Just got home

[bobbo]

I think we closed the game out a lot better today than we did in the other games

We didnt put 11 players behind the ball and hope to cling on11

precisely it just proves the best form of defence is attack.

[cookieg]

Putting Muniz on just encourages long balls to be pumped up to him. You then need to have another player standing next to him for the second ball, which then takes a player out of midfield. Plus there's no guarantee that Muniz will win any ball anyway which then just turns possession over to the opposition. Far better to keep the ball and playing on the break. My thoughts any way.

[C Block]

Putting Muniz on just encourages long balls to be pumped up to him. You then need to have another player standing next to him for the second ball, which then takes a player out of midfield. Plus there's no guarantee that Muniz will win any ball anyway which then just turns possession over to the opposition. Far better to keep the ball and playing on the break. My thoughts any way.

Alternatively, the Hull centre backs must have been absolutely delighted that they had nobody to mark once Garcia went off, allowing them to push their back line further forward,
And any Hull Corner kicks now meant you had little Palacios trying to mark those towering Hull players instead of the much more physically imposing Rodrigo Muniz, for the second week running it was an appalling tactical decision by Arbeloa, that's not just my opinion incidentally as the Hammersmith End and the Johnny Haynes Stand vented their frustration by chanting the name of Rodrigo,
I'm convinced theirs an agreement between Arbeloa and the Spanish kids that they all get minutes, why else would you take Charles off for Angel then Garcia for Palacios, Having Zepa on the bench instead of Angel would make far more sense for the balance of the squad.

[cookieg]

Putting Muniz on just encourages long balls to be pumped up to him. You then need to have another player standing next to him for the second ball, which then takes a player out of midfield. Plus there's no guarantee that Muniz will win any ball anyway which then just turns possession over to the opposition. Far better to keep the ball and playing on the break. My thoughts any way.

Alternatively, the Hull centre backs must have been absolutely delighted that they had nobody to mark once Garcia went off, allowing them to push their back line further forward,
And any Hull Corner kicks now meant you had little Palacios trying to mark those towering Hull players instead of the much more physically imposing Rodrigo Muniz, for the second week running it was an appalling tactical decision by Arbeloa, that's not just my opinion incidentally as the Hammersmith End and the Johnny Haynes Stand vented their frustration by chanting the name of Rodrigo,
I'm convinced theirs an agreement between Arbeloa and the Spanish kids that they all get minutes, why else would you take Charles off for Angel then Garcia for Palacios, Having Zepa on the bench instead of Angel would make far more sense for the balance of the squad.

I think I prefer AA's opinion on who to play rather than the fact that people in the crowd were calling for Muniz. Muniz has been here 5 years and never been a long term starter. If he was any good he'd be a regular but he wasn't under Silva and it looks like he won't be under AA. If we bring in another striker then he drops to 3rd choice. He was cheap which is benefit to having him in the squad. If we ever sell him at least we will make some money.

[C Block]

Putting Muniz on just encourages long balls to be pumped up to him. You then need to have another player standing next to him for the second ball, which then takes a player out of midfield. Plus there's no guarantee that Muniz will win any ball anyway which then just turns possession over to the opposition. Far better to keep the ball and playing on the break. My thoughts any way.

Alternatively, the Hull centre backs must have been absolutely delighted that they had nobody to mark once Garcia went off, allowing them to push their back line further forward,
And any Hull Corner kicks now meant you had little Palacios trying to mark those towering Hull players instead of the much more physically imposing Rodrigo Muniz, for the second week running it was an appalling tactical decision by Arbeloa, that's not just my opinion incidentally as the Hammersmith End and the Johnny Haynes Stand vented their frustration by chanting the name of Rodrigo,
I'm convinced theirs an agreement between Arbeloa and the Spanish kids that they all get minutes, why else would you take Charles off for Angel then Garcia for Palacios, Having Zepa on the bench instead of Angel would make far more sense for the balance of the squad.

