When challenged, I wrote: “I don't think Bridge is very good regardless of the salary. This notion that he can save us from the drop seems way wide of the mark to me. No better than Ben Haim, and lacks the versatility is my assessment of the guy. I still keep replaying his performance for Man City against Burnley last season over and over in my head. And how much competitive football has he played this season? There must be a danger that he is ring rusty. He's not getting any younger so the edge may have gone off what little pace he had in the first place. Is he cup tied out of interest?"
Well, now you're going to believe me! Today wasn't all about Bridge - there is a bigger issue than a hopelessly overpaid rank ordinary left back - but he was at fault for ALL THREE Arsenal goals. As debuts go, they don't come much worse than that!
For the first ten minutes, I was asking what the fcuk Bridge thought he was doing. He was playing so close to Upson that they could hold hands with each other, and leaving a third of the pitch for Walcott to wander around in unmarked. There was only going to be one outcome and, sure enough, the ball was played to Walcott and he had 90 minutes to pick his pass before Bridge even thought of closing. The ball to Van Persie was perfect and the Dutchman turned and fired home brilliantly. Tomkins did his best to close the shot and Green tried valiantly to reach it but the execution of both pass and finish were perfect. 1-0.
Goal two and Bridge was TEN YARDS behind the last West Ham defender, playing Van Persie onside on the other side of the pitch. Upson thought he was back at Arsenal and stood with his arm in the air, not believing that a West Ham defender could be so dozy as to play Robin onside when he had started his run fifteen minutes ago. As a result, Van Persie this time had 90 minutes to pick out Walcott, who ran in on the blind side of, you've guessed it, Bridge and buried the chance. 2-0.
Then, a simple ball out to Walcott, who was in yards of space yet again. He ran at Bridge, made it into the box and invited the foul. And Wayne duly obliged. Penalty. 3-0. And Bridge had handed all three on a plate to Arsenal!
£90,000 a week! £90,000 for that! More in wages in six months than a Yank paid for London Bridge! Like I said on Wednesday, "Madness. Sheer bloody madness!"
And what else is there to say about a truly abysmal performance? Blame Grant if you like but what did he have left to pick from? Dear God, Faubert and Kovac actually played quite well - in comparison to the rest, with the honourable exception of Tomkins and Green.
If this is Grant's last game in charge, his penultimate decision was perverse. Why take off Sears when he looked our only decent forward player, especially when Hines was truly hopeless? That one staggered me. Why stay 4-5-1 for so long when it clearly wasn't working, even when Noble came off injured? I was calling at that stage for Boa to go wide left and either Hines or Sears to join Cole up top, but Avram thought he knew better.
We had four chances. Cole made a complete hash of a header after a superb cross by Sears. Hines fired narrowly over after Sears had set up an attack down the left with a lovely flick. Cole was clean through and his shot was blocked far too easily. And Sears forced a save from an intended cross. Apart from that we were hopeless.
The possession count second half was 80-20 in Arsenal's favour. The pass completion rate first half was 199 to 85 in Arsenal's favour. Fabregas touched the ball more times in the first half than the five players in our midfield combined. The gulf in class was huge!
At the end there was no affection for Grant, from the crowd or the players. He is surely on his way out. But can anybody do anything with this shower of shit? I doubt it!
Player ratings: Green 7: Faubert 6, Upon 3, Tomkins 6, Bridge 1; Sears 6, Kovac 6, Spector 1, Noble 4, Hines 1; Cole 2 Subs: Boa 4, Barrera 1
52 comments:
Is that the best you can do? really that is very poor even by your standards? We've heard it all before. You are a one trick pony and nothing more. Bore, Bore, Boring.
very harsh on bridge he werent the one playing RVP onside he was in line with tomkins and he is not match fit we play 4-3-3/4-5-1 and nobody was covering him and he is left to deal with walcott and eboue and i very much doubt we are payimh im 90k a week just because it says it in one paper doesnt make it true
Wasn't the best of debuts BRIDGE played but like you state he is not properly match fit.I rate the player ,he has pace ,works the line well,tracks back well after venturing forward,although today he hardly got forward because we were continually under the cosh.Has an excellent cross whenever I have watched him play .His 2 corners today were good and not a bad freekick either ,so at least we have a decent set-piece taker now.I think he will come good and be an excellent recruit.
