Lop-sided West Ham Contrive To Pilfer Undeserved Point From Craven Cottage

A strange team selection was a case of inexplicable self-harm for West Ham’s ambitions as they struggle to build momentum or impose themselves against Fulham. Here are the takeaways.

Meet The New Boss, Same As The Old Boss?

With three Premier League games and an international break under the belt the short trip across town to Craven Cottage should have been the perfect opportunity to get a better understanding of what can be expected from Julen Lopetegui’s West Ham.

Most supporters will have appreciated the need for patience during the transition from the cautious approach of the previous manager and the bedding in of a host of new signings. But many will be left scratching their heads at how little has changed so far – or at least the pace at which change is taking place.  

Lopetegui is not known as a leading-edge progressive coach. But the expectation was that he would prepare a team capable of imposing themselves in games such as this by jealously guarding possession of the ball. There are few signs yet that this is anywhere close to happening and it was Fulham – no more than a decent mid-table team – who by some distance looked the better coached of the two teams.  

Claims that the performance was little different to what was seen last season are wide of the mark with obvious differences in a higher defensive line and desire to play out from the back. However, it was thanks to the Scottish manager’s old chestnut of resilience that eventually allowed the Hammers to scrape out an undeserved draw in the game’s dying minutes. Critics might also point to the fact that West Ham continue to be at the lower end of Premier League teams for possession (43% compared to 41% last season) and (in terms of minutes played) they are now the oldest side in the league.

Growing Pains or Bad Judgement?

There must have been a collective groan across the West Ham supporting world when the team sheets again revealed starting positions for both Michail Antonio and Tomas Soucek – and the absence of any semblance of creativity in midfield. It is ironic that while every supporter in the land is aware of the deficiencies these two have with ball control, it is lost on a highly experienced coaching team who work with them every day. Are we to believe they are the masters of one-touch and instant control in training all week, and only revert to clown shoe wearing incompetents once the referee’s whistle blows?  

An argument might be made for the coach showing loyalty to members of the squad that he inherited but they have had their chance, and their time has now passed. Everything else that went wrong in the performance stemmed from that initial inexplicable team selection decision. Playing a high defensive line while being incapable of keeping the ball through the middle was never going to work out well.

Formations and Substitutions

It would have been a major surprise if Antonio and Soucek had not been hooked off at half-time. It was such an obvious change that no credit can go to the coaching staff for spotting it. It was a better West Ham performance in the second period but, in truth, it would have been impossible to be any worse. Despite that, it was never a convincing turn around and after an initial flurry, the hosts largely remained in control.

Formations can be very fluid in modern football and vary depending on whether you are in or out of possession. It was not apparent after the break that everyone fully understood their role. The full backs rarely got far enough forward to provide the width that we are told Lopetegui expects, but neither did they resembled a traditional back four – largely occupying a no-mans-land between the two. And the front three – Mohammed Kudus, Jarrod Bowen, and ‘Jimmy’ Summerville – who should be a handful for anyone failed to operate as unit to put the Fulham defence under pressure. It is as if there is still a fixation with ‘one’ up front rather than ‘three.’ Failing to address this structural issue will not resolve the isolated striker problem that had haunted the Hammer’s attacking play for many a season – whether it is Bowen, Danny Ings or Nicklas Fullkrug playing as the arrow head.

We should perhaps give credit to the coach for flooding the field with attack minded players in the closing stages although positioning was somewhat anarchic as Kudus switched from left to right to left again and Summerville popped up on the right in the build up to the equaliser. The Ings goal was well taken and suggest that he can maybe do a job for now if given the right level of support.

The Strange Case of the Missing New Signings

I am not as negative on Dinos Mavropanos as other West Ham supporters appear to be. Goals conceded are more often a case of joint enterprise where it is defensive shape and cumulative failings that lead to a defence being breached rather than individual error. Mavropanos was certainly excruciatingly slow in closing down Smith-Rowe but how was the latter given so much space in the first place? And where was Aaron Wan-Bissaka who after previous encouraging performances was given the run around for most of the afternoon by Iwobi and Smith-Rowe?

