SA: ‘We didn’t hoof it. We sat in and played on the break, won 1-0, did them tactically.
The truth.
So when Gus Poyet criticises us, he’s done well. Fabulous. Let’s see him in 20 years.’
Twat.
twat maybe. but he's right.
SA: ‘We didn’t hoof it. We sat in and played on the break, won 1-0, did them tactically.
The truth.
So when Gus Poyet criticises us, he’s done well. Fabulous. Let’s see him in 20 years.’
Twat.
Nothing at all. Poyet never said a word about it.
All it's done is pretty much guaranteed that 3,000 Albion fans will spend 90 minutes screaming "Hooooooooooooooooof" at the top of their voices every time West Ham knock the ball more than ten yards.
Well done, Sam, well done
Bom tish!
I just don't think anyone's giving them enough credit by half. We weren't THAT bad. They just gave us NO options in the final third.
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.
My recollection too, and I am prepared to give the West Ham defense some credit for our lack of a cutting edge.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.
Hold on a minute - they won one nil because our stand in keeper made a massive positioning cock up
Sam is like Tony Pullis. He's able to set essentially mediocre teams up to negate the footballing advantage of many of the teams they play and get results through playing long balls and set pieces. There's a school of thought that used to be espoused by Charles Hughes, formerly FA Head Coach, about the Position Of Maximum Opportunity, POMO. An analysis of goals scored shows that the majority are scored after 3 or less players on the same team play the ball consecutively. So, the theory goes, if you get the ball in the box as quickly as possible, with a hoof, and as often as possible you are more likely to score goals because only one or two of your players will have played the ball. Sam is very keen on statistics and football science. I'll bet he knows all about POMO and sets his teams up to play it more often then not.
Urmmm isn't that the point I made?twat maybe. but he's right.
I would also blame Bridcutt as well if we are going to finger point.
Sam is like Tony Pullis. He's able to set essentially mediocre teams up to negate the footballing advantage of many of the teams they play and get results through playing long balls and set pieces. There's a school of thought that used to be espoused by Charles Hughes, formerly FA Head Coach, about the Position Of Maximum Opportunity, POMO. An analysis of goals scored shows that the majority are scored after 3 or less players on the same team play the ball consecutively. So, the theory goes, if you get the ball in the box as quickly as possible, with a hoof, and as often as possible you are more likely to score goals because only one or two of your players will have played the ball. Sam is very keen on statistics and football science. I'll bet he knows all about POMO and sets his teams up to play it more often then not.