Considered buckin opinion

G

GTIF

Roofer
Never mind the quality feel the win.
They dominated possession but Mats had a relatively easy night.
Their best chance was the Ings header which Mats would have saved if it was going in
Wiilf was restored to his correct position and did well
Vardy did what Vardy does and defensively we were much improved
Daka scored a decent goal
Much improved in general
Brighton will be a better test
God save Ireland
 
I am pleased we have the win for the 'vibes', the priceless 3 points and all that, but that was an excruciating performance especially in the first half. But Rome wasn't built in a day and some ideas seem to be seeping in even after a couple of training sessions.
I agree about needing Winks back for the control and there is a possibility of a rock solid midfield 3 of Ndidi, Soumare (who was much improved) and Winks which could really make the difference when we need to defend with our backs to the wall.
I also think there just may, MAY, be a possibility that Daka back means he can play the role of 'super' sub with 20 mins left. So Jamie can run himself in the ground doing his thing safe in the knowledge he will get a rest and then bring on another hard working speed merchant for the remaining time. I know this is not a fool-proof plan, but it is better than Eduard and means we keep a similar shape and plan. It could work.....with the emphasis on could, of course
 
I’ll reserve my judgement on Ruud for a few more weeks yet but early stages indicate I was very wrong about him and about our chances.
 
DagenhamFox said:
I’ll reserve my judgement on Ruud for a few more weeks yet but early stages indicate I was very wrong about him and about our chances.
Click to expand...
The more I have heard about him and listen to him speak, the more I think he does know what he is doing and is similar to Maresca style of appointment but with genuine managerial experience. I am actually quite excited, especially if we can find a few pennies to spend in January to develop the squad.
 
I thought that player for player they were miles better than us. Mad's kept us in the game, and their finishing was woeful.
Having said that, our performance was full of guts, and the real chances we had were well taken. Our defensive structure will take some sorting out, and RVN'S player options in any position on the field are extremely limited.
I still think it's going be a very rough ride towards May for all concerned.
 
evingtonfox said:
I thought that player for player they were miles better than us. Mad's kept us in the game, and their finishing was woeful.
Having said that, our performance was full of guts, and the real chances we had were well taken. Our defensive structure will take some sorting out, and RVN'S player options in any position on the field are extremely limited.
I still think it's going be a very rough ride towards May for all concerned.
Click to expand...
Reminds me of the saying after watching the extended highlights this morning, if you can't be good, be lucky. Hope this applies to managers as well.
 
I keep hearing about how lucky we are due to opposition strikers finishing being woeful. Every game, both last season and this, perhaps we're expecting too much of strikers, perhaps they're no longer as lethal as they were. We'd be on zero points if they'd scored the number of sitters people think they're missing.
 
Last edited:
hackneyfox said:
I keep hearing about how lucky we are due to opposition strikers finishing being woeful. Every game both last season and this, perhaps we're expecting too much of strikers, perhaps they're no longer as lethal as they were. We'd be on zero points if they'd scored tyhe number of sitters people thin they're missing.
Click to expand...
It was the most shots West Ham have ever had in the PL and it was the highest XG they’ve created since that particular metric began. If you don’t think that was lucky then I don’t know what else can possibly be said.
 
DagenhamFox said:
Was it luck or was it crap finishing coupled with a resolute defensive display?

Or a bit of both.
Click to expand...
The opposition missing sitters is lucky. Plain and simple. As is the referee disallowing a perfectly good goal for nothing.

It was enjoyable and exciting but as the manager himself admitted, it has to improve and isn’t sustainable and as they get more time together hopefully it will.
 
I thought we were better than Saturday but not by much. Keeper played great but was powder puff for the disallowed ,goal terrible refereeing decision.
Ndidi was much better and Soumare finally shows us he can actually play.
Not a fan of Vesta but thought him and Coady did ok.
The problem we have is not being good enough to keep hold of the ball and build a platform on which to attack .
Daka will be Daka,took his goal very well but earlier showed his other side when failing to control an easy ball and allowing the keeper to smother, he couldn’t trap a medicine ball.
I like both bilal and buono but I don’t think you can have both in the same team all the time.
 
GTIF said:
Never mind the quality feel the win.
They dominated possession but Mats had a relatively easy night.
Their best chance was the Ings header which Mats would have saved if it was going in
Wiilf was restored to his correct position and did well
Vardy did what Vardy does and defensively we were much improved
Daka scored a decent goal
Much improved in general
Brighton will be a better test
God save Ireland
Click to expand...
And Guinness.
 
shanetko said:
It was the most shots West Ham have ever had in the PL and it was the highest XG they’ve created since that particular metric began. If you don’t think that was lucky then I don’t know what else can possibly be said.
Click to expand...
That they're strikers aren't as lethal as ours?
 
hackneyfox said:
That their strikers aren't as lethal as ours?
Click to expand...
On a sample data of one game.. let’s face it West Ham are better in front of goal than us generally, they just weren’t yesterday. They got 60 goals last season in the prem with virtually the same players + a load of spend on top since.

