West Ham Online

stubbo-admin wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026, 19:27 Think I'd start Traore in this game, and either stick him up with Taty, or moved Bowen up top and stick him down the right. 

Hopefully it being a big team, and a start, he'd be up for it (and worse case he might fall on top of Salah and break him). 

stubbo-admin wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026, 11:08

Sanacs on tour" wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026, 10:48 Surely we have to go to the two up top?

Last time out, bar the odd corner in the early stages we didnt really look very exciting or creative

Wilson comes on, and suddenly our link up play works so much better - not giving Wilson 100% credit here, just that Tatty also looks better in a two and it means Bowen & Summerville have more space with teh two Cb's having to pick up players

Our goal difference is gone, so not to much to worry on that front

go for the win! 

Except our goal difference actually isn't gone. 

It's only 3 different to Forest.  we win 2-0, they lose 2-0, ours is then better.

We did more than enough to beat Bournmouth and barring 3 great saves and some bad luck we'd have won that game comfortably.

Wilson...just don't see it. He's struggled when coming on, had a couple of chances against Bournemouth where if he was this clinical super striker he'd have tucked them away, and greatly affects us in other areas when on the pitch. 

He's a no from me except under the most dire of circumstances, or hoping for a last 15 min slice of good forutne.  When ever he comes on our ability to win the ball high up the field diminishes, and we get pushed further and further back into our half.

Sanacs on tour" wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026, 10:48 Surely we have to go to the two up top?

Last time out, bar the odd corner in the early stages we didnt really look very exciting or creative

Wilson comes on, and suddenly our link up play works so much better - not giving Wilson 100% credit here, just that Tatty also looks better in a two and it means Bowen & Summerville have more space with teh two Cb's having to pick up players

Our goal difference is gone, so not to much to worry on that front

go for the win! 

onsideman wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026, 08:31

Rossal wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026, 08:12


 

Least threatening we had looked?

"...West Ham registered an XG score of 3.27 without scoring, which is a new PL record and the sixth highest all-time in all European top-flight leagues..."

Another metric had it at 2.54, the highest without scoring for any team in the PL in 4 years

onsideman wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026, 08:31

Rossal wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026, 08:12

 

Least threatening we had looked?

"...West Ham registered an XG score of 3.27 without scoring, which is a new PL record and the sixth highest all-time in all European top-flight leagues..."

Another metric had it at 2.54, the highest without scoring for any team in the PL in 4 years

Rossal wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026, 08:12
 

Manuel wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026, 08:08

Rossal wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026, 08:02

Manuel wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026, 07:39

Yes I think we all agree we are light in that department, but like I say there is more than one way to skin a cat and don't believe the only option is to play the exact same type of player. Don't you think we played well enough against B'mouth without him and prior to that Man Utd? 

 

With our squad there isnt really many ways to skin the cat at all.   Lets have it right this season we've been absolute dogshit trying 4 at the back, 5 at the back, inverted wing backs, 1 up front, changing keepers.  

It's been an absolute mess until we got the two strikers in and stuck two up top and pressed high up the pitch.  This season that is the ONLY way we have looked like a side that won't get thumped. When we move off of that in game, we are under the cosh again and have dropped shit loads of points. 

So yes, we should be obsessed with formation, as theres only one that will keep us up. 

Clearly there is more than one way to skin a cat as we played well against B'Mouth and Man Utd without him. You are way too much hard work and a bit tedious if I can be honest. Have you ever been right about anything?

Rossal wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026, 08:02

Manuel wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026, 07:39

John Drake" wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026, 07:34

But isn't that the conundrum? He is a very limited footballer but his presence appears to have brought a better balance to the team - unless the improved results since his introduction is a coincidence. Given that he is limited should make him easier to replace.

Ideally, we would have alternatives but are woefully short of attacking options.

Yes I think we all agree we are light in that department, but like I say there is more than one way to skin a cat and don't believe the only option is to play the exact same type of player. Don't you think we played well enough against B'mouth without him and prior to that Man Utd? 

 

With our squad there isnt really many ways to skin the cat at all.   Lets have it right this season we've been absolute dogshit trying 4 at the back, 5 at the back, inverted wing backs, 1 up front, changing keepers.  

