Boro Vs Watford (Away) 0-0

[johan7 15]

Thanks for singing there's only one graham taylor. I couldn't because I was somewhat choked up. Especially seeing his wife and family were there.

 

Watford could have won, but so could Boro with a touch of luck. If you consider what would happen if you opened up? There would have been more likely a win either way. We had very little space anywhere to create much, if you give us space by being more attacking then I would suggest 70-30 that we would have higher chances of winning the game. This is v Watford away not Man city or Spurs or Liverpool. You're doing ok, with the players you've got. Occasionally you'll stifle decent teams and snatch a winner with that and I think it'll keep you up - but its not exciting. Would you swap for gung ho, goals but relegated? Maybe next season you should expect more once your secure and can justify a top name signing or three.

 

Good post that, mate. Very nice to see an outsider's perspective.

 

+1. well balanced post.

[Will 2,958]

Clayton has moved to a different position, I'm not sure how that indicates a defensive approach? Karanka identified him as potentially a very good holding midfielder at championship level, bought him and turned him into that and now a reasonably competent premier league holding midfielder. The only evidence we have of him as a box-box midfielder is in middle to bottom half championship sides, there is no evidence whatsoever that he could do it at this level. If Karanka had signed a CB who he thought had all the attributes to be a good striker and moved him there would that indicate a more attacking approach? No, it would just indicate that our manager decided that his previous position wasn't best suited to him.

 

As for Downing at CAM, you must have a very short memory as I can remember a whole host of uninspiring performances from Downing in that position in the Championship. He was terrible there, hence why we signed Ramirez in January and Downing didn't play CAM again for us.

[ManBearPig 1,853]

Cba for an argument, I guess we will agree to disagree

[wilsoncgp 9,283]

Spot on regarding Clayts, Will. Aitor didn't see the goalscoring midfielder, he saw his attributes as a player and saw him as a perfect partner to Leadbitter in that 2 in midfield. It was never a case of taking a player we thought would add goals to our midfield and turning him into a defensive player because tactics required it.

 

Appreciate what you're getting at MBP, and as I said, I think the addition of Bojan and possibly Snodgrass will go more to proving or disproving your point. But Clayton wasn't a good example.

[sanddancer 1,967]

Karanka repeatedly states the goals will come, I ask when. Once again the pundits state it was one of the worst games to watch. We have the second lowest goal scoreing record which indicates we have serious problems not being addressed. I know the goal is survival so don't expect much but now starting to fear what we have achieved and what can achieve may not be enough.

[Neverbefore 10,942]

Not being addressed? We have bids or enquiries in for two strikers and 3 wingers that we know of and have already signed a striker. Of course it's being addressed

[MidleastBoro 30]

Our direct comparators are Burnley and Hull. They have to be, as the two other promoted sides.

 

I would say, on paper, that we have a stronger first eleven and stronger squads than either of those two teams.

 

Hull are in total disarray off the field but are still only 4(?) points behind us after 22(?) games, and Burnley are many more points ahead of us than I would have hoped at this stage of the season.

 

I completely accept that 17th is a good position to finish the season in, but in comparison to our comparators (of that makes sense) then I would say we're underperforming. Badly.

[Neverbefore 10,942]

As well as Hull, we're above 3 established premiership teams in the table. I don't understand how you can spin that into underperforming

[wilsoncgp 9,283]

As well as Hull, we're above 3 established premiership teams in the table. I don't understand how you can spin that into underperforming

 

Indeed. I think it's very hard to say we're underperforming when we are expected to be relegated but are sat outside the relegation zone. If anything, I'd say both us and Hull are doing about as good as we'd expect to do and, due to excellent home form, Burnley are over-performing. To be so comfortably away from the relegation spots midway through the season is commendable, so well done to them.

[MidleastBoro 30]

As well as Hull, we're above 3 established premiership teams in the table. I don't understand how you can spin that into underperforming

 

I thought I made it quite clear that it was compared to our comparators, and I even defined them for you (Burnley and Hull). Are Burnley as a team 6 points and 6 positions better than us? I would say no, although the league table obviously differs. Hull seem to be basically Snodgrass FC currently, yet they're only a few points behind us. In my opinion that means we aren't doing as well as we could be, which by its very definition is underperforming.

 

Also, the fact we're above two god-awful sides in Swansea and Sunderland hardly demonstrates that we're doing well. They're just doing worse - -and yes there's a definite difference.

[Neverbefore 10,942]

What you define as our competitors makes no sense. Our competition are those in danger of being relegated. Doesn't matter how long they have been in the league.

[MidleastBoro 30]

What you define as our competitors makes no sense. Our competition are those in danger of being relegated. Doesn't matter how long they have been in the league.

 

To be fair I said comparators, not competitors. By your own admission earlier, we're doing well to be ahead of established premier league teams. So our comparators should surely be the teams who were in the Championship with us last season?

[richmfc 41]

When we have Ramirez fit we look more like scoring. That's because he's a better player nothing to do with a change of tactics. Better players make you more attacking

[Will 2,958]

What you define as our competitors makes no sense. Our competition are those in danger of being relegated. Doesn't matter how long they have been in the league.

 

To be fair I said comparators, not competitors. By your own admission earlier, we're doing well to be ahead of established premier league teams. So our comparators should surely be the teams who were in the Championship with us last season?

 

And we are below the team that was above us last season and above the team that was below us last season? Performing as expected?

[Guest Changing Times]

I think a comparison with the other newly promoted sides is an obvious one to make but also the ultimate comparison is the league table and then everyone in the Premier League. I'd say it really kind of depends on what question you're asking. If the question is should we be ahead of Burnley then in my opinion we should be and we should have been last season as well so that is underperforming. If the question is will 16th in the league be acceptable this season then for the most part we're going to say it is so that means we're doing ok.

 

However you can also add that once you've established just how bad or good other teams are then your aims maybe should adjust in turn. I wouldn't say finishing ahead of Sunderland or Swansea is anything other than exactly what we should be doing. We're better than both and it really doesn't matter how long they've in the Premier League. They have some poor players and Swansea have also had some managerial issues so we should expect to finish ahead of them. If we finish in the bottom three this season it would be failure on our part not simply because we've been relegated but because we allowed at least one bad team to finish ahead of us.