RLC did we miss

[H4usuallysitting]

him against the lot up the road....my impression was no

[bencher]

We did lack some physical presence at the top of the pitch. But I would expect him to be a lot more dynamic than he has been. He sticks to the simple things far too often.

[We Are Premier League]

I missed him early in the 2nd half, when Cav really struggled to get hold of the ball.

[FFC1987]

I think we did to be honest.

[RaySmith]

I think we did too.

[Craven Mad]

I think we missed him, but think we could make better use of a domestic loan spot.

In summary: I think he does improve us, but I would return him if a more attacking player from the Prem became available on loan.

[Whitestone]

Yeah, definitely.

[blingo]

I dont think we did at all

[filham]

I am begining to think that maybe, just maybe, we did miss him and am hoping that his return against Man U. will improve the team.

[WindyCity]

I don't think we missed him at all.  FFC played a very good game overall all things considered, and w/o RLC.  If Cav had converted that sitter and Robinson avoided the red, who knows?  Could have been a 3 point outing.  I thought FFC played very well 2nd half down a man.  If not for the Areola assist on the goal score, could also have been a draw.  I know, I know, woulda coulda shouldas don't mean diddley-dew.  But I did think FFC played well sans RLC.

[sunburywhite]

I think we did. One thing he does well is drive at the opposition, not sure who he would have come in for though

[alfie]

He played well in the spurs game, there just seemed to be a gap that he would have filled

[Radiowhite]

We did miss his attacking presence

[Twig]

I don't really see how it can be argued that we missed RLC from an attacking perspective. Thus far his record for goals and assists is poor. If he were great at holding the ball up then that might be something we missed but is he, really?

[Sting of the North]

Haven't been impressed with him, but first half against Chelsea was one of our worst for quite some time. Don't agree at all with those that say we played well (except for about 5 minutes before Robinson's blunder). We were second best at almost every turn, and deserved to be a goal or two down. Cannot say if that had anything to do with RLC as I am still not sure what he actually contributes, but maybe there is a hint of causality there?

[mrmicawbers]

Maybe his presence on the pitch and being marked by the opposition may help free up some of our players.This is more due to his reputation than what he has done this season,

[NewYorkYank]

I don't think Fulham missed RLC, but they missed a third player in the midfield.  With Cairney injured, I would have loved to see Onomah.  With the introduction of Tete into the lineup, Fulham's back 5 has become less creative and marginally more defensive.  Playing Bobby D-C as a hybrid wingback, dropping back when out of possession, getting forward when with possession, has enabled Parker to play a midfield three while still keeping a balance between offense and defense.  This balance goes with Tete in that role.  It's a straight, rather than hybrid, back 5.  The difference was notable when Lookman came on for Tete against Spurs.  Against Chelsea, it was clearly just two in the midfield.  Occasionally, Aina stepped up, but in general, I thought Fulham's midfield was out-manned.  It is hardly surprising that Anguissa had his worst game to date.  Still not sure why Cairney lost his spot after a string of great games, or why RLC holds onto his after a string of bad to mediocre ones.

[jarv]

He is a decent player but from his games so far, I feel he has to make a better contribution. He fades out of games for too many breaks it seems. Sometimes hard to tell on tv, he might be working hard off the ball.

[colinwhite]

Hes been disappointing but has started to improve and we missed him against Chelsea.Composure on the ball ,abillity to hold it etc.

[fulhamben]

No