What is more important to you, Winning or Playing attractive football?

[Hornblower]

Reading through the postings since the game last night there seems to be a clear division emerging amongst posters. There are those who feel that the way we play, win or lose is the most important thing and then there are those who only seem to care about winning even at the expense of attractive football. For me I am firmly in the former camp. I've been watching BHA for over 40 years and whilst I am always keen to see them do well, I have to be honest and say that I would rather see them play attractive football and lose, even slip down the league again, than resort to the kind of tactics that WHU deployed last night or the way we played under some previous managers of the recent past. The fact is that I have enjoyed games where we have played good football (regardless of the result) in all leagues and I can't honestly say that playing in higher leagues necessarily increases my enjoyment. I guess what it boils down to is that I love the club and I want to be proud of my club and that does not necessarily equate to winning games and rising up the league. I feel sorry for those who feel differently because when you've supported the albion for as long as I have, you know that if you are only here for the wins then you are going to be sorely disappointed.

 

[Quinney]

Spot on.

 

[Easy 10]

Dunno about winning. Going by this place, I think WHINING is most important thing to some people.

 

[Bob!]

Winning, playing attractive football is always a good option

 

[Napper]

Winning for me

 

[Horton's halftime iceberg]

Its great when we win playing attractive football, In Gus we Trust

 

[The Large One]

I'm just looking forward to the day when a Brighton & Hove Albion team plays the way Gus wants them to with some seriously shit-hot players. Every week.

Winning will then be a natural consequence of playing attractive football.

 

[NSK Winthorpe]

i think r passin is gud we just need to do mor shots on goal or thru balls

 

[Tony Meolas Loan Spell]

Being a Brighton fan its more than that simple option. Before you know it we are down the Mcghee "performances not points" road.

If it was about winning then we would all be Man Utd, Chelsea, Liverpool, Arsenal or the new kid on the block City fans

 

[Pantani]

Couldn't agree more. It is all about the style of football for me. Under Adams mark II it was truly shocking to watch us, people talk about no plan B with this side but that side's plan A was just to pump the ball in to the box from anywhere and everywhere. Plan B was to pump it in to the box from somewhere and nowhere. It didn't work then and still wouldn't now. You can play that way if, like West Ham, you have a team of big, strong and athletic players. These players do not come cheap though and I will always prefer us to play it on the deck.

 

[SULLY COULDNT SHOOT]

The two or not mutually exclusive. The fact is that in the Champ you dont win regularly if you play hoofball.

 

[Sussex Nomad]

Are people really suggesting a win at all costs situation? Because if they have I haven't read it, perhaps through choice. I have read a fair few posts suggesting we still play our attractive style but with more strength and conviction. I don't see that as a change in the plan?

 

[Hornblower]

Are people really suggesting a win at all costs situation? Because if they have I haven't read it, perhaps through choice. I have read a fair few posts suggesting we still play our attractive style but with more strength and conviction. I don't see that as a change in the plan?

Playing the Gus way and winning is the perfect combination but if I had to plump for one or the other I would stick with playing the Gus way even if it means losing one nil to an ugly side.

 

[MRWHU]

As a West Ham fan 'benefiting' in terms of results from awful, long ball, percentage, boring, dull football I can categorically tell you I'd rather be watching a quality, passing football team every week. I don't see the two as mutually exclusive. I don't see why you can't defend like West Ham did last night and break at pace using wingers and gut busting midfielders getting up to support a front two as opposed to just letting the opposition have the ball and see what they can do with it like we did.

That said, I don't think Brighton are making that choice yet. Dozens of passes across your own back four does not constitute passing football and beyond that Brighton don't appear to have any creativity.

Leeds seemed to have the right balance when we played them early in the season at UP (2-2) but they lost some of their better players in the transfer window.

I've got plenty of West Ham fans trying to convince me I have the choice of awful winning football and exciting losing football but I really don't see it that way. What's the point of it if that's the case?

Enjoyed the non-footballing elements last night. Good banter before and after the game and even waiting 45 minutes in a queue for a 1950's bus to the race course was a laugh. Good luck for the rest of the season and I hope your passing football ethic pays off eventually

 

[Tony Meolas Loan Spell]

That said, I don't think Brighton are making that choice yet. Dozens of passes across your own back four does not constitute passing football and beyond that Brighton don't appear to have any creativity.

Thank you! If anyone was in any doubt this is what I mean by FANNYING. Then we get pressured, then we make a mistake, then we concede a goal.

 

[keaton]

I think it misses the point a bit. At the moment, with the players and staff we have our best chance of winning is playing attractive football

 

[pasty]

Much rather watch us than the rubbish WHU served up last night. Jonathan Liew in The Telegraph is pretty scathing of them.

The art of league success is in winning ugly, so the maxim goes; and it is difficult to imagine a more hideous triumph than West Ham’s last night.

Telegraph Sport

 

[Kazenga <3]

i think r passin is gud we just need to do mor shots on goal or thru balls

dis

 

[Pavilionaire]

I agree with MRWHU's post entirely.

To be really effective you have to be able to pass the ball but also do it one touch and at pace. Gus is making big demands on our players (rightly so) and some are coming up short of the mark.

As for West Ham last night, fair play they got the result but at the complete expense of their principles. Is this really the club of Devonshire, Moore, Brooking? The Academy Of Football? Looks to me as though Big Sam is being the Ultimate Pragmatist, parking the bus with 9 men behind the ball in the knowledge half this division isn't good enough to score and knowing he'll get one or two chances on the break.

 

[Shooting Star]

I'd rather the passing brand of football Gus has established at the club. Results speak for themselves; when we haven't played our passing football we've lost (Leicester, Palace, not sure how we played against Ipswich but I imagine it wasn't brilliant). Personally I think last night was the first time this season that we've lost playing our passing football for more or less 90 minutes. That's a testament to how effective it usually is, and there is a reason why Gus said we're back. All we needed last night was Vicente or a taller striker (*cough*Murray*cough*) to grab at least a point. I didn't feel like we lost, I wonder if the Hammers fans there came away feeling like they'd just won 3 points (may be a silly question, but for example against Blackpool, I felt like we'd lost 3 points with the way the game ended, not gained 1)? If we continue to play the way we did last night, we'll be soaring up the table again.