I think I prefer AA's opinion on who to play rather than the fact that people in the crowd were calling for Muniz. Muniz has been here 5 years and never been a long term starter. If he was any good he'd be a regular but he wasn't under Silva and it looks like he won't be under AA. If we bring in another striker then he drops to 3rd choice. He was cheap which is benefit to having him in the squad. If we ever sell him at least we will make some money.

Oh ok, I'm surprised more Premier League teams don't have a striker on the pitch for the final ten minutes, maybe Arbeloa is going to set a trend and other teams will be doing it this weekend, but I'm not convinced myself.

[Jim©]

Putting Muniz on just encourages long balls to be pumped up to him. You then need to have another player standing next to him for the second ball, which then takes a player out of midfield. Plus there's no guarantee that Muniz will win any ball anyway which then just turns possession over to the opposition. Far better to keep the ball and playing on the break. My thoughts any way.

Alternatively, the Hull centre backs must have been absolutely delighted that they had nobody to mark once Garcia went off, allowing them to push their back line further forward,
And any Hull Corner kicks now meant you had little Palacios trying to mark those towering Hull players instead of the much more physically imposing Rodrigo Muniz, for the second week running it was an appalling tactical decision by Arbeloa, that's not just my opinion incidentally as the Hammersmith End and the Johnny Haynes Stand vented their frustration by chanting the name of Rodrigo,
I'm convinced theirs an agreement between Arbeloa and the Spanish kids that they all get minutes, why else would you take Charles off for Angel then Garcia for Palacios, Having Zepa on the bench instead of Angel would make far more sense for the balance of the squad.

Personally I thought it was exactly the thing to do and whilst you call it "an appalling tactical decision" it proved ultimately to be the correct one. Palacios on a number of occasions relieved the pressure by carrying the ball upfield and consciously or otherwise, running the clock down. Arbeloa was slated for bringing on Andersen v Man Utd and losing attacking impetus and slated v Ipswich for bringing on Muniz and going too direct, this for me was ideal as Muniz isn't great at holding the ball up and the last thing we wanted to do anyway was to lump the ball long only for it to come straight back again.

The calls for Muniz in the home end weren't huge at all and led by the lads in back of H4. I'd go with Arebeloa's tactical nouse over theirs (being a world cup, Euros, Champions League winner with some more than impressive managers).

On your point about "why don't more premier teams not have a striker on the pitch" some of the most successful teams in the world have played a false 9- Barca, Spain, Man City etc etc.

[Jimsbeerbelly]

According to AA, Palacios has played centre forward before now.  Perhaps at this stage AA trusts Palacios more than Muniz.

Apparently, playing Muniz when only 1 up, causes us to lose the ball, as his holdup play isn't that great. He put Palacios on to help us keep the ball, and it worked.

[C Block]

Putting Muniz on just encourages long balls to be pumped up to him. You then need to have another player standing next to him for the second ball, which then takes a player out of midfield. Plus there's no guarantee that Muniz will win any ball anyway which then just turns possession over to the opposition. Far better to keep the ball and playing on the break. My thoughts any way.

Alternatively, the Hull centre backs must have been absolutely delighted that they had nobody to mark once Garcia went off, allowing them to push their back line further forward,
And any Hull Corner kicks now meant you had little Palacios trying to mark those towering Hull players instead of the much more physically imposing Rodrigo Muniz, for the second week running it was an appalling tactical decision by Arbeloa, that's not just my opinion incidentally as the Hammersmith End and the Johnny Haynes Stand vented their frustration by chanting the name of Rodrigo,
I'm convinced theirs an agreement between Arbeloa and the Spanish kids that they all get minutes, why else would you take Charles off for Angel then Garcia for Palacios, Having Zepa on the bench instead of Angel would make far more sense for the balance of the squad.

