Match Report and MOM v West Ham

Man . . . the whole "expected goals" thing is just a technical way of seeing who created more (and better) chances.
It's not rocket science and it isn't corrupting the game.
 
Druss_the_Legend said:
I did feel the urge to write a thread about our performance on the way home but with Al creating more than one I thought Id simply add my thoughts on here.

This, first a foremost, was an excellent game of football. As good as draw as you will see this season. We were excellent at times and its weird to have a keeper in goal who makes you feel like he will save every shot and command his penalty area. He doesn't, obviously, but he gives that feeling of confidence.

Coming into the this match I thought we would struggle against one of best teams this season. But the boys stepped up and coming out of the match disappointed not to have won shows how well we had played.

Every single player played well and while Harry Wilson is still too quite in matches he really did seem to get better as the game wore on. Rico was excellent with his best and most consistent match in a Bournemouth shirt so far. Stacey was bombing up the pitch as any Howe fullback should. Billing and Lerma controlled the middle of the park. West Ham had to resort to sending the ball long or down the wings as they failed time and again to control the centre.

Last point on Solanke. I cannot understand how certain people do not see what he brings to the team. Maybe they are the same people who are blinded by fast runs into dead ends and step overs before losing the ball? Solanke links all of the players together. Hes all over the place getting the ball and bringing players in. He still has room to improve and every player who gets over the halfway line needs goals at some point or another. If Wilshire had played exactly like Solanke had for us today when he was at number 10 he would rightfully be getting rave reviews but because Solanke is titled as a striker people get upset when hes not scoring?

If we carry on winning or drawing I really dont care if Solanke doesnt score all season.

Enjoyed today and now strongly believe this can be a good year for us.
Click to expand...
"failed to control the centre" You are joking aren't you? Rice had the midfield sewn up on his own. Whilst I agree totally it was a great game of football I would suggest you take off your rose (or black and red) coloured glasses and review your post. West Ham controlled the opening 15 mins then it was the turn of Bournemouth. The opening 5 mins of the 2nd half were Bournemouths and then frankly West Ham were by far the better team. It was never a pen and the goal was rightly ruled out for impeding the goalkeepers view.

A draw was the right and fair result.
 
Anyoldiron said:
"failed to control the centre" You are joking aren't you? Rice had the midfield sewn up on his own. Whilst I agree totally it was a great game of football I would suggest you take off your rose (or black and red) coloured glasses and review your post. West Ham controlled the opening 15 mins then it was the turn of Bournemouth. The opening 5 mins of the 2nd half were Bournemouths and then frankly West Ham were by far the better team. It was never a pen and the goal was rightly ruled out for impeding the goalkeepers view.

A draw was the right and fair result.
Click to expand...
I and most around me had Lerma, our midfield enforcer, as our MOTM. He was everywhere and won his battles.
It was a good tussle, nobody really had the midfield sewn up, certainly not Rice. Wilshere was totally anonymous when he came on, never got a sniff out of Lerma.
 
Anyoldiron said:
"failed to control the centre" You are joking aren't you? Rice had the midfield sewn up on his own. Whilst I agree totally it was a great game of football I would suggest you take off your rose (or black and red) coloured glasses and review your post. West Ham controlled the opening 15 mins then it was the turn of Bournemouth. The opening 5 mins of the 2nd half were Bournemouths and then frankly West Ham were by far the better team. It was never a pen and the goal was rightly ruled out for impeding the goalkeepers view.

A draw was the right and fair result.
Click to expand...

By far the better team? Do me a favour. Both teams had their moments - just a 50/50 dong dong of a game. A good one too.
 
Anyoldiron said:
"failed to control the centre" You are joking aren't you? Rice had the midfield sewn up on his own. Whilst I agree totally it was a great game of football I would suggest you take off your rose (or black and red) coloured glasses and review your post. West Ham controlled the opening 15 mins then it was the turn of Bournemouth. The opening 5 mins of the 2nd half were Bournemouths and then frankly West Ham were by far the better team. It was never a pen and the goal was rightly ruled out for impeding the goalkeepers view.

A draw was the right and fair result.
Click to expand...

LOL no seriously LOL
 
Druss_the_Legend said:
LOL no seriously LOL
Click to expand...
No you're right

Rice v Lerma
Mort Tackles = Rice
Most Blocked shots = Rice
Most Interceptions = Rice
Most Passes -= Rice
Most Accuracy of passes = Rice
Most Ariel Battles won = Rice
Fewest Ariel Battles lost = Rice

it goes on and on... But as I said, you're right.

Is that 'Druss' a misspelling by the way?
 
SlowDownDerek said:
By far the better team? Do me a favour. Both teams had their moments - just a 50/50 dong dong of a game. A good one too.
Click to expand...

True, but 2nd half after the first 5 minutes I think we were. As I said Bournemouth were for the majority of the first half and the start of the 2nd.
 
Anyoldiron said:
True, but 2nd half after the first 5 minutes I think we were. As I said Bournemouth were for the majority of the first half and the start of the 2nd.
Click to expand...

