Albion talking point: How can they increase their goal tally?

The Argus: David Rodriguez in action at Watford David Rodriguez in action at Watford

That’s three away league games without a goal for Albion.

They have not netted on the road in the Championship since Inigo Calderon’s low bobbler was helped into his own net by Blackpool keeper Matt Gilks on December 29.

There were a couple of moments at Watford when it seemed that run had ended, when they hit the bar and had a goal disallowed.

But the Seagulls are still struggling for goals both on the road and at The Amex, where their strike rate is not great of late.

So what would you do to change that? Can David Rodriguez, Solly March or Jonathan Obika play a bigger part?

Should Leo Ulloa have another striker alongside him?

Should Kazenga LuaLua always start home and away?

Where can Andrea Orlandi or David Lopez be most profitably used?

We’d love to know your thoughts.

Comments (81)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

10:15am Mon 3 Feb 14

thetungsten says...

simples- play 2 up front!
simples- play 2 up front! thetungsten

10:20am Mon 3 Feb 14

pjwilk says...

Think you have answered your own questions everybody knows what to do except OG and NJ.Always start with two up front and Lua Lua and Soly or Buckley on the other wing.Ditch the 4-5-1 and go 4-4-2 with wingers.Look at Saints,what an attacking line up breaking foreward with speed and accuracy.Dont forget OG while we are attacking there is no defending to do,there is only one ball on the pitch make sure we keep it or win it back quickly.
Think you have answered your own questions everybody knows what to do except OG and NJ.Always start with two up front and Lua Lua and Soly or Buckley on the other wing.Ditch the 4-5-1 and go 4-4-2 with wingers.Look at Saints,what an attacking line up breaking foreward with speed and accuracy.Dont forget OG while we are attacking there is no defending to do,there is only one ball on the pitch make sure we keep it or win it back quickly. pjwilk

10:24am Mon 3 Feb 14

Ex-pat Arnie says...

We've had the chances, we're just not putting them away. 15 efforts at goal against watford when we played badly isn't too appalling. Does anyone remember Bristol City away last season under Gus when we didn't have a single attempt at all?

Despite what pjwilk says, going all out attacking will cost you dear unless you score every time you bomb forward. We would get caught on the break time and time again, which is not how our relatively pace-less defence work at their best.
We've had the chances, we're just not putting them away. 15 efforts at goal against watford when we played badly isn't too appalling. Does anyone remember Bristol City away last season under Gus when we didn't have a single attempt at all? Despite what pjwilk says, going all out attacking will cost you dear unless you score every time you bomb forward. We would get caught on the break time and time again, which is not how our relatively pace-less defence work at their best. Ex-pat Arnie

10:26am Mon 3 Feb 14

Tweek70 says...

thetungsten wrote:
simples- play 2 up front!
Agreed, Ulloa was brought in and used as a target man to get the ball down and distribute or flick on the ball for the other striker and then play assist moving forward, using him as a lone striker means he then has to bring the ball down and take on a whole defece single handed if the wingers & midfield aren't up there with him, 4-4-2 seems to be the best option to suit that.
[quote][p][bold]thetungsten[/bold] wrote: simples- play 2 up front![/p][/quote]Agreed, Ulloa was brought in and used as a target man to get the ball down and distribute or flick on the ball for the other striker and then play assist moving forward, using him as a lone striker means he then has to bring the ball down and take on a whole defece single handed if the wingers & midfield aren't up there with him, 4-4-2 seems to be the best option to suit that. Tweek70

10:26am Mon 3 Feb 14

fratsomrover says...

Brighton will only ever increase their goal tally if they play a game where they encourage players to get into the opposition penalty box. I watch Man City, Southampton and the likes pouring men forward when they attack. Sometimes they get 5 or 6 in their opponents penalty area in open play.
By comparison we barely get 2 and more normally 1. We have skillful, pacy wingers in Lua Lua, Buckley and March, but rarely start with them. Instead we settle for mediocre,play safe players who dont get forward because they are frightened they will not be able to get back and cover if play breaks down.
We need to play a higher line throughout the team, with Greer and Upson pushing right up to the half way line so the midfielders can get further forward in support of the forward(s). We create nothing in our opponents penalty box because we dont get players in there. Most of our recent goal attempts have been Lua Lua's piledrivers from outside the box.
We need pace and trickery on the wings, hence Buckley or March, and we need another striker alongside Ulloa, whether that be CMS, Obika or new guy Rodriguez, I dont yet know, but what I do know for sure, is that playing Ulloa up front alone is absolutely pointless in OG current set up.
If OG & NJ cant see that, they shouldn't be in the job.
30 goals in 28 games is pathetic and it is the system that is to blame. It is also terribly boring to watch and a far cry from the entertainment OG promised when he was appointed.
Goals win games OG, and the sooner you wake up to that fact, the better
Brighton will only ever increase their goal tally if they play a game where they encourage players to get into the opposition penalty box. I watch Man City, Southampton and the likes pouring men forward when they attack. Sometimes they get 5 or 6 in their opponents penalty area in open play. By comparison we barely get 2 and more normally 1. We have skillful, pacy wingers in Lua Lua, Buckley and March, but rarely start with them. Instead we settle for mediocre,play safe players who dont get forward because they are frightened they will not be able to get back and cover if play breaks down. We need to play a higher line throughout the team, with Greer and Upson pushing right up to the half way line so the midfielders can get further forward in support of the forward(s). We create nothing in our opponents penalty box because we dont get players in there. Most of our recent goal attempts have been Lua Lua's piledrivers from outside the box. We need pace and trickery on the wings, hence Buckley or March, and we need another striker alongside Ulloa, whether that be CMS, Obika or new guy Rodriguez, I dont yet know, but what I do know for sure, is that playing Ulloa up front alone is absolutely pointless in OG current set up. If OG & NJ cant see that, they shouldn't be in the job. 30 goals in 28 games is pathetic and it is the system that is to blame. It is also terribly boring to watch and a far cry from the entertainment OG promised when he was appointed. Goals win games OG, and the sooner you wake up to that fact, the better fratsomrover

10:28am Mon 3 Feb 14

tug509 says...

I`ts painfully obvious to most ,if not all ,that Leo is struggling up front on his own ,and with poor service ,so play someone up front with him and put two wingers on the pitch to provide the service needed ,not FA manager talk ,but not rocket science either . When ever we have had two strikers on the pitch ,with at least one wide man ,we have been a threat ,y,day we were no threat ,until SM ,KLL and DRS came on.
Kaz was on the field less than two minutes before he made an impact ,by then we were already 1-0 down ,to a team with no fight or spirit ,according to their own supporters ,but our lack of teeth and defensive posture ,soon gave them that !.
As some noticed y,day ,the frustration from Leo is palpable ,a more attacking side will score more goals ,simple common sense ,we may let in a few more over the season ,but that is not a forgone conclussion ,ask Leicester !.
I`ts painfully obvious to most ,if not all ,that Leo is struggling up front on his own ,and with poor service ,so play someone up front with him and put two wingers on the pitch to provide the service needed ,not FA manager talk ,but not rocket science either . When ever we have had two strikers on the pitch ,with at least one wide man ,we have been a threat ,y,day we were no threat ,until SM ,KLL and DRS came on. Kaz was on the field less than two minutes before he made an impact ,by then we were already 1-0 down ,to a team with no fight or spirit ,according to their own supporters ,but our lack of teeth and defensive posture ,soon gave them that !. As some noticed y,day ,the frustration from Leo is palpable ,a more attacking side will score more goals ,simple common sense ,we may let in a few more over the season ,but that is not a forgone conclussion ,ask Leicester !. tug509

10:31am Mon 3 Feb 14

Postman_Pat says...

The gap between Ulloa and everyone else is too big. Our midfield yesterday lacked anyone with real pace to get up and support Leo and he became isolated.

Barnes would have been the ideal man to play "in the hole" behind him, but now he has gone. Hopefully Orlandi can stay fit and slot in there.
The gap between Ulloa and everyone else is too big. Our midfield yesterday lacked anyone with real pace to get up and support Leo and he became isolated. Barnes would have been the ideal man to play "in the hole" behind him, but now he has gone. Hopefully Orlandi can stay fit and slot in there. Postman_Pat

10:36am Mon 3 Feb 14

lotsofducks says...

The stats for Sunday (BBC website) tell a story: Albion - 65% possession - ONE shot on target; Watford, 35% possession - FIVE shots on target. Strikers tend (like fast bowlers) to hunt in pairs, so let's give Ulloa a partner. Yes, there's a risk we may concede more goals, but we will score more, I think.
The stats for Sunday (BBC website) tell a story: Albion - 65% possession - ONE shot on target; Watford, 35% possession - FIVE shots on target. Strikers tend (like fast bowlers) to hunt in pairs, so let's give Ulloa a partner. Yes, there's a risk we may concede more goals, but we will score more, I think. lotsofducks

10:47am Mon 3 Feb 14

Tonyuk175 says...

need a creater we have the workers somebody like VICENTE!!!!

lets just get him he is still available and when he played last season he was a class above!! MUST be worth a SHOT!!!

UTA
need a creater we have the workers somebody like VICENTE!!!! lets just get him he is still available and when he played last season he was a class above!! MUST be worth a SHOT!!! UTA Tonyuk175

11:04am Mon 3 Feb 14

Ex-pat Arnie says...

Ulloa did fine on his own under GP, so I don't think he has a problem with playing up front on his own.

Yesterday we seemed to miss Ince and Crofts, but nothing could be done about that as they're injured.

I've actually read people writing off Rodriguez after one appearance as substitute - a display many others saw as promising, so there you have it, there will always be moaners.

Some accuse me of having rose-tinted specs (a suggestion my wife would be in hysterics about), but let me ask those people one thing: who is enjoying this season more, you or me?
Ulloa did fine on his own under GP, so I don't think he has a problem with playing up front on his own. Yesterday we seemed to miss Ince and Crofts, but nothing could be done about that as they're injured. I've actually read people writing off Rodriguez after one appearance as substitute - a display many others saw as promising, so there you have it, there will always be moaners. Some accuse me of having rose-tinted specs (a suggestion my wife would be in hysterics about), but let me ask those people one thing: who is enjoying this season more, you or me? Ex-pat Arnie

11:15am Mon 3 Feb 14

SeagullOverSelsey says...

Alter the formation and play two up front.Should have gone all out and bought Conway not even attempted a loan deal.
Alter the formation and play two up front.Should have gone all out and bought Conway not even attempted a loan deal. SeagullOverSelsey

11:21am Mon 3 Feb 14

Claude Back says...

fratsomrover wrote:
Brighton will only ever increase their goal tally if they play a game where they encourage players to get into the opposition penalty box. I watch Man City, Southampton and the likes pouring men forward when they attack. Sometimes they get 5 or 6 in their opponents penalty area in open play.
By comparison we barely get 2 and more normally 1. We have skillful, pacy wingers in Lua Lua, Buckley and March, but rarely start with them. Instead we settle for mediocre,play safe players who dont get forward because they are frightened they will not be able to get back and cover if play breaks down.
We need to play a higher line throughout the team, with Greer and Upson pushing right up to the half way line so the midfielders can get further forward in support of the forward(s). We create nothing in our opponents penalty box because we dont get players in there. Most of our recent goal attempts have been Lua Lua's piledrivers from outside the box.
We need pace and trickery on the wings, hence Buckley or March, and we need another striker alongside Ulloa, whether that be CMS, Obika or new guy Rodriguez, I dont yet know, but what I do know for sure, is that playing Ulloa up front alone is absolutely pointless in OG current set up.
If OG & NJ cant see that, they shouldn't be in the job.
30 goals in 28 games is pathetic and it is the system that is to blame. It is also terribly boring to watch and a far cry from the entertainment OG promised when he was appointed.
Goals win games OG, and the sooner you wake up to that fact, the better
Excellent summary.
It's only all the people living abroad and who don't go to the games week in week out who cannot see it either. Edited lowlights on the web don't show the whole story especially as TV cannot show the movement off the ball, if any!
I might differ with our Centre Backs getting up to the half way line though as they are no longer blessed with the speed of the youngsters and teams might exploit that. Apart from that I think Fratsomrover speaks for most of us. It's pretty **** obvious what the problem is. We could sign the best striker in the world and he would struggle in this set-up.
Poor Leo had to contend with being marked by three Centre Backs yesterday and even if he won the ball he had nobody to lay it off to or head it on to. It is significant that he can not jump as high when the ball comes straight up to him through the middle but can reach it and head it better when the ball comes in from the wings. How many times though do we get behind the opposition and do that? How many times do we turn defenders? A low single digit is the answer.
[quote][p][bold]fratsomrover[/bold] wrote: Brighton will only ever increase their goal tally if they play a game where they encourage players to get into the opposition penalty box. I watch Man City, Southampton and the likes pouring men forward when they attack. Sometimes they get 5 or 6 in their opponents penalty area in open play. By comparison we barely get 2 and more normally 1. We have skillful, pacy wingers in Lua Lua, Buckley and March, but rarely start with them. Instead we settle for mediocre,play safe players who dont get forward because they are frightened they will not be able to get back and cover if play breaks down. We need to play a higher line throughout the team, with Greer and Upson pushing right up to the half way line so the midfielders can get further forward in support of the forward(s). We create nothing in our opponents penalty box because we dont get players in there. Most of our recent goal attempts have been Lua Lua's piledrivers from outside the box. We need pace and trickery on the wings, hence Buckley or March, and we need another striker alongside Ulloa, whether that be CMS, Obika or new guy Rodriguez, I dont yet know, but what I do know for sure, is that playing Ulloa up front alone is absolutely pointless in OG current set up. If OG & NJ cant see that, they shouldn't be in the job. 30 goals in 28 games is pathetic and it is the system that is to blame. It is also terribly boring to watch and a far cry from the entertainment OG promised when he was appointed. Goals win games OG, and the sooner you wake up to that fact, the better[/p][/quote]Excellent summary. It's only all the people living abroad and who don't go to the games week in week out who cannot see it either. Edited lowlights on the web don't show the whole story especially as TV cannot show the movement off the ball, if any! I might differ with our Centre Backs getting up to the half way line though as they are no longer blessed with the speed of the youngsters and teams might exploit that. Apart from that I think Fratsomrover speaks for most of us. It's pretty **** obvious what the problem is. We could sign the best striker in the world and he would struggle in this set-up. Poor Leo had to contend with being marked by three Centre Backs yesterday and even if he won the ball he had nobody to lay it off to or head it on to. It is significant that he can not jump as high when the ball comes straight up to him through the middle but can reach it and head it better when the ball comes in from the wings. How many times though do we get behind the opposition and do that? How many times do we turn defenders? A low single digit is the answer. Claude Back

11:27am Mon 3 Feb 14

Baldseagull says...

Ulloa needs decent crosses, he isn't getting them.
Ulloa needs decent crosses, he isn't getting them. Baldseagull

11:37am Mon 3 Feb 14

russellsnr2 says...

Claude Back wrote:
fratsomrover wrote:
Brighton will only ever increase their goal tally if they play a game where they encourage players to get into the opposition penalty box. I watch Man City, Southampton and the likes pouring men forward when they attack. Sometimes they get 5 or 6 in their opponents penalty area in open play.
By comparison we barely get 2 and more normally 1. We have skillful, pacy wingers in Lua Lua, Buckley and March, but rarely start with them. Instead we settle for mediocre,play safe players who dont get forward because they are frightened they will not be able to get back and cover if play breaks down.
We need to play a higher line throughout the team, with Greer and Upson pushing right up to the half way line so the midfielders can get further forward in support of the forward(s). We create nothing in our opponents penalty box because we dont get players in there. Most of our recent goal attempts have been Lua Lua's piledrivers from outside the box.
We need pace and trickery on the wings, hence Buckley or March, and we need another striker alongside Ulloa, whether that be CMS, Obika or new guy Rodriguez, I dont yet know, but what I do know for sure, is that playing Ulloa up front alone is absolutely pointless in OG current set up.
If OG & NJ cant see that, they shouldn't be in the job.
30 goals in 28 games is pathetic and it is the system that is to blame. It is also terribly boring to watch and a far cry from the entertainment OG promised when he was appointed.
Goals win games OG, and the sooner you wake up to that fact, the better
Excellent summary.
It's only all the people living abroad and who don't go to the games week in week out who cannot see it either. Edited lowlights on the web don't show the whole story especially as TV cannot show the movement off the ball, if any!
I might differ with our Centre Backs getting up to the half way line though as they are no longer blessed with the speed of the youngsters and teams might exploit that. Apart from that I think Fratsomrover speaks for most of us. It's pretty **** obvious what the problem is. We could sign the best striker in the world and he would struggle in this set-up.
Poor Leo had to contend with being marked by three Centre Backs yesterday and even if he won the ball he had nobody to lay it off to or head it on to. It is significant that he can not jump as high when the ball comes straight up to him through the middle but can reach it and head it better when the ball comes in from the wings. How many times though do we get behind the opposition and do that? How many times do we turn defenders? A low single digit is the answer.
Hi, Sorry but you don't have to go the games week in week out, you just have to listen to JC on the seagulls player every game, you can hear the frustration coming from the commentaries when we get the ball to the area only for the move to fall apart. I would love for OG to go with two men up front even if only for a couple games, what's to loose? if we don't score we are not getting into the play off's so put two up and at least double the chances for a goal or two!!!
[quote][p][bold]Claude Back[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fratsomrover[/bold] wrote: Brighton will only ever increase their goal tally if they play a game where they encourage players to get into the opposition penalty box. I watch Man City, Southampton and the likes pouring men forward when they attack. Sometimes they get 5 or 6 in their opponents penalty area in open play. By comparison we barely get 2 and more normally 1. We have skillful, pacy wingers in Lua Lua, Buckley and March, but rarely start with them. Instead we settle for mediocre,play safe players who dont get forward because they are frightened they will not be able to get back and cover if play breaks down. We need to play a higher line throughout the team, with Greer and Upson pushing right up to the half way line so the midfielders can get further forward in support of the forward(s). We create nothing in our opponents penalty box because we dont get players in there. Most of our recent goal attempts have been Lua Lua's piledrivers from outside the box. We need pace and trickery on the wings, hence Buckley or March, and we need another striker alongside Ulloa, whether that be CMS, Obika or new guy Rodriguez, I dont yet know, but what I do know for sure, is that playing Ulloa up front alone is absolutely pointless in OG current set up. If OG & NJ cant see that, they shouldn't be in the job. 30 goals in 28 games is pathetic and it is the system that is to blame. It is also terribly boring to watch and a far cry from the entertainment OG promised when he was appointed. Goals win games OG, and the sooner you wake up to that fact, the better[/p][/quote]Excellent summary. It's only all the people living abroad and who don't go to the games week in week out who cannot see it either. Edited lowlights on the web don't show the whole story especially as TV cannot show the movement off the ball, if any! I might differ with our Centre Backs getting up to the half way line though as they are no longer blessed with the speed of the youngsters and teams might exploit that. Apart from that I think Fratsomrover speaks for most of us. It's pretty **** obvious what the problem is. We could sign the best striker in the world and he would struggle in this set-up. Poor Leo had to contend with being marked by three Centre Backs yesterday and even if he won the ball he had nobody to lay it off to or head it on to. It is significant that he can not jump as high when the ball comes straight up to him through the middle but can reach it and head it better when the ball comes in from the wings. How many times though do we get behind the opposition and do that? How many times do we turn defenders? A low single digit is the answer.[/p][/quote]Hi, Sorry but you don't have to go the games week in week out, you just have to listen to JC on the seagulls player every game, you can hear the frustration coming from the commentaries when we get the ball to the area only for the move to fall apart. I would love for OG to go with two men up front even if only for a couple games, what's to loose? if we don't score we are not getting into the play off's so put two up and at least double the chances for a goal or two!!! russellsnr2

11:43am Mon 3 Feb 14

Clean Sheet says...

