Just back - Dont blame Hughes for the loss, blame Diakite.

[DouDou_87]

My thoughts after watching last night:

1) M'Bia is very very good- but not a CB and will struggle against good centre forwards.
2) Faurlin & Granero can be a brilliant pairing for us, the best we've had in years in the middle, but they need Diakite in there with them
3) Park was very average, but that's the first time I've seen him have a game like that. He's not as effective out wide, but i don't see a space for him in the middle either
4) I don't see much point in people digging out Onuoha when we had nobody else to go RB
5) Tactics were wrong from the start- Hughes is really starting to frustrate me with his selections to be honest
6) Hoilett & Taarabt- if we can't find space for them in the side at home against a team like West Ham- then when will we??
7) We all know we're struggling defensively and having Hill & Onuoha at FB was going to be a problem- so why didn't we take the game to West Ham? Instead we sat back and let them come onto our makeshift defence.

IMO we need to go 4-5-1.... Samba, Faurlin & Graneo in the middle with Hoilett & Tarbs out wide and Bobbie up top. At the moment the defence picks itself. We won't do this though and come Sunday morning this board will be going mental again after we get turned over t West Brom.

[ClemQPR]

The main observation I got from last night was that nearly every tackle we went in for, our players ended up on their backside. We seem incapable of making a tackle and staying on our feet. Both Diakite's yellows were for tackles where he went to ground. It makes the Ref's decisions very easy for them if we keep doing this.

Agree with the positive comments about Mbia. Thought he looked good last night.

[Jimmy Floyd Rabbit]

Really? Woeful/average at best (again) When was last time you saw a captain taken off who wasn't injured?

2 games running.

[Stanley]

We didn't lose in midfield because Faurlin and Granero played badly. It was because it was two against three, their three were very good at pressing us intensely and cutting off our passing angles, and our two strikers offered nothing in terms of movement and the wingers were scarcely any better. What were the CMs supposed to do, exactly? They got let down by their manager and their team mates.

Dropping Granero because of that would be daft. And that formation would leave Zamora too isolated, like Blackburn away towards the end of last season. It's the problem with playing Taarabt as a second striker in Hughes' 442 rather than Warnock's 4231.

The trouble is we have 4 very good CM's which we can only find 2 or 3 places for, depending on our formation. So 1 or 2 players will always have to be sacrificed depending on form, the opposition etc.

A viable alternative with 3 in the middle would be:

-------------------------Cesar---------------------------

Dyer/Harriman---Nelson---Mbia---Traore/Ehmer/Hill

------------------------Granero-------------------------

Park---------Diakite------------Faurlin----------Hoilett

----------------------Taarabt-----------------------------

--------------------------Zamora-------------------------

[Kit]

My own take on last night apart from our Non League standard first half, is we were bullied out of the game in midfield. Samba was not even on the pitch for the 2 goals against and it was our first half performance that lost us the game, not his sending off. WHU were a typical Allardyse team, you could have been watching Bolton from 4 years ago and they intimidated us from the start. Suprised really that MH is continuing with the current tactics and not gone back to the tactics towards the end of last season, until we get that win under our belts.
I still believe MH will turn it around though and we must show patience, Harry is not the answer, just ask Pompey or Saints fans !

[MrSwakeley]

The trouble is we have 4 very good CM's which we can only find 2 or 3 places for, depending on our formation. So 1 or 2 players will always have to be sacrificed depending on form, the opposition etc.

A viable alternative with 3 in the middle would be:

-------------------------Cesar---------------------------

Dyer/Harriman---Nelson---Mbia---Traore/Ehmer/Hill

------------------------Granero-------------------------

Park---------Diakite------------Faurlin----------Hoilett

----------------------Taarabt-----------------------------

--------------------------Zamora-------------------------

Would be a fantastic formation if it was 12-a-side

[Stanley]

Would be a fantastic formation if it was 12-a-side

Haha oops!! Sorry I meant:

-------------------------Cesar---------------------------

Dyer/Harriman---Nelson---Mbia---Traore/Ehmer/Hill

Park---------Granero------------Faurlin----------Hoilett

----------------------Taarabt-----------------------------

--------------------------Zamora-------------------------

...with Park pushing inside to help Granero and Faurlin when needed, like he did in the 2nd half last night.

[jaejaxon2000]

I'd agree with that but might push Park into CM and play SWP on the right. I'd also consider benching Granero as I feel last night's game was lost in CM and Granero played worse than Faurlin. Nelson and Mbia had better games than the two CM's which backs up my point. I'd then start Hoilett on the left. Diakite apart from his two bad tackles was excellent although he did sloppily concede possession on the edge of their area which almost led to a counter-attack goal. So its a toss-up between him and Park for a CM place now IMO.

As for the defence Nedum must definitely be dropped and should only be used as CB backup from now on. Tackling, strength and pace are his attributes but not as a FB. If Dyer is fit play him at RB, if not play Harriman who looked good in pre-season. Traore is on his way back now so play him at LB. If WBA is too soon for him then Hill again or possibly Ehmer who has strength, pace and can actually run with the ball (possibly as a WB).

So I'd go with something like:

-------------------------Cesar---------------------------

Dyer/Harriman---Nelson---Mbia---Traore/Ehmer/Hill

SWP----------Diakite----------Faurlin----------Hoilett

-----------------Taarabt---------------------------------

-----------------------------Zamora---------------------

Personally, I think that Hughes has to take some of the blame for not changing to a 4-5-1 after seeing that the back 4 were not getting it done and the midfield was becoming a shambles becuz of the back 4. West Ham's physical play and shattenturd's inconsistent refereeing allowing their first-half over-physical play in combo w/ the 4-5-1 they were playing to control the run of play. Ineffective Cisse should have been taken off and adel put in as an attacking mid behind Zamora.

[Busheyboy]

here's my earlier post, I maintain the game was lost early on and I don't understand why our team, needing a win, faled to out from the start and put it put it up to them. Why do we have to go behind before any real effort. Why weren't they motivated at 8.00 pm at kck off. Whose fault is that?

lots of people on this thread are talking about the 2nd half and what might have been. Diakite's *****ic tackling probably ending up costing us. We were in the ascendency and he looked more like the player we saw last year marauding forward.
However, WE SHOULDN'T HAVE BEEN IN THAT POSITION IN THE FIRST PLACE
Outmuscled and outnumbered in midfield in the first half, that's where the game was lost. I've supported Hughes up until now but think he has to take the blame for this one.
Allardyce has obviously watched out 2 boys n midfield and played 3 against them, denying time and space to dictate. Why hasn't Hughes watched West Ham and seen how they play and had a plan to nullify them?
Park has had 2 shockers but I think it's wrong to be on his back

[Busheyboy]

I know there was a story, Samba was depressed, well I certainly am, watching his reckless, brainless tackling