We had a goal disallowed for debatable reasons, a strong penalty shout, a gilt one-on-one and a few other half chances in the period you were "by far the better team". You scored and created a few other half chances but it was still 50/50 during that period in my view.

Expected goals puts us nearly a full goal ahead plus we were winning for the majority of this period, other than that yeah you bossed it mate.
 
Anyoldiron said:
True, but 2nd half after the first 5 minutes I think we were. As I said Bournemouth were for the majority of the first half and the start of the 2nd.
Click to expand...
It's all about opinions - my brother - a Liverpool fan - thought Rice was not at all stand out but highlighted Noble as more your main man.
You can dissect the game into as many pieces as you like and West Ham did not deserve to lose but we were unlucky not to win and had the greater threat in front of goal all game.
Add to that we are bedding in two rookie full backs, a keeper who has 18 months experience in League football, playing without our main chance providers in Brooks and Fraser and our main creative midfielder in Lewis Cook - I don't think we are doing too badly. Our midfield are playing deeper currently, so number of touches or passes when there is more space and time to play are not the best indicator of who played well and who didn't.
All that said - it was a cracking game of football and I think West Ham had a very good team 3 years ago but this one is definitely better. Lets both hopefully enjoy the Season and I'll look forward to Callums customary goal at the Olympic Stadium ;)
 
Anyoldiron said:
No you're right

Rice v Lerma
Mort Tackles = Rice
Most Blocked shots = Rice
Most Interceptions = Rice
Most Passes -= Rice
Most Accuracy of passes = Rice
Most Ariel Battles won = Rice
Fewest Ariel Battles lost = Rice

it goes on and on... But as I said, you're right.

Is that 'Druss' a misspelling by the way?
Click to expand...

Ah the ad hominem starts. Whats that the final resort of again?

Was I comparing Rice to Lerma? Was I talking about Rice at all? The fact is, our midfield had so much control that you played it down the wings or long ball. Anything through the middle was being picked up and dealt with.

The LOL was around your belief that WH were somehow "by far the better team". It was 2 points lost and a point gained for you at the end. We should have won it easily and let you back in. I always felt like we were about to score again and at no time felt like we would lose, even after the equaliser.
 
Druss_the_Legend said:
Ah the ad hominem starts. Whats that the final resort of again?

Was I comparing Rice to Lerma? Was I talking about Rice at all? The fact is, our midfield had so much control that you played it down the wings or long ball. Anything through the middle was being picked up and dealt with.

The LOL was around your belief that WH were somehow "by far the better team". It was 2 points lost and a point gained for you at the end. We should have won it easily and let you back in. I always felt like we were about to score again and at no time felt like we would lose, even after the equaliser.
Click to expand...
Fancy that... We play down the wings, that's where 2 of our best players play!

Like other have said it's about personal opinions, all bound to be biased. You're right though, it was 2 points lost!

Defiantly a misspelled user name!
 
Anyoldiron said:
Fancy that... We play down the wings, that's where 2 of our best players play!

Like other have said it's about personal opinions, all bound to be biased. You're right though, it was 2 points lost!

Defiantly a misspelled user name!
Click to expand...

He's defiant in every post..................
 
Anyoldiron is correct to an extent. West Ham did control the midfield. Our game plan has never been about controlling the midfield. It’s why we play with 2 midfielders whereas most teams play with 3.

Our game plan is about manipulating the opposition into thinking that control of the midfield is the same as control of the game. It isn’t. Our strength is fast transitions when the opponent loses the ball. West Ham might have controlled midfield, but they couldn’t control the pace and power of Wilson and King. They won’t be the only team. Everton and Southampton couldn’t control them either!
 
Tinpot Club said:
Anyoldiron is correct to an extent. West Ham did control the midfield. Our game plan has never been about controlling the midfield. It’s why we play with 2 midfielders whereas most teams play with 3.

Our game plan is about manipulating the opposition into thinking that control of the midfield is the same as control of the game. It isn’t. Our strength is fast transitions when the opponent loses the ball. West Ham might have controlled midfield, but they couldn’t control the pace and power of Wilson and King. They won’t be the only team. Everton and Southampton couldn’t control them either!
Click to expand...

We actually had more possession than West Ham which is very unusual for us since our deliberate change in style. I think both sides had their spells and like I said in the original post every neutral would say that was an even game between two very similar sides.
 
The Beeb says they had more possession and to me it looked like they shaded it (all sideways) but that aside two very equal sides and neither can complain about the result.

Interesting view from the west ham fella :wack:
 
red_house said:
The Beeb says they had more possession and to me it looked like they shaded it (all sideways) but that aside two very equal sides and neither can complain about the result.

Interesting view from the west ham fella :wack:
Click to expand...

Yep. You think he’d be too busy practising his Lambeth walk, learning to dance while holding his braces, drinking seven pints of ‘numbers’ in his vest and telling people ‘ it used to be all gwass raand ere before the haaases got built for all the immigrants’ to find our forum.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

;