I managed to brin myself to watch MOTD

And its more painful than I imagined.

On the evidence, if we had a more competent right back, it would of been 0-0.

First goal - Connolly lost his man on the left wing, allowing an easy pass to Joe Cole. Medel and Turner should of done better, but if Connolly had tracked his man the threat would of been neutralised.

Second goal - Some brilliant work by West Ham, but something still bothers me. The ball was passed low to Nolan, and Connolly was right behind him and had a full view of what was happening. Did he run towards Nolan, try and pressure him into a scuff? Did he run between Nolan and the goal, hoping to physically block the shot? No, he stood and watched.

Please play Brayford next week Malky.

I agree that Connolly was to blame for both goals 100%. However, the highlights shown on MOTD didn't really do us justice in that we spent the vast majority of the start of the second in a commanding position with a lot of the ball.

R-DONO wrote:I agree that Connolly was to blame for both goals 100%. However, the highlights shown on MOTD didn't really do us justice in that we spent the vast majority of the start of the second in a commanding position with a lot of the ball.

As I said elsewhere, a lot of possession, I think 52% overall, but only one shot on target all game.......and that was the looping header by Connolly that was actually going over the bar. This is the big, big problem that was always going to find us out. It is folly to believe that we were ever in command of anything yesterday........R-DONO - you have been listening to too much propaganda from Planet-Malky. Yesterday, he said something like "We restricted them to a few chances".....18 shots, 12 on target.....as someone on another board said....."pass the crack-pipe Malky"

PS Red...............you are a braver man than me........I couldn't face it....... 

Very poor defending for the second goal.
Left Nolan in loads of space on the edge of the penalty area.
Connolly or Caulker should have reacted much sooner.

Still disappointed at the negative team selection.

Come on it's the first game of 38 this season in the league! We had a poor start last year and finished top, there's nothing to say we won't survive this year. Connolly was exposed but Caulker and Medel looked good and Whitts and Kim will be big assets once they have adjusted

I didn't say that it was positive possession did I TDA. I merely pointed out the fact that MOTD made the game look a little more one sides than it was.

R-DONO wrote:I didn't say that it was positive possession did I TDA. I merely pointed out the fact that MOTD made the game look a little more one sides than it was.

Okay, I believe you...... 

Slumdog's Son™ wrote:Come on it's the first game of 38 this season in the league! We had a poor start last year and finished top, there's nothing to say we won't survive this year. Connolly was exposed but Caulker and Medel looked good and Whitts and Kim will be big assets once they have adjusted

Agreed that the midfield looked comfortable and so they should, all class players. However, the attack was toothless and the defence shaky at best. That said, I think the defensive problems are not so acute and the adjustment will be made, but I am wondering how we are going to create chances....