Brighton has been through quite a turbulent January, but to write off the season for 1 poor month with almost all difficult away games is ridiculous. All teams have a slump at some point during the season, injuries, loss of form/confidence. We have had ours I hope, and with a string of home games, can put a run together. We still have a great squad, despite the changes in Jan. I think we have missed Croft more than any of the others, and Stephens is the one to replace him, but will need this week training to work himself into the side. Clearly LU needs support. Is that going to be CMS as it was whe he arrived last season?
Brighton has been through quite a turbulent January, but to write off the season for 1 poor month with almost all difficult away games is ridiculous. All teams have a slump at some point during the season, injuries, loss of form/confidence. We have had ours I hope, and with a string of home games, can put a run together. We still have a great squad, despite the changes in Jan. I think we have missed Croft more than any of the others, and Stephens is the one to replace him, but will need this week training to work himself into the side. Clearly LU needs support. Is that going to be CMS as it was whe he arrived last season? Clean Sheet

11:45am Mon 3 Feb 14

gilbertthecat says...

Been said elsewhere and i said it on another thread, we need someone in m/field who can be the creative engine at the heart of the game, controlling things and making things happen. The sort of thing Steven Gerrard does / did but we are lacking - and no, I'm not suggesting we try and get him before any of you jump on that bit! Vicente playing regularly may well have made a difference last season, we'll never know now, but I believe we really need someone of that ilk to come through, either as a loan or from the development squad. That would release the wingers who would then in turn produce crosses for the striker/s. As stated, it's all about getting the ball to LU as often as possible, then the chances will get converted. Not sure we'll get a suitable loan in though due to wages/ffp/blah blah and anyone that good and affordable will likely be staying at their own club

Still looking forward to Donny and Leeds..
Been said elsewhere and i said it on another thread, we need someone in m/field who can be the creative engine at the heart of the game, controlling things and making things happen. The sort of thing Steven Gerrard does / did but we are lacking - and no, I'm not suggesting we try and get him before any of you jump on that bit! Vicente playing regularly may well have made a difference last season, we'll never know now, but I believe we really need someone of that ilk to come through, either as a loan or from the development squad. That would release the wingers who would then in turn produce crosses for the striker/s. As stated, it's all about getting the ball to LU as often as possible, then the chances will get converted. Not sure we'll get a suitable loan in though due to wages/ffp/blah blah and anyone that good and affordable will likely be staying at their own club Still looking forward to Donny and Leeds.. gilbertthecat

11:59am Mon 3 Feb 14

Steveg1958 says...

I'm amazed that some on here advocate still playing one up front when clearly this isn't working ! , we certainly have players that are capable enough, what's wrong with trying two wingers, Kaz and Buckley or Solly March, plus Leo and Rodney, (or Obika), plus Ince charging forward from the middle, at least that way we put the opposition on the back foot for once and make it less likely that our lack of pace at the back is exposed, move the ball forward quicker and have enough players far enough forward to get something and who knows we might find it works, it just needs OG and NJ to be a bit adventurous for once,
It worked in the past and it could work again. (Ward / Mellor / Towner and Sully), (Smiley, Ryan, Robinson and Smith), ring any bells anyone, I seem to remember those teams being a bit successful and funnily enough exciting to watch too, (maybe Tony Bloom should think back to how exciting the football was when his Grandad Harry took him to the Goldstone all those years ago, and do something about it, If our present management team won't change the system to see if it works, (at least), maybe he should change them. I'd actually like to be entertained when I go to the Amex please, that's why I pay for my season tickets actually.
I'm amazed that some on here advocate still playing one up front when clearly this isn't working ! , we certainly have players that are capable enough, what's wrong with trying two wingers, Kaz and Buckley or Solly March, plus Leo and Rodney, (or Obika), plus Ince charging forward from the middle, at least that way we put the opposition on the back foot for once and make it less likely that our lack of pace at the back is exposed, move the ball forward quicker and have enough players far enough forward to get something and who knows we might find it works, it just needs OG and NJ to be a bit adventurous for once, It worked in the past and it could work again. (Ward / Mellor / Towner and Sully), (Smiley, Ryan, Robinson and Smith), ring any bells anyone, I seem to remember those teams being a bit successful and funnily enough exciting to watch too, (maybe Tony Bloom should think back to how exciting the football was when his Grandad Harry took him to the Goldstone all those years ago, and do something about it, If our present management team won't change the system to see if it works, (at least), maybe he should change them. I'd actually like to be entertained when I go to the Amex please, that's why I pay for my season tickets actually. Steveg1958

12:04pm Mon 3 Feb 14

GosportGull says...

Play a more attacking style , ditch the defensive midfielder that plays infront of the defence , why do we need that ! I still think Ince could be Centre Back , he knows how to bring the ball out of defence .. unlike Gordon !
Play one winger with a free role , so he can play either side of the park ..and of course , two up front gives you twice as much chance of scoring as one does .. Center backs love it , they only have one striker to mark bewteen them .. And midfield need to stop recieveing the ball with their backs to the opponents goal ! Their body shape dictates that they acn only go straight back or sideways ... more counter attacking play .. give the ball to the winger and the forwards flood the box ..What we lack is pace and speed on the attack , its all too sideways and predictable , slow , boring and the other side has plenty of time to get numbers behind the ball which means we resort to long shots from 35yds out !
There , thats got that off my chest .. nothing will change but at least i feel better for my rant ! lol UTA !!!
Play a more attacking style , ditch the defensive midfielder that plays infront of the defence , why do we need that ! I still think Ince could be Centre Back , he knows how to bring the ball out of defence .. unlike Gordon ! Play one winger with a free role , so he can play either side of the park ..and of course , two up front gives you twice as much chance of scoring as one does .. Center backs love it , they only have one striker to mark bewteen them .. And midfield need to stop recieveing the ball with their backs to the opponents goal ! Their body shape dictates that they acn only go straight back or sideways ... more counter attacking play .. give the ball to the winger and the forwards flood the box ..What we lack is pace and speed on the attack , its all too sideways and predictable , slow , boring and the other side has plenty of time to get numbers behind the ball which means we resort to long shots from 35yds out ! There , thats got that off my chest .. nothing will change but at least i feel better for my rant ! lol UTA !!! GosportGull

12:20pm Mon 3 Feb 14

Ex-pat Arnie says...

One person beomans shooting from distance, while others have spent all season arguing that we don't shoot enough from distance.

And there is our support in microcosm :-)

PS: No offence to anyone intended, it's just that the team will never please everyone.
One person beomans shooting from distance, while others have spent all season arguing that we don't shoot enough from distance. And there is our support in microcosm :-) PS: No offence to anyone intended, it's just that the team will never please everyone. Ex-pat Arnie

12:49pm Mon 3 Feb 14

fansunited says...

We are to predictable, we don't trouble the oppostions defence, Ulloa hasn't got the pace, a lone stiker will only work if they have loads of pace, need wingers that can place a ball with accuracy come in Craig Conway! teams like Burnley and Leicester have proved how affective two up front is especially in the championship, it's not rocket science.
We are to predictable, we don't trouble the oppostions defence, Ulloa hasn't got the pace, a lone stiker will only work if they have loads of pace, need wingers that can place a ball with accuracy come in Craig Conway! teams like Burnley and Leicester have proved how affective two up front is especially in the championship, it's not rocket science. fansunited

1:09pm Mon 3 Feb 14

VegasSeagull says...

How can we score more goals, well perhaps our back four could learn how to get their collective heads on a ball sent in from a corner, and direct it toward the goal, that would help.
How about having a settled line up of our best players, you know, a line up which does not change due to injuries nearly every match.
Perhaps having a couple of players that are capable of running at defenders, players with on ball skills and pace, but Kaz and Buckley can't stay fit, can they and Crofts has only just been replaced.
What if we get Ward and Bruno to raid more, operate as wing backs, give us a little of the, Wayne Bridge effect, but neither have the pace to do that, and maybe not the skills either.
I know, we should play our two creative midfielders, you know the two that are always on the bench, can't think of their names **** it, oh wait a minute, we don't have two creative midfielders, do we.
How do we score more goals, well we wait until the summer, we off load all the players that can't stay fit. We get rid of all those that lack pace. We then get shot of all players over 30 years of age but retain the talented young lads around whom we completely rebuild. Rebuild with some players that have pace, flair and creativity, players that are comfortable with the ball at their feet and can go past defenders, oh yeah, and we spend about 12 million in the process, maybe more. That should do it, but that's all next year, isn't it.
How can we score more goals, well perhaps our back four could learn how to get their collective heads on a ball sent in from a corner, and direct it toward the goal, that would help. How about having a settled line up of our best players, you know, a line up which does not change due to injuries nearly every match. Perhaps having a couple of players that are capable of running at defenders, players with on ball skills and pace, but Kaz and Buckley can't stay fit, can they and Crofts has only just been replaced. What if we get Ward and Bruno to raid more, operate as wing backs, give us a little of the, Wayne Bridge effect, but neither have the pace to do that, and maybe not the skills either. I know, we should play our two creative midfielders, you know the two that are always on the bench, can't think of their names **** it, oh wait a minute, we don't have two creative midfielders, do we. How do we score more goals, well we wait until the summer, we off load all the players that can't stay fit. We get rid of all those that lack pace. We then get shot of all players over 30 years of age but retain the talented young lads around whom we completely rebuild. Rebuild with some players that have pace, flair and creativity, players that are comfortable with the ball at their feet and can go past defenders, oh yeah, and we spend about 12 million in the process, maybe more. That should do it, but that's all next year, isn't it. VegasSeagull

1:15pm Mon 3 Feb 14

pjwilk says...

Ulloa needs balls put in from the wings he is good with his head and will snap up fast crosses its no good with him with his back to goal his strengths are not speed through the middle but from where he can see the ball coming across goal.
Ulloa needs balls put in from the wings he is good with his head and will snap up fast crosses its no good with him with his back to goal his strengths are not speed through the middle but from where he can see the ball coming across goal. pjwilk

1:19pm Mon 3 Feb 14

brightonfan34 says...

i feel we are so predictable and we make it so easy for other teams
i feel we are so predictable and we make it so easy for other teams brightonfan34

1:20pm Mon 3 Feb 14

falmer seagull says...

Play Solly and drop David, should have happened months ago!
Play Solly and drop David, should have happened months ago! falmer seagull

1:24pm Mon 3 Feb 14

brightonfan34 says...

why not play 2 up top with ulloa and obika with march on one side and lua lua or buckley on the other and have stephens and orlandi in the middle of midfield with ince in front of the back four
why not play 2 up top with ulloa and obika with march on one side and lua lua or buckley on the other and have stephens and orlandi in the middle of midfield with ince in front of the back four brightonfan34

1:55pm Mon 3 Feb 14

lowerbeedingseagull says...

The Chairman should be looking very closely at how Garcia and Jones react to this situation before it become a crisis.
The Chairman should be looking very closely at how Garcia and Jones react to this situation before it become a crisis. lowerbeedingseagull

2:09pm Mon 3 Feb 14

Ex-pat Arnie says...

brightonfan34 wrote:
why not play 2 up top with ulloa and obika with march on one side and lua lua or buckley on the other and have stephens and orlandi in the middle of midfield with ince in front of the back four
I'm sure OG would live to do that, but that would need 12 players, unless you want to play without a keeper?
[quote][p][bold]brightonfan34[/bold] wrote: why not play 2 up top with ulloa and obika with march on one side and lua lua or buckley on the other and have stephens and orlandi in the middle of midfield with ince in front of the back four[/p][/quote]I'm sure OG would live to do that, but that would need 12 players, unless you want to play without a keeper? Ex-pat Arnie

3:43pm Mon 3 Feb 14

VegasSeagull says...

lowerbeedingseagull wrote:
The Chairman should be looking very closely at how Garcia and Jones react to this situation before it become a crisis.
Do you think that it's possible that the chairman, and others, did look very closely prior to the window closing?
Mr. Bloom is the man at the top, he writes the cheques, Burke and Barber do his bidding, so was it Burke that didn't buy in the window, or was he not allowed to by in the window, buy more than he did.
[quote][p][bold]lowerbeedingseagull[/bold] wrote: The Chairman should be looking very closely at how Garcia and Jones react to this situation before it become a crisis.[/p][/quote]Do you think that it's possible that the chairman, and others, did look very closely prior to the window closing? Mr. Bloom is the man at the top, he writes the cheques, Burke and Barber do his bidding, so was it Burke that didn't buy in the window, or was he not allowed to by in the window, buy more than he did. VegasSeagull

3:51pm Mon 3 Feb 14

Oscar's Chin says...

Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
Ulloa did fine on his own under GP, so I don't think he has a problem with playing up front on his own.

Yesterday we seemed to miss Ince and Crofts, but nothing could be done about that as they're injured.

I've actually read people writing off Rodriguez after one appearance as substitute - a display many others saw as promising, so there you have it, there will always be moaners.

Some accuse me of having rose-tinted specs (a suggestion my wife would be in hysterics about), but let me ask those people one thing: who is enjoying this season more, you or me?
I'm with you, Arnie!

(By the way, you don't happen to have a comedy Austro-American accent do you?!)

;)
[quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: Ulloa did fine on his own under GP, so I don't think he has a problem with playing up front on his own. Yesterday we seemed to miss Ince and Crofts, but nothing could be done about that as they're injured. I've actually read people writing off Rodriguez after one appearance as substitute - a display many others saw as promising, so there you have it, there will always be moaners. Some accuse me of having rose-tinted specs (a suggestion my wife would be in hysterics about), but let me ask those people one thing: who is enjoying this season more, you or me?[/p][/quote]I'm with you, Arnie! (By the way, you don't happen to have a comedy Austro-American accent do you?!) ;) Oscar's Chin

3:55pm Mon 3 Feb 14

ballantrrae says...

Claude Back wrote:
fratsomrover wrote:
Brighton will only ever increase their goal tally if they play a game where they encourage players to get into the opposition penalty box. I watch Man City, Southampton and the likes pouring men forward when they attack. Sometimes they get 5 or 6 in their opponents penalty area in open play.
By comparison we barely get 2 and more normally 1. We have skillful, pacy wingers in Lua Lua, Buckley and March, but rarely start with them. Instead we settle for mediocre,play safe players who dont get forward because they are frightened they will not be able to get back and cover if play breaks down.
We need to play a higher line throughout the team, with Greer and Upson pushing right up to the half way line so the midfielders can get further forward in support of the forward(s). We create nothing in our opponents penalty box because we dont get players in there. Most of our recent goal attempts have been Lua Lua's piledrivers from outside the box.
We need pace and trickery on the wings, hence Buckley or March, and we need another striker alongside Ulloa, whether that be CMS, Obika or new guy Rodriguez, I dont yet know, but what I do know for sure, is that playing Ulloa up front alone is absolutely pointless in OG current set up.
If OG & NJ cant see that, they shouldn't be in the job.
30 goals in 28 games is pathetic and it is the system that is to blame. It is also terribly boring to watch and a far cry from the entertainment OG promised when he was appointed.
Goals win games OG, and the sooner you wake up to that fact, the better
Excellent summary.
It's only all the people living abroad and who don't go to the games week in week out who cannot see it either. Edited lowlights on the web don't show the whole story especially as TV cannot show the movement off the ball, if any!
I might differ with our Centre Backs getting up to the half way line though as they are no longer blessed with the speed of the youngsters and teams might exploit that. Apart from that I think Fratsomrover speaks for most of us. It's pretty **** obvious what the problem is. We could sign the best striker in the world and he would struggle in this set-up.
Poor Leo had to contend with being marked by three Centre Backs yesterday and even if he won the ball he had nobody to lay it off to or head it on to. It is significant that he can not jump as high when the ball comes straight up to him through the middle but can reach it and head it better when the ball comes in from the wings. How many times though do we get behind the opposition and do that? How many times do we turn defenders? A low single digit is the answer.
Two good posts. Thanks Fratsmorover and Claude Back.
If we are going to play 4-3-3 (ie back 4, midfield 3 including defensive midfielder with 3 up front - CF plus two wingers) then lets play 4-3-3 not 4-5-1. If not then switch to 4-4-2. The main point is to ensure that Ulloa or whoever the main striker is doesn't get isolated. Improving the accuracy of our shooting might help as well. Taking yesterday as an example we had 15 shots but only one on target with a couple of near things - LuaLua hitting the wood work and Ulloa's disallowed header.
66% possession is not the point if it doesn't translate into goals.
[quote][p][bold]Claude Back[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fratsomrover[/bold] wrote: Brighton will only ever increase their goal tally if they play a game where they encourage players to get into the opposition penalty box. I watch Man City, Southampton and the likes pouring men forward when they attack. Sometimes they get 5 or 6 in their opponents penalty area in open play. By comparison we barely get 2 and more normally 1. We have skillful, pacy wingers in Lua Lua, Buckley and March, but rarely start with them. Instead we settle for mediocre,play safe players who dont get forward because they are frightened they will not be able to get back and cover if play breaks down. We need to play a higher line throughout the team, with Greer and Upson pushing right up to the half way line so the midfielders can get further forward in support of the forward(s). We create nothing in our opponents penalty box because we dont get players in there. Most of our recent goal attempts have been Lua Lua's piledrivers from outside the box. We need pace and trickery on the wings, hence Buckley or March, and we need another striker alongside Ulloa, whether that be CMS, Obika or new guy Rodriguez, I dont yet know, but what I do know for sure, is that playing Ulloa up front alone is absolutely pointless in OG current set up. If OG & NJ cant see that, they shouldn't be in the job. 30 goals in 28 games is pathetic and it is the system that is to blame. It is also terribly boring to watch and a far cry from the entertainment OG promised when he was appointed. Goals win games OG, and the sooner you wake up to that fact, the better[/p][/quote]Excellent summary. It's only all the people living abroad and who don't go to the games week in week out who cannot see it either. Edited lowlights on the web don't show the whole story especially as TV cannot show the movement off the ball, if any! I might differ with our Centre Backs getting up to the half way line though as they are no longer blessed with the speed of the youngsters and teams might exploit that. Apart from that I think Fratsomrover speaks for most of us. It's pretty **** obvious what the problem is. We could sign the best striker in the world and he would struggle in this set-up. Poor Leo had to contend with being marked by three Centre Backs yesterday and even if he won the ball he had nobody to lay it off to or head it on to. It is significant that he can not jump as high when the ball comes straight up to him through the middle but can reach it and head it better when the ball comes in from the wings. How many times though do we get behind the opposition and do that? How many times do we turn defenders? A low single digit is the answer.[/p][/quote]Two good posts. Thanks Fratsmorover and Claude Back. If we are going to play 4-3-3 (ie back 4, midfield 3 including defensive midfielder with 3 up front - CF plus two wingers) then lets play 4-3-3 not 4-5-1. If not then switch to 4-4-2. The main point is to ensure that Ulloa or whoever the main striker is doesn't get isolated. Improving the accuracy of our shooting might help as well. Taking yesterday as an example we had 15 shots but only one on target with a couple of near things - LuaLua hitting the wood work and Ulloa's disallowed header. 66% possession is not the point if it doesn't translate into goals. ballantrrae

