neither do shots on goal mean much if you aren't going to get them on target and then score from them. But at least we should be thankful that the team showed some commitment and desire today, which they didn't last Saturday. But it is galling that with over 20 shots on goal we only managed half a dozen on target, whereas West Ham managed to get about six shots on target and scored from three of them."
- Wes Tender
"No point in having 70% possession if you (a) don't defend like idiots and (b) score more than the other team. West Ham wanted it more. We were pedestrian in attack until we were 3-1 down. Pathetic."
- Saint Fan CaM
* Comments originally posted on saintsweb.co.uk
* Something to say about this story? Please visit the KUMB Forum to leave a comment.