A bit harsh on Bridge? They took him off early to put him out of his misery. Hopefully with a bullet to save us £2million in wages!
Why are you such a W@nker - 20:27 is right of course you are a one trick pony. What is the point of winding people up all the time? what do you get out of it? it's not difficult to play devils advocate all the time, even my children can do it and they're only 10 and 12 years old but it's not very clever.
They took him off because he obviously he isn't match fit.
Arsenal fan here. not rubbing it in but i feel sorry for you. That was without doubt the poorest side we've played this season. maybe with piquoinne and parker in the side and martin o neill ye can get out of trouble. but based on todays game i think its going to be a real battle for you to stay in the league.
Which is what I said before he was selected! I quote: "And how much competitive football has he played this season? There must be a danger that he is ring rusty. He's not getting any younger so the edge may have gone off what little pace he had in the first place." I wrote that on Wednesday without seeing him in training! If he is unfit, why did we sign him?
Essex, if he can take direct free kicks, why has he a goal return of six goals in 12 years?
Little pace?! ho ho you might as well through ugly in to the mix too... come on try a different tact, looks like the plebeians have finally seen through you.
The teams he has played for have all been quality sides with a specialist free-kick taker,which is presumably why he doesn't get selected.But he should go to the top of the list in our side.
Plebians? So you recognise me as Caesar? Glad to hear it!
But really HF, why don't you tell us again how gifted a manager Avram Grant is? His only inspiration tonight was to ask Zines and Sears to switch wings! And then, as you point out yourself, he takes Sears off instead of Zines who basically couldn't put a foot right all night! Bridge had a horried game) but at least he had an excuse; he is not match fit. What is the excuse for the rest of them? If Grant had any self respect he would have resigned already rather than hinting to the media that he is staying on. I really want to know whether you also still want him to stay on HF? Please tell us.
No Stech, no Jacobsen, no Ilunga, no Da Costa, no Parker, no Piquionne, no Dyer, no Collison, no Behrami, no Hiztlespurger, no Obinna - and Noble off after 15 minutes. That's an entire team isn't it? So which team would win if they played each other, the side Grant was FORCED to field today or this one:
Stech; Jacobsen, Da Costa, Gabbidon, Ilunga; Dyer, Behrami, Parker,Hitzlespurger, Collison; Piquionne.
You know, I reckon the team unavailable might have scored three just like Arsenal!
He's rusty HF, it's obvious. Couple that with the natural urge of wanting to immediately impress on your debut then you know an accident's going to happen. Headlong and straight in again you are. Never learn. Give the guy some games for goodness sake.
Like you did Ben Haim? And Noble after he was rushed back from an appendix operation? You hypocrite!
We seemed to make the mistake of allowing the game to be played at Arsenal's pace. They were never ruffled out of their comfort zone. I would say tactically we were at zero,and there has to be a question of how fit our players are compared to the rest of the premiership teams.
If I was asked which team I thought was the easiest to beat in the premiership at the moment regrettably it would have be West Ham by a long distance.
Now, now HF, if there is a hypocrite here I don't think it is Stani.
Another black day for the club. What is going on?
Yes, Bridge had a poor game but the match report above is over the top and detracts from other serious shortcomings.
I wonder how the pre match talk went. "Fabregas & Co can play a bit. Don't bother to close them down at all times - stand back and see how it should be done?"
And the substitutions - "Hines obviously needs to stay on the pitch to learn from the experience. Let's take Sears off instead.."