4:06pm Mon 3 Feb 14

Oscar's Chin says...

ballantrrae wrote:
Claude Back wrote:
fratsomrover wrote:
Brighton will only ever increase their goal tally if they play a game where they encourage players to get into the opposition penalty box. I watch Man City, Southampton and the likes pouring men forward when they attack. Sometimes they get 5 or 6 in their opponents penalty area in open play.
By comparison we barely get 2 and more normally 1. We have skillful, pacy wingers in Lua Lua, Buckley and March, but rarely start with them. Instead we settle for mediocre,play safe players who dont get forward because they are frightened they will not be able to get back and cover if play breaks down.
We need to play a higher line throughout the team, with Greer and Upson pushing right up to the half way line so the midfielders can get further forward in support of the forward(s). We create nothing in our opponents penalty box because we dont get players in there. Most of our recent goal attempts have been Lua Lua's piledrivers from outside the box.
We need pace and trickery on the wings, hence Buckley or March, and we need another striker alongside Ulloa, whether that be CMS, Obika or new guy Rodriguez, I dont yet know, but what I do know for sure, is that playing Ulloa up front alone is absolutely pointless in OG current set up.
If OG & NJ cant see that, they shouldn't be in the job.
30 goals in 28 games is pathetic and it is the system that is to blame. It is also terribly boring to watch and a far cry from the entertainment OG promised when he was appointed.
Goals win games OG, and the sooner you wake up to that fact, the better
Excellent summary.
It's only all the people living abroad and who don't go to the games week in week out who cannot see it either. Edited lowlights on the web don't show the whole story especially as TV cannot show the movement off the ball, if any!
I might differ with our Centre Backs getting up to the half way line though as they are no longer blessed with the speed of the youngsters and teams might exploit that. Apart from that I think Fratsomrover speaks for most of us. It's pretty **** obvious what the problem is. We could sign the best striker in the world and he would struggle in this set-up.
Poor Leo had to contend with being marked by three Centre Backs yesterday and even if he won the ball he had nobody to lay it off to or head it on to. It is significant that he can not jump as high when the ball comes straight up to him through the middle but can reach it and head it better when the ball comes in from the wings. How many times though do we get behind the opposition and do that? How many times do we turn defenders? A low single digit is the answer.
Two good posts. Thanks Fratsmorover and Claude Back.
If we are going to play 4-3-3 (ie back 4, midfield 3 including defensive midfielder with 3 up front - CF plus two wingers) then lets play 4-3-3 not 4-5-1. If not then switch to 4-4-2. The main point is to ensure that Ulloa or whoever the main striker is doesn't get isolated. Improving the accuracy of our shooting might help as well. Taking yesterday as an example we had 15 shots but only one on target with a couple of near things - LuaLua hitting the wood work and Ulloa's disallowed header.
66% possession is not the point if it doesn't translate into goals.
Agree. We claim to play a flexible 4-3-3 / 4-5-1 formation depending on the transitions of play but in fact all too rarely do we actually assume a 4-3-3 during play. Not quick or substantial enough support from midfield, due to midfield pace, creativity or execution of duty (drills)? Probably a bit of each but if Oscar is trying to instil it in 'em to no avail he has my sympathy. Must leave him scratching his magnificent chin!
[quote][p][bold]ballantrrae[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Claude Back[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fratsomrover[/bold] wrote: Brighton will only ever increase their goal tally if they play a game where they encourage players to get into the opposition penalty box. I watch Man City, Southampton and the likes pouring men forward when they attack. Sometimes they get 5 or 6 in their opponents penalty area in open play. By comparison we barely get 2 and more normally 1. We have skillful, pacy wingers in Lua Lua, Buckley and March, but rarely start with them. Instead we settle for mediocre,play safe players who dont get forward because they are frightened they will not be able to get back and cover if play breaks down. We need to play a higher line throughout the team, with Greer and Upson pushing right up to the half way line so the midfielders can get further forward in support of the forward(s). We create nothing in our opponents penalty box because we dont get players in there. Most of our recent goal attempts have been Lua Lua's piledrivers from outside the box. We need pace and trickery on the wings, hence Buckley or March, and we need another striker alongside Ulloa, whether that be CMS, Obika or new guy Rodriguez, I dont yet know, but what I do know for sure, is that playing Ulloa up front alone is absolutely pointless in OG current set up. If OG & NJ cant see that, they shouldn't be in the job. 30 goals in 28 games is pathetic and it is the system that is to blame. It is also terribly boring to watch and a far cry from the entertainment OG promised when he was appointed. Goals win games OG, and the sooner you wake up to that fact, the better[/p][/quote]Excellent summary. It's only all the people living abroad and who don't go to the games week in week out who cannot see it either. Edited lowlights on the web don't show the whole story especially as TV cannot show the movement off the ball, if any! I might differ with our Centre Backs getting up to the half way line though as they are no longer blessed with the speed of the youngsters and teams might exploit that. Apart from that I think Fratsomrover speaks for most of us. It's pretty **** obvious what the problem is. We could sign the best striker in the world and he would struggle in this set-up. Poor Leo had to contend with being marked by three Centre Backs yesterday and even if he won the ball he had nobody to lay it off to or head it on to. It is significant that he can not jump as high when the ball comes straight up to him through the middle but can reach it and head it better when the ball comes in from the wings. How many times though do we get behind the opposition and do that? How many times do we turn defenders? A low single digit is the answer.[/p][/quote]Two good posts. Thanks Fratsmorover and Claude Back. If we are going to play 4-3-3 (ie back 4, midfield 3 including defensive midfielder with 3 up front - CF plus two wingers) then lets play 4-3-3 not 4-5-1. If not then switch to 4-4-2. The main point is to ensure that Ulloa or whoever the main striker is doesn't get isolated. Improving the accuracy of our shooting might help as well. Taking yesterday as an example we had 15 shots but only one on target with a couple of near things - LuaLua hitting the wood work and Ulloa's disallowed header. 66% possession is not the point if it doesn't translate into goals.[/p][/quote]Agree. We claim to play a flexible 4-3-3 / 4-5-1 formation depending on the transitions of play but in fact all too rarely do we actually assume a 4-3-3 during play. Not quick or substantial enough support from midfield, due to midfield pace, creativity or execution of duty (drills)? Probably a bit of each but if Oscar is trying to instil it in 'em to no avail he has my sympathy. Must leave him scratching his magnificent chin! Oscar's Chin

4:10pm Mon 3 Feb 14

tez1959 says...

yeah i can sum it up in four words. get a decent striker.easy suprised the manager dont see it.they wont play offs either not good enough.
yeah i can sum it up in four words. get a decent striker.easy suprised the manager dont see it.they wont play offs either not good enough. tez1959

4:24pm Mon 3 Feb 14

Ex-pat Arnie says...

Oscar's Chin wrote:
Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
Ulloa did fine on his own under GP, so I don't think he has a problem with playing up front on his own.

Yesterday we seemed to miss Ince and Crofts, but nothing could be done about that as they're injured.

I've actually read people writing off Rodriguez after one appearance as substitute - a display many others saw as promising, so there you have it, there will always be moaners.

Some accuse me of having rose-tinted specs (a suggestion my wife would be in hysterics about), but let me ask those people one thing: who is enjoying this season more, you or me?
I'm with you, Arnie!

(By the way, you don't happen to have a comedy Austro-American accent do you?!)

;)
No, Sussex born and bred :-)
[quote][p][bold]Oscar's Chin[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: Ulloa did fine on his own under GP, so I don't think he has a problem with playing up front on his own. Yesterday we seemed to miss Ince and Crofts, but nothing could be done about that as they're injured. I've actually read people writing off Rodriguez after one appearance as substitute - a display many others saw as promising, so there you have it, there will always be moaners. Some accuse me of having rose-tinted specs (a suggestion my wife would be in hysterics about), but let me ask those people one thing: who is enjoying this season more, you or me?[/p][/quote]I'm with you, Arnie! (By the way, you don't happen to have a comedy Austro-American accent do you?!) ;)[/p][/quote]No, Sussex born and bred :-) Ex-pat Arnie

4:25pm Mon 3 Feb 14

Ex-pat Arnie says...

Oscar's Chin wrote:
Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
Ulloa did fine on his own under GP, so I don't think he has a problem with playing up front on his own.

Yesterday we seemed to miss Ince and Crofts, but nothing could be done about that as they're injured.

I've actually read people writing off Rodriguez after one appearance as substitute - a display many others saw as promising, so there you have it, there will always be moaners.

Some accuse me of having rose-tinted specs (a suggestion my wife would be in hysterics about), but let me ask those people one thing: who is enjoying this season more, you or me?
I'm with you, Arnie!

(By the way, you don't happen to have a comedy Austro-American accent do you?!)

;)
And you're not related to "By Ulloa's Beard" who used to be on here with his poor spelling, are you?
[quote][p][bold]Oscar's Chin[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: Ulloa did fine on his own under GP, so I don't think he has a problem with playing up front on his own. Yesterday we seemed to miss Ince and Crofts, but nothing could be done about that as they're injured. I've actually read people writing off Rodriguez after one appearance as substitute - a display many others saw as promising, so there you have it, there will always be moaners. Some accuse me of having rose-tinted specs (a suggestion my wife would be in hysterics about), but let me ask those people one thing: who is enjoying this season more, you or me?[/p][/quote]I'm with you, Arnie! (By the way, you don't happen to have a comedy Austro-American accent do you?!) ;)[/p][/quote]And you're not related to "By Ulloa's Beard" who used to be on here with his poor spelling, are you? Ex-pat Arnie

4:57pm Mon 3 Feb 14

lowerbeedingseagull says...

VegasSeagull wrote:
lowerbeedingseagull wrote:
The Chairman should be looking very closely at how Garcia and Jones react to this situation before it become a crisis.
Do you think that it's possible that the chairman, and others, did look very closely prior to the window closing?
Mr. Bloom is the man at the top, he writes the cheques, Burke and Barber do his bidding, so was it Burke that didn't buy in the window, or was he not allowed to by in the window, buy more than he did.
If it was down to me i'd change the management team right now & get Malky McKay into the job. He was the man that got Cardiff out of The Championship and we need someone with the know how to do that. It was suggested that the previous manager had no Plan B , well these two have no workable Plan A or are just too stubborn to admit that they have made the wrong call way too often in terms of tactics and selection. Garcia is devoid of charisma whilst Jones is a tried and tested failure wherever he has been.

The present squad can do the job given proper leadership.

Go for it Mr Chairman!!!
[quote][p][bold]VegasSeagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lowerbeedingseagull[/bold] wrote: The Chairman should be looking very closely at how Garcia and Jones react to this situation before it become a crisis.[/p][/quote]Do you think that it's possible that the chairman, and others, did look very closely prior to the window closing? Mr. Bloom is the man at the top, he writes the cheques, Burke and Barber do his bidding, so was it Burke that didn't buy in the window, or was he not allowed to by in the window, buy more than he did.[/p][/quote]If it was down to me i'd change the management team right now & get Malky McKay into the job. He was the man that got Cardiff out of The Championship and we need someone with the know how to do that. It was suggested that the previous manager had no Plan B , well these two have no workable Plan A or are just too stubborn to admit that they have made the wrong call way too often in terms of tactics and selection. Garcia is devoid of charisma whilst Jones is a tried and tested failure wherever he has been. The present squad can do the job given proper leadership. Go for it Mr Chairman!!! lowerbeedingseagull

5:11pm Mon 3 Feb 14

dave from bexill says...

ballantrrae wrote:
Claude Back wrote:
fratsomrover wrote:
Brighton will only ever increase their goal tally if they play a game where they encourage players to get into the opposition penalty box. I watch Man City, Southampton and the likes pouring men forward when they attack. Sometimes they get 5 or 6 in their opponents penalty area in open play.
By comparison we barely get 2 and more normally 1. We have skillful, pacy wingers in Lua Lua, Buckley and March, but rarely start with them. Instead we settle for mediocre,play safe players who dont get forward because they are frightened they will not be able to get back and cover if play breaks down.
We need to play a higher line throughout the team, with Greer and Upson pushing right up to the half way line so the midfielders can get further forward in support of the forward(s). We create nothing in our opponents penalty box because we dont get players in there. Most of our recent goal attempts have been Lua Lua's piledrivers from outside the box.
We need pace and trickery on the wings, hence Buckley or March, and we need another striker alongside Ulloa, whether that be CMS, Obika or new guy Rodriguez, I dont yet know, but what I do know for sure, is that playing Ulloa up front alone is absolutely pointless in OG current set up.
If OG & NJ cant see that, they shouldn't be in the job.
30 goals in 28 games is pathetic and it is the system that is to blame. It is also terribly boring to watch and a far cry from the entertainment OG promised when he was appointed.
Goals win games OG, and the sooner you wake up to that fact, the better
Excellent summary.
It's only all the people living abroad and who don't go to the games week in week out who cannot see it either. Edited lowlights on the web don't show the whole story especially as TV cannot show the movement off the ball, if any!
I might differ with our Centre Backs getting up to the half way line though as they are no longer blessed with the speed of the youngsters and teams might exploit that. Apart from that I think Fratsomrover speaks for most of us. It's pretty **** obvious what the problem is. We could sign the best striker in the world and he would struggle in this set-up.
Poor Leo had to contend with being marked by three Centre Backs yesterday and even if he won the ball he had nobody to lay it off to or head it on to. It is significant that he can not jump as high when the ball comes straight up to him through the middle but can reach it and head it better when the ball comes in from the wings. How many times though do we get behind the opposition and do that? How many times do we turn defenders? A low single digit is the answer.
Two good posts. Thanks Fratsmorover and Claude Back.
If we are going to play 4-3-3 (ie back 4, midfield 3 including defensive midfielder with 3 up front - CF plus two wingers) then lets play 4-3-3 not 4-5-1. If not then switch to 4-4-2. The main point is to ensure that Ulloa or whoever the main striker is doesn't get isolated. Improving the accuracy of our shooting might help as well. Taking yesterday as an example we had 15 shots but only one on target with a couple of near things - LuaLua hitting the wood work and Ulloa's disallowed header.
66% possession is not the point if it doesn't translate into goals.
Three excellent posts. I don't necessarily agree with all the well made points, but all well made by proper football people/supporters. Thanks
[quote][p][bold]ballantrrae[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Claude Back[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fratsomrover[/bold] wrote: Brighton will only ever increase their goal tally if they play a game where they encourage players to get into the opposition penalty box. I watch Man City, Southampton and the likes pouring men forward when they attack. Sometimes they get 5 or 6 in their opponents penalty area in open play. By comparison we barely get 2 and more normally 1. We have skillful, pacy wingers in Lua Lua, Buckley and March, but rarely start with them. Instead we settle for mediocre,play safe players who dont get forward because they are frightened they will not be able to get back and cover if play breaks down. We need to play a higher line throughout the team, with Greer and Upson pushing right up to the half way line so the midfielders can get further forward in support of the forward(s). We create nothing in our opponents penalty box because we dont get players in there. Most of our recent goal attempts have been Lua Lua's piledrivers from outside the box. We need pace and trickery on the wings, hence Buckley or March, and we need another striker alongside Ulloa, whether that be CMS, Obika or new guy Rodriguez, I dont yet know, but what I do know for sure, is that playing Ulloa up front alone is absolutely pointless in OG current set up. If OG & NJ cant see that, they shouldn't be in the job. 30 goals in 28 games is pathetic and it is the system that is to blame. It is also terribly boring to watch and a far cry from the entertainment OG promised when he was appointed. Goals win games OG, and the sooner you wake up to that fact, the better[/p][/quote]Excellent summary. It's only all the people living abroad and who don't go to the games week in week out who cannot see it either. Edited lowlights on the web don't show the whole story especially as TV cannot show the movement off the ball, if any! I might differ with our Centre Backs getting up to the half way line though as they are no longer blessed with the speed of the youngsters and teams might exploit that. Apart from that I think Fratsomrover speaks for most of us. It's pretty **** obvious what the problem is. We could sign the best striker in the world and he would struggle in this set-up. Poor Leo had to contend with being marked by three Centre Backs yesterday and even if he won the ball he had nobody to lay it off to or head it on to. It is significant that he can not jump as high when the ball comes straight up to him through the middle but can reach it and head it better when the ball comes in from the wings. How many times though do we get behind the opposition and do that? How many times do we turn defenders? A low single digit is the answer.[/p][/quote]Two good posts. Thanks Fratsmorover and Claude Back. If we are going to play 4-3-3 (ie back 4, midfield 3 including defensive midfielder with 3 up front - CF plus two wingers) then lets play 4-3-3 not 4-5-1. If not then switch to 4-4-2. The main point is to ensure that Ulloa or whoever the main striker is doesn't get isolated. Improving the accuracy of our shooting might help as well. Taking yesterday as an example we had 15 shots but only one on target with a couple of near things - LuaLua hitting the wood work and Ulloa's disallowed header. 66% possession is not the point if it doesn't translate into goals.[/p][/quote]Three excellent posts. I don't necessarily agree with all the well made points, but all well made by proper football people/supporters. Thanks dave from bexill

