Exactly !! Defies all logic doesn't ? It also mystifies me when some people even have on the subs bench in their team selectionsTheAlmightyAmmer wrote:I find it mad that some people are desperate for Sears to start just for the sake of 442. He's scored 3 goals in 70 something games :lol:
West Ham Utd 1 Burnley 2 (03/12/11)
Moderator: Gnome
- Puff Daddy
- Gone for a Burton
- Posts: 42250
- Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 2:08 pm
- Location: Westham Way
- Has liked: 248 likes
- Total likes: 1160 likes
Re: West Ham Utd v Burnley: match thread
-
- Posts: 18466
- Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 3:17 pm
- Location: Kumb Poster of the year 2009
- Has liked: 640 likes
- Total likes: 844 likes
Re: West Ham Utd v Burnley: match thread
Second best? Are you sure? Thats not the way I saw it.stormbringer wrote:In the first half we played very well,but the finishing was poor (Nolans miss) and why was Cole on the wing so much .?
Second half without Taylor and the very poor Piq on we looked a very second best to a strong quick Burnley side .
The 2 goals we let in were both poorly defended,the first Piq did not stop our old boy crossing which Taylor had done .
Poor team selection by BS (the team from midweek (2 droped) why? and poor subs .#
We could have started with Cole and Sears up front .
Collison is not playing well and could have scored in the second half.
Faubert ended up playing as a full back after O'brien went off for Carew,all in all we looked all over the place in the second half,and as allways when we get a chance to go top we blow it.
I've been to all the away games and the suport is fantastic ,we play without fear away from home ,yesterday the suport was not great, very quite in the first half and the team seem to get more nervous as the second half went on .
And Sam Faubert is best played as an out and out winger.
Sears starting up front as well?
Deary me.
- Up the Junction
- Thinks he owns the place
- Posts: 70931
- Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2002 12:03 am
- Has liked: 744 likes
- Total likes: 3444 likes
Re: West Ham Utd v Burnley: match thread
Post match pressers - Sam Allardyce:
http://www.kumb.com/story.php?id=125844" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.kumb.com/story.php?id=125844" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
- Cuenca 'ammer
- ex 'ouston 'ammer
- Posts: 40715
- Joined: Thu Dec 05, 2002 4:19 pm
- Location: Journey to the dead of night. High on a hill in Eldorado
- Has liked: 1903 likes
- Total likes: 1613 likes
Re: West Ham Utd v Burnley: match thread
Wasn't it Romford that predicted that "someone" would say that we didn't play 4-5-1 !!!!
:lol:
:lol:
- btajim - mcfc
- There when they were sh*t
- Posts: 9879
- Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 11:40 am
- Location: Cheshire
- Has liked: 72 likes
- Total likes: 440 likes
- Contact:
Re: West Ham Utd v Burnley: match thread
Did Burnley bring many? Well supported Club whose fans deserve Premiership football over Wigan or Bolton. That's the problem with attendances display in the match reviews, they never say how many away fans made the trip.
- RyanWHUFC
- Posts: 13787
- Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 8:33 am
- Location: Gold Sullivan and Brady OUT
- Total likes: 1 like
Re: West Ham Utd v Burnley: match thread
I think about 1500, West Ham opened up two blocks in the Trevor Brooking Lower.btajim - mcfc wrote:Did Burnley bring many? Well supported Club whose fans deserve Premiership football over Wigan or Bolton. That's the problem with attendances display in the match reviews, they never say how many away fans made the trip.
-
- Posts: 4768
- Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 11:13 pm
- Location: Woodford Green
- Has liked: 61 likes
- Total likes: 82 likes
- Bobby Orangeboom
- Posts: 34465
- Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2003 3:10 pm
- Location: London, unfortunately.
Re: West Ham Utd v Burnley: match thread
Him & probably 26,000 others..Cuenca 'ammer wrote:Wasn't it Romford that predicted that "someone" would say that we didn't play 4-5-1 !!!!
- cockney hammer
- Resident badge expert
- Posts: 108461
- Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2002 12:52 pm
- Location: http://boleynbadges.com
- Has liked: 1 like
- Total likes: 143 likes
- Contact:
- btajim - mcfc
- There when they were sh*t
- Posts: 9879
- Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 11:40 am
- Location: Cheshire
- Has liked: 72 likes
- Total likes: 440 likes
- Contact:
-
- Posts: 2795
- Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2011 11:21 am
Re: West Ham Utd v Burnley: match thread
They bought the fewest away fans this season and the majority sat.
