Selection this, selection that...

You might have read West Ham United have complained to the Premier League about Fulham's decision to rest players last weekend when they played (and lost) 2-0 to Hull City. Obviously, a weakened Fulham side is detrimental to West Ham (and arguably others in the same predicament down at the bottom) because to those sides struggling for points, seeing one of their rivals for survival gather them with comparative ease leaves a bad taste in their mouth.

You'll remember similar complaints when Wolves fielded practically a reserve side up at Old Trafford, a sacrifice/risk that their manager calculated as worthy. If you're not going to win against Manchester United, you might as well lose without losing players to injury. Utd's rivals might also disagree with these types of selections because it is, on paper, an easy three points. But that's not Man Utd's problem, is it? The same way it's not Fulham's problem if West Ham are absolute toilet.

Wolves lost three points at United, and won three against Burnley. Rather than end up with the one or nothing at all. Sure, it should be about glory and had Wolves shocked Utd...but then again the manager makes the final decision, and in this case it paid off for McCarthy. Much like it has in the eyes of Hodgson and their 2-1 win in the Europa League.

For the sake of footballing justice, yes, I agree every side should be at its most strongest in order for competition to be fair. But define strongest? Actually, don't bother because that's not your job - it's the managers. If Hodgson wants to play youth and reserves because he has prioritised his teams objectives (Europe being that priority) then the side that faced Hull was the strongest he could possibly field.

If West Ham are in such dire desperate times, they should perhaps look inwards at sorting out their inability to function as a cohesive unit. If a side is in trouble it's because they've dragged themselves down there and not because other teams are winning thanks to the odd (very rare) occasion a rival side has played an under-strength upper region side and won.

The footballing governing bodies should not legislate team selections to the nth degree. Even if the final game of the season a manager rests every first team player in a game that might decide someone else's fate - and yes, I know, the Hull/Fulham result might just have been that type of game - just not played on the final day. And nobody rests players for the sake of it, there's always a reason and that reason is always justified as far as the team doing the resting are concerned. It's the ones who are desperate who look for a way to claw back some hope.

The crux of the problem is that this form of complaint is driving towards the suggestion that a club should consider the plight of another club when they are making decisions based on their own ambitions. The rule about having to field a full-strength side is there to protect the integrity of the league - which it does perfectly fine.

But placing another club ahead of your own? In a parallel universe perhaps where a match is postponed to allow players to recover from a dodgy lasagne, perhaps.

Hodgson cares for nothing more than Fulham and their progression, so of course he's going to take a risk and sacrifice potential points for the sake of silverware in another competition.

It's a bitter pill to swallow, and I know that if Spurs had to rely on others to fail (a possibility in the run-in for 4th place) its still something completely out of our control and there is nothing we can do other than do the best in our own games - a destiny we can shape. If one of our rivals plays an under-strength side and gains points that places them above us, that's just the way the cookie crumbles. If it was the other way around, we'd be smiling our faces off.

So to go back to the actual rule that West Ham are arguing Fulham broke (from the BBC article covering this story):

The Premier League's E20 rule stipulates that clubs must field a full-strength side in all top-flight games.

Perhaps next time Hodgson should play a full-strength side and ask them to play at around 40% effort. Which matches the level that West Ham have been playing all season long. Which should restore some balance to the farce.

FA Cup glory? Take it back...(to the lane)

Fulham 0 Spurs 0

Not exactly your quintessential cup tie that. For all the talk about squad depletion and recalling of yoof players to make up the numbers, our starting line-up wasn't too shabby. Defoe on the bench, but the switch on the left-side (BAE slotting into left-back and Bale into left-midfield) was something I was keen to see and Modric in the middle is something that's always up for discussion - can it work? Crouch upfront with Pav and Niko on the right. Regardless of the kids on the bench keeping JD company, it's a line-up good enough to beat Fulham, or at least make the effort to do so.