5:18pm Mon 3 Feb 14

dave from bexill says...

ballantrrae wrote:
Claude Back wrote:
fratsomrover wrote:
Brighton will only ever increase their goal tally if they play a game where they encourage players to get into the opposition penalty box. I watch Man City, Southampton and the likes pouring men forward when they attack. Sometimes they get 5 or 6 in their opponents penalty area in open play.
By comparison we barely get 2 and more normally 1. We have skillful, pacy wingers in Lua Lua, Buckley and March, but rarely start with them. Instead we settle for mediocre,play safe players who dont get forward because they are frightened they will not be able to get back and cover if play breaks down.
We need to play a higher line throughout the team, with Greer and Upson pushing right up to the half way line so the midfielders can get further forward in support of the forward(s). We create nothing in our opponents penalty box because we dont get players in there. Most of our recent goal attempts have been Lua Lua's piledrivers from outside the box.
We need pace and trickery on the wings, hence Buckley or March, and we need another striker alongside Ulloa, whether that be CMS, Obika or new guy Rodriguez, I dont yet know, but what I do know for sure, is that playing Ulloa up front alone is absolutely pointless in OG current set up.
If OG & NJ cant see that, they shouldn't be in the job.
30 goals in 28 games is pathetic and it is the system that is to blame. It is also terribly boring to watch and a far cry from the entertainment OG promised when he was appointed.
Goals win games OG, and the sooner you wake up to that fact, the better
Excellent summary.
It's only all the people living abroad and who don't go to the games week in week out who cannot see it either. Edited lowlights on the web don't show the whole story especially as TV cannot show the movement off the ball, if any!
I might differ with our Centre Backs getting up to the half way line though as they are no longer blessed with the speed of the youngsters and teams might exploit that. Apart from that I think Fratsomrover speaks for most of us. It's pretty **** obvious what the problem is. We could sign the best striker in the world and he would struggle in this set-up.
Poor Leo had to contend with being marked by three Centre Backs yesterday and even if he won the ball he had nobody to lay it off to or head it on to. It is significant that he can not jump as high when the ball comes straight up to him through the middle but can reach it and head it better when the ball comes in from the wings. How many times though do we get behind the opposition and do that? How many times do we turn defenders? A low single digit is the answer.
Two good posts. Thanks Fratsmorover and Claude Back.
If we are going to play 4-3-3 (ie back 4, midfield 3 including defensive midfielder with 3 up front - CF plus two wingers) then lets play 4-3-3 not 4-5-1. If not then switch to 4-4-2. The main point is to ensure that Ulloa or whoever the main striker is doesn't get isolated. Improving the accuracy of our shooting might help as well. Taking yesterday as an example we had 15 shots but only one on target with a couple of near things - LuaLua hitting the wood work and Ulloa's disallowed header.
66% possession is not the point if it doesn't translate into goals.
Sorry, meant to include Oscar's Chin comment as well
[quote][p][bold]ballantrrae[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Claude Back[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fratsomrover[/bold] wrote: Brighton will only ever increase their goal tally if they play a game where they encourage players to get into the opposition penalty box. I watch Man City, Southampton and the likes pouring men forward when they attack. Sometimes they get 5 or 6 in their opponents penalty area in open play. By comparison we barely get 2 and more normally 1. We have skillful, pacy wingers in Lua Lua, Buckley and March, but rarely start with them. Instead we settle for mediocre,play safe players who dont get forward because they are frightened they will not be able to get back and cover if play breaks down. We need to play a higher line throughout the team, with Greer and Upson pushing right up to the half way line so the midfielders can get further forward in support of the forward(s). We create nothing in our opponents penalty box because we dont get players in there. Most of our recent goal attempts have been Lua Lua's piledrivers from outside the box. We need pace and trickery on the wings, hence Buckley or March, and we need another striker alongside Ulloa, whether that be CMS, Obika or new guy Rodriguez, I dont yet know, but what I do know for sure, is that playing Ulloa up front alone is absolutely pointless in OG current set up. If OG & NJ cant see that, they shouldn't be in the job. 30 goals in 28 games is pathetic and it is the system that is to blame. It is also terribly boring to watch and a far cry from the entertainment OG promised when he was appointed. Goals win games OG, and the sooner you wake up to that fact, the better[/p][/quote]Excellent summary. It's only all the people living abroad and who don't go to the games week in week out who cannot see it either. Edited lowlights on the web don't show the whole story especially as TV cannot show the movement off the ball, if any! I might differ with our Centre Backs getting up to the half way line though as they are no longer blessed with the speed of the youngsters and teams might exploit that. Apart from that I think Fratsomrover speaks for most of us. It's pretty **** obvious what the problem is. We could sign the best striker in the world and he would struggle in this set-up. Poor Leo had to contend with being marked by three Centre Backs yesterday and even if he won the ball he had nobody to lay it off to or head it on to. It is significant that he can not jump as high when the ball comes straight up to him through the middle but can reach it and head it better when the ball comes in from the wings. How many times though do we get behind the opposition and do that? How many times do we turn defenders? A low single digit is the answer.[/p][/quote]Two good posts. Thanks Fratsmorover and Claude Back. If we are going to play 4-3-3 (ie back 4, midfield 3 including defensive midfielder with 3 up front - CF plus two wingers) then lets play 4-3-3 not 4-5-1. If not then switch to 4-4-2. The main point is to ensure that Ulloa or whoever the main striker is doesn't get isolated. Improving the accuracy of our shooting might help as well. Taking yesterday as an example we had 15 shots but only one on target with a couple of near things - LuaLua hitting the wood work and Ulloa's disallowed header. 66% possession is not the point if it doesn't translate into goals.[/p][/quote]Sorry, meant to include Oscar's Chin comment as well dave from bexill

6:56pm Mon 3 Feb 14

Vince says...

Steveg1958 wrote:
I'm amazed that some on here advocate still playing one up front when clearly this isn't working ! , we certainly have players that are capable enough, what's wrong with trying two wingers, Kaz and Buckley or Solly March, plus Leo and Rodney, (or Obika), plus Ince charging forward from the middle, at least that way we put the opposition on the back foot for once and make it less likely that our lack of pace at the back is exposed, move the ball forward quicker and have enough players far enough forward to get something and who knows we might find it works, it just needs OG and NJ to be a bit adventurous for once, It worked in the past and it could work again. (Ward / Mellor / Towner and Sully), (Smiley, Ryan, Robinson and Smith), ring any bells anyone, I seem to remember those teams being a bit successful and funnily enough exciting to watch too, (maybe Tony Bloom should think back to how exciting the football was when his Grandad Harry took him to the Goldstone all those years ago, and do something about it, If our present management team won't change the system to see if it works, (at least), maybe he should change them. I'd actually like to be entertained when I go to the Amex please, that's why I pay for my season tickets actually.
I'm getting so frustrated at the same old, same old - from OG. He needs to be far more proactive and adventurous, and change things much earlier if it's not working.
I pay my money to be entertained - not to suffer torture and frustration at our BORING BORING BORING starting line-ups - and ultra-safety first tactics.
We should, and would have scored 4 against Barnsley, Huddersfield, Bournemouth if we had got more players in the box.

we need 2 wide men and 2 strikers - with midfielders getting into or on the edge of the box when we attack.
Gus 's system was more helpful to Uloa because he had quality players like Wayne Bridge and Orlandi to attack down the flanks, and Buckley was on fire on the other flank. We demolished Crystal Palace 3-0 with these players, and but for an Ankergren howler in stoppage time, would have demolished Notts Forest away.

I have been a life-long Albion fan, and it's patently obvious that OG and NJ haven't a clue about using a system to turn defenders down both flanks, and getting 3 or 4 players in the box.

I'm not sure I can take another season of this FRUSTRATION.
With the amount of possesion we have had, and the squad we have, we should be sitting second in the table. We are as good as QPR, Burnley, and Forest and better than Derby, Reading, Blackburn and Ipswich. Wigan are now in a better position than us.

HOW MANY MORE BORING 0-0 OR 1-1 DRAWS WILL WE HAVE TO ENDURE AT HOME THIS SEASON?

Remember with a "weak" team we demolished Leicester, because we attacked them and played a high line, even though we only had Barnes, Conway and Lua Lua/Lopez attacking their goal.
We didn't sit back in defence playing sideways and backwards - like we did against Barnsley - when we literally said to them - "come and attack us" as you have nothing to fear from our one striker!

Please Mr Bloom - sort it now, or I fear that you will see a big reduction in season ticket sales next season
[quote][p][bold]Steveg1958[/bold] wrote: I'm amazed that some on here advocate still playing one up front when clearly this isn't working ! , we certainly have players that are capable enough, what's wrong with trying two wingers, Kaz and Buckley or Solly March, plus Leo and Rodney, (or Obika), plus Ince charging forward from the middle, at least that way we put the opposition on the back foot for once and make it less likely that our lack of pace at the back is exposed, move the ball forward quicker and have enough players far enough forward to get something and who knows we might find it works, it just needs OG and NJ to be a bit adventurous for once, It worked in the past and it could work again. (Ward / Mellor / Towner and Sully), (Smiley, Ryan, Robinson and Smith), ring any bells anyone, I seem to remember those teams being a bit successful and funnily enough exciting to watch too, (maybe Tony Bloom should think back to how exciting the football was when his Grandad Harry took him to the Goldstone all those years ago, and do something about it, If our present management team won't change the system to see if it works, (at least), maybe he should change them. I'd actually like to be entertained when I go to the Amex please, that's why I pay for my season tickets actually.[/p][/quote]I'm getting so frustrated at the same old, same old - from OG. He needs to be far more proactive and adventurous, and change things much earlier if it's not working. I pay my money to be entertained - not to suffer torture and frustration at our BORING BORING BORING starting line-ups - and ultra-safety first tactics. We should, and would have scored 4 against Barnsley, Huddersfield, Bournemouth if we had got more players in the box. we need 2 wide men and 2 strikers - with midfielders getting into or on the edge of the box when we attack. Gus 's system was more helpful to Uloa because he had quality players like Wayne Bridge and Orlandi to attack down the flanks, and Buckley was on fire on the other flank. We demolished Crystal Palace 3-0 with these players, and but for an Ankergren howler in stoppage time, would have demolished Notts Forest away. I have been a life-long Albion fan, and it's patently obvious that OG and NJ haven't a clue about using a system to turn defenders down both flanks, and getting 3 or 4 players in the box. I'm not sure I can take another season of this FRUSTRATION. With the amount of possesion we have had, and the squad we have, we should be sitting second in the table. We are as good as QPR, Burnley, and Forest and better than Derby, Reading, Blackburn and Ipswich. Wigan are now in a better position than us. HOW MANY MORE BORING 0-0 OR 1-1 DRAWS WILL WE HAVE TO ENDURE AT HOME THIS SEASON? Remember with a "weak" team we demolished Leicester, because we attacked them and played a high line, even though we only had Barnes, Conway and Lua Lua/Lopez attacking their goal. We didn't sit back in defence playing sideways and backwards - like we did against Barnsley - when we literally said to them - "come and attack us" as you have nothing to fear from our one striker! Please Mr Bloom - sort it now, or I fear that you will see a big reduction in season ticket sales next season Vince

7:14pm Mon 3 Feb 14

Ex-pat Arnie says...

We beat Leicester because they came to the Amex looking to attack (unlike just about every other team), leaving gaps in behind for us to take advantage of. It's exactly what would happen to us if we went all gung-ho.
We beat Leicester because they came to the Amex looking to attack (unlike just about every other team), leaving gaps in behind for us to take advantage of. It's exactly what would happen to us if we went all gung-ho. Ex-pat Arnie

7:18pm Mon 3 Feb 14

Ex-pat Arnie says...

Vince - it's also worth noticing that we had fewer attempts at goal in the 3-0 win against Palace than at Watford yesterday (although they were more accurate).

It's therefore NOT necessarily the system, it's the non-conversion of chances.
Vince - it's also worth noticing that we had fewer attempts at goal in the 3-0 win against Palace than at Watford yesterday (although they were more accurate). It's therefore NOT necessarily the system, it's the non-conversion of chances. Ex-pat Arnie

7:25pm Mon 3 Feb 14

lowerbeedingseagull says...

Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
We beat Leicester because they came to the Amex looking to attack (unlike just about every other team), leaving gaps in behind for us to take advantage of. It's exactly what would happen to us if we went all gung-ho.
Amazing. If gung-ho brings 9 wins in a row, a goal difference of +24 with 21 wins out of 29 then let's try it!!!!!!!!!!!
[quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: We beat Leicester because they came to the Amex looking to attack (unlike just about every other team), leaving gaps in behind for us to take advantage of. It's exactly what would happen to us if we went all gung-ho.[/p][/quote]Amazing. If gung-ho brings 9 wins in a row, a goal difference of +24 with 21 wins out of 29 then let's try it!!!!!!!!!!! lowerbeedingseagull

7:45pm Mon 3 Feb 14

WiseOldSeagull says...

I'm not too sure that playing two strikers will solve it. I'd like to see us move the ball up through the midfield or out to the wings quicker and getting more midfield support in the box to help Leo. We would do a bit better by playing two wingers to provide crosses for Leo, running midfielders and support incoming from the opposite winger. It creates a sense of panic for the defence and distraction.
I'm not too sure that playing two strikers will solve it. I'd like to see us move the ball up through the midfield or out to the wings quicker and getting more midfield support in the box to help Leo. We would do a bit better by playing two wingers to provide crosses for Leo, running midfielders and support incoming from the opposite winger. It creates a sense of panic for the defence and distraction. WiseOldSeagull

7:56pm Mon 3 Feb 14

Ex-pat Arnie says...

lowerbeedingseagull wrote:
Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
We beat Leicester because they came to the Amex looking to attack (unlike just about every other team), leaving gaps in behind for us to take advantage of. It's exactly what would happen to us if we went all gung-ho.
Amazing. If gung-ho brings 9 wins in a row, a goal difference of +24 with 21 wins out of 29 then let's try it!!!!!!!!!!!
We don't have their expensively-assemble
d, FFP-defying squad, so I doubt we'd manage 9 wins in a row.

They win because of their players, not the formation.
[quote][p][bold]lowerbeedingseagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: We beat Leicester because they came to the Amex looking to attack (unlike just about every other team), leaving gaps in behind for us to take advantage of. It's exactly what would happen to us if we went all gung-ho.[/p][/quote]Amazing. If gung-ho brings 9 wins in a row, a goal difference of +24 with 21 wins out of 29 then let's try it!!!!!!!!!!![/p][/quote]We don't have their expensively-assemble d, FFP-defying squad, so I doubt we'd manage 9 wins in a row. They win because of their players, not the formation. Ex-pat Arnie

8:05pm Mon 3 Feb 14

lowerbeedingseagull says...

Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
lowerbeedingseagull wrote:
Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
We beat Leicester because they came to the Amex looking to attack (unlike just about every other team), leaving gaps in behind for us to take advantage of. It's exactly what would happen to us if we went all gung-ho.
Amazing. If gung-ho brings 9 wins in a row, a goal difference of +24 with 21 wins out of 29 then let's try it!!!!!!!!!!!
We don't have their expensively-assemble

d, FFP-defying squad, so I doubt we'd manage 9 wins in a row.

They win because of their players, not the formation.
Like a 40 year old on a freebie!!!!

They are 10 points clear at the top so their fear of FFP is of no consequence.
[quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lowerbeedingseagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: We beat Leicester because they came to the Amex looking to attack (unlike just about every other team), leaving gaps in behind for us to take advantage of. It's exactly what would happen to us if we went all gung-ho.[/p][/quote]Amazing. If gung-ho brings 9 wins in a row, a goal difference of +24 with 21 wins out of 29 then let's try it!!!!!!!!!!![/p][/quote]We don't have their expensively-assemble d, FFP-defying squad, so I doubt we'd manage 9 wins in a row. They win because of their players, not the formation.[/p][/quote]Like a 40 year old on a freebie!!!! They are 10 points clear at the top so their fear of FFP is of no consequence. lowerbeedingseagull

8:05pm Mon 3 Feb 14

lowerbeedingseagull says...

Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
lowerbeedingseagull wrote:
Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
We beat Leicester because they came to the Amex looking to attack (unlike just about every other team), leaving gaps in behind for us to take advantage of. It's exactly what would happen to us if we went all gung-ho.
Amazing. If gung-ho brings 9 wins in a row, a goal difference of +24 with 21 wins out of 29 then let's try it!!!!!!!!!!!
We don't have their expensively-assemble

d, FFP-defying squad, so I doubt we'd manage 9 wins in a row.

They win because of their players, not the formation.
Like a 40 year old on a freebie!!!!

They are 10 points clear at the top so their fear of FFP is of no consequence.
[quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lowerbeedingseagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: We beat Leicester because they came to the Amex looking to attack (unlike just about every other team), leaving gaps in behind for us to take advantage of. It's exactly what would happen to us if we went all gung-ho.[/p][/quote]Amazing. If gung-ho brings 9 wins in a row, a goal difference of +24 with 21 wins out of 29 then let's try it!!!!!!!!!!![/p][/quote]We don't have their expensively-assemble d, FFP-defying squad, so I doubt we'd manage 9 wins in a row. They win because of their players, not the formation.[/p][/quote]Like a 40 year old on a freebie!!!! They are 10 points clear at the top so their fear of FFP is of no consequence. lowerbeedingseagull

8:08pm Mon 3 Feb 14

Ex-pat Arnie says...

lowerbeedingseagull wrote:
Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
lowerbeedingseagull wrote:
Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
We beat Leicester because they came to the Amex looking to attack (unlike just about every other team), leaving gaps in behind for us to take advantage of. It's exactly what would happen to us if we went all gung-ho.
Amazing. If gung-ho brings 9 wins in a row, a goal difference of +24 with 21 wins out of 29 then let's try it!!!!!!!!!!!
We don't have their expensively-assemble


d, FFP-defying squad, so I doubt we'd manage 9 wins in a row.