Personally I thought it was exactly the thing to do and whilst you call it "an appalling tactical decision" it proved ultimately to be the correct one. Palacios on a number of occasions relieved the pressure by carrying the ball upfield and consciously or otherwise, running the clock down. Arbeloa was slated for bringing on Andersen v Man Utd and losing attacking impetus and slated v Ipswich for bringing on Muniz and going too direct, this for me was ideal as Muniz isn't great at holding the ball up and the last thing we wanted to do anyway was to lump the ball long only for it to come straight back again.

The calls for Muniz in the home end weren't huge at all and led by the lads in back of H4. I'd go with Arebeloa's tactical nouse over theirs (being a world cup, Euros, Champions League winner with some more than impressive managers).

On your point about "why don't more premier teams not have a striker on the pitch" some of the most successful teams in the world have played a false 9- Barca, Spain, Man City etc etc.

Palacios "carried the ball up field " to who ? There was nobody up there,
And he was slated after Ipswich for taking Charles off for Angel, it had absolutely nothing to do with Muniz, where have you got that from ?

[alfie]

Putting Muniz on just encourages long balls to be pumped up to him. You then need to have another player standing next to him for the second ball, which then takes a player out of midfield. Plus there's no guarantee that Muniz will win any ball anyway which then just turns possession over to the opposition. Far better to keep the ball and playing on the break. My thoughts any way.

Alternatively, the Hull centre backs must have been absolutely delighted that they had nobody to mark once Garcia went off, allowing them to push their back line further forward,
And any Hull Corner kicks now meant you had little Palacios trying to mark those towering Hull players instead of the much more physically imposing Rodrigo Muniz, for the second week running it was an appalling tactical decision by Arbeloa, that's not just my opinion incidentally as the Hammersmith End and the Johnny Haynes Stand vented their frustration by chanting the name of Rodrigo,
I'm convinced theirs an agreement between Arbeloa and the Spanish kids that they all get minutes, why else would you take Charles off for Angel then Garcia for Palacios, Having Zepa on the bench instead of Angel would make far more sense for the balance of the squad.

Personally I thought it was exactly the thing to do and whilst you call it "an appalling tactical decision" it proved ultimately to be the correct one. Palacios on a number of occasions relieved the pressure by carrying the ball upfield and consciously or otherwise, running the clock down. Arbeloa was slated for bringing on Andersen v Man Utd and losing attacking impetus and slated v Ipswich for bringing on Muniz and going too direct, this for me was ideal as Muniz isn't great at holding the ball up and the last thing we wanted to do anyway was to lump the ball long only for it to come straight back again.

The calls for Muniz in the home end weren't huge at all and led by the lads in back of H4. I'd go with Arebeloa's tactical nouse over theirs (being a world cup, Euros, Champions League winner with some more than impressive managers).

On your point about "why don't more premier teams not have a striker on the pitch" some of the most successful teams in the world have played a false 9- Barca, Spain, Man City etc etc.

Palacios "carried the ball up field " to who ? There was nobody up there,
And he was slated after Ipswich for taking Charles off for Angel, it had absolutely nothing to do with Muniz, where have you got that from ?

I guess the answer is by carrying the ball upfield, was the ball lost by him or was it retained by Fulham

[Jim©]

Putting Muniz on just encourages long balls to be pumped up to him. You then need to have another player standing next to him for the second ball, which then takes a player out of midfield. Plus there's no guarantee that Muniz will win any ball anyway which then just turns possession over to the opposition. Far better to keep the ball and playing on the break. My thoughts any way.

Alternatively, the Hull centre backs must have been absolutely delighted that they had nobody to mark once Garcia went off, allowing them to push their back line further forward,
And any Hull Corner kicks now meant you had little Palacios trying to mark those towering Hull players instead of the much more physically imposing Rodrigo Muniz, for the second week running it was an appalling tactical decision by Arbeloa, that's not just my opinion incidentally as the Hammersmith End and the Johnny Haynes Stand vented their frustration by chanting the name of Rodrigo,
I'm convinced theirs an agreement between Arbeloa and the Spanish kids that they all get minutes, why else would you take Charles off for Angel then Garcia for Palacios, Having Zepa on the bench instead of Angel would make far more sense for the balance of the squad.

