Team vs Bournemouth

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pboromag

so why not be positive and replace him with a forward
the midfield dint need shoring up
we were on top and looking loke the ones to score next

he handed the initative back to them

we should have gone for the 3rd and killer goal

---

we did and missed 2 sitters.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by toonlegend

we did and missed 2 sitters.

---

but it proves we were still creating and if gayle had been on we woudld have been 3-0 up

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pboromag

but it proves we were still creating and if gayle had been on we woudld have been 3-0 up

---

How did we "hand the initiative back to them" if we were still creating chances? You´ve said both of these in the last 2 posts.

That´s a fast U turn, even for you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pboromag

but it proves we were still creating and if gayle had been on we woudld have been 3-0 up

---

Or we'd of still missed them and Gayle completely knackered himself with his hamstring for rest of hte season.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by toptoon

How did we "hand the initiative back to them" if we were still creating chances? You´ve said both of these in the last 2 posts.

That´s a fast U turn, even for you.

---

because we had someone who had scored two taken off

perez and shelvey couldnt hit a barn door from 3 tyards so by taking a striker off and going defensive he handed the initative back to bournemouth ,he should have subbed like for like and gone for the 3rd goal

i dont think shelvey has scored for nearly a year in the prem and he hasnt had an assisit in that long either

we took a goal threat off and handed the initiative back to them
it isnt me that has just said he phecked up
look at te gam thread
many sswid he did

which ever way you spin this
its ashlys fault ,gayle had a hamstring (he didnt ,the club throw that out there to protect rafa)
he cocked up
even if he did have a hamstring

why not make a positive sub and put an attacker on and go for the 3rd and killer goal

any maager will tell you 2 isnt enough

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pboromag

because we had someone who had scored two taken off

perez and shelvey couldnt hit a barn door from 3 tyards so by taking a striker off and going defensive he handed the initative back to bournemouth ,he should have subbed like for like and gone for the 3rd goal

---

I'm a bit worried you've lost perspective. Shelvey's miss came after the Hayden substitution, so one of the two chances to wrap up the game in the second half that we're talking about came after we went defensive. And there's no way he should have been expected to have missed that - a professional of any standard puts that in 9 times out of 10, it was just that one freak miss in ten.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pboromag

we took a goal threat off and handed the initiative back to them

---

We'd already lost control of the midfield by this point. The fact is that we were conceding more chances than we were creating ahead of the Dubravka/Shelvey incident (go back and watch the game again if you don't believe me). For those who watched the game you will probably remember that the break in play that came then was a bit of a relief - they'd carved out decent chances in the second half, and we'd been restricted to shots from distances and blocked shots. Our best chances came on the counter, and for those who need it spelling out, counter-attacking football is where you defend, waiting for the opposition to commit bodies forward, then shift the ball and your attacking line to the other end of the pitch at pace as soon as you regain possession. So our best chances actually came at our most defensive moments.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pboromag

why not make a positive sub and put an attacker on and go for the 3rd and killer goal

any maager will tell you 2 isnt enough

---

I mean, this is just crazy talk. I get the idea of people criticising Rafa for going defensive, because the result didn't go our way and you're looking for some explanation. But why, at 2-0 up, would you go all out for a third goal when 3 points were so important?? If he did that, and we conceded that first goal because we were recklessly committing bodies forward, and conceded the second all the same, would you honestly be on here defending Rafa for his tactical genius because he went for it? Or should we have put Joselu on for a central midfielder after just conceding a goal away from home in a second half where we were on the back foot? Neither of those choices are defensible.

And, like I've already pointed out, our most dangerous counter-attack came after we'd made the Hayden sub, so it looks to me like Rafa's tactical decisions would have seen us get that third goal you're banging on about if only our best paid player could have put the ball in from 3 yards out. I promise you that Rafa isn't coaching the players into missing easy chances - it's just an unfortunate set of circumstances that has absolutely nothing to do with tactics or coaching, so not Rafa's fault. He's been at fault in other games, but just not in this one despite how frustrating the result was.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy1981_2

I'm a bit worried you've lost perspective. Shelvey's miss came after the Hayden substitution, so one of the two chances to wrap up the game in the second half that we're talking about came after we went defensive. And there's no way he should have been expected to have missed that - a professional of any standard puts that in 9 times out of 10, it was just that one freak miss in ten.



We'd already lost control of the midfield by this point. The fact is that we were conceding more chances than we were creating ahead of the Dubravka/Shelvey incident (go back and watch the game again if you don't believe me). For those who watched the game you will probably remember that the break in play that came then was a bit of a relief - they'd carved out decent chances in the second half, and we'd been restricted to shots from distances and blocked shots. Our best chances came on the counter, and for those who need it spelling out, counter-attacking football is where you defend, waiting for the opposition to commit bodies forward, then shift the ball and your attacking line to the other end of the pitch at pace as soon as you regain possession. So our best chances actually came at our most defensive moments.



I mean, this is just crazy talk. I get the idea of people criticising Rafa for going defensive, because the result didn't go our way and you're looking for some explanation. But why, at 2-0 up, would you go all out for a third goal when 3 points were so important?? If he did that, and we conceded that first goal because we were recklessly committing bodies forward, and conceded the second all the same, would you honestly be on here defending Rafa for his tactical genius because he went for it? Or should we have put Joselu on for a central midfielder after just conceding a goal away from home in a second half where we were on the back foot? Neither of those choices are defensible.

And, like I've already pointed out, our most dangerous counter-attack came after we'd made the Hayden sub, so it looks to me like Rafa's tactical decisions would have seen us get that third goal you're banging on about if only our best paid player could have put the ball in from 3 yards out. I promise you that Rafa isn't coaching the players into missing easy chances - it's just an unfortunate set of circumstances that has absolutely nothing to do with tactics or coaching, so not Rafa's fault. He's been at fault in other games, but just not in this one despite how frustrating the result was.

---

any manager will tell you they would go for the 3rd goal

and if i did take someone of to bolster the midfield it would have been shelvey
even before we knew or were told he had a knee injury

and i honestly would defend rafa as all i have asked is we attack
as much as some of the widescreen brigade keep harping on about how he sorts the back 4 out our goals conceded record doesnt back that up

we looked great attacking manure
we looked great attacking bournemouth
had we another credible striker option if i had to have taken of gayle i would have replaced him with a striker

as soon as we had no crdible threat(Shelvey hasnt scored or assisted a prem goal in over a year )and perez isnt a concern for any manager then you hand the initative back to them

how you can say any player puts taht in 9 times out of 10 well perez missed an easier one
shelvey has missed a hat full
he hasnt scored in over a year

thisis why he shouldnt have let mtro go

rafa is making the calls he is making the mistakes
our players are not defensive players in general
so why play a sytem they cant handle

is kennedy a defensive type layer .nope
atsu .nope
shelvey .nope
yedlin
perez
ritchie
murphy
merinho
none of the above
so why ask so many players to do somethingthey aint good at

when they attack and continue to attack they are a top 10-12 side