Allardyce talks Hoofball (brighton reference)

[Icy Gull]

They were AWFUL going forward. One of the worst sides at the Amex in that respect. EXCELLENT defensively, and that's what you expect from an Allardyce side. My point is, with their players and budget, they should be coming to a ground like ours looking to win 3-0 and playing good football. Not excuse for what Fat Sam's done there.

I am not defending Allardyce, I just can't get all precious about him having a go back about the hoof comments. I will love it (in a Keeganesque way) if we totally outfootball them at their place. We are a much better team than we were when we last played them and I reckon we are capable of causing a big upset if they are still struggling nervously to make the top two.

 

[Lady Whistledown]

Let's not be too harsh on big Sam. After all: if his team keep on playing like they have been, at least it'll render the debate about the need for a move to the bigger Olympic Stadium irrelevant.

 

[Paris]

Maybe there is still ill feeling over the Mackail-Smith transfer last summer. He's been doing the rounds in the media over the last week or so alienating himself amongst the West Ham fans. He has predictably reacted to the mob and this might well be the beginning of the end of his tenure at Upton Park. Twat.

 

[Smythe]

He's written Gus's team talk for him on 14th April

 

[Questions]

I love listening to Big Sam as he is completely deluded. WHU didn`t beat us because of Sam`s east end style Catenaccio, but because we played shit and gifted then a goal when one of our players slipped over on the ball.
Master tactician my arse. As they watch Reading and Saints ease past them I suspect Golds and his sidekick are getting out their honing steels at this very moment, planning their next moves and I bet it doesn`t involve the great tactition Alardyce. On the budget that he has WHU should be promoted by now.

He shouldn`t worry about where Gus will be in twenty years but where he`ll be in a little over 20 days.

 

[Mellotron]

I am not defending Allardyce, I just can't get all precious about him having a go back about the hoof comments. I will love it (in a Keeganesque way) if we totally outfootball them at their place. We are a much better team than we were when we last played them and I reckon we are capable of causing a big upset if they are still struggling nervously to make the top two.

I don't think people are giving enough credit to how good they were DEFENSIVELY against us. We wouldn't have scored if we'd played for 2 hours, and that wasn't just down to our players, I will give him credit for that.

But they were f***ing shitballs going forward against us. Carew was HILARIOUS that day.

 

[Acker79]

I thought that we were well beaten on the day personally

Looking back at the player ratings thread, I said:

I don't feel like I can give marks on individual basis tonight, but if my section of the crowd is anything to go by, you should probably all add 2 or 3 points on to barnes's score, because you're probably marking him down for the wrong things.

Every time Dicker or Sparrow misplaced a pass, lingered on the ball or failed to win a tackle there were cries of "ffs, Barnes, you're shit!" (or similar) I think at one point someone criticised him for his poor corner. He also stopped their full back advancing up the pitch, forcing him to turn back and play it back into is own half to which someone replied "Come on, Barnes, you jut let him play it!"

I thought the goal aside, we looked quite solid defensively.
We seemed to dominate the game, but after they got the goal, we didn't seem able to break them down. We seemed stuck in midfield. I don't know if it was lack of movement ahead of them, or just the sheer number of west ham players defending deep smothering the space, but it was frustrating on the times we broke and had a chance to get behind them, we would stop, and go back, it seemed like there were three or four occasions where the ball dropped to one of our players in the box and they would turn away from goal and play it back to midfield.

There were a lot of sloppy passes from us, maybe that was as much to do with the weather, I don't know.

West ham defended solidly, if unattractively, with the odd threatening break, while they were effective west ham didn't, for me, deserve the three points.

The ref was inconsistent, having booked reyes for a late challenge then failing to do it for three or four hammers late challenges, the booking another one of ours for something that they got away with, but it seemed in the second half, there were plenty of decisions they could feel hard done by for (though again, there seems to be an imbalance in the number of yellows cards we get in relation to the number of fouls we commit, compared to our opponents). 12 fouls for us, 4 yellows, 11 fouls for them, one yellow (not as bad as leeds where we both got 5 yellow, us committing 8 fouls, them committing 18).

It seemed out biggest failing was a lack of attacking intent, despite dominating possession. But west ham didn't deserve the 3 points, and we weren't that awful. "Well beaten" would oversell it, imo.

