West hams BENCH

Also i think WHU wanted to prove a point on tv.

They have (manager,players) have took a lot stick and we were the unlucky team that got it and did we get a beating.2nd goal was very good though.

 

Twaddle. If they had beaten us because of their quality then fair enough, trouble is they did not have to use it often enough cos we made it too easy.

 

The problem is, it's easy to talk about "having a go" and "putting up a fight" and all that but this squad of players are assembled from another footballing world than West Ham (and loads more in this division). Not only that, but after starting brightly in the opening 5 minutes, we conceded a soft goal and our incredibly fragile confidence shattered into pieces, right in front of our eyes.

To say they don't care about the shirt, they aren't trying and all the rest of it, that's absolute b*llocks as far as I'm concerned. That wasn't a team not trying out there, it was a team that is absolutely devoid of self-belief, confidence, and when you lack the ability and experience of almost every team we've come up against this season, then once confidence goes, it's a dangerous place to be.

I don't know where they're gonna find that belief from, which is very worrying.

 

Ultimately the first goal set the game up

Not one of our players in the box attempted to clear the ball and we left their best player unmarked 2 yards out.

Maybe that's because we're skint?

 

whoa easy tiger ! :0)

I don't think that I'm a happy clapper and I certainly respect all our right to an opinion.

I do think that the money can make a massive difference though

The performance was poor but it isn't a level playing field and it's getting worse.

 

That is what Keith Hill is paid handsomely for, not you or me, its his job and he is failing in his job at the moment.

 

I agree Tykleton that a lot of people have gone way over the top... I think mainly due to their emotions, because they're angry and embarrassed and in some cases because all they do is whinge.

However today was woeful - you mention conceding a soft goal - which is the point. If you do that so early, and it was a shocking goal, then yes it can impact your confidence, but conceding that goal was part of the poor performance.

 

Perhaps we should stop talking about "over-achieving" at any given opportunity then?

 

The middle ground is just that...

Having the perspective to notice that they were the better team today. They stopped us playing. We didn't just go out and decide not to play. The main reason they were better is because they have the quality in their side that we seem to be lacking at the moment. Sometimes, hard work and endeavour just doesn't cut it. Sometimes it does. Unfortunately, that wasn't the case this evening.

Regarding Donny, West Hams home form has been shocking this season, which is why they aren't top of the league. That's because of the way they play. They've won 12 away games this season. They constantly close down opposition and force errors. When you're playing away, this tactic is much more effective as the home team tries to go for it. At home, most away teams tend to sit back and soak up the pressure, so such tactics are much less effective.

 

Re: Ultimately the first goal set the game up

Like. Basic errors are **** all to do with money.

 

Quality at this level, right through the starting 11 too but we were still poor. When we had the ball we didn't have a clue, we just moved it sideways and backwards, slowly. Man for man though they are better than us right through the 16.

 

Re: At least someone's trying to show a bit of perspective...

Then why not change that tactic then?

 

Re: Ultimately the first goal set the game up

Davies tried. Unfortunately, it went straight through his legs. Granted, it was a **** goal to concede, but there was a certain amount of misfortune to be allocated to it.

The second was probably worse for me. I can't begin to think of a reason our MOTM didn't close him down. Great finish, but he shouldn't have been allowed to crack one.

The third all began when we should have had a clear free kick, then an awful ball back to the keeper resulted in him being forced into an error by Maynard. He then hesitated and decided to stay off his line, which was perhaps not the best idea. Another great finish.

The final goal was just awful from both players on the right hand side.

 

Re: Ultimately the first goal set the game up

So in summary the goals we conceded were awful. Which is what I was getting at from the start.

 

That's fair enough. Rather than actually try against teams, what we should do is look at how much they earn, realise it's more than us, so we should just roll over and die.

 

Hell yeah.

 

I must have misconstrued what you were getting at...

As it seemed like you were saying we were just **** all over, and it had nothing to do with the opposition...

 

Re: Ultimately the first goal set the game up

yeah because the more you pay, the more 'talent' the player has and less likely to make a mistake??

 

I certainly never said it was nothing to do with West Ham

However you just went through all the goals and described most of them as awful.

You credited two of the finishes, and rightly so, but they only had the chances due to our incompetence.

I'd argue none of their goals were down to them cutting us open with fine football and that they were all very avoidable - hence them having more money was not the main reason we lost.

Blaming lack of money for a poor performance is very easy.

 

That was a Premier League team today

The only player they lost was Scott Parker from last season's premier league campaign. They have also added Vaz Te, Maynard, Baldock, Nolan, Carew etc.

It was a premier league team against a middle/lower Championship team low on confidence and it showed.