Have we played a better side than that this season?

Dorset Seagull said:

Taking nothing away from a very good side but the tactical battle did us no favours. They had 3 in the hole behind the main striker and were constantly on the move. We had Kayla and Norwood in the central midfield on a hiding to nothing and should have had Slidell in a defensive midfield role from the off the disrupt them.

They were also strong on the flanks early as we played very narrow and were murdering us on both sides. We widened our defence to try to cope with it but they then took advantage of the gaps this created in the central midfield with their 3.

They were good but we got it tactically wrong for an away game against a team that were always going to come at us

Click to expand...

Arthur said:

Well have we??

Thought Hudds were superb this evening. Didn't let us settle for a second and were in our face from the word go.

Yes there was an element of luck on each of their goals but you make your own luck in this game and quite frankly if they'd kept up the intensity in the second half they would have had 5 or 6.

Bad night at the office with a trip to another bogey club on Sunday (who were superb the other night against Villa) but then 3 very winnable games.

Click to expand...

blue'n'white said:

Remnded me very much of our capitulation against Cardiff away last season. Hopefully what happened after that match will happen again and we won't lose again.

Click to expand...

warmleyseagull said:

Have just had a punt on them at 55/1. This strikes me as long odds for a team that maybe has had that magical transformation that can bring about a late charge. Bournemouth were on 54 points after 28 and finished with 90, albeit there was a key difference that they were already top of the League with 54.

Reading in 2012 really did come from nowhere, had 45 after 28 and achieved 44 points from last 18 games. Again there is a difference to this season in that West Ham were top with just 53 from 28.

So it could be done. But there are some crucial differences this time: the two leaders are in a much better position than the competition that Reading and Bournemouth faced. Crucially too, it is inconceivable that more than one team can make a big charge for the simple reason that the challengers have to play each other. I can't see that both Newcastle and Albioncan be dislodged, one maybe but not both.

But I was mightily impressed with Huddersfield. IMO they are being underrated. Chances are that they cannot replicate that form enough from now to season end to get into top two,but I think there's is better than a 55/1 chance they can win the League.

Click to expand...

Giraffe said:

They were very very good. But I'd say Fulham looked as good, just we upped our game for a period in the second half, and defended much much better. Had we performed as we did at Fulham we would have come away with a better result. But I'd say Fulham for most of the game looked as good as Huddersfield.

Click to expand...

bhafc99 said:

Agree with NooBHA. For once, I'm a little disappointed in CH's selection and tactics.

442 works for us when we're running the show, or competing strongly. It also works when the two 'fluid' parts are there - Baldock linking midfield to attack, Stephens linking midfield to defence and attack. We had neither last night.

So to put out 442 regardless, with two 'centre forwards' in Hemed and Murray, and a midfield partnership of Kayal and Norwood that had never played together, was a tad complacent.

Maybe, for once, we should have plumped for Murray as a lone striker, and put Sidwell into a 3 across the middle formation, and looked to contain Huddersfield and even - gasp - looked to secure a draw first and foremost.

Click to expand...