- Up the Junction
- Thinks he owns the place
- Posts: 70931
- Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2002 12:03 am
- Has liked: 744 likes
- Total likes: 3444 likes
Re: West Ham Utd v Burnley: match thread
Eddie Howe, post-match presser:
http://www.kumb.com/story.php?id=125845" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.kumb.com/story.php?id=125845" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
- Cuenca 'ammer
- ex 'ouston 'ammer
- Posts: 40715
- Joined: Thu Dec 05, 2002 4:19 pm
- Location: Journey to the dead of night. High on a hill in Eldorado
- Has liked: 1903 likes
- Total likes: 1613 likes
Re: West Ham Utd v Burnley: match thread
Eddie Howe interview not exactly revealing. So it seems that they came to frustrate us and pack back and hope for a point.
Not for the first or last time methinks..........Seems like the reports (okay fish wraps not the best view to offer ~ seemingly confirmed by ESM's match report)
Burnley rarely threatened and got at least seven men behind the ball at the slightest hint of danger.
Fielding five in midfield and one striker, they tried to stifle West Ham, as the Hammers’ manager, Sam Allardyce, had feared.
Not until early in the second half did West Ham get any joy from their repeated attacks. Burnley were happy to sit back and soak up the pressure, a dangerous ploy given the hosts’ attacking threat.
And parking the bus backfired as Nolan made amends for his earlier miss by netting his sixth goal of the season in the 52nd minute.
Burnley's first shot came 10 minutes before the interval, Keith Treacy's long-range effort not troubling Robert Green as it fizzed wide.
Lots or reports of us "playing them off the park" but it seems as though they were "happy" to concede possession, defend and hope to hit on the break. Nowt wrong with that, we've done it umpteen times this season. We have to find a way to break that kind of tactic down. The onus is on us at U.P. I feel.
Not for the first or last time methinks..........Seems like the reports (okay fish wraps not the best view to offer ~ seemingly confirmed by ESM's match report)
Burnley rarely threatened and got at least seven men behind the ball at the slightest hint of danger.
Fielding five in midfield and one striker, they tried to stifle West Ham, as the Hammers’ manager, Sam Allardyce, had feared.
Not until early in the second half did West Ham get any joy from their repeated attacks. Burnley were happy to sit back and soak up the pressure, a dangerous ploy given the hosts’ attacking threat.
And parking the bus backfired as Nolan made amends for his earlier miss by netting his sixth goal of the season in the 52nd minute.
Burnley's first shot came 10 minutes before the interval, Keith Treacy's long-range effort not troubling Robert Green as it fizzed wide.
Lots or reports of us "playing them off the park" but it seems as though they were "happy" to concede possession, defend and hope to hit on the break. Nowt wrong with that, we've done it umpteen times this season. We have to find a way to break that kind of tactic down. The onus is on us at U.P. I feel.
- thejackhammer
- Posts: 9189
- Joined: Tue May 17, 2011 11:49 pm
- Total likes: 2 likes
Re: West Ham Utd v Burnley: match thread
I worry that without Baldock or Taylor we could struggle to break teams down, unless someone emerges as a goalscorer or setpiece master. I don't think any of our academy are ready to step up with the pressure on as replacements for Baldock and Taylor whilst we're out.Cuenca 'ammer wrote:.
Lots or reports of us "playing them off the park" but it seems as though they were "happy" to concede possession, defend and hope to hit on the break. Nowt wrong with that, we've done it umpteen times this season. We have to find a way to break that kind of tactic down. The onus is on us at U.P. I feel.
Re: West Ham Utd v Burnley: match thread
Cuenca 'ammer wrote:We have to find a way to break that kind of tactic down. The onus is on us at U.P. I feel.
We didn't fail to break them down, we just failed to take our chances. Burnley's defensive display was far from resolute.
Last edited by beckton on Sun Dec 04, 2011 3:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- RyanWHUFC
- Posts: 13787
- Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 8:33 am
- Location: Gold Sullivan and Brady OUT
- Total likes: 1 like
Re: West Ham Utd v Burnley: match thread
Very true, we didn't take our chances yesterday was just one of them days, had Nolan's 6 yard tap in gone in it may have been different but it didn't so now we must move on and win the next one.We didn't fail to break them down, we just failed to take our chances. Burnley's defensive was far from resolute
Last edited by RyanWHUFC on Sun Dec 04, 2011 3:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- The Rebirth
- It's all about the confidence
- Posts: 6704
- Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 11:59 am
- Location: Always censored, never quiet
Re: West Ham Utd v Burnley: match thread
love it they get 2 goals off the cuff and Howe bangs on about how good his defence were? Erm yeah goal post did well for you yesterday!
Howe comes out with the typical b*llocks but so does Allardyce to be fair!
Howe comes out with the typical b*llocks but so does Allardyce to be fair!