 

[Chucknorris]

He's up there with Colin Wanker and Steve Evans in the race for the 'bellend d'or'

 

[Mellotron]

Looking back at the player ratings thread, I said:


It seemed out biggest failing was a lack of attacking intent, despite dominating possession. But west ham didn't deserve the 3 points, and we weren't that awful. "Well beaten" would oversell it, imo.

And I would argue that was in large part due to excellent positional discipline from WHU's defenders.

 

[JamesAndTheGiantHead]

So Bridcutt is part of Sam's master plan after all, the sly old fox.

 

[Seagull16]

Well done Allardyce just get our backs up already, you absolute twat. I wonder where he will be in 20 yrs time, a far worse place than Gus.

 

[Simster]

I know I'm in the minority but I genuinely feel that Fat Sam gets a raw deal on here. His managerial record stands up to scrutiny wherever he's been; Bolton, Blackburn, Newcastle and now West Ham - his record has been decent everywhere.

He shouldn't have gobbed off about being able to win everything at Real Madrid of course, but that said West Ham in the Championship is as close to that situation as he's going to get - bigger resources than everyone else, so expected to win, and he could yet win the league in a 3 horse race.

And I know we all love Gus, but I can understand why Fat Sam gets f***ed off at the media. Ultimately, his team rocked up at The Amex, beat us with an early (ish) goal and parked the bus with ease. We didn't look like scoring. Job done. I suspect his Gus comments are more a swipe at the media and their gushing than they are at Gus himself.

 

[burrish-gull]

You are 100% right mate, cannot stand the bloke

Allardyce epitomises everything wrong with English football

 

[Tooting Gull]

I'm amazed at some people's recollections of that West Ham game.

They only 'did' us if they were coming for a 0-0. If that was the case (unlikely, I'd have thought), then up to a point.

The goal was nothing tactical from them, Bridcutt made a mistake he won't do again for five years probably, and Harper could have set himself more centrally.

Our overall football was good that night, we passed them off the pitch, and I came away nowhere near as pissed off as say for Palace. We just badly lacked a cutting edge, a familiar failing earlier in the season, but one which is nothing to do with how West Ham played at all.

I thought given their 'Premier League' players they were really poor on the night. They only looked liked scoring again when we started chasing the game, as we had to.

 

[Acker79]

And I would argue that was in large part due to excellent positional discipline from WHU's defenders.

I would argue that that has little to do with 'tactically doing us' and more to do with premier league defenders v league one attacking players with little experience in the championship.

 

[Mellotron]

I would argue that that has little to do with 'tactically doing us' and more to do with premier league defenders v league one attacking players with little experience in the championship.

Agreed. You will note above that I don't think they "tactically did us".

 

[Mellotron]

I'm amazed at some people's recollections of that West Ham game.

They only 'did' us if they were coming for a 0-0. If that was the case (unlikely, I'd have thought), then up to a point.

The goal was nothing tactical from them, Bridcutt made a mistake he won't do again for five years probably, and Harper could have set himself more centrally.

Our overall football was good that night, we passed them off the pitch, and I came away nowhere near as pissed off as say for Palace. We just badly lacked a cutting edge, a familiar failing earlier in the season, but one which is nothing to do with how West Ham played at all.

I thought given their 'Premier League' players they were really poor on the night. They only looked liked scoring again when we started chasing the game, as we had to.

Agreed with everything except the bit in bold. Their defence worked very hard to stop any options all game. They were very good in defence, as you would expect.

 

[Acker79]

Agreed. You will note above that I don't think they "tactically did us".

I did note that, but couldn't work out how to fit it in to my comment.

 

[turienzo's lovechild]

i confidently predict that in 20 years time gus will have achieved more than "big sam" ever has

in fact i'll go for 10 years

 

[wardy wonder land]

............He's been doing the rounds in the media over the last week or so alienating himself amongst the West Ham fans. He has predictably reacted to the mob and this might well be the beginning of the end of his tenure at Upton Park.............

.......reckon he's got the nod for the England Job, just clearing the way to walk away from 'ammers, team up with Stu for the dream pairing of minds

jonny forienger don't like it up 'em, smash, chase, hoof, lump, euro's in the bag !!!