[Archived] Fulham Preview

[imy9]

Played 2 Drawn 2 F1 A1

Do you base your stats on a couple of games or do you prefer do what most normal people do and look at results over a season or longer?

8 wins

7 draws

4 losses

Last seasons results.

I can think of at least 10 more difficult not even including Manchester!

Did you extrapolate the results of the home fixtures for the first TWO games to work that out? Or will you wait for one more game to be played

[grizfoot]

The thing that's most worrying for me is that the players do not seem to understand what system they're playing. I tried to work out what formation we were playing, what each player's role was, and I really struggled. We didn't look stable, we just looked like a disorganised mess. Our few attacks came from players like Rochina showing their individual talent - there was very little team-play on show. As someone else earlier in the thread mentioned, our team play like strangers.

Whilst Fulham were very blunt attacking wise and had no real threat, I could at least make sense of the system they were playing and what each player was supposed to be doing.

We where playing 4-2-3-1, a system we've been playing for what at least four seasons now. Don't know what you found so difficult about recognizing it. In the first half I thought we played well enough and probably edged it, the formation and style of play is meant to be more fluid so the likes of Hoilett, Rochina and Formica can be continuously changing positions (not to be confused with being disorganised) and thus marking them harder to mark and better for finding space. This proved effective to some degree as Rochina's set position was supposedly on the right wing yet for his goal he found himself in the central-left attacking third.

A point is a good result against Fulham at Craven Cottage, second half was backs against the wall stuff at times but we still managed to limit Fulham to very few clear cut chances, Robbo only had two meaningful saves to make in the entire game. The fullback positions are still a major concern for me with Salgado and Givet often being caught out due to lack of pace, not helpedo ut by the fact our midfielders don't cover back particularly well, especially Hoilett.Thought we where wasteful at times going forward and often missed or simply didn't see that final pass in the final third. Overall a draw was probably a fair reflection, we where the better in the first half but Fulham came out much stronger in the second but we restricted them to very little in terms of chances.

[thenodrog]

You're floundering. We are in deep deep trouble due to gross mismanagement and you are carrying on with your baffling stance. Why?

[EWOODACE1]

1st half today was pretty decent. we edged it i would say. 2nd half was all fulham but we coped with it. they didnt create any major clear cut chances.

apart from his one bad back pass i thought dann was great.

our fullbacks where way too exposed

formica and goodwillie offered nothing

dunn played the holding role well and once he went off we couldnt keep possession

a point away from home is normally a good result but after the first 3 games its not really enough

[imy9]

You're floundering. We are in deep deep trouble due to gross mismanagement and you are carrying on with your baffling stance. Why?

was that aimed at me?

what's my baffling stance?

[DE.]

We where playing 4-2-3-1, a system we've been playing for what at least four seasons now. Don't know what you found so difficult about recognizing it. In the first half I thought we played well enough and probably edged it, the formation and style of play is meant to be more fluid so the likes of Hoilett, Rochina and Formica can be continuously changing positions (not to be confused with being disorganised) and thus marking them harder to mark and better for finding space. This proved effective to some degree as Rochina's set position was supposedly on the right wing yet for his goal he found himself in the central-left attacking third.

Hmmm... I don't think our current formation is anything like Hughes, Ince, or Allardyce ever played... but if that's how it's supposed to work then great. Somebody should probably tell the players though as 1 point out of 12 doesn't suggest they understand it or that it works at all.

[roverandout]

i think you will find fulham had one or 2 clear cut chances like the one where johnson wriggled passed our static defence only for zamora to get in the way including robinson's two great saves, we created...nothing!!!

[koi]

As I posted 10 mins in, the fitness was terrible, a number of players looked well out of condition and that's just not acceptable. The absolute basics should be to get a team both physically and mentally fit.

[martmitch]

On way back from the game, can't quite believe we got a point from that game, if I was a fulham fan I'd be furious, as I'm not I'm just feeling relief we were able to even get a point

Absolute belter of a goal from rochina, zamoras was good to tho real crappy defending from givet who got exposed countless times the first half by duff, thought dann did well bar 'that pass', petrovic was poor, goodwille was hobbling most the second half so at the end we had 9 men in effect

Schwartzer yellow was bit of a joke

My two pennies, feel lucky to have even got a point, prob didn't deserve to

Oh and credit for andy Johnson coming on and doing that great impersonation of a man being shot

[grizfoot]

Hmmm... I don't think our current formation is anything like Hughes, Ince, or Allardyce ever played... but if that's how it's supposed to work then great. Somebody should probably tell the players though as 1 point out of 12 doesn't suggest they understand it or that it works at all.

We played two upfront against Aston Villa so that was a different formation so can't really count that. Maybe it's more of the fact that new players need time to bed in, we've got a lot of new players in and it always takes time for them to bed in. My main worry from a tactical point of view was that our fullbacks always look extremely exposed. The current formation isn't anything amazingly new it's what most teams in the league play or subtle variation of the formation. Simply stated it's four at the back, two holding midfielders, two wide men and then one striker supported by an attacking midfield or "supporting striker". The only thing that has changed is the players in the team, call it naive or you could call it an attacking move but playing Hoilett & Rochina on the wings was a brave move, especially away from home. Difference being in days gone by we'd play with what I would call more defensive minded wide midfielders likes Pedersen, Diouf, Emerton, ect.

[texasrover]

I don't remember it too well now, but did schwartzer go to punch the ball? They were outside of the box, adding another dimension to the foul. Like I said, I don't remember and haven't seen any highlights, so I'm probably wrong.