And the tactics - "We're 2-0 down. No point going 4-4-2 to see if we can exploit any holes in their weakened defence. May be bad for our goal difference "
And post match "I'm very happy with the boys"
Perhaps you were spot on with an earlier blog quote HF:
"Sack me? I'll fcuk them!"
The post match interview seemed to centre on the "senior source" leaking rumours to the media.
None of this nonsense helps anyone and is not in the best interests of the club. Hopefully the mole will be smoked out and be given their P45 on Monday morning.
Fanno do ya think we should Bringbackcurbs?
Now that would be the very very very last resort Masty.
0038, I think I cover most of that in the match report. I couldn't deal with post match as I hadn't heard the comments - and still haven't. Do you really think Brady could be given her P45 on Monday?
Really Sav? You obviously haven't been following the debate very closely!
The difference between Bridge and Ben Haim is that Bridge has talent. You can give Ben Haim all the time in the world but he will not be good.
As for Noble; I didn't criticise him for playing poor immediately after his operation only. I've criticised him long before that, long after that (i.e now) and all with sound footballing reasoning. So you've pooed there.
Two questions for you by the way: 1) is Bridge a better left back than BenHaim? 2) Is O'Neil a better manager than Grant?
Can you check your spam for me, I'm missing a comment on the O'Neil and West Ham disunited post.
Sav,
Thanks mate. I hope HF gains the human touch, some contrition, and restores people's faith in him. I did tell him you only lose a good reputation once, and he needs to change because it's not good to be a person who people will no longer take the opinion of seriously. And if he says he doesn't care, well he should care because that should be the whole point of this blog.
Two answers
1) Bridge is a better left back than Ben Haim, marginally. Ben Haim is unquestionably a better centre back than Bridge. Ben Haim was being paid less than half Bridge's wages and offered much more versatility. Question back, could Ben Haim have played WORSE than Bridge yesterday? Another question, has Ben Haim cost us three goals in a single game this season?
Yes O'Neill is, I think, a better manager than Grant but will he join us - he hasn't yet - and will he be able to work with Sullivan and Gold? Unlikely. Another question, can ANYBODY manage this hopeless, spiritless bunch? Zola left a mess. O'Neill spent £12million on Harewood and Reo-Coker! Another question, how is he going to cope within the financial realities at West Ham if he joins?
I suspect he has had a rethink. I don't expect O'Neill to join. I may be wrong and I will back him if he joins, just like I have backed Grant and I backed Zola. Any manager needs some time to prove himself.
How could any manager anywhere have properly prepared for a match in such circumstances? How could the players go out there and perform at all without knowing if their manager was going to be there at the final whistle? This match was a write off hours before it began, luckily it was Arsenal and not Wigan/Wolves or any other relegation battler as we would have lost to them today. Just sack the guy or make it clear that he is being backed because the entire club, playing group and all is suffering.
Did you check the spam?
Yes. Same rules apply to all. If you wish to engage in the debate, fine. If it is a case of hurling insults, then it isn't worth publishing.
There are still plenty of debating points that you have still not addressed Stani. How about dealing with them, rather than allowing a guy who has abused you so often in the past to make you look foolish, by flattering you into siding with him because he thinks it is a way of getting at me? I would have thought you too intelligent for that!
So, I have asked you some questions about Bridge and Ben Haim...
I'm on my phone at the moment. Of course I will answer
What insult? Stop lying. It was a perfectly reasonable comment, especially compared to the ones you allow through against me. What's happened to your freedom of speech policy?
I do wish you would stop accusing me of lying. I do not lie. Your submission offered nothing to the debate and was insulting. You have absolute freedom of speech when it comes to issues.
As for insults directed at you, at certain anonymous poster originates a lot of them and you were thanking him in your comment! That was stupid and vain I'm afraid and I was protecting you from looking foolish by not publishing your comment. The person concerned is a rascist and would love to read you thanking him, given the invective he has directed at you in the past.
