Such a big gap between us & 17th

[Fulham76]

We've had a couple of wins against decent teams but generally, a 12 point gap, (as things stand), shows just how far off the pace we've been this season.

We knew it was going to be tough but unfortunately we never really put up much of a fight. Apart from that mini run, which ended after the win at Liverpool, we've been awful.

SP continuously talks about 'fine margins' but there's nothing fine about the gap between us & 4th bottom.

Just not competitive at all. We've got a LONG way to go.

[SP]

I notice Burnley slipping down the table, not sure where they'd be without Dyche. Perhaps he'll take the Palace job & make things interesting?

[The Rational Fan]

Burnley, Crystal Palace and Newcastle are old teams which is currently a huge advantage in terms of cohesiveness, but they are aging's squad that without wise investment will get worse year on year. One of the yo-yo clubs will break into the top 17 teams soon, let it be us.

Fulham Fans are implying the gap is huge, but against Burnley, the nine oldest players (eight starters and one sub) during the game were all from Burnley. We go down and come back up, it is likely that they either have "a whole new starting lineup" that lacks cohesiveness or they have a truly aging squad that is three years past their best.

[gang]

It would help if our players are signed during the Summer breaks and training together instead of joining after the start of the season.

[hongkongfulham]

I think given that we really rode our luck to get up here, we are probably about where we should be?

Its very disappointing but by no way unexpected. Us and WBA were the worst teams in the league coming in to it by a long shot

[The Rational Fan]

It would help if our players are signed during the Summer breaks and training together instead of joining after the start of the season.

Incorrect we don't want early summer signings, because what would help is retaining players from Spring. Having 18 players from the previous season good enough to start the first game of the next season. Our problem is the tendency to clean out the squad every Spring and then trying to fix it with Summer Signings. It doesn't work well.

Preseason is about getting everyone fit, integrating new players is best done one player every two games over a dozen league games. Of course, a few injuries may force that process to be speed up, but at a cost to the team.

Summer Signings always have the issue do we get a player like MLM/Seri/Fabri at the start of the window or wait to get better players like Tosin/Anguissa/Areola that were expecting to get a better offer than us but didn't.

As a yo-yo team, prefer getting players later that hoped to play in a mid-table premier league team as they are always better, but neither decision early or good is very unsatisfactory. Every season, we ask TK to solve the issue but it is always "early vs good", no exceptions in my opinion (the last good early signing was Denis Odoi but he was basically a championship player so hardly an exception to the rule).

We should aim to have the same starting XI against Newcastle this season and the first eight to twelve games next season. We have a massive 46-49 game season next year, all our new recruits should be focusing on starting the last 35-41 games and doing something off the bench after a few games at the club. 

[Karlos]

It would help if our players are signed during the Summer breaks and training together instead of joining after the start of the season.

Incorrect we don't want early summer signings, because what would help is retaining players from Spring. Having 18 players from the previous season good enough to start the first game of the next season. Our problem is the tendency to clean out the squad every Spring and then trying to fix it with Summer Signings. It doesn't work well.

Preseason is about getting everyone fit, integrating new players is best done one player every two games over a dozen league games. Of course, a few injuries may force that process to be speed up, but at a cost to the team.

Summer Signings always have the issue do we get a player like MLM/Seri/Fabri at the start of the window or wait to get better players like Tosin/Anguissa/Areola that were expecting to get a better offer than us but didn't.

As a yo-yo team, prefer getting players later that hoped to play in a mid-table premier league team as they are always better, but neither decision early or good is very unsatisfactory. Every season, we ask TK to solve the issue but it is always "early vs good", no exceptions in my opinion (the last good early signing was Denis Odoi but he was basically a championship player so hardly an exception to the rule).

We should aim to have the same starting XI against Newcastle this season and the first eight to twelve games next season. We have a massive 46-49 game season next year, all our new recruits should be focusing on starting the last 35-41 games and doing something off the bench after a few games at the club. 

Would love to agree with this but with the loan players leaving and the likelyhood of a few others your left with players who aren't going to be good enough for what we want to achieve and therefore we need to add asap to integrate those players asap

[Woolly Mammoth]

It would help if our players are signed during the Summer breaks and training together instead of joining after the start of the season.