[EWOODACE1]

we didnt have 2 up against villa. he played goodwillie down the right. another tactical masterstroke from our great manager

[FourLaneBlue]

C'mon Imy we lost Hoilett 2 minutes from the end, we looked fine without Samba and how Dunn is our best player this season I don't know. We've played 4 games and he's gotten injured in two of them.

You're technically right - a draw at Fulham is a good result. However, considering our terrible start to the season we really needed more. Not to mention the performance itself was stunningly bad. If we continue to play like that we go down.

Perfectly said.

[Drunx2002]

Slightly off topic, but just watched the highlights on MOTD2 and isn't Brad Friedel a true gent. Game was poor today, we got a point, a few injuries, Arsenal next. Nice.

[Commondore]

Did someone bribe Salgado before the game? I'm absolutely clueless over what he hoped to achieve with those two lunges in our penalty area, the first one especially was a penalty every day of the week. Givet also had one of those games, he's usually a steady if unspectacular full back but his first half today was just terrible. I'm a bit torn over the tactical approach, we did look disorganized and had problems securing a foothold in midfield but on the other hand the overflow of offensive players we had on the pitch made sure that we could threaten Fulham and caused our goal with good work from Dunn, Hoilett and Rochina.

I still think we look pretty porous, we need to complete our excellent array of center backs with working fullbacks as well as a more solid pairing in midfield. I still think Petrovic will turn out good, but he's still learning the ropes. The best solution would be to ease him in with Grella playing a larger role during that time, but we all know how dependable that man's fitness is...

[FourLaneBlue]

Extrapolating after FOUR games, 'bleedin' Nora'

How about if we extrapolate from our past half-season worth of results?

Last 19 Prem games...what would that give us?

[chaddyrovers]

Hmmm... I don't think our current formation is anything like Hughes, Ince, or Allardyce ever played... but if that's how it's supposed to work then great. Somebody should probably tell the players though as 1 point out of 12 doesn't suggest they understand it or that it works at all.

we did played a 4-2-3-1 formation under Hughes!!!

The games I can remember us playing this formation was 1st game was against Brimingham City in Carling Cup, Sunderland away in PL, I think Larissa game at home in Uefa Cup, then I think he back to 4-4-2 then return to that formation later in the season for the Villa away game, Man Utd game at home and Portsmouth away game. During that Game he switch his formation back to 4-4-2.

The front 6 players for the Sunderland away game was Tugay, Mokenna in central midfielder, Derbyshire on the right wing, Bentley in the Hole, Dunn on left winger and Santa Cruz up front.

[FourLaneBlue]

We where playing 4-2-3-1, a system we've been playing for what at least four seasons now. Don't know what you found so difficult about recognizing it.

Probably because he watched the game and tried to understand, instead of just accepting what he was told.

Tactically, we are a mess. If you couldn't recognise that today, then there isn't a lot more to say, is there?

[beastlove]

I don't think a draw at fulham is a bad result.... It was the performance particularly in the second half which makes me believe we are going down with keen. It was obvious that duff was the main danger yet keen did nothing. The same could be said about the midfield getting tight. Goodwilly isn't a target man and in that formation and style we needed someone to hold up the ball. I didn't get lowe .

WHY was samba not captain today

[roverandout]

imy you change your mind about kean more often than beckham changes his haircuts.

[Andy]

I don't remember it too well now, but did schwartzer go to punch the ball? They were outside of the box, adding another dimension to the foul. Like I said, I don't remember and haven't seen any highlights, so I'm probably wrong.

They both challenged for a 50/50 header, collided head-on and both went down.

Personally, I didn't see it as a foul, just a collision of heads, but if the ref is both seeing it as a foul and giving a card, it should probably have been a red rather than a yellow.

[DavidMailsTightPerm]

1st half today was pretty decent. we edged it i would say. 2nd half was all fulham but we coped with it. they didnt create any major clear cut chances.

apart from his one bad back pass i thought dann was great.

our fullbacks where way too exposed

formica and goodwillie offered nothing

dunn played the holding role well and once he went off we couldnt keep possession

a point away from home is normally a good result but after the first 3 games its not really enough

I would agree with this.

Overall - if we hadn't been subject to the last few months under Kean I would have been happy with a point. There were some positives - including Dann's overall performance and Rochina's goal. Unfortunately overall we looked like a team without a real team pattern and struggled to retain the ball (especially in the second half). We have some decent flair players - but unfortunately they didn't produce the goods - especially Hoilett who was especially poor. But Kean needs to realise quickly - that flair players also need a team pattern.

Thought Givet was poor first half - brilliant second. Dunn had a good match until injured. Nzonzi shows yet more promise, Dann showed promise (one misplaced pass apart).

Difficult match for Kean - injuries forced all his substitutions - or I am sure Goodwillie (who didn't look 100% fit) would have been off.

Where to now - personally I feel there is enough in the squad to get out of the mess we are in. However - this match also showed that Kean (and his back room staff) don't seem able to set up a reasonable team pattern or (unless unlucky) prepare teams adequately fitness wise. One point shouldn't be enough to detract Venky's if they feel Kean isn't up to the job. I still think there was enough commitment from the players to think they are behind him - but is it enough ? At the very least he needs an experienced no 2.

[AggyBlue]

Givet was good once he switched to CB. He was gash at left back for 45 minutes.

Because Junior hung him out to dry

[Tom]

Can't remember seeing a strike of such quality from a Rovers player maybe since Tugay, that ball was perfectly struck and no fluke either.

Watch him be dropped now. Why not play him up front though with a partner he isn't a winger.

[roverandout]

lumper roberts will be up front against arsenal, mertersaker will eat roberts alive.