"Question back, could Ben Haim have played WORSE than Bridge yesterday? Another question, has Ben Haim cost us three goals in a single game this season?"
You answered these yourself by agreeing that Bridge is a better left back then BenHaim so your questions have no purpose. Bridge needs game time, so it was no point not playing him. Plus we were hardly going to beta Arsenal. And it was Grant's decision to lay him so if you are criticising his purchase and selection then you're stuck there too.
"Another question, how is [O'Neil] going to cope within the financial realities at West Ham if he joins?"
Once again you have answered this by agreeing that O'Neil is a better manager. If he s a better manager then he will not only cope better with the limited funds but will also get more out of the players we have. Why? Because we have both agreed, he is a better manager.
How do you know it is the same guy? And youre stopping someone from making me look foolish? Haha, I dont believe that for a second. But you have no right to make that decision anyway. You would love for someone to make me look foolish so I dont believe that excuse.
I thank everyone who compliments me, but like I have said previously, I stay wary. Nothing wrong with being well-mannered though. If he wants to be like that then good luck to him! And if he does gain pleasure from it, how sad and fake is that?
So you've allowed someone to call you a twat and let that comment through but you dont allow my perfectly reasonable comment through? It wasnt insulting. You did not let it through because it was the truth, and the truth hurts HF. Double standards. I never believed people who said that you used to moderate their comments unfairly, but I guess I was wrong.
*beat
*play (woops!)
Obvious and tiresome evasion. Sadly this is becoming a trademark Stani. So, lets try to get there in stages shall we?
1. Can an inferior player sometimes play better than a superior player? To answer no to this would be absurd because EVERY contest in sport would then be predictable. But still, answer the question.
2. Does it therefore matter who is superior in ability when answering the question, could Ben Haim have played any worse than Bridge yesterday? If you have answered question one correctly, this answer is obvious. But still, answer the question.
3. You have not answered if Ben Haim has cost us three goals in any single game this season. Please do so.
4. I said that Bridge is a MARGINALLY better left back and that Ben Haim offers more in terms of versatility. I also pointed out that Ben Haim was costing us less than half of Bridge's salary. Tell me, what is better, paying everything to Bridge as a marginally better left back or using half Bridge's wages to pay Ben Haim, and the other half to pay a player we desperatelly need in an alternative position? Maybe ANOTHER left back and a forward even?
5. What happens if Upson or Tomkins are injured? Do you want Reid at centre back? Wouldn't Ben Haim be a better bet? Bridge can't play there can he? What if Tomkins AND Upson are both injured? The way things are going, that seems quite likely! Bridge at centre back? Fancy that? The point about Ben Haim is that he is versatile as a defender, he can cover all across the back four as he has already shown at West Ham. Can Bridge play right back and centre half? God help us if we have to use him there, he doesn't even seem to understand positional discipline for what is supposed to be his strongest position!
6. With regards to the decision to sign Bridge, I do not believe for a minute that this was down to Grant. He knows Ben Haim and appears to trust him. Given the rumours, do you think Grant is being consulted about transfer policy? You claimed the Davids undermined Zola. I don't remember Zola being undermined to the same extent as Grant was undermined yesterday! But good on Grant, he maintained dignity whilst still
having his say. He hasn't run off home to Israel in the same way as Zola ran off to Sardinia has he?
7. I said that O'Neill is probably the better manager but his transfer dealings at Villa were, on the whole poor. He went because of the debt mountain HE built up and left because Learner said, enough is enough. Could he cope with a situation where he has nothing to spend? I'm not sure. We only saw the Villa kids AFTER O'Neill left. I'm not saying he was wrong to go with experience, results suggest he was right to do so. But at West Ham, we expect the kids to get a chance. If he sticks a cork in the Academy pipeline, he will be hated.
I let the twat comment through because it was witty and accurate! I am not as precious as you Stani, I can laugh at myself.
