|
Post by kevkj on Nov 30, 2013 17:34:19 GMT
Everton played with such confidence.Even their defenders brought the ball forward and joined in. Each player showed bravery on the ball to pass the ball accurately to the next resulting in large numbers of players in and around our area.
We just could not play like that anyway ,to many uncomfortable and ponderous players on the ball.
I really do not know what the answer is,our players are so inconsistent and ponderous.
Maybe back to hoofball until January.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 30, 2013 17:37:25 GMT
If we play hoofball then we have to cut out Arnautovic, Ireland and Adam out of the side as they are not suited to that game in any way, shape or form.
They are the only three players we have that are capable of creating or scoring at the moment.
I don't understand why it's so hard for Hughes and his 'coaching' staff to organise the defence to allow a simple passing game that doesn't leave us exposed at every opportunity.
Are the two mutually exclusive or what? If you pass it short at Stoke City does it mean that you have to forget the defensive side of the game or something?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 30, 2013 17:46:11 GMT
For ten minutes, after Kenny and Shea came on, we were something like 4-4-1-1 (with kenny running around behind crouchy). That was our best (only) spell of the game.
One of the two chances we created was hoofed at Crouchy's head and SUPER Jon should have done better having got on the end of the knock down.
However; today we played a team on a different level. We'd have lost that playing hoofball, back in 2009.
(and everton were very good indeed, as they were last week v the Red Car Thieves. I'm a bit amazed at the reaction on 'ere ... We were always likely to get a kicking if they played at the top of their form ... and credit to martinez for making changes, as well as the enforced one; they looked hungry)
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Nov 30, 2013 17:49:28 GMT
We showed how we need to play against Sunderland. We mixed it well and the passing (even against 10 men) was faster and crisper. And then the long ball to Crouch worked every time. It doesn't have to be one or the other.
Having a genuine threat on the wing helps too, today we didn't have one.
|
|
|
Post by RAF on Nov 30, 2013 17:51:19 GMT
If it were the plan to revert back to hoofball at the earliest sign of trouble then what was the fucking point in sacking Pulis? Should have just kept him and plodded along until he eventually took us down, which he would have done after Coates cut his 'Front of House' funding.
H
|
|
|
Everton
Nov 30, 2013 18:51:10 GMT
via mobile
Post by wearestoke80 on Nov 30, 2013 18:51:10 GMT
Thrashed, rout, battered, dismantled just a few words being banded around by the press and if anyone disagrees with this on today you must have had your eyes closed for 90 mins
|
|
|
Post by andylgr on Nov 30, 2013 19:03:56 GMT
They were quicker sharper and had more heart and desire. They are a good side.
|
|
|
Post by robwahlmann on Nov 30, 2013 19:24:15 GMT
Everton are no big spenders, but despite this they are doing very well every season! How is this possible?
|
|
|
Post by kevkj on Nov 30, 2013 19:27:42 GMT
Peter Coates made his difficult decisions in the summer - to sack Pulis and to appoint Hughes. In my view he got the first bit right and the second bit wrong.
|
|
|
Post by Caerwrangonpotter on Nov 30, 2013 19:28:31 GMT
Doff my hat to them today
|
|