So, how did this game end 0-0? Simply put, because it wasn't very good. There were moments for both sides. We dominated possession but Fulham had the shots on target. Palacios marshalled the midfield but Modric struggled to dictate or find the time to hurt the opposition. Perhaps this wasn't the perfect stage for him to play central, but then Harry was forced to do so thanks to our bare bone crisis. Had we another CM capable of fulfilling the role then perhaps Modric starting out on the left would have allowed him to roam, dink and cut inside in that wonderfully jinxing manner we love to watch. His passing was a little off-key too. Not the best of days. But perhaps not the best of pitches (although no excuse, he worked his magic up at Wigan a few weeks back).

First half was congested, untidy. No real FA Cup magic to behold, in fact no real evidence of this being an FA Cup tie full stop. Second half, better, but frustrating. For all the ball at our feet and defending when called upon to do so there was still moments when Zamora and company threatened. The threat thankfully always ended with a sigh of relief. Fulham not really causing us anything more than half a missed heart-beat. But you know how it is, we dominate, they break, they score and we rage. You could almost see it happening, compounded with what smelt like ominous irony (smells like sick) mainly because we lacked cutting edge up front. This game was made for the sucker-punch.

I guess with Fulham playing so deep and defensive, there wasn't enough about them to make us that nervous. Not really.

As for us; cutting edge, the lack of. How you haunt me week after week. I'm actually not going to knee-jerk and perhaps the more astute amongst you will reason why the Pav/Crouch combo failed to ignite today. IMO, it failed because it was just one of those games. I love the word 'fragmented' (to be copyrighted). And today it just felt like our forwards were snuffed out of it by the resolute tenacity of the Fulham defenders and the tactics of Hodgson. It was all a bit too fragmented.

I think Roy was quite clever. If this was a traditional cup tie and had Fulham gone out and attempted to give it some proper gallivanting play, we'd had beaten them. We have the better footballers. And they lacked the presence of a Murphy in the middle to make them truly tick creatively. So what Roy did (the git) was have his players work their socks off. And their more direct play pushing forward (not talking long ball but speed of attack) allowed them the opportunities to test us, so from their perspective they could contain us and counter. Good tactics.

The problem we had in countering this, is one open for debate. Pav didn't really have any goal-sniffing opps that he thrives off. No 'one second' to think moments. He disappeared in some of the build up play, sometimes struggling to bring the ball under control quickly. Could he have dug deeper? Can he dig deeper? Is it the right game to knee-jerk on his performance? No. Let this one be. Watch the difference in the replay. Although if a play fails to find another way into a game and a trend develops, we have a problem. Said player can only play effectively if the game suits him (Darren Bent anyone?)

Crouch was okay. Felt at times that we didn't really use him properly. Crossing was not great and there seemed to be the usual confusion with when exactly to aim for his head and when to play the ball forward to his feet. Towards the end (when JD came on for Pav) someone (sorry, forgot who) pumped the ball up to Defoe. I mean seriously, Crouch has gone off and we're still pumping it up forwards. This time to a midget. Giving him 60/40 against him to win it. Bit of common sense sometimes let's us down. I know this isn't exactly criminal, but sometimes a little bit more intelligence is required - especially in the final moments of a game.

edit: Crouch was in fact still on the pitch. Slight balls up there in my reporting. Soz. Evidently, one too many beers it would seem. I guess you might argue that even though he had not been subbed, he was invisible. Boom boom.

I'll add this - there were moments in the game when players made mistakes when a LEADER was blatantly required to shout at them. Sometimes it looks like discrepancies are accepted.

Perhaps its time for a new directive. Play the ball on the ground unless you're passing the ball up the field to someone's feet. There is a time and place to play the knock down via Crouch. But anyways, if we haven't worked it out yet, I can't see us working it out any time soon. It's what births the questions about how Crouch is more successful for England than he is for Spurs - and if its because Crouch is an out and out striker for England - then it means we've got the wrong player up front to aid the Spurs 'out and out' forward.

Moving on.