Incorrect we don't want early summer signings, because what would help is retaining players from Spring. Having 18 players from the previous season good enough to start the first game of the next season. Our problem is the tendency to clean out the squad every Spring and then trying to fix it with Summer Signings. It doesn't work well.

Preseason is about getting everyone fit, integrating new players is best done one player every two games over a dozen league games. Of course, a few injuries may force that process to be speed up, but at a cost to the team.

Summer Signings always have the issue do we get a player like MLM/Seri/Fabri at the start of the window or wait to get better players like Tosin/Anguissa/Areola that were expecting to get a better offer than us but didn't.

As a yo-yo team, prefer getting players later that hoped to play in a mid-table premier league team as they are always better, but neither decision early or good is very unsatisfactory. Every season, we ask TK to solve the issue but it is always "early vs good", no exceptions in my opinion (the last good early signing was Denis Odoi but he was basically a championship player so hardly an exception to the rule).

We should aim to have the same starting XI against Newcastle this season and the first eight to twelve games next season. We have a massive 46-49 game season next year, all our new recruits should be focusing on starting the last 35-41 games and doing something off the bench after a few games at the club. 

Would love to agree with this but with the loan players leaving and the likelyhood of a few others your left with players who aren't going to be good enough for what we want to achieve and therefore we need to add asap to integrate those players asap

Far too many loan players coming and going every season, a D of F should be working all year round sowing seeds and researching prospects because it is an ongoing roll. Fulhams current bogus D of F does not ever come near to carrying out those rolls so relies on a loan process to fill in the gaps without thinking or even knowing how to run an English football club. So sometime during the summer when he can find the time TK will fumble around on his lap top and try and catch up what he should have been doing all year round.
I would not even call him part time, Fulham are on a roundabout each year with this farce and this farcical D of F. That is why at the start of every season we start off with a handicap playing catch up and you wonder why he is a laughing stock. Which in turn cripples the manager and the team and the club suffers and stands still while better run clubs overtake.

[Stoneleigh Loyalist]

I find it amusing that some people on here were suggesting that 36/37/38 points would be enough to stay up and how many points Newcastle would get.
I have no love for Newcastle but respect to them for their strong finish and the way that Burnley and Brighton have fought their way out. Looking at it the odd missed penalty and late goals would have made very little difference as we would still not have been up with the pace.

[MJG]

I find it amusing that some people on here were suggesting that 36/37/38 points would be enough to stay up and how many points Newcastle would get.
I have no love for Newcastle but respect to them for their strong finish and the way that Burnley and Brighton have fought their way out. Looking at it the odd missed penalty and late goals would have made very little difference as we would still not have been up with the pace.

And that should have been the target and would have been IF we had won the games against our rivals. Its the earliest all 3 teams have been relegated and just shows no matter how many VAR or last minute goals we just were not good enough by a county mile.
I never bought into the Newcastle wont get another point into last ten games.

We needed to convert 3 of those draws against those bottom teams into 6 extra points and one win elsewhere and you are there or there abouts. But 2 points in 9 games you deserve what you get.

[filham]

Lack of goals as the Cottage needs to be explained, a few more goals spread across all those draws would have made a difference.
Take away the big six and it is a rat race to avoid relegation among the remaining fourteen teams which starts on the first day of the season, we were not there at the beginning of the race.

[Lordedmundo]

I must admit that in March (when we were on a good run and Newcastle the opposite), I did think that going into the final game on 37 points and then winning would keep us up on 40 points. However, it looks very much as if that would not quite have been good enough.

If you take into account the 3 terrible VAR decisions against us and the missed penalties then then that would have us on 8-10 points more.  However, I look at our performances against the sides arounnd us and say that we didn't deserve to stay up.  I think we were hard done by in the Newcastle away game, but we didn't deserve any more than points than we got against Brighton, West Brom (away), Burnley, Southampton and Palace.

[MJG]

The other 14 league table, we were still shite.