Personally I thought it was exactly the thing to do and whilst you call it "an appalling tactical decision" it proved ultimately to be the correct one. Palacios on a number of occasions relieved the pressure by carrying the ball upfield and consciously or otherwise, running the clock down. Arbeloa was slated for bringing on Andersen v Man Utd and losing attacking impetus and slated v Ipswich for bringing on Muniz and going too direct, this for me was ideal as Muniz isn't great at holding the ball up and the last thing we wanted to do anyway was to lump the ball long only for it to come straight back again.

The calls for Muniz in the home end weren't huge at all and led by the lads in back of H4. I'd go with Arebeloa's tactical nouse over theirs (being a world cup, Euros, Champions League winner with some more than impressive managers).

On your point about "why don't more premier teams not have a striker on the pitch" some of the most successful teams in the world have played a false 9- Barca, Spain, Man City etc etc.

Palacios "carried the ball up field " to who ? There was nobody up there,
And he was slated after Ipswich for taking Charles off for Angel, it had absolutely nothing to do with Muniz, where have you got that from ?

Here it is in video format, easier than explaining in words- his little cameo was quality and ensured we retained possession. You'll see that most of the time, players were also busting a gut to get up there with him. https://x.com/UchennaVictor0/status/2111741869432434832?s=20

AA was slated for bringing Muniz on with Garcia- plenty of chat on here, at the game and on other forums about it. I even mentioned about what the criticism was about.

[WindyCity]

Nice summation by the OP.  Leno won't have an easier game.  About that.  He still looks very dodgy on the ball.  I hold my breath every time he's on the ball.  Some of his passes centrally put our players under immediate pressure and could cause disaster.  Luckily nothing resulted in bad news in this game, but I just wish Leno would be more positive and accurate in his decision making.

[Ronnief]

Little Palacios was mentioned above. He is in fact 6ft tall minus an eigth of an inch.5 feet and 11.6535433 inches, 1m82. I don't call that little.

[Jim©]

Little Palacios was mentioned above. He is in fact 6ft tall minus an eigth of an inch.5 feet and 11.6535433 inches, 1m82. I don't call that little.

I know, it's been mentioned loads on this forum about how Palacios won't make it as he's too small. Yet Josh King has been our best player by a mile this season.

[Aaron]

Bit of a mixed bag for me, although not really because of the football.

Early flight in, so was already very tired by kick off. I'd also already had a couple of pints which was making me uneasy about having to duck out for a bathroom break before the end of the first half.

I was sitting in R26 which I didn't know even existed, neither did any of the stewards.  Eventually, we got taken up via the Sky Deck or something and got told to make our way to the end of a row with 60+ seats in it.  I really didn't fancy being that guy, so we sat ourselves down in the couple of empty (presumably) hospitality seats and watched what was left of the first half.

After spending the guts of 20 minutes trying to get out of the stand during the break, realising there was a good chance we'd get moved on from the seats we were in and genuinely not having a clue how to actually get back up again without another steward's escort, we decided to go with Gentleman Jim and the big screen out the back of the Riverside instead.

(Un)fortunately(?), that meant more pints and lots of getting into pleasant, but distracting, conversations with wealthy Americans in town for the NFL.  Can't say I remember a whole lot about the second half as a result.

[LittleErn]

Little Palacios was mentioned above. He is in fact 6ft tall minus an eigth of an inch.5 feet and 11.6535433 inches, 1m82. I don't call that little.

Approximately an inch (in old money)shorter than Muniz - hardly makes him little but, to be fair, he is about a 20 lbs lighter. Perhaps that's why Muniz finds it difficult to make quick movements in the box or to outrun his markers?