The whole point is being proactive and realising you can’t simply base your existence on expecting the opposition to miss every chance, you have to be better so they don’t get anywhere near as many of them because on another day (Man Utd away for eg, every half sniff goes in and you are hammered).
 
shanetko said:
On a sample data of one game.. let’s face it West Ham are better in front of goal than us generally, they just weren’t yesterday. They got 60 goals last season in the prem with virtually the same players + a load of spend on top since.

The whole point is being proactive and realising you can’t simply base your existence on expecting the opposition to miss every chance, you have to be better so they don’t get anywhere near as many of them because on another day (Man Utd away for eg, every half sniff goes in and you are hammered).
Click to expand...
Or Brentford where we gave them too much space and they were clinical.
 
shanetko said:
On a sample data of one game.. let’s face it West Ham are better in front of goal than us generally, they just weren’t yesterday. They got 60 goals last season in the prem with virtually the same players + a load of spend on top since.

The whole point is being proactive and realising you can’t simply base your existence on expecting the opposition to miss every chance, you have to be better so they don’t get anywhere near as many of them because on another day (Man Utd away for eg, every half sniff goes in and you are hammered).
Click to expand...
Agreed but the point I was trying to make was that since we've all become negative nellies we keep moaning about how lucky we are and that we only got points because the opposition missed a hatful of sitters. How many times over the last two seasons have you seen comments like 'they should have been 4 up by halftime'? Either we are lucky in every game, all teams miss sitters and we're more pessimistic than most other fans and think we're getting away with it. I thinks it's the latter. All Leicester fan sites for the last few seasons are generally full of people moaning whatever the score.
 
I think the circumstances helped us.
RVN 1st game and at home which automatically puts the fans in a more positive mood

Also the West Ham fans are on the verge of a meltdown. Loppy chops ain't going down very well with them, they were on the end of a drubbing by the Gunners, and their mood seems to be on a downer.

The 3pts for us are a very welcome bonus, but the ' bounce ' is not likely to last long with so many difficult fixtures looming.
The task for RVN is to keep the players believing when things don't go our way.
 
hackneyfox said:
Agreed but the point I was trying to make was that since we've all become negative nellies we keep moaning about how lucky we are and that we only got points because the opposition missed a hatful of sitters. How many times over the last two seasons have you seen comments like 'they should have been 4 up by halftime'? Either we are lucky in every game, all teams miss sitters and we're more pessimistic than most other fans and think we're getting away with it. I thinks it's the latter. All Leicester fan sites for the last few seasons are generally full of people moaning whatever the score.
Click to expand...
It’s striving for better not being a negative Nellie IMO. Shame nobody at the club took note of how freakishly fortunate 21/22 (8th when we should have been in relegation trouble) was and adjusted things for 22/23.
 
shanetko said:
The opposition missing sitters is lucky. Plain and simple. As is the referee disallowing a perfectly good goal for nothing.

It was enjoyable and exciting but as the manager himself admitted, it has to improve and isn’t sustainable and as they get more time together hopefully it will.
Click to expand...
Are u having a laugh the foul on Mads for the disallowed one was bĺatant as buck
 
GTIF said:
Are u having a laugh the foul on Mads for the disallowed one was bĺatant as buck
Click to expand...
It was weak as piss goalkeeping Soucek barely moved. He’s basically air punched it into his own net then threw himself down out of shame. Goalkeepers a protected species on an embarrassing level.
 
shanetko said:
It’s striving for better not being a negative Nellie IMO. Shame nobody at the club took note of how freakishly fortunate 21/22 (8th when we should have been in relegation trouble) was and adjusted things for 22/23.
Click to expand...
All boards have become pits of doom with people moaning about everything the club/team does, yes things haven't been great but it's hardwork reading posts nowadays. FT is typical, 8 pages if we win, 48 if we don't.
 
Chad Backstick said:
I am pleased we have the win for the 'vibes', the priceless 3 points and all that, but that was an excruciating performance especially in the first half. But Rome wasn't built in a day and some ideas seem to be seeping in even after a couple of training sessions.
I agree about needing Winks back for the control and there is a possibility of a rock solid midfield 3 of Ndidi, Soumare (who was much improved) and Winks which could really make the difference when we need to defend with our backs to the wall.
I also think there just may, MAY, be a possibility that Daka back means he can play the role of 'super' sub with 20 mins left. So Jamie can run himself in the ground doing his thing safe in the knowledge he will get a rest and then bring on another hard working speed merchant for the remaining time. I know this is not a fool-proof plan, but it is better than Eduard and means we keep a similar shape and plan. It could work.....with the emphasis on could, of course
Click to expand...
winks ndidi and soumare means no creative mids. you can only have 2 of those 3 if you want to make chances.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top