Your comments were untrue and spiteful. They were beneath you. And they had no relevance to the article. His comments did, they actually referred to the article.
I know it is the same person. And he has played you in way that is frankly embarrassing. Your vanity stood in the way of sound judgement. Don't align yourself with Satan to win a battle Stani, Allah will ensure you lose the war. You know that better than I do!
Are you purposely asking me silly questions so I return because I dont wann any more. You abuse people and bring up their faith and also moderate their replies unfairly.
My comment was witty and more accurate. The whole reason you did not publish it because it was accurate. So you only let comments through that refer to the article? Rubbish.
Played me? I couldnt care less about his games...or your games...these small minded things dont bother me. I'm a straight person. I thanked someone who complimented me. If he wants to be sly, his problem. God is great.
My vanity? It just shows all this time and you do not know a thing about me.
1. Can an inferior player sometimes play better than a superior player?
Yes, as a superior player can play worse, as did Bridge against Arsenal. I didnt disagree with that.
2. could Ben Haim have played any worse than Bridge yesterday?
Of course he could have as the notion above proves. Whether he would have, we have no idea.
3.
He has played as bad as Bridge played yesterday in my opinion. Will Bridge continue to cost us like that? No. Why? Because WE agree he is better than BenHaim. You say a bit, I say vastly.
4.
BenHaim is not good enough. He has been not good enough at every Premiership team he has been at. I do not know what you see in him.
5.
No I wouldnt want Reid at centre back, but you would have to ask Grant why he wasted £4m on him when we could have got a defender that was ready. But now Bridge is here, I would have Gabbidon play in centre half ahead on BenHiam anyway. We have DaCosta to come back too and both Gabbidon and DaCosta are better than BenHaim in the middle.
6.
Probably not. Bridge was probably told of Grant's sacking which is why he signed. Which says a lot.
Did Gold and Sullivan undermine Grant yesterday? No, Have you seen Gold and Sullivan in the press doing to Grant what they did to Zola? No. No comparison.
7.
O'Neil might not be perfect, be we agree he is better than Grant. I'm not saying he would be my first choice.
My reaction to thanking him was an innocent one. And you accuse me of vanity? But I guess that's just you HF. You see something good and you wanna bring it down to your level just to make yourself feel better. Even if things/people seem too good to be true, it does not mean they are. I don't care what you think of me. God is great. He knows me better than I know myself, and certainly better than you think you know me.
Still evading questions, still having hissy fits when backed into a corner, still taking extreme and irrational umbrage. Take a chill pill Stani, you need one. Life isn't as serious as you make it. learn to laugh at yourself before you explode with virtuous passion. You won't answer my questions because you are in a corner. And everytime you back yourself into a corner you hurl insults and flounce off. It is getting a bit pathetic. There are so many questions you have left unanswered because you can't answer them. And I'm not just talking about questions on this blog!
Remember, you have flounced off from other blogs and forums in the past. Everybody, it seems, is out to get Stani. Why the persecution complex? Why the inability to laugh at yourself? Why does every debate have to become a slanging match? Why the language of hatred? The accusations of lying? The thing is, the small minded things hurt you like hell, because every prick is felt as a stab. Why?
That's better! Answers. I will read them and get back to you!
1. On the contrary, you said, "You answered these yourself by agreeing that Bridge is a better left back then BenHaim so your questions have no purpose." So, there is a point to my question if an inferior player can outperform a superior player. You now concede that point. Good. I will read your next reply.
2 & 3. You avoid the question still. Has Ben Haim cost us three goals in a single game this season? Please answer that question.
Try answering this one. Had Ben Haim played worse than Bridge, would it have mattered? We lost 3-0 because of Bridge! Would you rather pay £40,000 for a crap performance or £90,000 for a crap performance?
God AF you are boring - you're are as boring as an amateur historian.