Having said that, Mavropanos has not been so outstanding as to deny giving Jean-Clair Todibo the opportunity to show what he can do. Todibo comes highly rated, so his lack of game time (8 minutes in total) is a mystery. There is  no chance of adapting to life in English football from sitting on the bench.

And what has become of Luis Guilherme who neither gets a place in the matchday squad or seemingly the opportunity to play for the U21s. It’s an unusual way to develop a player even if he is regarded as one for the future.

Must Do Better

Four points from four games is not a great start to a season where the ambition has to be competing for one of the available European places. It’s early days but the hopeful shoots of improvement have yet to emerge.

The current trajectory of one point per game would have us on the fringes of relegation battle, although that will surely improve as the season progresses. The coach has another four of five games to demonstrate the club is on the right path before the pressure mounts. On a more positive note, West Ham earned just one from the equivalent four fixtures last season, so arguably we are already ahead of the curve. COYI!

5 thoughts on “Lop-sided West Ham Contrive To Pilfer Undeserved Point From Craven Cottage”

  1. Well thought – out piece Geoff. Like many others I guess, doubts about our coaching ( and fitness) staff are beginning to creep in already. How, for example, is it possible for Fulham to look, sharper, faster and fitter than us in almost every position? Why does Lopetegui persist with Antonio,Soucek and Mavropanos when better alternatives are readily available? We shouldn’t be hooking players at half time in games like this – we just shouldn’t! Refusing to pay £40 million for Duran is beginning to look like a candidate for error of the season, as he fires in a worldy for Villa. I fully accept that we are ahead of where we were at this stage last season, but that wasn’t hard to do given how bad we were then! Also, it’s fair to give staff and players alike time to settle in and to get on board with the style of play Lopetegui is( apparently) demanding. That time is rapidly coming to an end. We need to be better organised, singing from the same hymn sheet and a LOT fitter. COYI

    Liked by 1 person

    1. The fitness aspect is a puzzle. Lopetegui is apparently demanding (as you say) and the same was said of Moyes – if you don’t run you don’t play etc. But we regularly appear to tire before the opposition does. Fulham certainly looked sharper and more together as a team. I do worry that there is still a lack of pace throughout the squad. Neither Alvarez or Rodriguez are the quickest and that would seem an issue if they are meant to drop back or cover for the full backs when they push up.

      It would be interesting to know the full Duran story. Was it just a case of not wanting to cough up 40 mil or was there more to it. I believe that Chelsea had been interested but were similarly blown back. Without a doubt we remain short of quality and options up front

      Like

  2. Hi Geoff, now this really is not good enough, I expect answers not just repetition of my own queries !!!! I find it very difficult and disappointing to find that we are no further forward with knowing what our strongest team will look like. It must be puzzling, and disappointing??, for some of newbies. From comments made by JLo it does seem that he is worried by by the pace and robustness of the PL for his Euro buys who will have to grow into the new style and accept that they will no longer get easy yellow cards for tough tackles which are no longer penalised here. We surely would have been better playing them and losing to whatever to get them acclimatised for better things later. The more we continue as now I can only see problems and discontent with the WH natives. If only we can see a starting team including Summerville, Torino, Fullbrig plus at least of the new midfielders. He has been brave enough to buy a new team so why is he backing off implementing the next stage. If he wants to slow the introduction why did we see WP and Downes sold off. Regards Michael

    >

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Hi Michael, Ha ha! If I had all the answers I would be a highly paid Premier League coach – not a bloke waffling on a football blog 😉 It is impossible to understand Lopetegui’s rationale for keeping his powder dry with the new signings. Only one way they will become familiar with the rough, tunble and demands of Premier League football. They might as well all be experiencing the step learning curve as a group and getting it over and done with. We can only hope the light came on after that terrible first half performance on Saturday. Geoff

      Like

Comments are closed.