They win because of their players, not the formation.
Like a 40 year old on a freebie!!!!

They are 10 points clear at the top so their fear of FFP is of no consequence.
Wrong again... FFP will affect each and every club that flouts the rules. They have signed into a legally-binding contract and the Football League are legally obliged (and directed by UEFA/FIFA) to act accordingly.

Kevin Phillips may have been signed without payment to his previous club, but he is a million miles away from being 'free'. His wages will be that of probably 4 Albion players, and for 10 minutes a week? Not exactly a bargain.
[quote][p][bold]lowerbeedingseagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lowerbeedingseagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: We beat Leicester because they came to the Amex looking to attack (unlike just about every other team), leaving gaps in behind for us to take advantage of. It's exactly what would happen to us if we went all gung-ho.[/p][/quote]Amazing. If gung-ho brings 9 wins in a row, a goal difference of +24 with 21 wins out of 29 then let's try it!!!!!!!!!!![/p][/quote]We don't have their expensively-assemble d, FFP-defying squad, so I doubt we'd manage 9 wins in a row. They win because of their players, not the formation.[/p][/quote]Like a 40 year old on a freebie!!!! They are 10 points clear at the top so their fear of FFP is of no consequence.[/p][/quote]Wrong again... FFP will affect each and every club that flouts the rules. They have signed into a legally-binding contract and the Football League are legally obliged (and directed by UEFA/FIFA) to act accordingly. Kevin Phillips may have been signed without payment to his previous club, but he is a million miles away from being 'free'. His wages will be that of probably 4 Albion players, and for 10 minutes a week? Not exactly a bargain. Ex-pat Arnie

8:15pm Mon 3 Feb 14

lowerbeedingseagull says...

Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
lowerbeedingseagull wrote:
Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
lowerbeedingseagull wrote:
Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
We beat Leicester because they came to the Amex looking to attack (unlike just about every other team), leaving gaps in behind for us to take advantage of. It's exactly what would happen to us if we went all gung-ho.
Amazing. If gung-ho brings 9 wins in a row, a goal difference of +24 with 21 wins out of 29 then let's try it!!!!!!!!!!!
We don't have their expensively-assemble



d, FFP-defying squad, so I doubt we'd manage 9 wins in a row.

They win because of their players, not the formation.
Like a 40 year old on a freebie!!!!

They are 10 points clear at the top so their fear of FFP is of no consequence.
Wrong again... FFP will affect each and every club that flouts the rules. They have signed into a legally-binding contract and the Football League are legally obliged (and directed by UEFA/FIFA) to act accordingly.

Kevin Phillips may have been signed without payment to his previous club, but he is a million miles away from being 'free'. His wages will be that of probably 4 Albion players, and for 10 minutes a week? Not exactly a bargain.
When nothing happens with FFP of any consequence to the promoted teams i suppose you will thank Barber for all his good work.

You are well informed on the wage structure of every club in the competition, if only us mere mortals were such experts.
[quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lowerbeedingseagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lowerbeedingseagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: We beat Leicester because they came to the Amex looking to attack (unlike just about every other team), leaving gaps in behind for us to take advantage of. It's exactly what would happen to us if we went all gung-ho.[/p][/quote]Amazing. If gung-ho brings 9 wins in a row, a goal difference of +24 with 21 wins out of 29 then let's try it!!!!!!!!!!![/p][/quote]We don't have their expensively-assemble d, FFP-defying squad, so I doubt we'd manage 9 wins in a row. They win because of their players, not the formation.[/p][/quote]Like a 40 year old on a freebie!!!! They are 10 points clear at the top so their fear of FFP is of no consequence.[/p][/quote]Wrong again... FFP will affect each and every club that flouts the rules. They have signed into a legally-binding contract and the Football League are legally obliged (and directed by UEFA/FIFA) to act accordingly. Kevin Phillips may have been signed without payment to his previous club, but he is a million miles away from being 'free'. His wages will be that of probably 4 Albion players, and for 10 minutes a week? Not exactly a bargain.[/p][/quote]When nothing happens with FFP of any consequence to the promoted teams i suppose you will thank Barber for all his good work. You are well informed on the wage structure of every club in the competition, if only us mere mortals were such experts. lowerbeedingseagull

8:15pm Mon 3 Feb 14

tug509 says...

Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
lowerbeedingseagull wrote:
Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
We beat Leicester because they came to the Amex looking to attack (unlike just about every other team), leaving gaps in behind for us to take advantage of. It's exactly what would happen to us if we went all gung-ho.
Amazing. If gung-ho brings 9 wins in a row, a goal difference of +24 with 21 wins out of 29 then let's try it!!!!!!!!!!!
We don't have their expensively-assemble

d, FFP-defying squad, so I doubt we'd manage 9 wins in a row.

They win because of their players, not the formation.
Wrong Arnie ,they win totally because they have the courage to commit players forward ,how do you think they take teams apart ,by pushing them back ,always on the attack. We beat them ,by countering their attack ,it was the best forward football we have played at home all season ,and probably last season too .
No one is suggesting "gung ho tactics "i hope ,but when you call playing two strikers gung ho,then it`s time for the old peoples home ,that is league two .
And we need to make sure that doesn`t happen ,by changing our approach ,everyone on here to a person ,at one time or another ,has stated that teams ,come prepared ,knowing how we will play ,one striker !!!,even my pet duck ,has figured us out for pete`s sake ,so change it ,when Donny come on saturday ,show them an attacking line up ,that will make them think they are up against it ,before a ball is kicked ,not present them with the generic team sheet of the last 20 home games ,we want them crying ,not laughing .
[quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lowerbeedingseagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: We beat Leicester because they came to the Amex looking to attack (unlike just about every other team), leaving gaps in behind for us to take advantage of. It's exactly what would happen to us if we went all gung-ho.[/p][/quote]Amazing. If gung-ho brings 9 wins in a row, a goal difference of +24 with 21 wins out of 29 then let's try it!!!!!!!!!!![/p][/quote]We don't have their expensively-assemble d, FFP-defying squad, so I doubt we'd manage 9 wins in a row. They win because of their players, not the formation.[/p][/quote]Wrong Arnie ,they win totally because they have the courage to commit players forward ,how do you think they take teams apart ,by pushing them back ,always on the attack. We beat them ,by countering their attack ,it was the best forward football we have played at home all season ,and probably last season too . No one is suggesting "gung ho tactics "i hope ,but when you call playing two strikers gung ho,then it`s time for the old peoples home ,that is league two . And we need to make sure that doesn`t happen ,by changing our approach ,everyone on here to a person ,at one time or another ,has stated that teams ,come prepared ,knowing how we will play ,one striker !!!,even my pet duck ,has figured us out for pete`s sake ,so change it ,when Donny come on saturday ,show them an attacking line up ,that will make them think they are up against it ,before a ball is kicked ,not present them with the generic team sheet of the last 20 home games ,we want them crying ,not laughing . tug509

8:52pm Mon 3 Feb 14

Ex-pat Arnie says...

They can attack and attack because they have the players to do that. We do not. We really do not.
They can attack and attack because they have the players to do that. We do not. We really do not. Ex-pat Arnie

9:25pm Mon 3 Feb 14

tug509 says...

Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
They can attack and attack because they have the players to do that. We do not. We really do not.
So how is it ,that we had 2 strikers and 2 wingers on the bench y,day ,and only 1 striker on the pitch ,we have them ,we just dont use them !!.
[quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: They can attack and attack because they have the players to do that. We do not. We really do not.[/p][/quote]So how is it ,that we had 2 strikers and 2 wingers on the bench y,day ,and only 1 striker on the pitch ,we have them ,we just dont use them !!. tug509

10:00pm Mon 3 Feb 14

2ndCitySeagull says...

Build an attacking midfield around Orlandi. One other winger and Ulloa up top. Don't mind who bombs forward so long as someone keeps up with the wingers or links up with Andreas. Defence is sound, offence need to shoot from the channels more and watch Leo hunt down the ball in the box.
Build an attacking midfield around Orlandi. One other winger and Ulloa up top. Don't mind who bombs forward so long as someone keeps up with the wingers or links up with Andreas. Defence is sound, offence need to shoot from the channels more and watch Leo hunt down the ball in the box. 2ndCitySeagull

10:50pm Mon 3 Feb 14

lowerbeedingseagull says...

tug509 wrote:
Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
They can attack and attack because they have the players to do that. We do not. We really do not.
So how is it ,that we had 2 strikers and 2 wingers on the bench y,day ,and only 1 striker on the pitch ,we have them ,we just dont use them !!.
Tug, Mate there is no point trying to tell Arnie the way it is from our vantage point inside the ground. We have to accept that he and his chum from Nevada are the experts on each and every subject including FFP, team selection, tactics, who to buy, what to pay them, how much everyone else is paying their players etc.
[quote][p][bold]tug509[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: They can attack and attack because they have the players to do that. We do not. We really do not.[/p][/quote]So how is it ,that we had 2 strikers and 2 wingers on the bench y,day ,and only 1 striker on the pitch ,we have them ,we just dont use them !!.[/p][/quote]Tug, Mate there is no point trying to tell Arnie the way it is from our vantage point inside the ground. We have to accept that he and his chum from Nevada are the experts on each and every subject including FFP, team selection, tactics, who to buy, what to pay them, how much everyone else is paying their players etc. lowerbeedingseagull

11:10pm Mon 3 Feb 14

campotolox says...

Cant put the ball in the net ,simple,bring on Livercey,all the spill i have read tonight isCRA.overpaid whatever,should not be putting on the shirt,bring onJimmy Langley,Des Tennant,Leck,
Cant put the ball in the net ,simple,bring on Livercey,all the spill i have read tonight isCRA.overpaid whatever,should not be putting on the shirt,bring onJimmy Langley,Des Tennant,Leck, campotolox

11:30pm Mon 3 Feb 14

campotolox says...

one season discotec wonders in Brighton,takes a lot of working out!!
one season discotec wonders in Brighton,takes a lot of working out!! campotolox

11:55pm Mon 3 Feb 14

campotolox says...

What other other BHA player has played for england apart from Jimmy,Langley,tell me,sums it up!!
What other other BHA player has played for england apart from Jimmy,Langley,tell me,sums it up!! campotolox

12:08am Tue 4 Feb 14

VegasSeagull says...

lowerbeedingseagull wrote:
tug509 wrote:
Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
They can attack and attack because they have the players to do that. We do not. We really do not.
So how is it ,that we had 2 strikers and 2 wingers on the bench y,day ,and only 1 striker on the pitch ,we have them ,we just dont use them !!.
Tug, Mate there is no point trying to tell Arnie the way it is from our vantage point inside the ground. We have to accept that he and his chum from Nevada are the experts on each and every subject including FFP, team selection, tactics, who to buy, what to pay them, how much everyone else is paying their players etc.
What a silly posting you have made. Everyone on here knows that I never comment on a match I have not seen. The only lads I have suggested by name we could sign are DS players. I have never spoken of what we should pay anyone. I have never spoken about what other clubs are paying. I have only stated what the FFP means to Brighton based on the written word contained in new articles and a public website that explains how it works.
I do from time to time offer a suggestion as to our lineup but that is after I have watched a match.
You are a fool Lowerbeedingseagull.
[quote][p][bold]lowerbeedingseagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tug509[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: They can attack and attack because they have the players to do that. We do not. We really do not.[/p][/quote]So how is it ,that we had 2 strikers and 2 wingers on the bench y,day ,and only 1 striker on the pitch ,we have them ,we just dont use them !!.[/p][/quote]Tug, Mate there is no point trying to tell Arnie the way it is from our vantage point inside the ground. We have to accept that he and his chum from Nevada are the experts on each and every subject including FFP, team selection, tactics, who to buy, what to pay them, how much everyone else is paying their players etc.[/p][/quote]What a silly posting you have made. Everyone on here knows that I never comment on a match I have not seen. The only lads I have suggested by name we could sign are DS players. I have never spoken of what we should pay anyone. I have never spoken about what other clubs are paying. I have only stated what the FFP means to Brighton based on the written word contained in new articles and a public website that explains how it works. I do from time to time offer a suggestion as to our lineup but that is after I have watched a match. You are a fool Lowerbeedingseagull. VegasSeagull

12:23am Tue 4 Feb 14

campotolox says...

thought Vegas would be out flashing the cash ,just a suggestion,seems to know all about everthing?
thought Vegas would be out flashing the cash ,just a suggestion,seems to know all about everthing? campotolox

12:48am Tue 4 Feb 14

campotolox says...

I BET I WAS AT THE ALBION WHEN YOU LOT WERE A TWINKLE IN YOUR DADS EYE,AT THE END OF THE DAY ITS A GAME,WIN A FEW ,DRAW OR LOOSE,IF YOU WANT TO SE A WINNING TEAM EVERY WEEK MOVE TO THE NORTH,ITS A GAME AT THE END OF THE DAY ,END OF, PATHETIC EVEN READING THIS SITE,GO OUT AND GET A JOB,LOAD OF WASTERS EATING PIES,ALL ON BENIF!!
I BET I WAS AT THE ALBION WHEN YOU LOT WERE A TWINKLE IN YOUR DADS EYE,AT THE END OF THE DAY ITS A GAME,WIN A FEW ,DRAW OR LOOSE,IF YOU WANT TO SE A WINNING TEAM EVERY WEEK MOVE TO THE NORTH,ITS A GAME AT THE END OF THE DAY ,END OF, PATHETIC EVEN READING THIS SITE,GO OUT AND GET A JOB,LOAD OF WASTERS EATING PIES,ALL ON BENIF!! campotolox

1:00am Tue 4 Feb 14

campotolox says...

Just a thought you lot,keep working to pay my pension,bit hot here at the mo,adios
Just a thought you lot,keep working to pay my pension,bit hot here at the mo,adios campotolox

1:13am Tue 4 Feb 14

campotolox says...

Ye venison pies here,they are really deer,adios!!
Ye venison pies here,they are really deer,adios!! campotolox

8:22am Tue 4 Feb 14

lowerbeedingseagull says...

VegasSeagull wrote:
lowerbeedingseagull wrote:
tug509 wrote:
Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
They can attack and attack because they have the players to do that. We do not. We really do not.
So how is it ,that we had 2 strikers and 2 wingers on the bench y,day ,and only 1 striker on the pitch ,we have them ,we just dont use them !!.
Tug, Mate there is no point trying to tell Arnie the way it is from our vantage point inside the ground. We have to accept that he and his chum from Nevada are the experts on each and every subject including FFP, team selection, tactics, who to buy, what to pay them, how much everyone else is paying their players etc.
What a silly posting you have made. Everyone on here knows that I never comment on a match I have not seen. The only lads I have suggested by name we could sign are DS players. I have never spoken of what we should pay anyone. I have never spoken about what other clubs are paying. I have only stated what the FFP means to Brighton based on the written word contained in new articles and a public website that explains how it works.
I do from time to time offer a suggestion as to our lineup but that is after I have watched a match.
You are a fool Lowerbeedingseagull.
When did you last watch a live Seagulls match?? Just read what those that go think. 30 goals in 28 games with just 2 league goals in 2014 suggests that there is a major problem.The last time we scored twice was on Boxing Day in a defeat at relegation threatened Charlton.

If you think that seeing a game on your PC gives you a true reflection of what is happening then it is you who is a fool!! Why do all the top managers go to watch matches live? By the way i have never insulted you personally, just questioned what you say.

You have a selective memory about what you post.As a example how about those MSL players you suggested would be good signings? You are very fond of picking the team and how they should line up. It may be your other chum who constantly talks about wages & purports to be an expert on every
subject but you are right up there with him.
[quote][p][bold]VegasSeagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lowerbeedingseagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tug509[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: They can attack and attack because they have the players to do that. We do not. We really do not.[/p][/quote]So how is it ,that we had 2 strikers and 2 wingers on the bench y,day ,and only 1 striker on the pitch ,we have them ,we just dont use them !!.[/p][/quote]Tug, Mate there is no point trying to tell Arnie the way it is from our vantage point inside the ground. We have to accept that he and his chum from Nevada are the experts on each and every subject including FFP, team selection, tactics, who to buy, what to pay them, how much everyone else is paying their players etc.[/p][/quote]What a silly posting you have made. Everyone on here knows that I never comment on a match I have not seen. The only lads I have suggested by name we could sign are DS players. I have never spoken of what we should pay anyone. I have never spoken about what other clubs are paying. I have only stated what the FFP means to Brighton based on the written word contained in new articles and a public website that explains how it works. I do from time to time offer a suggestion as to our lineup but that is after I have watched a match. You are a fool Lowerbeedingseagull.[/p][/quote]When did you last watch a live Seagulls match?? Just read what those that go think. 30 goals in 28 games with just 2 league goals in 2014 suggests that there is a major problem.The last time we scored twice was on Boxing Day in a defeat at relegation threatened Charlton. If you think that seeing a game on your PC gives you a true reflection of what is happening then it is you who is a fool!! Why do all the top managers go to watch matches live? By the way i have never insulted you personally, just questioned what you say. You have a selective memory about what you post.As a example how about those MSL players you suggested would be good signings? You are very fond of picking the team and how they should line up. It may be your other chum who constantly talks about wages & purports to be an expert on every subject but you are right up there with him. lowerbeedingseagull

11:43am Tue 4 Feb 14

VegasSeagull says...

Lowerbeeding, I have only named one player within the MLS, and that was two seasons ago, at the time he had scored 18 goals in 17 matches.
Yes watching a match in the stadium does have it's advantages, but to say that watching live on television on via a computer screen does not offer enough insight into a match so as to offer an opinion is plain wrong.

What you fail to understand is that this site is a forum, a place where people offer opinions, thoughts and ideas, it is not a court of law where factual evidence rules.
'The FA won't impose harsh punishments on those flouting the FFP rules,' not a fact just a person's opinion.
'I think Oscar we should play with two strikers, we will score more goals,' not a fact but a thought or an opinion.
'Burke is choosing who we sign and Oscars isn't,' not a fact but an opinion.