- Cuenca 'ammer
- ex 'ouston 'ammer
- Posts: 40715
- Joined: Thu Dec 05, 2002 4:19 pm
- Location: Journey to the dead of night. High on a hill in Eldorado
- Has liked: 1903 likes
- Total likes: 1613 likes
Re: West Ham Utd v Burnley: match thread
Beckton
Did we test the keeper at all ? Now I know we weren't brilliant with our shots on target, but it seemed (again from only hearing) that their defenders threw themselves into blocks, tackles and last ditch stuff.
So sometimes (and I couldn't watch we had no stream) defenders mark their opponents so tightly that the attacking team are "forced" to take ill advised long range shots. Or it could be lack of movement up front. Either way it makes a difference how the defending is viewed. According to Howe they defended well. According to BFS they didn't.
Judging by the formation b*llocks he keeps spouting I know who my money is on.
:lol:
Did we test the keeper at all ? Now I know we weren't brilliant with our shots on target, but it seemed (again from only hearing) that their defenders threw themselves into blocks, tackles and last ditch stuff.
So sometimes (and I couldn't watch we had no stream) defenders mark their opponents so tightly that the attacking team are "forced" to take ill advised long range shots. Or it could be lack of movement up front. Either way it makes a difference how the defending is viewed. According to Howe they defended well. According to BFS they didn't.
Judging by the formation b*llocks he keeps spouting I know who my money is on.
:lol:
Re: West Ham Utd v Burnley: match thread
Mentioned yesterday that could it be we are a little too one dimensional. By that i mean regardless of whether its a 433/451 or
41311, 43111 etc starting out the match with one up top on his own can become easily defensible for opponents especially at home. simply put two CB on the lone forward and mark him out of the game. Only had the commentary (?) to go by, but in the first half they perhaps commentated on the action for 15 minutes, implying there was very little going on. I know those who went say we were bossing it, but did we create much. It sounded also like Cole was having to come deep to collect the ball but was still isolated when he got the ball and turned up the pitch. I have a feeling that now some of the teams lower down the table will look at Burnley's approach to the game and rather than have a go, simply sit back, defend in numbers, dull the support down and try and catch us on the break. Even if it may mean riding their luck a little, like Burnley did yesterday. According to Dicks yesterday we had numerous crosses into the box but were trying to pick out one forward, we also had 10 corners, thats a boat load for us in general, but souned like we didnt clear the first man on many of them. I know the result could have been different and basically just put it down to being one of those days, just feel we may have been a little to predictable, especially first half.
I'm with Puff on this one, we need another forward of different ilk than Cole, Carew and Piq, even though we have Baldock who we missed yesterday.
Asking a lot, but feel we also need a out and out winger with pace, flair, ball at feet ability to help us unlock 8-9 behind the ball defences at home. Think we will see more of it over the winter months. The five man sub rule, really doesn't help us with the depth of squad we have in comparison to some other teams in the league. Would like to see what Montenegro or Montano could offer to the team, don't play them and we'll never know.
One of those days i guess.
41311, 43111 etc starting out the match with one up top on his own can become easily defensible for opponents especially at home. simply put two CB on the lone forward and mark him out of the game. Only had the commentary (?) to go by, but in the first half they perhaps commentated on the action for 15 minutes, implying there was very little going on. I know those who went say we were bossing it, but did we create much. It sounded also like Cole was having to come deep to collect the ball but was still isolated when he got the ball and turned up the pitch. I have a feeling that now some of the teams lower down the table will look at Burnley's approach to the game and rather than have a go, simply sit back, defend in numbers, dull the support down and try and catch us on the break. Even if it may mean riding their luck a little, like Burnley did yesterday. According to Dicks yesterday we had numerous crosses into the box but were trying to pick out one forward, we also had 10 corners, thats a boat load for us in general, but souned like we didnt clear the first man on many of them. I know the result could have been different and basically just put it down to being one of those days, just feel we may have been a little to predictable, especially first half.
I'm with Puff on this one, we need another forward of different ilk than Cole, Carew and Piq, even though we have Baldock who we missed yesterday.
Asking a lot, but feel we also need a out and out winger with pace, flair, ball at feet ability to help us unlock 8-9 behind the ball defences at home. Think we will see more of it over the winter months. The five man sub rule, really doesn't help us with the depth of squad we have in comparison to some other teams in the league. Would like to see what Montenegro or Montano could offer to the team, don't play them and we'll never know.
One of those days i guess.
- Up the Junction
- Thinks he owns the place
- Posts: 70931
- Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2002 12:03 am
- Has liked: 744 likes
- Total likes: 3444 likes
Re: West Ham Utd v Burnley: match thread
I felt he told it how it is. They came to frustrate, threw on some forwards when we scored and got an unexpected win.The Rebirth wrote:Howe comes out with the typical b***ocks but so does Allardyce to be fair!
I like Howe though. If he was Scottish I could see him in the Premier League at a Wigan or Blackburn.