This isn't the first time ...

[East Anglia Fox]

We're in a bad plaice now.

 

[SJN-Fox]

I think we've had our chips.

 

[Lako42]

We've sunk to new depths, beating us is like shooting fish in a barrel.

 

[homer]

Bring back Guppy....

 

[Mawsley]

Pearson made it clear enough that he was going to go with his Championship squad.

And clearer that he was not going to pay over the odds, recruit mercenaries and bankrupt the club in the process.

It's a long term plan, most bought into it during the close season.

I'm sure there'd be plenty more bitching if we went down with a squad of overpaid people with no heart to rectify and continue building next season.

 

[Mawsley]

****, I missed the puns. I feel a right spratt.

 

[Chrysalis]

To me a clear problem is set pieces, defensively and offensively.

When we were in this league under MON we scored a shed load of them.

We are poor in possession (even burnley who were in very bad form out played us at our own ground), we can only seem to score from penalties or from long balls, because if we try to keep the ball for anything more than a few passes we lose it.

Pearson also seems to fail to act or have backup plans, e.g. a couple of games ago James was overhitting all his crosses, corners, free kicks, yet noone took over the set peice duties in the game.

I also find it a concern that defense is pearson's strength and we cannot defend to save our life after taking the lead. I am comparing to the season we had after adminl under micky adams, we lost many points from bad defending but at least in that season we were scoring more freely and usually held out for longer in games.

It seems currently we need to score 4+ to win a game, but we struggling to score even one and hence the form. The so called improvement in performance I think isnt really an improvement, man city were basically knackered from their mid week, they just did what they had to do and were far from the top of their game.

Another worrying sign is how we have basically collapsed after letting burnley back into that game, that may have hit the playing staff mentally.

Since I think defending and set pieces is down to coaching this is why I am not pro pearson at the moment. Historical trends dont have promoted teams with 100+ points doing so badly.

Our summer was clearly a trainwreck which I said at the time, but we dont know who was responsible for that hence my comments been on what I have observed during games. I dont think our strikers are the problem, they simply getting not enough quality service.

Burnley who probably have a squad no better than our's are much tighter at the back and are better at set pieces. This is why I think they have managed to start getting results.

Of course we also look set to lose mahrez in January for that african cup as well.

 

[Longcliffe]

To me a clear problem is set pieces, defensively and offensively.

When we were in this league under MON we scored a shed load of them.

We are poor in possession (even burnley who were in very bad form out played us at our own ground), we can only seem to score from penalties or from long balls, because if we try to keep the ball for anything more than a few passes we lose it.

Pearson also seems to fail to act or have backup plans, e.g. a couple of games ago James was overhitting all his crosses, corners, free kicks, yet noone took over the set peice duties in the game.

I also find it a concern that defense is pearson's strength and we cannot defend to save our life after taking the lead. I am comparing to the season we had after adminl under micky adams, we lost many points from bad defending but at least in that season we were scoring more freely and usually held out for longer in games.

It seems currently we need to score 4+ to win a game, but we struggling to score even one and hence the form. The so called improvement in performance I think isnt really an improvement, man city were basically knackered from their mid week, they just did what they had to do and were far from the top of their game.

Another worrying sign is how we have basically collapsed after letting burnley back into that game, that may have hit the playing staff mentally.

Since I think defending and set pieces is down to coaching this is why I am not pro pearson at the moment. Historical trends dont have promoted teams with 100+ points doing so badly.

Our summer was clearly a trainwreck which I said at the time, but we dont know who was responsible for that hence my comments been on what I have observed during games. I dont think our strikers are the problem, they simply getting not enough quality service.

Burnley who probably have a squad no better than our's are much tighter at the back and are better at set pieces. This is why I think they have managed to start getting results.

Of course we also look set to lose mahrez in January for that african cup as well.

Exactly my sentiments. I think that the team are not equipped to get enough points and they know that they are to be relegated.

 

[homer]

It seems currently we need to score 4+ to win a game

Man City beat us 1-0, as did West Brom and Newcastle. Swansea, Burnley, Southampton and Palace scored only two. Sunderland didn't score any

So no, we don't actually have to score 4+ at all. Although it would be very nice

 

[Lako42]

Unless Mahrez actually starts performing for more than 1 game in a row then I don't care if he stays in Africa.

 

[Longcliffe]

Man City beat us 1-0, as did West Brom and Newcastle. Swansea, Burnley, Southampton and Palace scored only two. Sunderland didn't score any

So no, we don't actually have to score 4+ at all. Although it would be very nice

On the other hand we only got 2 points from those games and 2 goals.

 

[homer]

On the other hand we only got 2 points from those games and 2 goals.

That, old bean, is not in doubt

Although completely irrelevant to the point being made

 

[Lako42]

Butter Bean

 

[Longcliffe]

That, old bean, is not in doubt

Although completely irrelevant to the point being made

Just for clarity Homie old chap it is a relevant point.

 

[Blaarev]

Just for clarity Homie old chap it is a relevant point.

So we need to score 4+ to win a game then. Thanks for clearing that up :icon_wink

 

[homer]

Just for clarity Homie old chap it is a relevant point.

Not to the point I was making i.e. we don't have to score 4+ goals to win a game

jebus wept

 

[pork pie fox]

Not to the point I was making i.e. we don't have to score 4+ goals to win a game

jebus wept

Keep going homer, you'll get there in the end.

 

[SJN-Fox]

So if the score is 3-1 does that mean we still lose even though we've scored more goals? These new Premier League rules are very confusing. It was much easier to understand last season when we only had to score more than the opposition to get the three points :icon_conf

 

[Longcliffe]

Not to the point I was making i.e. we don't have to score 4+ goals to win a game

jebus wept

For clarification I didn't say we had to score 4+ goals to win a game, but we probably do.

 

[homer]

I give in