Opinions, thoughts and ideas offered by anyone at any time on this site may be wrong in your, or other's eyes, but those offering those comments are entitled to them if that is what they truly feel. Just because a person might be a lone voice doesn't make him/her wrong, it simply means that he/she thinks differently to the general consensus of opinion, only events as they unfold will tell.
Nobody on here has to be, 'right,' to be valid, offering what might be seen as, 'wrong,' opens up debate. I might say that, having two strikers on the park won't make the slightest difference, we don't have players that are good enough to provide good service. Now to me that might be a, 'fact,' but on here, when I post that, it becomes an opinion.

There are no thought police on here, we can all post what we want, no matter what you or anyone else thinks and those that want to insult rather than debate, are fools. If some want to have a pop at a person they will, but that having pop should at least get their facts straight or they risk looking foolish.
Lowerbeeding, I have only named one player within the MLS, and that was two seasons ago, at the time he had scored 18 goals in 17 matches. Yes watching a match in the stadium does have it's advantages, but to say that watching live on television on via a computer screen does not offer enough insight into a match so as to offer an opinion is plain wrong. What you fail to understand is that this site is a forum, a place where people offer opinions, thoughts and ideas, it is not a court of law where factual evidence rules. 'The FA won't impose harsh punishments on those flouting the FFP rules,' not a fact just a person's opinion. 'I think Oscar we should play with two strikers, we will score more goals,' not a fact but a thought or an opinion. 'Burke is choosing who we sign and Oscars isn't,' not a fact but an opinion. Opinions, thoughts and ideas offered by anyone at any time on this site may be wrong in your, or other's eyes, but those offering those comments are entitled to them if that is what they truly feel. Just because a person might be a lone voice doesn't make him/her wrong, it simply means that he/she thinks differently to the general consensus of opinion, only events as they unfold will tell. Nobody on here has to be, 'right,' to be valid, offering what might be seen as, 'wrong,' opens up debate. I might say that, having two strikers on the park won't make the slightest difference, we don't have players that are good enough to provide good service. Now to me that might be a, 'fact,' but on here, when I post that, it becomes an opinion. There are no thought police on here, we can all post what we want, no matter what you or anyone else thinks and those that want to insult rather than debate, are fools. If some want to have a pop at a person they will, but that having pop should at least get their facts straight or they risk looking foolish. VegasSeagull

12:02pm Tue 4 Feb 14

lowerbeedingseagull says...

VegasSeagull wrote:
Lowerbeeding, I have only named one player within the MLS, and that was two seasons ago, at the time he had scored 18 goals in 17 matches.
Yes watching a match in the stadium does have it's advantages, but to say that watching live on television on via a computer screen does not offer enough insight into a match so as to offer an opinion is plain wrong.

What you fail to understand is that this site is a forum, a place where people offer opinions, thoughts and ideas, it is not a court of law where factual evidence rules.
'The FA won't impose harsh punishments on those flouting the FFP rules,' not a fact just a person's opinion.
'I think Oscar we should play with two strikers, we will score more goals,' not a fact but a thought or an opinion.
'Burke is choosing who we sign and Oscars isn't,' not a fact but an opinion.

Opinions, thoughts and ideas offered by anyone at any time on this site may be wrong in your, or other's eyes, but those offering those comments are entitled to them if that is what they truly feel. Just because a person might be a lone voice doesn't make him/her wrong, it simply means that he/she thinks differently to the general consensus of opinion, only events as they unfold will tell.
Nobody on here has to be, 'right,' to be valid, offering what might be seen as, 'wrong,' opens up debate. I might say that, having two strikers on the park won't make the slightest difference, we don't have players that are good enough to provide good service. Now to me that might be a, 'fact,' but on here, when I post that, it becomes an opinion.

There are no thought police on here, we can all post what we want, no matter what you or anyone else thinks and those that want to insult rather than debate, are fools. If some want to have a pop at a person they will, but that having pop should at least get their facts straight or they risk looking foolish.
I will watch your future posts with interest just to make sure that you are a man of your word about your many comments.I will also desist from making personal remarks as you seem prone to do when addressing me.

By the way your MLS remark was earlier this season as i have not been involved on here for 2 years.
[quote][p][bold]VegasSeagull[/bold] wrote: Lowerbeeding, I have only named one player within the MLS, and that was two seasons ago, at the time he had scored 18 goals in 17 matches. Yes watching a match in the stadium does have it's advantages, but to say that watching live on television on via a computer screen does not offer enough insight into a match so as to offer an opinion is plain wrong. What you fail to understand is that this site is a forum, a place where people offer opinions, thoughts and ideas, it is not a court of law where factual evidence rules. 'The FA won't impose harsh punishments on those flouting the FFP rules,' not a fact just a person's opinion. 'I think Oscar we should play with two strikers, we will score more goals,' not a fact but a thought or an opinion. 'Burke is choosing who we sign and Oscars isn't,' not a fact but an opinion. Opinions, thoughts and ideas offered by anyone at any time on this site may be wrong in your, or other's eyes, but those offering those comments are entitled to them if that is what they truly feel. Just because a person might be a lone voice doesn't make him/her wrong, it simply means that he/she thinks differently to the general consensus of opinion, only events as they unfold will tell. Nobody on here has to be, 'right,' to be valid, offering what might be seen as, 'wrong,' opens up debate. I might say that, having two strikers on the park won't make the slightest difference, we don't have players that are good enough to provide good service. Now to me that might be a, 'fact,' but on here, when I post that, it becomes an opinion. There are no thought police on here, we can all post what we want, no matter what you or anyone else thinks and those that want to insult rather than debate, are fools. If some want to have a pop at a person they will, but that having pop should at least get their facts straight or they risk looking foolish.[/p][/quote]I will watch your future posts with interest just to make sure that you are a man of your word about your many comments.I will also desist from making personal remarks as you seem prone to do when addressing me. By the way your MLS remark was earlier this season as i have not been involved on here for 2 years. lowerbeedingseagull

12:10pm Tue 4 Feb 14

VegasSeagull says...

lowerbeedingseagull wrote:
VegasSeagull wrote:
Lowerbeeding, I have only named one player within the MLS, and that was two seasons ago, at the time he had scored 18 goals in 17 matches.
Yes watching a match in the stadium does have it's advantages, but to say that watching live on television on via a computer screen does not offer enough insight into a match so as to offer an opinion is plain wrong.

What you fail to understand is that this site is a forum, a place where people offer opinions, thoughts and ideas, it is not a court of law where factual evidence rules.
'The FA won't impose harsh punishments on those flouting the FFP rules,' not a fact just a person's opinion.
'I think Oscar we should play with two strikers, we will score more goals,' not a fact but a thought or an opinion.
'Burke is choosing who we sign and Oscars isn't,' not a fact but an opinion.

Opinions, thoughts and ideas offered by anyone at any time on this site may be wrong in your, or other's eyes, but those offering those comments are entitled to them if that is what they truly feel. Just because a person might be a lone voice doesn't make him/her wrong, it simply means that he/she thinks differently to the general consensus of opinion, only events as they unfold will tell.
Nobody on here has to be, 'right,' to be valid, offering what might be seen as, 'wrong,' opens up debate. I might say that, having two strikers on the park won't make the slightest difference, we don't have players that are good enough to provide good service. Now to me that might be a, 'fact,' but on here, when I post that, it becomes an opinion.

There are no thought police on here, we can all post what we want, no matter what you or anyone else thinks and those that want to insult rather than debate, are fools. If some want to have a pop at a person they will, but that having pop should at least get their facts straight or they risk looking foolish.
I will watch your future posts with interest just to make sure that you are a man of your word about your many comments.I will also desist from making personal remarks as you seem prone to do when addressing me.

By the way your MLS remark was earlier this season as i have not been involved on here for 2 years.
Well you may be right about that player from the MLS but I thought it was two seasons ago, we all make errors.
[quote][p][bold]lowerbeedingseagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]VegasSeagull[/bold] wrote: Lowerbeeding, I have only named one player within the MLS, and that was two seasons ago, at the time he had scored 18 goals in 17 matches. Yes watching a match in the stadium does have it's advantages, but to say that watching live on television on via a computer screen does not offer enough insight into a match so as to offer an opinion is plain wrong. What you fail to understand is that this site is a forum, a place where people offer opinions, thoughts and ideas, it is not a court of law where factual evidence rules. 'The FA won't impose harsh punishments on those flouting the FFP rules,' not a fact just a person's opinion. 'I think Oscar we should play with two strikers, we will score more goals,' not a fact but a thought or an opinion. 'Burke is choosing who we sign and Oscars isn't,' not a fact but an opinion. Opinions, thoughts and ideas offered by anyone at any time on this site may be wrong in your, or other's eyes, but those offering those comments are entitled to them if that is what they truly feel. Just because a person might be a lone voice doesn't make him/her wrong, it simply means that he/she thinks differently to the general consensus of opinion, only events as they unfold will tell. Nobody on here has to be, 'right,' to be valid, offering what might be seen as, 'wrong,' opens up debate. I might say that, having two strikers on the park won't make the slightest difference, we don't have players that are good enough to provide good service. Now to me that might be a, 'fact,' but on here, when I post that, it becomes an opinion. There are no thought police on here, we can all post what we want, no matter what you or anyone else thinks and those that want to insult rather than debate, are fools. If some want to have a pop at a person they will, but that having pop should at least get their facts straight or they risk looking foolish.[/p][/quote]I will watch your future posts with interest just to make sure that you are a man of your word about your many comments.I will also desist from making personal remarks as you seem prone to do when addressing me. By the way your MLS remark was earlier this season as i have not been involved on here for 2 years.[/p][/quote]Well you may be right about that player from the MLS but I thought it was two seasons ago, we all make errors. VegasSeagull

12:35pm Tue 4 Feb 14

VegasSeagull says...

Can Brighton solve the goal scoring issue by simply playing two strikers rather than one, is the answer that easy?
If we field two strikers would we not have to look to our midfield to push up and support them, a midfield that would be minus one player due to the extra striker. If the midfield pushes up in support would not the back four also have to play higher up the field, or run the risk of leaving a huge hole between midfield and defense, does our back four have the pace to do that?

If the answer is to play two strikers we have to accept that one midfield player will be out as we are never going to play just three at the back. Who makes way for the extra striker, Andrews or Ince, surely it would have to be one of these as we would want our wide players to supply two strikers, we don't have a wing back that is quick enough to get up and down the park for 90 minutes.
The keeper and back four we know. Two strikers with Kaz out wide and Stephens in midfield. Nine places gone so if Andrews and Ince fill the other two spots we sacrifice the wide right position, but we have two strikers who will need a supply from both sides. Are Andrews and Ince both good enough to hold the midfield or does Stephens become a midfield player rather than an attacking midfielder and if he does, do we not lose something from that?

I ask all this because I really don't think that our midfield is good enough o support two strikers, not when our back four have such little pace about them. We might score one or two more goals, but I think we will concede more that one or two. Until we can get some real pace all over the park, I just don't see how we can play two up front. Two strikers might be the answer but the problem lies in midfield and the lack of pace in back four, or at least it does in my mind.
Can Brighton solve the goal scoring issue by simply playing two strikers rather than one, is the answer that easy? If we field two strikers would we not have to look to our midfield to push up and support them, a midfield that would be minus one player due to the extra striker. If the midfield pushes up in support would not the back four also have to play higher up the field, or run the risk of leaving a huge hole between midfield and defense, does our back four have the pace to do that? If the answer is to play two strikers we have to accept that one midfield player will be out as we are never going to play just three at the back. Who makes way for the extra striker, Andrews or Ince, surely it would have to be one of these as we would want our wide players to supply two strikers, we don't have a wing back that is quick enough to get up and down the park for 90 minutes. The keeper and back four we know. Two strikers with Kaz out wide and Stephens in midfield. Nine places gone so if Andrews and Ince fill the other two spots we sacrifice the wide right position, but we have two strikers who will need a supply from both sides. Are Andrews and Ince both good enough to hold the midfield or does Stephens become a midfield player rather than an attacking midfielder and if he does, do we not lose something from that? I ask all this because I really don't think that our midfield is good enough o support two strikers, not when our back four have such little pace about them. We might score one or two more goals, but I think we will concede more that one or two. Until we can get some real pace all over the park, I just don't see how we can play two up front. Two strikers might be the answer but the problem lies in midfield and the lack of pace in back four, or at least it does in my mind. VegasSeagull

12:53pm Tue 4 Feb 14

VegasSeagull says...

Lowerbeedingseagull.

The guy I was referring to in the MLS was Chris Wondolowski, in 2012 he scored 27 goals and started just 31 matches, he had 55 shots on target.
I still think he might do a job for us.
I think that you are right in that I did mention a player last year, a black guy who consistently score with his head from set pieces and in open play, but for the life of me I can't recall his name.
Lowerbeedingseagull. The guy I was referring to in the MLS was Chris Wondolowski, in 2012 he scored 27 goals and started just 31 matches, he had 55 shots on target. I still think he might do a job for us. I think that you are right in that I did mention a player last year, a black guy who consistently score with his head from set pieces and in open play, but for the life of me I can't recall his name. VegasSeagull

2:45pm Tue 4 Feb 14

Ex-pat Arnie says...

lowerbeedingseagull wrote:
tug509 wrote:
Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
They can attack and attack because they have the players to do that. We do not. We really do not.
So how is it ,that we had 2 strikers and 2 wingers on the bench y,day ,and only 1 striker on the pitch ,we have them ,we just dont use them !!.
Tug, Mate there is no point trying to tell Arnie the way it is from our vantage point inside the ground. We have to accept that he and his chum from Nevada are the experts on each and every subject including FFP, team selection, tactics, who to buy, what to pay them, how much everyone else is paying their players etc.
Sheesh, another one who thinks they have a more valid opinion than me just because they stupidly think I don't go to matches. I have been to nearly half the home games this season, and have watched on TV every time we have been broadcast. (Unless you somehow have a better view from your seat than I do from mine?) That's at least the 4th time I have explained that on here.

And back to Tug's original comment, we may have had attacking players on the bench, but are they as good as those in Leicester's squad? No, in my opinion they are not. I was talking about the quality of player, not the quantity.
[quote][p][bold]lowerbeedingseagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tug509[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: They can attack and attack because they have the players to do that. We do not. We really do not.[/p][/quote]So how is it ,that we had 2 strikers and 2 wingers on the bench y,day ,and only 1 striker on the pitch ,we have them ,we just dont use them !!.[/p][/quote]Tug, Mate there is no point trying to tell Arnie the way it is from our vantage point inside the ground. We have to accept that he and his chum from Nevada are the experts on each and every subject including FFP, team selection, tactics, who to buy, what to pay them, how much everyone else is paying their players etc.[/p][/quote]Sheesh, another one who thinks they have a more valid opinion than me just because they stupidly think I don't go to matches. I have been to nearly half the home games this season, and have watched on TV every time we have been broadcast. (Unless you somehow have a better view from your seat than I do from mine?) That's at least the 4th time I have explained that on here. And back to Tug's original comment, we may have had attacking players on the bench, but are they as good as those in Leicester's squad? No, in my opinion they are not. I was talking about the quality of player, not the quantity. Ex-pat Arnie

3:56pm Tue 4 Feb 14

VegasSeagull says...

I don't know if you would agree Arnie, or if many others would, but in all honesty as good as our squad looks, and on paper it does look quite good, I am just not convinced that this is a promotion challenging squad. I do believe that the squad is a top ten squad, and maybe slightly better, but top six, no.
I used the term, 'on paper,' and by that I mean, so many of our lads have lost something from their game this year, and I think that is due to the injuries they have sustained. So very few of them have had an extended run in the starting eleven, those that have, Upson and Crofts stand out, are, or were, having a better season than last, Ward took a few matches to get going but then started to look rather good once he had a few games under his belt.
I don't know if you would agree Arnie, or if many others would, but in all honesty as good as our squad looks, and on paper it does look quite good, I am just not convinced that this is a promotion challenging squad. I do believe that the squad is a top ten squad, and maybe slightly better, but top six, no. I used the term, 'on paper,' and by that I mean, so many of our lads have lost something from their game this year, and I think that is due to the injuries they have sustained. So very few of them have had an extended run in the starting eleven, those that have, Upson and Crofts stand out, are, or were, having a better season than last, Ward took a few matches to get going but then started to look rather good once he had a few games under his belt. VegasSeagull

4:10pm Tue 4 Feb 14

franckiep en france says...

campotolox wrote:
What other other BHA player has played for england apart from Jimmy,Langley,tell me,sums it up!!
Lorrow, Jimmy Case, Foster to name 3.
[quote][p][bold]campotolox[/bold] wrote: What other other BHA player has played for england apart from Jimmy,Langley,tell me,sums it up!![/p][/quote]Lorrow, Jimmy Case, Foster to name 3. franckiep en france

4:34pm Tue 4 Feb 14

tug509 says...

Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
lowerbeedingseagull wrote:
tug509 wrote:
Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
They can attack and attack because they have the players to do that. We do not. We really do not.
So how is it ,that we had 2 strikers and 2 wingers on the bench y,day ,and only 1 striker on the pitch ,we have them ,we just dont use them !!.
Tug, Mate there is no point trying to tell Arnie the way it is from our vantage point inside the ground. We have to accept that he and his chum from Nevada are the experts on each and every subject including FFP, team selection, tactics, who to buy, what to pay them, how much everyone else is paying their players etc.
Sheesh, another one who thinks they have a more valid opinion than me just because they stupidly think I don't go to matches. I have been to nearly half the home games this season, and have watched on TV every time we have been broadcast. (Unless you somehow have a better view from your seat than I do from mine?) That's at least the 4th time I have explained that on here.