Bale was stupendous to watch. Powerful and silky. Our best creative outlet, but alas not enough on the day to craft out a chance. No fault of his. He had plenty of success but cut backs were limited. Gomes, confident in goal, helped as survive any potentially heart in mouth moments. In the end, tbh, I'm happy with the result. Neither side deserved to win it and had, let's say Fulham nicked it, I'd have been furious for what was such a lacklustre game to have allowed a winner to head towards Wembley for the semi-final. Mainly because I'd have looked at our players and questioned their belief and determination to force the issue and score. Losing games of this manner is far more frustrating then losing a ding dong cup tie.

Corluka almost scoring an own-goal and earlier in the game, BAE attempting to be smart in the box and losing the ball - two moments that had me screaming out WTF expletives. Crouchies header and Pav's attempted over-head kick not enough.

Far from over, mind. But Fulham have a mental fixture list in the next few weeks, so as long as we can recover some of our walking wounded and get through our games without any further damage - we should...should be able to get the right result at WHL (Wed 24th).

As important as 4th is, the FA Cup is something I'm desperate for us to win again. Been too long.

Fulham v Spurs - It's Actually Massive

by guest blogger Chrisman

I’m going to lay it on the line here – The F.A. Cup QF against Fulham will be a cracker. It might not have loads of goals, and we might not get either of the results that we want, but it will be good. It will be a rarity – a game between two PL teams desperately wanting to win. And two teams quite reasonably believing they can win.

Roy Hodgson is a manager that I love listening to. He is almost the polar opposite of Harry in his handling of the media. Hodgson will openly, and often quite savagely ridicule the interviewer and his questions. ‘Roy, surely this is a must win game?’ he will be asked. His reply will be something along the lines of ‘Well, what happens if we don’t win? Does the season end? Will Fulham FC automatically self-destruct? Of course we want to win, but no, it’s not a must win’. You can tell he absolutely hates the cliché driven style of football in the British media, and he won’t even play lip service to it. Harry, on the other hand, revels in it.

Both men are actually very similar. The difference in their personas is directly due to the fact that Hodgson has spent the best part of 30 years in management outside England. To a total foreigner coming here, the way the ‘media circus’ exists will be a source of amusement, bafflement and eventual indifference. But because Hodgson is English, and he understands it a bit more, he’s visibly disgusted by it. He doesn’t even make an effort to conceal his total contempt for it. Old Harry, however, doesn’t have that luxury. He has had to play the game over the last 20 years, and he’s played it pretty well. He is so well versed in cliché speak that it’s actually very difficult to tell what he is thinking, about anything, ever. But one thing is certain, and it’s one thing that Harry’s cliché speak and Hodgson’s cynicism cannot overpower – The F.A Cup is a trophy both of these men are still desperate to win.

There won’t be any resting players, no saving it for the league – with 3 of the traditional big 4 already out, this is probably the best chance either team has had of winning the trophy for quite a while. It’s the business end of the tournament, and it’s 2 men at the business end of their careers. Expect both teams to give everything on behalf of the managers and fans.

Pavlyuchenko remains the key man for Spurs. If he plays as well as he has done, we have a great chance. With Defoe probably out, you feel Pav has to score if we are to get a result. And with Huddlestone out, a huge amount of responsibility falls on Modric, and to a lesser extent Kranjcar. Playing against a Fulham midfield that is likely to include Murphy, Gera, Davies and maybe Greening could be a blessing. They have a lot of ball players and not a lot of horsepower in their midfield, which should suit us if we are to play Modric in the middle. Conversely, the battering ram approach of Zamora should suit Dawson’s style. Gomes is going to have to have another good game if we are going to get a result. More of his heroics from the league visit to Craven Cottage are pretty essential.

It’s also to be expected that Smalling and Hangeland won’t have too much trouble dealing with a ‘direct’ approach. What we need is Pav coming deep and linking up with Modric and Kranjcar. If the 3 of them hit it off, we could, against all odds, win the game. If we were to do that, without Defoe and Huddlestone in the team, I think that will give the lads a pretty significant confidence boost for the rest of the season. What’s more likely is a hard fought score draw, then back to the lane for another classic night of mayhem.

Excitement building already. With the battle for the top 4 taking all our attention, this has almost approach unnoticed. But it’s here, an F.A. Cup Quarter Final, and a London Derby to boot. Sexual Chocolate.