It's been an absolute mess until we got the two strikers in and stuck two up top and pressed high up the pitch.  This season that is the ONLY way we have looked like a side that won't get thumped. When we move off of that in game, we are under the cosh again and have dropped shit loads of points. 

So yes, we should be obsessed with formation, as theres only one that will keep us up. 

Manuel wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026, 07:39

John Drake" wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026, 07:34

Manuel wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026, 07:24

No I'm really not suggesting that at all, just stating that ''like for like'' replacements are not necessarily the way to go and that too much emphasis  is put on doing just that by some. There is more than one way to skin a cat and as you say the manager should have the ability to be able to change things up when god forbid we have an injury. I think you got the wrong end of the stick, fella.

Tbh it's become nauseating and just plain weird that some are talking Pablo up like he's the second coming.

But isn't that the conundrum? He is a very limited footballer but his presence appears to have brought a better balance to the team - unless the improved results since his introduction is a coincidence. Given that he is limited should make him easier to replace.

Ideally, we would have alternatives but are woefully short of attacking options.

Yes I think we all agree we are light in that department, but like I say there is more than one way to skin a cat and don't believe the only option is to play the exact same type of player. Don't you think we played well enough against B'mouth without him and prior to that Man Utd? 

John Drake" wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026, 07:48

Manuel wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026, 07:39

John Drake" wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026, 07:34

But isn't that the conundrum? He is a very limited footballer but his presence appears to have brought a better balance to the team - unless the improved results since his introduction is a coincidence. Given that he is limited should make him easier to replace.

Ideally, we would have alternatives but are woefully short of attacking options.

Yes I think we all agree we are light in that department, but like I say there is more than one way to skin a cat and don't believe the only option is to play the exact same type of player. Don't you think we played well enough against B'mouth without him and prior to that Man Utd? 

Yes, I thought the performances against Manchester United and Bournemouth were both decent. But, of course, we didn't win either of them. And I don't think the other way to skin the cat - a midfield three of Fernandes, Soucek and Magassa/ Potts - offers enough attacking threat or support to the forwards who, as a result, are marked more tightly.

My point isn't to big up Pablo but to suggest that his blunt instrument role shouldn't be too difficult to replicate. But perhaps there isn't anyone. And I agree with your earlier point - Marshall wouldn't be the answer   

Manuel wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026, 07:39

John Drake" wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026, 07:34

Manuel wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026, 07:24

No I'm really not suggesting that at all, just stating that ''like for like'' replacements are not necessarily the way to go and that too much emphasis  is put on doing just that by some. There is more than one way to skin a cat and as you say the manager should have the ability to be able to change things up when god forbid we have an injury. I think you got the wrong end of the stick, fella.

Tbh it's become nauseating and just plain weird that some are talking Pablo up like he's the second coming.

But isn't that the conundrum? He is a very limited footballer but his presence appears to have brought a better balance to the team - unless the improved results since his introduction is a coincidence. Given that he is limited should make him easier to replace.

Ideally, we would have alternatives but are woefully short of attacking options.

Yes I think we all agree we are light in that department, but like I say there is more than one way to skin a cat and don't believe the only option is to play the exact same type of player. Don't you think we played well enough against B'mouth without him and prior to that Man Utd? 

John Drake" wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026, 07:34

Manuel wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026, 07:24

John Drake" wrote: ↑27 Feb 2026, 07:12

 

Are you really suggesting that tactics and formations are irrelevant? That the way a manager sets his team up has no bearing on performances and results? Sounds a bit odd to me. Surely, the role of a good manager is to matching tactical approach with the ability of players at his disposal. If its only about ability the role of the manager is redundant.

It's a measure of our poor squad depth that there is no-one to replace what Pablo has been doing. 

No I'm really not suggesting that at all, just stating that ''like for like'' replacements are not necessarily the way to go and that too much emphasis  is put on doing just that by some. There is more than one way to skin a cat and as you say the manager should have the ability to be able to change things up when god forbid we have an injury. I think you got the wrong end of the stick, fella.

Tbh it's become nauseating and just plain weird that some are talking Pablo up like he's the second coming.

But isn't that the conundrum? He is a very limited footballer but his presence appears to have brought a better balance to the team - unless the improved results since his introduction is a coincidence. Given that he is limited should make him easier to replace.

Ideally, we would have alternatives but are woefully short of attacking options.