And back to Tug's original comment, we may have had attacking players on the bench, but are they as good as those in Leicester's squad? No, in my opinion they are not. I was talking about the quality of player, not the quantity.
My point wasn`t to do with comparing the quality of Leicester`s players to ours ,it was to point out that ,had we played 2 strikers and at least 1 winger against Watford ,i dont beleive we would have lost .
I have always worked in the building trade ,and i will tell you for nothing ,a tradesman does not save his best tools for a special ocassion ,he uses what he has got ,in order to get the best possible finish ,not leave them in the box as a last resort . Sticking with that analogy ,if a 2lb hammer does not do the job ,then use a bigger hammer ,but dont persevere with the wrong tools ,until the job is beyond repair .
[quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lowerbeedingseagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tug509[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: They can attack and attack because they have the players to do that. We do not. We really do not.[/p][/quote]So how is it ,that we had 2 strikers and 2 wingers on the bench y,day ,and only 1 striker on the pitch ,we have them ,we just dont use them !!.[/p][/quote]Tug, Mate there is no point trying to tell Arnie the way it is from our vantage point inside the ground. We have to accept that he and his chum from Nevada are the experts on each and every subject including FFP, team selection, tactics, who to buy, what to pay them, how much everyone else is paying their players etc.[/p][/quote]Sheesh, another one who thinks they have a more valid opinion than me just because they stupidly think I don't go to matches. I have been to nearly half the home games this season, and have watched on TV every time we have been broadcast. (Unless you somehow have a better view from your seat than I do from mine?) That's at least the 4th time I have explained that on here. And back to Tug's original comment, we may have had attacking players on the bench, but are they as good as those in Leicester's squad? No, in my opinion they are not. I was talking about the quality of player, not the quantity.[/p][/quote]My point wasn`t to do with comparing the quality of Leicester`s players to ours ,it was to point out that ,had we played 2 strikers and at least 1 winger against Watford ,i dont beleive we would have lost . I have always worked in the building trade ,and i will tell you for nothing ,a tradesman does not save his best tools for a special ocassion ,he uses what he has got ,in order to get the best possible finish ,not leave them in the box as a last resort . Sticking with that analogy ,if a 2lb hammer does not do the job ,then use a bigger hammer ,but dont persevere with the wrong tools ,until the job is beyond repair . tug509

4:38pm Tue 4 Feb 14

lowerbeedingseagull says...

franckiep en france wrote:
campotolox wrote:
What other other BHA player has played for england apart from Jimmy,Langley,tell me,sums it up!!
Lorrow, Jimmy Case, Foster to name 3.
Lorrow, as you call him, played for Ireland/ Eire whichever you like.

Case did not play when he was at Albion.
[quote][p][bold]franckiep en france[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]campotolox[/bold] wrote: What other other BHA player has played for england apart from Jimmy,Langley,tell me,sums it up!![/p][/quote]Lorrow, Jimmy Case, Foster to name 3.[/p][/quote]Lorrow, as you call him, played for Ireland/ Eire whichever you like. Case did not play when he was at Albion. lowerbeedingseagull

5:49pm Tue 4 Feb 14

To baldly go says...

Just got to the bottom of the page and i am knackered, guy's, we only want to know how to score more goals not put the world to rights.
We do have the players to win these games, but not only do the players have to adapt but the manager/coach also, at home against teams like Doncaster we only need to play 3 defenders imo, they will come and park the bus and play 1 striker like the rest of the teams have done, look at Watford, they did their homework and knew that Ulloa would be on his own, 3 against 1, no contest, if we approach the game with the same attitude that free's up another player for midfield, allowing us 2 upfront but still have a packed midfield.
I would go with the following if fit:
TK in goal, Ward, Upson and Calderon in defence, midfield would be Ince, Stephens and Orlandi with March and LuaLua linking play between midfield and a strike pairing of Ulloa and Obika/Rodney.
Bench would look strong, Brez, Bruno, Greer, Lopez, Jfc, Andrews and either Obika/Rodney. This line up is workable imo both as an attacking line up but with both March and LuaLua capable of defending when required.
Just got to the bottom of the page and i am knackered, guy's, we only want to know how to score more goals not put the world to rights. We do have the players to win these games, but not only do the players have to adapt but the manager/coach also, at home against teams like Doncaster we only need to play 3 defenders imo, they will come and park the bus and play 1 striker like the rest of the teams have done, look at Watford, they did their homework and knew that Ulloa would be on his own, 3 against 1, no contest, if we approach the game with the same attitude that free's up another player for midfield, allowing us 2 upfront but still have a packed midfield. I would go with the following if fit: TK in goal, Ward, Upson and Calderon in defence, midfield would be Ince, Stephens and Orlandi with March and LuaLua linking play between midfield and a strike pairing of Ulloa and Obika/Rodney. Bench would look strong, Brez, Bruno, Greer, Lopez, Jfc, Andrews and either Obika/Rodney. This line up is workable imo both as an attacking line up but with both March and LuaLua capable of defending when required. To baldly go

6:42pm Tue 4 Feb 14

Ex-pat Arnie says...

VegasSeagull wrote:
I don't know if you would agree Arnie, or if many others would, but in all honesty as good as our squad looks, and on paper it does look quite good, I am just not convinced that this is a promotion challenging squad. I do believe that the squad is a top ten squad, and maybe slightly better, but top six, no.
I used the term, 'on paper,' and by that I mean, so many of our lads have lost something from their game this year, and I think that is due to the injuries they have sustained. So very few of them have had an extended run in the starting eleven, those that have, Upson and Crofts stand out, are, or were, having a better season than last, Ward took a few matches to get going but then started to look rather good once he had a few games under his belt.
No, I would agree. This is a squad that have proven the CAN get in the top 6, but I don't think we can stay there. Therefore the play-offs are a reality only if the season ends whilst we are at a peak in our position.

One of the main problems, as you say, so few of our attacking players have been fit . How many games have we had Buckley, LuaLua and Ulloa fit available for selection? A handful, if that. And when they do come back it takes a while to get back up to speed, by which time (for the wingers, at least) they pick up another niggle.

It's no coincidence (IMO) that the season we won League One we had almost no injuries, save for AEA near the end. A consistently strong squad to choose from would make OG's life so much easier, but at least the silver lining is the emergence of March and particularly Ince (and, to a slightly lesser extent, JFC).
[quote][p][bold]VegasSeagull[/bold] wrote: I don't know if you would agree Arnie, or if many others would, but in all honesty as good as our squad looks, and on paper it does look quite good, I am just not convinced that this is a promotion challenging squad. I do believe that the squad is a top ten squad, and maybe slightly better, but top six, no. I used the term, 'on paper,' and by that I mean, so many of our lads have lost something from their game this year, and I think that is due to the injuries they have sustained. So very few of them have had an extended run in the starting eleven, those that have, Upson and Crofts stand out, are, or were, having a better season than last, Ward took a few matches to get going but then started to look rather good once he had a few games under his belt.[/p][/quote]No, I would agree. This is a squad that have proven the CAN get in the top 6, but I don't think we can stay there. Therefore the play-offs are a reality only if the season ends whilst we are at a peak in our position. One of the main problems, as you say, so few of our attacking players have been fit . How many games have we had Buckley, LuaLua and Ulloa fit available for selection? A handful, if that. And when they do come back it takes a while to get back up to speed, by which time (for the wingers, at least) they pick up another niggle. It's no coincidence (IMO) that the season we won League One we had almost no injuries, save for AEA near the end. A consistently strong squad to choose from would make OG's life so much easier, but at least the silver lining is the emergence of March and particularly Ince (and, to a slightly lesser extent, JFC). Ex-pat Arnie

6:46pm Tue 4 Feb 14

Ex-pat Arnie says...

tug509 wrote:
Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
lowerbeedingseagull wrote:
tug509 wrote:
Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
They can attack and attack because they have the players to do that. We do not. We really do not.
So how is it ,that we had 2 strikers and 2 wingers on the bench y,day ,and only 1 striker on the pitch ,we have them ,we just dont use them !!.
Tug, Mate there is no point trying to tell Arnie the way it is from our vantage point inside the ground. We have to accept that he and his chum from Nevada are the experts on each and every subject including FFP, team selection, tactics, who to buy, what to pay them, how much everyone else is paying their players etc.
Sheesh, another one who thinks they have a more valid opinion than me just because they stupidly think I don't go to matches. I have been to nearly half the home games this season, and have watched on TV every time we have been broadcast. (Unless you somehow have a better view from your seat than I do from mine?) That's at least the 4th time I have explained that on here.

And back to Tug's original comment, we may have had attacking players on the bench, but are they as good as those in Leicester's squad? No, in my opinion they are not. I was talking about the quality of player, not the quantity.
My point wasn`t to do with comparing the quality of Leicester`s players to ours ,it was to point out that ,had we played 2 strikers and at least 1 winger against Watford ,i dont beleive we would have lost .
I have always worked in the building trade ,and i will tell you for nothing ,a tradesman does not save his best tools for a special ocassion ,he uses what he has got ,in order to get the best possible finish ,not leave them in the box as a last resort . Sticking with that analogy ,if a 2lb hammer does not do the job ,then use a bigger hammer ,but dont persevere with the wrong tools ,until the job is beyond repair .
The analogy doesn't really work if you consider that what you think is a bigger or better hammer might in fact turn out to be a chisel, or the same weight of hammer but with a smaller head.

OG has the tools provided to him by his employer and he will use them in whichever way he thinks will get him the desired result. If he has more faith in some of them than others then I can't see, even if things aren't going great, why he would entrust the job to an inferior option.

(And we did that without resorting to calling each other a tool :-)
[quote][p][bold]tug509[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lowerbeedingseagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tug509[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: They can attack and attack because they have the players to do that. We do not. We really do not.[/p][/quote]So how is it ,that we had 2 strikers and 2 wingers on the bench y,day ,and only 1 striker on the pitch ,we have them ,we just dont use them !!.[/p][/quote]Tug, Mate there is no point trying to tell Arnie the way it is from our vantage point inside the ground. We have to accept that he and his chum from Nevada are the experts on each and every subject including FFP, team selection, tactics, who to buy, what to pay them, how much everyone else is paying their players etc.[/p][/quote]Sheesh, another one who thinks they have a more valid opinion than me just because they stupidly think I don't go to matches. I have been to nearly half the home games this season, and have watched on TV every time we have been broadcast. (Unless you somehow have a better view from your seat than I do from mine?) That's at least the 4th time I have explained that on here. And back to Tug's original comment, we may have had attacking players on the bench, but are they as good as those in Leicester's squad? No, in my opinion they are not. I was talking about the quality of player, not the quantity.[/p][/quote]My point wasn`t to do with comparing the quality of Leicester`s players to ours ,it was to point out that ,had we played 2 strikers and at least 1 winger against Watford ,i dont beleive we would have lost . I have always worked in the building trade ,and i will tell you for nothing ,a tradesman does not save his best tools for a special ocassion ,he uses what he has got ,in order to get the best possible finish ,not leave them in the box as a last resort . Sticking with that analogy ,if a 2lb hammer does not do the job ,then use a bigger hammer ,but dont persevere with the wrong tools ,until the job is beyond repair .[/p][/quote]The analogy doesn't really work if you consider that what you think is a bigger or better hammer might in fact turn out to be a chisel, or the same weight of hammer but with a smaller head. OG has the tools provided to him by his employer and he will use them in whichever way he thinks will get him the desired result. If he has more faith in some of them than others then I can't see, even if things aren't going great, why he would entrust the job to an inferior option. (And we did that without resorting to calling each other a tool :-) Ex-pat Arnie

7:05pm Tue 4 Feb 14

tug509 says...

Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
tug509 wrote:
Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
lowerbeedingseagull wrote:
tug509 wrote:
Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
They can attack and attack because they have the players to do that. We do not. We really do not.
So how is it ,that we had 2 strikers and 2 wingers on the bench y,day ,and only 1 striker on the pitch ,we have them ,we just dont use them !!.
Tug, Mate there is no point trying to tell Arnie the way it is from our vantage point inside the ground. We have to accept that he and his chum from Nevada are the experts on each and every subject including FFP, team selection, tactics, who to buy, what to pay them, how much everyone else is paying their players etc.
Sheesh, another one who thinks they have a more valid opinion than me just because they stupidly think I don't go to matches. I have been to nearly half the home games this season, and have watched on TV every time we have been broadcast. (Unless you somehow have a better view from your seat than I do from mine?) That's at least the 4th time I have explained that on here.

And back to Tug's original comment, we may have had attacking players on the bench, but are they as good as those in Leicester's squad? No, in my opinion they are not. I was talking about the quality of player, not the quantity.
My point wasn`t to do with comparing the quality of Leicester`s players to ours ,it was to point out that ,had we played 2 strikers and at least 1 winger against Watford ,i dont beleive we would have lost .
I have always worked in the building trade ,and i will tell you for nothing ,a tradesman does not save his best tools for a special ocassion ,he uses what he has got ,in order to get the best possible finish ,not leave them in the box as a last resort . Sticking with that analogy ,if a 2lb hammer does not do the job ,then use a bigger hammer ,but dont persevere with the wrong tools ,until the job is beyond repair .
The analogy doesn't really work if you consider that what you think is a bigger or better hammer might in fact turn out to be a chisel, or the same weight of hammer but with a smaller head.

OG has the tools provided to him by his employer and he will use them in whichever way he thinks will get him the desired result. If he has more faith in some of them than others then I can't see, even if things aren't going great, why he would entrust the job to an inferior option.

(And we did that without resorting to calling each other a tool :-)
No i didn`t think it would !
If you continue to miss my point about playing two forwards instead of one ,then there is no point in me bothering , i thought my anolalogy pointed out very easily ,that if one striker doesn`t work ,then dont play one striker ,play two ,just read To Baldly Go`s post ,he says it all for me ,and very well imo .
[quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tug509[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lowerbeedingseagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tug509[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: They can attack and attack because they have the players to do that. We do not. We really do not.[/p][/quote]So how is it ,that we had 2 strikers and 2 wingers on the bench y,day ,and only 1 striker on the pitch ,we have them ,we just dont use them !!.[/p][/quote]Tug, Mate there is no point trying to tell Arnie the way it is from our vantage point inside the ground. We have to accept that he and his chum from Nevada are the experts on each and every subject including FFP, team selection, tactics, who to buy, what to pay them, how much everyone else is paying their players etc.[/p][/quote]Sheesh, another one who thinks they have a more valid opinion than me just because they stupidly think I don't go to matches. I have been to nearly half the home games this season, and have watched on TV every time we have been broadcast. (Unless you somehow have a better view from your seat than I do from mine?) That's at least the 4th time I have explained that on here. And back to Tug's original comment, we may have had attacking players on the bench, but are they as good as those in Leicester's squad? No, in my opinion they are not. I was talking about the quality of player, not the quantity.[/p][/quote]My point wasn`t to do with comparing the quality of Leicester`s players to ours ,it was to point out that ,had we played 2 strikers and at least 1 winger against Watford ,i dont beleive we would have lost . I have always worked in the building trade ,and i will tell you for nothing ,a tradesman does not save his best tools for a special ocassion ,he uses what he has got ,in order to get the best possible finish ,not leave them in the box as a last resort . Sticking with that analogy ,if a 2lb hammer does not do the job ,then use a bigger hammer ,but dont persevere with the wrong tools ,until the job is beyond repair .[/p][/quote]The analogy doesn't really work if you consider that what you think is a bigger or better hammer might in fact turn out to be a chisel, or the same weight of hammer but with a smaller head. OG has the tools provided to him by his employer and he will use them in whichever way he thinks will get him the desired result. If he has more faith in some of them than others then I can't see, even if things aren't going great, why he would entrust the job to an inferior option. (And we did that without resorting to calling each other a tool :-)[/p][/quote]No i didn`t think it would ! If you continue to miss my point about playing two forwards instead of one ,then there is no point in me bothering , i thought my anolalogy pointed out very easily ,that if one striker doesn`t work ,then dont play one striker ,play two ,just read To Baldly Go`s post ,he says it all for me ,and very well imo . tug509

7:09pm Tue 4 Feb 14

albion64 says...

pjwilk wrote:
Think you have answered your own questions everybody knows what to do except OG and NJ.Always start with two up front and Lua Lua and Soly or Buckley on the other wing.Ditch the 4-5-1 and go 4-4-2 with wingers.Look at Saints,what an attacking line up breaking foreward with speed and accuracy.Dont forget OG while we are attacking there is no defending to do,there is only one ball on the pitch make sure we keep it or win it back quickly.
One problem with this. Watford break very quickly and other teams with fast wingers break quickly when we give the ball away deep in the oppositions half. This is with the extra man already in a defensive role.

I agree with two up front and don't like negative football, but think we'd struggle even more with the players we have. A bit more pace required, I'm afraid. Perhaps we should start every game, home or away, with two up front, then shut up shop with a decent lead. (hopefully). UTA
[quote][p][bold]pjwilk[/bold] wrote: Think you have answered your own questions everybody knows what to do except OG and NJ.Always start with two up front and Lua Lua and Soly or Buckley on the other wing.Ditch the 4-5-1 and go 4-4-2 with wingers.Look at Saints,what an attacking line up breaking foreward with speed and accuracy.Dont forget OG while we are attacking there is no defending to do,there is only one ball on the pitch make sure we keep it or win it back quickly.[/p][/quote]One problem with this. Watford break very quickly and other teams with fast wingers break quickly when we give the ball away deep in the oppositions half. This is with the extra man already in a defensive role. I agree with two up front and don't like negative football, but think we'd struggle even more with the players we have. A bit more pace required, I'm afraid. Perhaps we should start every game, home or away, with two up front, then shut up shop with a decent lead. (hopefully). UTA albion64

7:18pm Tue 4 Feb 14

albion64 says...

campotolox wrote:
Ye venison pies here,they are really deer,adios!!
Village idiot
[quote][p][bold]campotolox[/bold] wrote: Ye venison pies here,they are really deer,adios!![/p][/quote]Village idiot albion64

8:27pm Tue 4 Feb 14

Ex-pat Arnie says...

tug509 wrote:
Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
tug509 wrote:
Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
lowerbeedingseagull wrote:
tug509 wrote:
Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
They can attack and attack because they have the players to do that. We do not. We really do not.
So how is it ,that we had 2 strikers and 2 wingers on the bench y,day ,and only 1 striker on the pitch ,we have them ,we just dont use them !!.
Tug, Mate there is no point trying to tell Arnie the way it is from our vantage point inside the ground. We have to accept that he and his chum from Nevada are the experts on each and every subject including FFP, team selection, tactics, who to buy, what to pay them, how much everyone else is paying their players etc.
Sheesh, another one who thinks they have a more valid opinion than me just because they stupidly think I don't go to matches. I have been to nearly half the home games this season, and have watched on TV every time we have been broadcast. (Unless you somehow have a better view from your seat than I do from mine?) That's at least the 4th time I have explained that on here.