4. Bridge has not been good enough you mean. He was a reserve at Chelsea and a reserve at Man City. City have bought three players for his position since Bridge arrived! He wasn't even third choice this season! You do not address the salary question. Please do so. Why pay £90,000 a week for an ordinary left back instead of £40,000 to a slightly below ordinary left back? Why not invest that money in another player?
5. Gabbidon cannot play two games in a week apparently so answer the question. Is Ben Haim more versatile than Bridge? Simple yes or no.
6. Absurd self contradictory argument. In one breath you say Bridge was TOLD Grant had been sacked and in the next you claim Grant was not undermined. Truly absurd. Admit to the inconsistency please. It is this sort of doublespeak that makes you Orwellian my friend. But then religion adores Big Brother! Allah is watching you!
7. Who would be YOUR first choice? And does it matter if everything is truly at the will of Allah? I don't mean this facetiously. I have asked you before, genuinely, what is the point of individual decision making if EVERYTHING is at the will of Allah. But that aside, WHO would YOU give the job to and why? Why not make the case in an article?
Who the Hell is this AF guy?
'Ammersfan
LOL very good. A REAL cockney geezer in our midst.
Evading questions? Having hissy fits? Hahaha. I couldnt be more chilled right now! You have just described yourself in all that. Not sure where you get these impressions from...but then again, you have a habit of reading things wrong. I really am more laid back than you think I am...or Muslims are, for that matter.
"flounced off from other blogs and forums in the past"
Hahahaha! Astonishing. Just because I left Dale's blog, you conclude this! The reason you have come to this conclusion is because this is YOU!
Life is dead serious mate. You dont think so because you live in your ivory tower. You wake up, and your sole purpose is 'where is my next bit of pleasure coming from?'. Whether it's food, drink, sex, football or whatever.
"That's better! Answers. I will read them and get back to you!"
Thats right, wait and dont be so highly strung. Take a chill pill and dont always be ready to take extreme and irrational umbrage.
1. My God.
So what makes the superior player superior? He is more consistently good. Therefore, it doesnt matter what BenHaim would have done in one game. Bridge is better. You said so.
2. 3.
The question was answered! You could have easily worked it out! But it is a pointless question anyway, because Bridge didnt cost us 3 goals by himself did he? If you say he did, then you may as well say Grant did by playing him.
"Would you rather pay £40,000 for a crap performance or £90,000 for a crap performance?"
We agreed Bridge is a better play. He will not be crap every week. WE AGREED! So I would rather pay and play Bridge. Pointless argument HF. What is wrong with you? I'm astonished youre taking such naive positions on these points. You're just purposely wasting my time arent you?
4.
Bridge has not been good enough for top clubs...just. We're not a top club. But you said Bridge is better than BenHaim anyway.
I have no idea how much Bridge is getting paid or who is paying him. Whatever it is, it cant be as bad as paying BenHaim, even a penny! :)
5.
I've not seen Bridge play in other positions so cannot say with any proof. He's a better left back though and thats what we needed. Jack of all and master of none is what applies to BenHaim so I'm not sure why you are making it out that he is good because he is versatile. He was played in different positions because he's never been good enough to oust others in his preferred position which is why he was put in other positions as last resort.
6.
Astonishing. How is it contradictory? I said Grant was not undermined in the press like Zola was BY GOLD AND SULLIVAN. This has not happened with Grant. Accept that you clearly read it wrong please.
7.
God has given man free will.
My choice...it's a difficult one. We may need two managers in quick succession (one to escape relegation, the next to build) or one that will keep us up and have the ability to change and manage in the other way and build a club which competes for Europe. Kinda what Redknapp is about. Grant certainly cannot do either. Can O'Neill do it? Well he has been at small clubs as well as big so he may be better than the credit I give him. So maybe it's our club's situation which is more not suited to O'Neil, than O'Neil not suited to us. But there are not many to pick from out there.
Am I allowed to leave now or is there anything else I can help you with? And you should post my other comment. Even if you wanna edit the bit you dont like.
Post a Comment