[ALG01]

I agree there are fine margins but scott is talking about in the game. translated into a series of results it becomes a chasm.

against man utd it was fine margins. we started slow and clearly the players were down. but they picked up, competed and finished much the stronger of the two teams but the fine margin was when they shot, they hit the target and they had players of a quality that looked dangerous.
Our front line was limp.. the youngster does look a prospect and just needs to gain a bit of body strength, shame he did not take one more touch for his big chance.

The truth is we did not invest in forwards and that meant we had a fine margin of no attacking capability worthy of the name.

[AJW48361]

The home form tells you everything embarrassing.

[colinwhite]

I find it amusing that some people on here were suggesting that 36/37/38 points would be enough to stay up and how many points Newcastle would get.
I have no love for Newcastle but respect to them for their strong finish and the way that Burnley and Brighton have fought their way out. Looking at it the odd missed penalty and late goals would have made very little difference as we would still not have been up with the pace.

And that should have been the target and would have been IF we had won the games against our rivals. Its the earliest all 3 teams have been relegated and just shows no matter how many VAR or last minute goals we just were not good enough by a county mile.
I never bought into the Newcastle wont get another point into last ten games.

We needed to convert 3 of those draws against those bottom teams into 6 extra points and one win elsewhere and you are there or there abouts. But 2 points in 9 games you deserve what you get.

we werent good enough. But .  Newcastle away we were robbed of 2pts by poor refereeing as well as a missed pen against SH utd ( not to mention missed sitters ), and of those 3 draws there are any number of games that could easily have gone our way with a bit of luck ! so a country mile ?  A Pl quality goalscorer would have done it.

[Fulham76]

I find it amusing that some people on here were suggesting that 36/37/38 points would be enough to stay up and how many points Newcastle would get.
I have no love for Newcastle but respect to them for their strong finish and the way that Burnley and Brighton have fought their way out. Looking at it the odd missed penalty and late goals would have made very little difference as we would still not have been up with the pace.

And that should have been the target and would have been IF we had won the games against our rivals. Its the earliest all 3 teams have been relegated and just shows no matter how many VAR or last minute goals we just were not good enough by a county mile.
I never bought into the Newcastle wont get another point into last ten games.

We needed to convert 3 of those draws against those bottom teams into 6 extra points and one win elsewhere and you are there or there abouts. But 2 points in 9 games you deserve what you get.

we werent good enough. But .  Newcastle away we were robbed of 2pts by poor refereeing as well as a missed pen against SH utd ( not to mention missed sitters ), and of those 3 draws there are any number of games that could easily have gone our way with a bit of luck ! so a country mile ?  A Pl quality goalscorer would have done it.

Not sure it's that simple. A premier league quality goal scorer still wouldn't have got any service with our style of play. 

90 passes before we cross the half way line would leave Ronaldo struggling for goals.

[FFC In Oz]

Our lack of points and goals against the bottom half sides, particularly at home is indefensible.

[MJG]

I find it amusing that some people on here were suggesting that 36/37/38 points would be enough to stay up and how many points Newcastle would get.
I have no love for Newcastle but respect to them for their strong finish and the way that Burnley and Brighton have fought their way out. Looking at it the odd missed penalty and late goals would have made very little difference as we would still not have been up with the pace.

And that should have been the target and would have been IF we had won the games against our rivals. Its the earliest all 3 teams have been relegated and just shows no matter how many VAR or last minute goals we just were not good enough by a county mile.
I never bought into the Newcastle wont get another point into last ten games.

We needed to convert 3 of those draws against those bottom teams into 6 extra points and one win elsewhere and you are there or there abouts. But 2 points in 9 games you deserve what you get.

we werent good enough. But .  Newcastle away we were robbed of 2pts by poor refereeing as well as a missed pen against SH utd ( not to mention missed sitters ), and of those 3 draws there are any number of games that could easily have gone our way with a bit of luck ! so a country mile ?  A Pl quality goalscorer would have done it.

But at the other end of the pitch we are 7 goals less conceded due to better than expected goalkeeping. Over 37 games we ahve been shown to just not be good enough, I'm sure you can see that?

[colinwhite]

I agree ,it was the country mile that i was questioning.