BensGrandad
New member
Good to see Steele on the bench over Button as I prefer him of the two.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Albion] Brighton & Hove Albion vs Wolverhampton Wanderers *** Official Match Thread ***
- Thread starter Dick Head
- Start date
Boroseagull
Well-known member
Couldn't agree more, and if Paul Merson singles him out for praise and the DM (yes I know, I read it sometimes) starts its report by saying this;
When the team-sheets emerged, Chris Hughton's decision to place the 38-year-old right-back Bruno against the electric Adama Traore had the potential to be one of the crueller experiments the Premier League has witnessed.
Instead, the Catalan defender rose to the occasion quite remarkably. Not only did Bruno's diligence, experience and patient defending nullify the threat of the former Barcelona winger, but his confidence grew to the extent that he raided forwards beyond Traore to set up Brighton's winning goal.
The cult hero with the bald head and the Shoreditch beard powered into the penalty area on Traore's blindside just after the interval to meet a hooked cross, where he drove a cross-cum-shot that fell to Glenn Murray to score his sixth goal of the campaign. It makes Murray, 35, the highest-scoring Englishman in the Premier League this season and his natural instincts turning Brighton's obstinance into a winning formula.
Soon after the goal, Traore conceded defeat in the battle against a man sixteen years his senior as he swapped wings and by the hour mark, he had been hooked and replaced by Ivan Cavaleiro.
Weststander
Well-known member
Against brilliant ££££ young players, the veteran was understandably was up against it at times.
Also, what a few people don't seem to appreciate, is that he didn't have his usual right side partner in front of him. That makes a lot of difference in match situations. It's a team game.
ferring seagull
Well-known member
- Dec 30, 2010
- 4,607
swindonseagull
Well-known member
Did Knocky go straight down the tunnel at full time? thats what it looked like when I left...( edit....just seen the thread)
Last edited:
Fantastic we won but a performance apart from centre backs we were rubbish. A home game yet our 2 wingers spend more time doubling up as full backs. Despite this time and time again there wide players were left free. On the basis that our supporters think we are good if we win and rubbish if we lose i will refrain from looking at players ratings because sure they will all be 7 plus. Our wingers contributed nothing although a bit more then March. Last 2 home games have loved us winning but have also enjoyed the entertaining football opposition have played. But what do I know about football as I see although we are so defensive we have scored more goals then both West Ham and Wolves
Weststander
Well-known member
Perspective:
Albion - a relatively low budget (by PL standards) work in progress, and we cannot afford to pay the vast player wages demanded on signing by the Wolves players. Hence no international class CM'ers and playmakers, able to control the ball and games.
Wolves and West Ham - paying vast sums in wages and fees to superagents, to pack their squads with internationals, able to run games. I follow European football, and Wolves have somehow been able to acquire/borrow a whole bunch of very well known accomplished players over the last 2 years.
They're the irrefutable facts of footballing life.
So CH has to find a way to get points, despite the huge advantages in playing staff at other clubs.
He succeeded.
True but Man Utd probably have a wage bill more than the combined amounts of West Ham, Newcastle and Wolves and we gave them a run for their money!
Weststander
Well-known member
I put that down to CH who weighs up tactics for every game with his analytical team, having far more insight than us. They must have seen a chink in ManU and their current indifferent problems with some lazy primadonnas at that time, to go for it. Whereas the new style WHam and their media chums thought they were world beaters when turned up at the Amex, similarly much loved Wolves. Our current squad is inferior in many ways due to their spending power, so clever CH does that not get sucked into end to end attacking football - 9 times out of 10 they'd crush us.
Not ideal, but we're building steadily, improving pur squad window by window.
Patience.
Hudd and Fulham keep taking it to the opposition and getting destroyed.
Ahhh the importance of understanding the difference between then and than. This **** has just said he want to lose a game of football followed by some homosexual activity.
brightn'ove
cringe
In 7 years at the Amex I’ve never had trouble with any fans except wolves, every time we’ve played them.
Peter Grummit
Well-known member
We have a winner.
I didn't make it to Sunderland but the other 3 games were epic affairs. Came from a goal down to beat Leicester at the Goldstone on Easter Saturday; outclassed already relegated Palace at an half-empty Selhurst; Steve Foster goal helping beat Dirty Leeds in a must-win Goldstone finale.
Can we emulate this feat at Goodison next week? A big ask, and we'd have to play much better than we did yesterday.
PG
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
I didn't make it to Sunderland but the other 3 games were epic affairs. Came from a goal down to beat Leicester at the Goldstone on Easter Saturday; outclassed already relegated Palace at an half-empty Selhurst; Steve Foster goal helping beat Dirty Leeds in a must-win Goldstone finale.
Can we emulate this feat at Goodison next week? A big ask, and we'd have to play much better than we did yesterday.
PG
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
Nottseagull
Well-known member
By 'going for goal' I meant scoring or making a goal. He may well have been dispossessed by going to the corner but this was in the dying seconds, so WW's final attack would have been launched several vital seconds later. This would have been far less risky than attempting to 'seal it', which I think is a euphemism for 'going for glory'.
Last edited:
Obviously neither Paul Merson or the DM know what they're talking about then, at least according to many NSC on this thread.
- Aug 7, 2003
- 8,075
If that article had been in the Guardian, the usual suspects, on here, would be creaming themselves and posting copious
’s 
Nixonator
Well-known member
He said chances, not shots.
We had 2 clear breakaways where you'd expect us to score if an earlier, more decisive pass was made in either of them. We squandered them, but they were very good chances.
Most of Wolves shots came from long range, and aside from the very late Bennett chance and a shot through a crowd of players, Ryan was barely troubled.
Would you say out of the 7 shots they had on target, that any of them was as clearcut a chance as when Izquierdo or Knockaert broke away?
Their best and only real clearcut chance of the game came in the first half when they failed to hit the target - Doherty passing it outside the post.
Bruno, pass or shot?
Not so much a pass but he looked up and hit in front of Murray. It looked awkward because he used his right foot. The last time Bruno scored he used his left.
PS. In the percentage manual of football (CH era), possession football is a defensive tactic. I wish we could keep the ball a bit better though.
I thought the game would go like this. Playing three at the back like Wolves is asking for trouble with a quick break (which really needs three players).
Not so much a pass but he looked up and hit in front of Murray. It looked awkward because he used his right foot. The last time Bruno scored he used his left.
PS. In the percentage manual of football (CH era), possession football is a defensive tactic. I wish we could keep the ball a bit better though.
I thought the game would go like this. Playing three at the back like Wolves is asking for trouble with a quick break (which really needs three players).
I agree. Doherty shepherded on to his weaker left foot. Saw that all the way.
I was only concerned when Boly arrived late in our penalty area and nearly got his head on a cross.
Wolves were worth a draw though.