And back to Tug's original comment, we may have had attacking players on the bench, but are they as good as those in Leicester's squad? No, in my opinion they are not. I was talking about the quality of player, not the quantity.
My point wasn`t to do with comparing the quality of Leicester`s players to ours ,it was to point out that ,had we played 2 strikers and at least 1 winger against Watford ,i dont beleive we would have lost .
I have always worked in the building trade ,and i will tell you for nothing ,a tradesman does not save his best tools for a special ocassion ,he uses what he has got ,in order to get the best possible finish ,not leave them in the box as a last resort . Sticking with that analogy ,if a 2lb hammer does not do the job ,then use a bigger hammer ,but dont persevere with the wrong tools ,until the job is beyond repair .
The analogy doesn't really work if you consider that what you think is a bigger or better hammer might in fact turn out to be a chisel, or the same weight of hammer but with a smaller head.

OG has the tools provided to him by his employer and he will use them in whichever way he thinks will get him the desired result. If he has more faith in some of them than others then I can't see, even if things aren't going great, why he would entrust the job to an inferior option.

(And we did that without resorting to calling each other a tool :-)
No i didn`t think it would !
If you continue to miss my point about playing two forwards instead of one ,then there is no point in me bothering , i thought my anolalogy pointed out very easily ,that if one striker doesn`t work ,then dont play one striker ,play two ,just read To Baldly Go`s post ,he says it all for me ,and very well imo .
I don't miss your point, not at all. And nor does OG, but I guess he wants to try the one striker option before resorting to two, because if you play two strikers you risk losing the midfield.

(And I really don't think there's any mileage in playing three at the back, as TBG suggests.)

But this misses the point anyway... OG is instilling (or at least trying to instill) a particularly method of playing and it will take time. If he starts matches with a different formation he starts to undo all the hard work he is putting in. That's not to say he can't chuck an extra man on near the end (as indeed he does if needed sometimes) but there is method at play and it will take time for the players to adapt. Those that don't manage to do so will leave and be replaced by those who can.

If he picks an XI which he thinks is the best, than it is still probably the best XI available at the end, unless someone is having a 'mare. Playing two up front is not a panacea, it is a punt, a gamble when there is nothing to lose.

Personally, I don't like 4-4-2 and never have (and even Man C were shown up last night - they lost the midfield despite having some unbelievable talent in there) so I'm happy with whatever variation of one-up-front OG wants to use.

It will work eventually, we just have to be patient.
[quote][p][bold]tug509[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tug509[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lowerbeedingseagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tug509[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: They can attack and attack because they have the players to do that. We do not. We really do not.[/p][/quote]So how is it ,that we had 2 strikers and 2 wingers on the bench y,day ,and only 1 striker on the pitch ,we have them ,we just dont use them !!.[/p][/quote]Tug, Mate there is no point trying to tell Arnie the way it is from our vantage point inside the ground. We have to accept that he and his chum from Nevada are the experts on each and every subject including FFP, team selection, tactics, who to buy, what to pay them, how much everyone else is paying their players etc.[/p][/quote]Sheesh, another one who thinks they have a more valid opinion than me just because they stupidly think I don't go to matches. I have been to nearly half the home games this season, and have watched on TV every time we have been broadcast. (Unless you somehow have a better view from your seat than I do from mine?) That's at least the 4th time I have explained that on here. And back to Tug's original comment, we may have had attacking players on the bench, but are they as good as those in Leicester's squad? No, in my opinion they are not. I was talking about the quality of player, not the quantity.[/p][/quote]My point wasn`t to do with comparing the quality of Leicester`s players to ours ,it was to point out that ,had we played 2 strikers and at least 1 winger against Watford ,i dont beleive we would have lost . I have always worked in the building trade ,and i will tell you for nothing ,a tradesman does not save his best tools for a special ocassion ,he uses what he has got ,in order to get the best possible finish ,not leave them in the box as a last resort . Sticking with that analogy ,if a 2lb hammer does not do the job ,then use a bigger hammer ,but dont persevere with the wrong tools ,until the job is beyond repair .[/p][/quote]The analogy doesn't really work if you consider that what you think is a bigger or better hammer might in fact turn out to be a chisel, or the same weight of hammer but with a smaller head. OG has the tools provided to him by his employer and he will use them in whichever way he thinks will get him the desired result. If he has more faith in some of them than others then I can't see, even if things aren't going great, why he would entrust the job to an inferior option. (And we did that without resorting to calling each other a tool :-)[/p][/quote]No i didn`t think it would ! If you continue to miss my point about playing two forwards instead of one ,then there is no point in me bothering , i thought my anolalogy pointed out very easily ,that if one striker doesn`t work ,then dont play one striker ,play two ,just read To Baldly Go`s post ,he says it all for me ,and very well imo .[/p][/quote]I don't miss your point, not at all. And nor does OG, but I guess he wants to try the one striker option before resorting to two, because if you play two strikers you risk losing the midfield. (And I really don't think there's any mileage in playing three at the back, as TBG suggests.) But this misses the point anyway... OG is instilling (or at least trying to instill) a particularly method of playing and it will take time. If he starts matches with a different formation he starts to undo all the hard work he is putting in. That's not to say he can't chuck an extra man on near the end (as indeed he does if needed sometimes) but there is method at play and it will take time for the players to adapt. Those that don't manage to do so will leave and be replaced by those who can. If he picks an XI which he thinks is the best, than it is still probably the best XI available at the end, unless someone is having a 'mare. Playing two up front is not a panacea, it is a punt, a gamble when there is nothing to lose. Personally, I don't like 4-4-2 and never have (and even Man C were shown up last night - they lost the midfield despite having some unbelievable talent in there) so I'm happy with whatever variation of one-up-front OG wants to use. It will work eventually, we just have to be patient. Ex-pat Arnie

8:58pm Tue 4 Feb 14

To baldly go says...

Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
tug509 wrote:
Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
tug509 wrote:
Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
lowerbeedingseagull wrote:
tug509 wrote:
Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
They can attack and attack because they have the players to do that. We do not. We really do not.
So how is it ,that we had 2 strikers and 2 wingers on the bench y,day ,and only 1 striker on the pitch ,we have them ,we just dont use them !!.
Tug, Mate there is no point trying to tell Arnie the way it is from our vantage point inside the ground. We have to accept that he and his chum from Nevada are the experts on each and every subject including FFP, team selection, tactics, who to buy, what to pay them, how much everyone else is paying their players etc.
Sheesh, another one who thinks they have a more valid opinion than me just because they stupidly think I don't go to matches. I have been to nearly half the home games this season, and have watched on TV every time we have been broadcast. (Unless you somehow have a better view from your seat than I do from mine?) That's at least the 4th time I have explained that on here.

And back to Tug's original comment, we may have had attacking players on the bench, but are they as good as those in Leicester's squad? No, in my opinion they are not. I was talking about the quality of player, not the quantity.
My point wasn`t to do with comparing the quality of Leicester`s players to ours ,it was to point out that ,had we played 2 strikers and at least 1 winger against Watford ,i dont beleive we would have lost .
I have always worked in the building trade ,and i will tell you for nothing ,a tradesman does not save his best tools for a special ocassion ,he uses what he has got ,in order to get the best possible finish ,not leave them in the box as a last resort . Sticking with that analogy ,if a 2lb hammer does not do the job ,then use a bigger hammer ,but dont persevere with the wrong tools ,until the job is beyond repair .
The analogy doesn't really work if you consider that what you think is a bigger or better hammer might in fact turn out to be a chisel, or the same weight of hammer but with a smaller head.

OG has the tools provided to him by his employer and he will use them in whichever way he thinks will get him the desired result. If he has more faith in some of them than others then I can't see, even if things aren't going great, why he would entrust the job to an inferior option.

(And we did that without resorting to calling each other a tool :-)
No i didn`t think it would !
If you continue to miss my point about playing two forwards instead of one ,then there is no point in me bothering , i thought my anolalogy pointed out very easily ,that if one striker doesn`t work ,then dont play one striker ,play two ,just read To Baldly Go`s post ,he says it all for me ,and very well imo .
I don't miss your point, not at all. And nor does OG, but I guess he wants to try the one striker option before resorting to two, because if you play two strikers you risk losing the midfield.

(And I really don't think there's any mileage in playing three at the back, as TBG suggests.)

But this misses the point anyway... OG is instilling (or at least trying to instill) a particularly method of playing and it will take time. If he starts matches with a different formation he starts to undo all the hard work he is putting in. That's not to say he can't chuck an extra man on near the end (as indeed he does if needed sometimes) but there is method at play and it will take time for the players to adapt. Those that don't manage to do so will leave and be replaced by those who can.

If he picks an XI which he thinks is the best, than it is still probably the best XI available at the end, unless someone is having a 'mare. Playing two up front is not a panacea, it is a punt, a gamble when there is nothing to lose.

Personally, I don't like 4-4-2 and never have (and even Man C were shown up last night - they lost the midfield despite having some unbelievable talent in there) so I'm happy with whatever variation of one-up-front OG wants to use.

It will work eventually, we just have to be patient.
We can go on about this all night and get no where, the team/setup/style of play isn't working at the moment, we all agree on that point. Is it a matter of time for it to work, possibly, but with some of the team on loan, out of contract end of season and getting on a bit in age, trying to get this team to play in a certain way is not the way to go, next season when OG has the players HE wants then maybe. What we need now is to score goals, entertain us supporters and possibly get a play off spot, if we loose 4-3 who cares, at least we would have had a go and been on the edge of our seats, not becoming frustrated at loosing 1-0 or drawing another game! We all want what's best for the club, yes, but this is also an entertainment industry and at the moment we are not being entertained. Go for it at home and just tighten it up a bit when away. 10 more goals would have probably got us 10 more points and we would be right in the mix, imo. Saturday we need goals, play the same way as we have done so far could see us facing another Barnsley type of result!
[quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tug509[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tug509[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lowerbeedingseagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tug509[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: They can attack and attack because they have the players to do that. We do not. We really do not.[/p][/quote]So how is it ,that we had 2 strikers and 2 wingers on the bench y,day ,and only 1 striker on the pitch ,we have them ,we just dont use them !!.[/p][/quote]Tug, Mate there is no point trying to tell Arnie the way it is from our vantage point inside the ground. We have to accept that he and his chum from Nevada are the experts on each and every subject including FFP, team selection, tactics, who to buy, what to pay them, how much everyone else is paying their players etc.[/p][/quote]Sheesh, another one who thinks they have a more valid opinion than me just because they stupidly think I don't go to matches. I have been to nearly half the home games this season, and have watched on TV every time we have been broadcast. (Unless you somehow have a better view from your seat than I do from mine?) That's at least the 4th time I have explained that on here. And back to Tug's original comment, we may have had attacking players on the bench, but are they as good as those in Leicester's squad? No, in my opinion they are not. I was talking about the quality of player, not the quantity.[/p][/quote]My point wasn`t to do with comparing the quality of Leicester`s players to ours ,it was to point out that ,had we played 2 strikers and at least 1 winger against Watford ,i dont beleive we would have lost . I have always worked in the building trade ,and i will tell you for nothing ,a tradesman does not save his best tools for a special ocassion ,he uses what he has got ,in order to get the best possible finish ,not leave them in the box as a last resort . Sticking with that analogy ,if a 2lb hammer does not do the job ,then use a bigger hammer ,but dont persevere with the wrong tools ,until the job is beyond repair .[/p][/quote]The analogy doesn't really work if you consider that what you think is a bigger or better hammer might in fact turn out to be a chisel, or the same weight of hammer but with a smaller head. OG has the tools provided to him by his employer and he will use them in whichever way he thinks will get him the desired result. If he has more faith in some of them than others then I can't see, even if things aren't going great, why he would entrust the job to an inferior option. (And we did that without resorting to calling each other a tool :-)[/p][/quote]No i didn`t think it would ! If you continue to miss my point about playing two forwards instead of one ,then there is no point in me bothering , i thought my anolalogy pointed out very easily ,that if one striker doesn`t work ,then dont play one striker ,play two ,just read To Baldly Go`s post ,he says it all for me ,and very well imo .[/p][/quote]I don't miss your point, not at all. And nor does OG, but I guess he wants to try the one striker option before resorting to two, because if you play two strikers you risk losing the midfield. (And I really don't think there's any mileage in playing three at the back, as TBG suggests.) But this misses the point anyway... OG is instilling (or at least trying to instill) a particularly method of playing and it will take time. If he starts matches with a different formation he starts to undo all the hard work he is putting in. That's not to say he can't chuck an extra man on near the end (as indeed he does if needed sometimes) but there is method at play and it will take time for the players to adapt. Those that don't manage to do so will leave and be replaced by those who can. If he picks an XI which he thinks is the best, than it is still probably the best XI available at the end, unless someone is having a 'mare. Playing two up front is not a panacea, it is a punt, a gamble when there is nothing to lose. Personally, I don't like 4-4-2 and never have (and even Man C were shown up last night - they lost the midfield despite having some unbelievable talent in there) so I'm happy with whatever variation of one-up-front OG wants to use. It will work eventually, we just have to be patient.[/p][/quote]We can go on about this all night and get no where, the team/setup/style of play isn't working at the moment, we all agree on that point. Is it a matter of time for it to work, possibly, but with some of the team on loan, out of contract end of season and getting on a bit in age, trying to get this team to play in a certain way is not the way to go, next season when OG has the players HE wants then maybe. What we need now is to score goals, entertain us supporters and possibly get a play off spot, if we loose 4-3 who cares, at least we would have had a go and been on the edge of our seats, not becoming frustrated at loosing 1-0 or drawing another game! We all want what's best for the club, yes, but this is also an entertainment industry and at the moment we are not being entertained. Go for it at home and just tighten it up a bit when away. 10 more goals would have probably got us 10 more points and we would be right in the mix, imo. Saturday we need goals, play the same way as we have done so far could see us facing another Barnsley type of result! To baldly go

10:47pm Tue 4 Feb 14

VegasSeagull says...

To Baldly Go, I think you have it about right, the current squad of players are not playing to the way Oscar wants them to, not a total failure, we are dominating possession, we are getting shots off, we just can't convert enough of the chances, and that is not entertaining.
From the matches I have been able to watch, all be it watch them on a screen and not in person, I think I am right in saying that the vast majority of the shots we get fired off are outside the 18 yard box, and whilst 20 and 25 yard goals are spectacular, they are few and far between for any club.

Poyet said it and now Oscar is saying it, we must be more clinical when it comes to finishing. It's not that the single striker system is not producing chances inside the 18 yard box, it is, but we are not making enough of them. So I guess we come back to asking, would having the extra striker see us put away a higher percentage of chances created, well mate, there is only one way to find out, and if we try, we had better hope that our defensive players can handle the extra pressure they will inevitably come under.
To Baldly Go, I think you have it about right, the current squad of players are not playing to the way Oscar wants them to, not a total failure, we are dominating possession, we are getting shots off, we just can't convert enough of the chances, and that is not entertaining. From the matches I have been able to watch, all be it watch them on a screen and not in person, I think I am right in saying that the vast majority of the shots we get fired off are outside the 18 yard box, and whilst 20 and 25 yard goals are spectacular, they are few and far between for any club. Poyet said it and now Oscar is saying it, we must be more clinical when it comes to finishing. It's not that the single striker system is not producing chances inside the 18 yard box, it is, but we are not making enough of them. So I guess we come back to asking, would having the extra striker see us put away a higher percentage of chances created, well mate, there is only one way to find out, and if we try, we had better hope that our defensive players can handle the extra pressure they will inevitably come under. VegasSeagull

11:15am Wed 5 Feb 14

JollyRoger says...

fratsomrover wrote:
Brighton will only ever increase their goal tally if they play a game where they encourage players to get into the opposition penalty box. I watch Man City, Southampton and the likes pouring men forward when they attack. Sometimes they get 5 or 6 in their opponents penalty area in open play.
By comparison we barely get 2 and more normally 1. We have skillful, pacy wingers in Lua Lua, Buckley and March, but rarely start with them. Instead we settle for mediocre,play safe players who dont get forward because they are frightened they will not be able to get back and cover if play breaks down.
We need to play a higher line throughout the team, with Greer and Upson pushing right up to the half way line so the midfielders can get further forward in support of the forward(s). We create nothing in our opponents penalty box because we dont get players in there. Most of our recent goal attempts have been Lua Lua's piledrivers from outside the box.
We need pace and trickery on the wings, hence Buckley or March, and we need another striker alongside Ulloa, whether that be CMS, Obika or new guy Rodriguez, I dont yet know, but what I do know for sure, is that playing Ulloa up front alone is absolutely pointless in OG current set up.
If OG & NJ cant see that, they shouldn't be in the job.
30 goals in 28 games is pathetic and it is the system that is to blame. It is also terribly boring to watch and a far cry from the entertainment OG promised when he was appointed.
Goals win games OG, and the sooner you wake up to that fact, the better
Totally agree - 100%
[quote][p][bold]fratsomrover[/bold] wrote: Brighton will only ever increase their goal tally if they play a game where they encourage players to get into the opposition penalty box. I watch Man City, Southampton and the likes pouring men forward when they attack. Sometimes they get 5 or 6 in their opponents penalty area in open play. By comparison we barely get 2 and more normally 1. We have skillful, pacy wingers in Lua Lua, Buckley and March, but rarely start with them. Instead we settle for mediocre,play safe players who dont get forward because they are frightened they will not be able to get back and cover if play breaks down. We need to play a higher line throughout the team, with Greer and Upson pushing right up to the half way line so the midfielders can get further forward in support of the forward(s). We create nothing in our opponents penalty box because we dont get players in there. Most of our recent goal attempts have been Lua Lua's piledrivers from outside the box. We need pace and trickery on the wings, hence Buckley or March, and we need another striker alongside Ulloa, whether that be CMS, Obika or new guy Rodriguez, I dont yet know, but what I do know for sure, is that playing Ulloa up front alone is absolutely pointless in OG current set up. If OG & NJ cant see that, they shouldn't be in the job. 30 goals in 28 games is pathetic and it is the system that is to blame. It is also terribly boring to watch and a far cry from the entertainment OG promised when he was appointed. Goals win games OG, and the sooner you wake up to that fact, the better[/p][/quote]Totally agree - 100% JollyRoger

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

Get Adobe Flash player
About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree