Pretty much any Zoltan Gera performance you care to mention this season has involved lots of tentative short passes. He has been ineffective.
Then this happened against Arsenal:
What’s this all about? Better teammate runs? Nobody defending him? Confidence from the Man City Thunderbolt of Thunderbolts?
Who knows?
But if he plays like this he’s a big asset to the side.
I should preface this by saying that Andrei Arshavin is one of my favourite footballers. He’s got it all, scores goals, makes them, and one of those players you just can’t pin down.
However, one lesson we learn watching football every week is that even the best players aren’t great every time they take to the field. And yesterday Andrei Arshavin just wasn’t interested. John Paintsil (above) kept a close eye on him early on, a number of passes that could have come his way didn’t, and by half time you sensed that he had half a mind on his dinner.
Vito Mannone. New kid in goal. He looked sober, calm, businesslike, confident. He wore a turquoise top and turquoise shorts, his black hair shiny in the evening haze, his eyebrows visible from distance. He looked like a guy who had learned to roll with the punches. He looked about as inconspicuous as a tarantula on a slice of toast.
Johnson header, Mannone paws it out. Dempsey bundles it back, hits Mannone on the head. Gera shoots, Mannone stretches and flips it wide. Johnson header again, Mannone beats it out again. Dempsey crosses it back, nobody’s there. *Zamora* header, point blank this one, Mannone in the way again. Some keeper. Some day.
Mannone, Mannone, Mannone. What did we ever do to you?
Fulham deserved so much and got nothing. But it was the Fulham we wanted, spurred into life by a poor trip to Wolverhampton and the reserves’ fine performance at Man City during the week. This time Danny Murphy bossed things, the forwards hustled, Clint Dempsey bustled, and Zoltan Gera (yes, Zoltan Gera) had a belter of a game. Gera was A1 in defence, making some fine tackles and denying Andre Arshavin a goal with a ludicrously daring six yard box challenge. But he also had his game going forwards, turning out of tight spaces, taking care in possession (the criticism of late) and whipping in some devilishly good crosses. If he plays like this he’s going to be an automatic selection. But he has to play like this more.
Arsenal brought something to the game too, of course, with the wonderful loping runs of Abou Diaby, slicing through gaps with awesome power and speed, the compact sensibilities of Alexander Song, who looks to have it all, and that menacing Robin van Persie, around whom you can never relax.
It was van Persie who decided the encounter, a diagonal run taking him behind Hangeland and onto a clever Fabregas chip. From there, despite Hughes’ attention, van Persie controlled and fired low past Schwarzer’s right hand, a sucker punch after all our good work and a scarcely deserved lead. Sure, Arsenal were much improved in the second half, but they had to be and Schwarzer still had relatively little to do.
This type of game brings us all kinds of frustrations. Why can’t we play like this at Wolves? Why can’t we play like this anywhere but Craven Cottage? Why is it always our forwards getting spectacularly denied, while other teams seem to bury loose chances? But these frustrations are softened after a good performance, and we must hope that there’s something in the locker for West Ham next Sunday, another traditionally difficult game.
You know when you’re watching a game… and certain players make the experience really unpleasant?
Robin van Persie always seems to be unusually busy against Fulham, peppering our goal with shots from start to end.
I’ve left games against Arsenal and found Robin van Persie stuck in my mind like an unwanted tv jingle.
Or more like a nightmare that you can’t wake up from.
Brrrr. I hope he doesn’t play.
Balance is crucial for sportsmen. By balance I don’t mean staying upright, but a sort of internal synergy that gets everything working as it ought to.
I recently read a good book about running, “Born to Run” by Christopher Macdougall. Among other things Macdougall talks to and about ultra-runners, people who do 50 mile runs, and sometimes more than double that. Macdougall discusses running styles, and one of his subjects is Chi running.
The basic technique is the following: you lean slighly forward (while maintaining your good posture) and allow gravity to pull you forward. Then you catch yourself with your feet. However, your foot should land mid-foot, rather than on your toe or heel, which lessens the force on the lower part of your body.
If you land with your heel out in front of your body, your feet are in effect stopping your forward momentum: they’re landing in front of your center of gravity. In addition, all of that force comes up your legs and you knees get much of the impact. That’s why people get bad knees from running with a heel strike.
When you’re moving from your center and allowing the rest of your body to relax, your running is more efficient.
I’ve a book on Chi running too, and have done some preliminary trials of this leaning forwards lark. It really does seem to work. For whatever reason your body becomes greater than the sum of its parts. Efficiency is the word.
It works in cricket too.
This is Podington. I remember Podington because it’s where I hit the greatest shot of my life. I was about seventeen I suspect, and that year was using a light bat. It was a Gunn & Moore Maestro, a lovely piece of willow, but being that bit lighter, it was causing me trouble. I used to have a Graham Gooch approach to batting I think, keep it simple, straight bat, straight drives, flicks around the corner, the odd short arm pull shot. All of these worked pretty well throughout my teens, until the year I got my Maestro. None of the old shots worked quite as well. The bat was swishing through the air too fast, I was getting leading edges galore, getting bowled attempting pull shots (out in front), all sorts. By the time we played Podington, late in the season, I was averaging about 10, I’d lost my confidence and generally felt like a bit of a waste of space.
So there I was, using this bat that I’d grown to hate, batting 7 or something, as the day turns into evening and the match isn’t doing much at all. The opposing fast bowler hurtles in, I try to keep my mind quiet (story of my life!), scratch around for a few balls and look genuinely ungainly, then here comes a half volley, and without even trying my bat pushes out and sends the ball back, high and long, and into the field over mid off. It was a massive hit, a hit I’ve never come close to replicating, amid the worst run of form I’d ever had, off a bloody good bowler, and somehow I’d pinged it into a nearby field. I got out soon after and continued to play like crap for the rest of the year, but that one shot… it stays with me now.
I never did know how it happened until years later. My mate Dan was bought a cricket lesson by his girlfriend and I tagged along. If this sounds like a bad present, really it wasn’t. The pro at Ealing, a young saffer with two people’s worth of shoulders and that confident way they have, was giving lessons to the public and in about two seconds he told me what I was doing wrong. Walking into my shots, he said. Don’t move that back foot. Keep it still, and the rest of your body will be anchored, and this’ll create power in your driving. I didn’t even realise I wasn’t doing this, so it took a bit of an adjustment, but after a few hits I realised he was right. Somehow this little thing had completely sorted out my timing. Balls were flying without effort. I never hit another Podington six, but at least I finally understood how it had happened. Balance. For that one moment, completely by accident, my body had operated as a perfect spring, transferring power wonderfully efficiently from my legs, hips, trunk, shoulders, arms, wrists, hands, bat, ball, field. A miracle given my form, mental state and ability, but it happened and I remember it like it was yesterday.
Zoltan Gera’s had a bad season by his own standards.
Caught that one alright though didn’t he? Better than that. He’ll never hit a shot that well again. Nobody will. It was perfect. Balance, control, wallop. Wallop, wallop, wallop. You can’t hit the ball that hard, you can’t beat a keeper like Shay Given from there, you can’t make the ball bounce out of a net! Zoltan Gera did it last night. That’s sport, where little glimpses of perfection turn up when you least expect them, with wonderful, wonderful results. Wallop.
Normally we wouldn’t mind going out of the Coca-Cola cup, but for the first time in a long time Fulham are able to rest the first team without punting the game, and it has been refreshing to see the likes of Baird and Smalling show what they’re made of. I’m sure this isn’t the last we’ll see of Squad II, but even so, I’m still saddened by its departure, however temporary it may be.
Last night’s game was, by all accounts (we had to ‘make do’ with Gentleman Jim on the radio and the goals on Sky Sports later) a fair old tussle, with Man City putting out a full-strength (read: bloody good) side and (given Fulham’s selection) presumably anticipating a goalscoring extravaganza. Well we saw something special alright, but it came from the much maligned right boot of Zoltan Gera, a thumping volley from long range that somehow reminded me of an ice hockey goal. In football there is a theoretical limit to how hard a ball can be struck, and therefore how far away a player can score from via brute force alone. But somehow Gera’s strike rubbished all that, and hurtled past Shay Given like a furiously struck puck, passing over ice at frightening speed and whirring past the keeper before his reactions could register the need to do something about it.
As best we can tell Squad II did a fair job of keeping City’s stars quiet, but conceded an equaliser when David Stockdale came for a corner that soared on past his outstretched arm and onto the head of Gareth Barry, who nodded home. The game went into extra time and City scored again when Kolo Toure headed in from another corner. Shame.
We only have Gentleman Jim’s feedback to go on, but Chrises Baird and Smalling again received rave reviews, the former for his unflappable excellence, the latter for a precocity not seen in a Fulham centre-back for… well, who knows? Beyond that Kagiso Dikjacoi came on after 71 minutes and seemed to have a stormer for the rest of the game, and Jim was also positive about David Elm, who joined in at the start of extra time. We’ve also had a look at David Stockdale, who seems promising, and Greening, Riise and Gera have all had an opportunity to see proper match action. Simon Davies moves nearer to full fitness, at which point he’ll revert to being one of our key players. It’s all good.
The obvious question then is how many of a reserve team that can hold Manchester City deserve promotion into a first team last seen bungling a trip to Wolverhampton. The standout player has been Chris Baird, who, well as he is playing, will not displace Hughes and Hangeland in the forseeable future. Simon Davies should play as soon as he’s fit (Clint might be due a rest, and we’ve been saying that for months now), but the really interesting question is whether Danny Murphy’s recent form is indicative of anything other than an early season injury and teams wising up to his importance to us. If he doesn’t start playing better the team may need fresh impetus in the middle of the park. Whether that means squeezing Duff, Davies and Dempsey into one midfield remains to be seen, but Dikjacoi will have done himself no harm with such a bright start and Jonathan Greening can play at this level. In short, we have depth and competition in defence and midfield. But up front? Not so much. Nevermind though, this team looks reasonably well set for a long season.
No Diomansy tonight. Because Eddie Johnson is leading the line! Wicked. Eddie may not get many opportunities but I remain convinced of his awesomeness, at least on a theoretical level.
Meanwhile, Jonathan Wilson has an article up about tactics.
He asks if the sweeper might come back, but the article is really about space. (On a football pitch)
More recently, the attacking full-back has become increasingly important. Ashley Cole’s performance for Chelsea on Sunday showed exactly the damage such a player can cause if he can dominate an essentially attacking wide midfielder – Aaron Lennon in this case – and then exploit his lack of defensive ability. Their rise, as predicted by Jack Charlton after the 1994 World Cup, stems from the fact that when 4–4–2 meets 4–4–2, they are the only players on the pitch with space in front of them, as centre-backs pick up centre-forwards and four-man midfields tend to cancel each other out.
This is something we have discussed before, but it’s nice to see Wilson confirming things.
Already other effects are beginning to be seen that hint at what the future may hold. The question is always where is the space, and two trends have begun to emerge. The first involves the wide forwards. If they are tight against the full-back high up the field, there is no space, but if they drop deeper, whether the full-back follows or not, space is opened on the diagonal in to goal.
This is where Demps and Duffer come in. Zamora and Johnson drag defenders away, wide men cut in, GOAL! Ideally, anyway.
I remember someone – and I really can’t remember who – saying that you focus on your weaknesses after wins and on your strengths after defeats.
You can’t take this too literally, but as a general principle it’s probably not bad is it?
Man City tomorrow night. Good chance for Diomansy and his crew to make a point.
Last year we justified the lack of goals by pointing to a cast iron defensive record. The idea was (correctly, I think) that because the midfielders are more defensive than attacking our men are behind the ball in transition and neither team scores many.
This year’s been a bit of a bugger, in that we’ve already allowed 7 goals. This isn’t extortionate by any means – it’s not too bad at all – but the goals have been a bit soft.
We’ve already allowed three from set pieces. Last year this didn’t happen too much. Cahill v Everton, Paintsil v Villa, Doyle v Wolves. All set pieces, all avoidable.
Worse, our vaunted midfield shield has been breached four times. Regard:
For the Wolves goal (top) Clint Dempsey managed to wipe out a compact four in one careless moment. You can see everyone well set to deal with most things, but in playing the ball as he did all four midfielders were caught on the wrong side of the ball. The last thing Roy wants is his back four having to come out and tackle. Ideally the midfield deals with this, the back four keeps its shape, and trouble is averted. The moment our midfield all gets goal side we’re in trouble.
The second goal here, Agbonlahor’s for Villa, shows this too. Jon Greening loses out, and from then there’s nobody home to deal with Agbonlahor’s run until Aaron Hughes leaves his station, fractionally late. It still took a belter of a shot to get by Schwarzer, but there was nobody in that space protecting the back four once Greening had been taken out of the game.
Chelsea we might be kinder, but the two goals still came the same way, with passes finding players between our lines of four, meaning the midfield was chasing and the defence caught out between going out and staying back. Both of the goals came this way, and while they were from nice Chelsea moves, both were sourced in that supposedly secure area between our midfield and defence.
So that’s seven goals conceded in ways we would really not be happy about. Does it mean anything? Probably not – it’s been a tough enough start – but Roy will have been disappointed with every one of these seven goals. It’s been an up and down start, just as it was last year, but people are, I think, fretting about the wrong things: if there’s a warning sign (and again, I’m sure there’s no reason to panic) it’s not that we’re still firing blanks (although that’s not a good thing) but that our rock solid defence is shipping quite soft goals.
A lacklustre performance and a suitably poor result against one of the division’s weaker teams. For the first hour especially we were utterly aimless, and from that there was no coming back.
The first goal was soft and most unlike our usually solid defence. A Delap-esque long throw-in was flicked on to Doyle who, somehow unmarked from three yards out, couldn’t miss. Elsewhere in the first half, Wolves had a few other half-chances but were more eager than threatening; Fulham couldn’t even manage that. Our strike partnership saw very little of the ball and were ineffective when they did. Murphy was off form again and getting frustrated – outwardly with the referee but probably, in reality, with himself. Only Duff looked lively for the whites – indeed it was difficult to believe that ten of these eleven players were rested in Europe on Thursday in order to prepare properly for this game.
At the beginning of the second half Dempsey’s poor header in a dangerous area lead to a Wolves breakaway and a second, well-taken goal – although again the scorer was unmarked in the box. The golden stadium danced in celebration: we looked dead and buried. But the game was changed when finally Hodgson switched our wingers to their ‘proper’ sides: Davies came on for the anonymous Dempsey and Duff moved to left, where he immediately began to have more impact.
Soon, Davies played Johnson in on the right his low centre provoked Mancienne into dragging Zamora to the floor. Penalty, dispatched with usual confidence by Murphy. Wolves were now nervous and our pressure grew without us ever really turning it on. It was scrappy and low on quality, but a point looked possible. In amongst it all, Zamora wasted two chances with woeful control and rounded off his day by clumsily blocking Duff’s goalbound shot.
Wolves hung on and were deserved victors. Let’s hope this was an off-day.
Ukraine have beaten Portugal 5-4 to win the 2009 Homeless World Cup in Milan.
What is the Homeless World Cup?
The Homeless World Cup is an annual, international football tournament, uniting teams of people who are homeless and excluded to take a once in a lifetime opportunity to represent their country and change their lives forever. It has triggered and supports grass roots football projects in over 60 nations working with over 25,000 homeless and excluded people throughout the year.
The first tournament took place in Graz 2003 uniting 18 national teams. 6 years on 56 nations were united for Melbourne 2008, which included the first Women’s Cup. We are on the road to Milan 2009 from 6-13 September.
The impact is consistently significant year on year with 73% of players changing their lives for the better by coming off drugs and alcohol, moving into jobs, education, homes, training, reuniting with families and even going on to become players and coaches for pro or semi-pro football teams.
Previous venues:
* Graz 2003
* Gothenburg 2004
* Edinburgh 2005
* Cape Town 2006
* Copenhagen 2007
* Melbourne 2008
And now Milan 2009. It all sounds like a great tournament. You can see the Flickr photostream here, and it’s worth having a good rummage. Also the website has a run-down on all the group games, etc. England seem to have done alright in the groups to begin with, but couldn’t get out of the second group stage. Brazil beat Nigeria in the 3rd/4th place playoff.
Our pals at Soccerpro.com have teamed up with Calle to make this limited edition Homeless World Cup t-shirt. All revenues go to The Homeless World Cup.
An emphatic case of job done. Roy Hodgson’s Fulham XI, featuring only John Paintsil of our regular lineup, produced a fine containing effort and will be well pleased with this point. You want to start a group stage well and we’ve done just that. With some good home performances we may yet progress.
It’s quite hard to judge the performance today. On the one hand, CSKA Sofia looked ordinary, beatable; on the other, our second string went to Bulgaria and more than earned a point. So while the team looked fairly dysfunctional in many ways, we cannot underestimate their achievement.
Good teams, so we all now believe, are strong up the middle. Today’s Fulham lineup was driven by rookie goalkeeper David Stockdale, even rookier centre-back Chris Smalling, steady Chris Baird, Jonathan Greening, Bjorn Helge Riise, Erik Nevland and Diomansy Kamara. That’s not a spine that you’d be overly confident in, and in truth these players had mixed games. Kamara and Baird were head and shoulders above any other Fulham players, but Chris Smalling at times looked like a very young centre-back in his second senior game, Erik Nevland had a fairly typical Nevland game (a bit of good hard running but little to show for it and long periods of isolation), and Greening and Riise… well this is the hardest part of the team to rate. Greening, I suspect, played quite well, but the midfield really failed to link defence and attack, and a lot of that was surely the absence of an Etuhu/Murphy combination to keep things ticking along.
Too often our passing was long and hopeful. People frequently bemoan Etuhu and Murphy’s tendency to pass short to one another, but you can see why this is not wasted effort. By keeping the ball, keeping things simple, somehow the team settles, possession develops, moves start. Greening and Riise popped up around the pitch and both had moments of interesting play, but as a combination they lacked a calling card, a strength. It didn’t help that they were flanked by a recovering Davies and an out of form Gera, the latter playing so raggedly that it’s tempting to wonder if he hasn’t picked up some kind of injury. Zoltan Gera is a good footballer. Zoltan Gera is not playing good football. Why?
CSKA were average in the first half and could only manage a few longish shots at David Stockdale, none of which looked dangerous. They had some joy down the flanks, where John Paintsil was caught out a couple of times and Stephen Kelly, on his wrong wing, had a minor nightmare, but Chris Baird generally dealt with anything that came his way. In the end Fulham could have scored on the verge of half time, but between them Greening and Davies didn’t come up with anything convincing and the moment was lost.
In the second half CSKA made a couple of changes with two Brazilian substitutes (one named Michel Platini). As Gera and Kelly continued their horror show, Chris Smalling got himself booked for very little, and you sensed growing menace. Sure enough a goal followed, one sub chesting down to the other, Smalling wasn’t quite close enough and the ball was skilfully volleyed beyond a helpless Stockdale.
It had been coming and Fulham needed to bounce straight back. This they duly did, Nevland helping the ball over the top, Joe Kamara skating through, round the keeper 25 yards out and over a sliding defender for 1-1. It was a beautifully neat goal, Kamara bringing order to a chaotic breakaway with some nifty footwork and an impressively calm finish; how he deserved the goal. All game he had dropped back, picked up the ball in congested areas and accelerated out of trouble. He led the line well, got the team/individualism balance about right (we must remember that he and Nevland were quite isolated, so a degree of improvisation was required), and perhaps put in his most impressive shift in a Fulham shirt.
Stockdale made a name for himself with 15 minutes left. A mishit cross caught Baird and Kelly with arms aloft and feet still, and a CSKA forward had a free swing from six yards out. Stockdale arched his back like Neville Southall and flipped the shot over the bar, a certain goal turned into a corner kick. What a save! What a save. Good for him. Life sometimes throws you opportunities; the lad’s taking his very nicely.
At the end of an absorbing contest we’re about where we’d want to be, I suspect. Roy Hodgson will have enjoyed the chance to look at his squad, and he’ll have seen his young ‘keeper developing, his utility defender showing a reassuring excellence, and his livewire forward show why he’s such an important member of this squad. Elsewhere, Simon Davies is a step nearer to full fitness and Chris Smalling has 90 first team minutes on file. Beyond that we must be content that the squad players are as good a set of squad players as we’ve seen for a while. We’re progressing well.
It’ll be Operation 0-0 I’m sure, and in that respect the names of those men behind the ball are less important than would be the case if we were planning on attacking. As it is, Nevland and Kamara (the assumed starting pair) are good on the counter anyway, so I can’t see any issue with Roy’s hints here.
Lork posted the following on TiFF. Which is great because I hadn’t seen replays of any of the goals. Nice.
One of the nice things about Damien Duff is that he appears willing to try things in the final third. Poor old Zoltan Gera thoroughly lost his way in the end, but as the diagram below shows, Duff got the ball into the box a fair amount on Sunday. Gera (I’ve got the Chelsea game here simply because I’ve shown his Portsmouth board before) wasn’t doing this.
A fair few of Duff’s are corners, but a fair few aren’t. On a team like ours where attacking gumption is not common, you need someone like this, someone who can take the initiative, get where it hurts, and make things happen. Looks like an astute signing already, no?
In order:
were we playing 4-2-4?
Dickson Etuhu: doesn’t just pass to Danny Murphy
Danny Murphy: does pass to Dickson Etuhu
Conclusion: it’s their job to pass to each other.
Match stats: at last we get some shots on target! About time. A coincidence that this happens with our full-backs really attacking Everton? (incidentally, Leon Osman hardly got a kick all game – 10 passes made (Pienaar 35 down the other side) – which is testament to something or other)
There’s a title you never thought you’d see.
Does anyone with a good understanding of basketball and maybe its history feel able to draw a parallel between the center (sic) position in baseketball (now and in the past) and the role of the non-scoring forward?
I was just thinking… the center in basketball is clearly a focal point of attacks, but in most cases (it being rare to find someone that big who’s also a big scorer) his role is a facilitator, on any number of levels. It seems similar to the Heskey/Zamora debate in principle. Any suggestions?
Five things from yesterday:
David Stockdale
I don’t think we could have expected much more from the lad. Nothing he could have done about the Cahill header, and whatever else came his way he dealt with nicely. The early deflected shot could have made him look silly but he kept it out (and diverted it out of harm’s way), and he made a nice save late on as well. In between his kicking was good fun (there are few things I enjoy more in football than good, old fashioned hoofs). Well done, David.
Centre-backs
This was another thing I really enjoyed. All game long we had Zamora and various Everton defenders really giving it some, massive effort from all parties. Distin and Yobo are a fair pairing and the way our front two didn’t give up, kept on working and eventually made some space was great to see.
Meanwhile, at the other end, Hughes and Hangeland had cracking games. Aaron Hughes made a couple of absolutely vital interventions. His reading of the game and speed off the mark can be first class. A good day for centre-back fans.
Diagonal runs
Also a good day for fans of wide-men cutting in. Everton had Pienaar and Osman, two of my favourite players, and both had moments where they really nearly broke through (Hughes – I think – stopped them both). These two are quick and nimble, and make wonderful runs diagonally through opposing defences. It’s really hard to pick these up but we just about got away with it.
Going the other way it was nice to see Dempsey given his left-wing position back. I’ve mentioned this before, but I think he’s earned the right to keep his place out there, as the cutting in and let fly approach seems quite dangerous. He had several long range efforts yesterday, and while nothing came of them, if we can get him the ball in the area just outside the D then he’ll score a lot of goals. He’ll also put away a header or two before long – he’s won several in the last couple of games but not made them count.
On the other side, Damien Duff made a good fist of being a right-winger, and his goal was a nice way to reassure the doubters that class is permanent.
Full-backs
Konchesky scored and got himself forward quite a lot, but what about John Paintsil? More than once I looked up and thought “what’s he doing there?” Our man was as adventurous as I remember seeing him, but got back into defence like lightning when the attacks petered out. For Fulham to really make things happen we need our full-backs to get up the field, and they really did this in the second half.
The boiler room
I still don’t think Murphy’s back to his best, but there’s no doubt that he brings a certain something to the team. Yesterday he was lucky not to get booked a couple of times, but his passion and will to win were obvious. The same can be said for Etuhu next to him: these two haven’t had the best of starts to the season, but in the second half they were bang on form. We’ll need them to keep this up in the weeks ahead.
PS
Maroane Fallaini bounces around like he thinks he’s in a Lynx advert. Strange man but you need these oddities don’t you?
Phew, wow, hurray! A reminder that Roy knows what he’s doing and that last season’s magic didn’t get lost over the summer. Today was classic Hodgson-era Fulham, solid, strong, hard-working and occasionally flat out excellent. A win to put smiles on faces.
The game started slowly, with some wonderful centre-back/centre-forward duels but few chances. Everton brought gasps with a free kick that David Stockdale repelled with his legs (we must assume it deflected en route) but the centre-backs were on top and neither forward line could make the ball stick. So no chances were fashioned.
It made for a messy game: Danny Murphy’s temper was boiling over (ex-Liverpool) and his passing was of 09-10 vintage rather than the superior 08-09 version, but just having him out there makes us better, particularly when Dickson Etuhu is on song, as he was today. Someone may have had a word with the big man, who beat up Everton midfielders (legally, of course) with impressive regularity. Great fun.
However, Everton scored first. Tim Cahill, one of the most worrying footballers in the game, did what he always seems to do and popped up in the box to head his team into the lead. Leighton Baines drove in a terrific cross (it looked dangerous from the moment it left his boot) and there was Cahill and there was a goal. Harsh on Fulham but these things happen against good teams.
Fulham fought back, largely through Clint Dempsey (having another propulsive performance, dragging our attacks deep into Everton territory). Dempsey, back on the left today (Damien Duff was on the right), had a handful of attempts and at this point looked the player most likely to make something happen. Sadly his radar is not quite on at the moment, but he’ll bag a hat-trick one of these days.
Fulham roared out in the second half and soon drew level. After a series of attacks Paul Konchesky smashed home from the edge of the box via a deflection, a slightly fortuitous but vital strike. And you make your own luck: hard to score with deflected shots if you don’t put in good shots, after all.
At this point there was only one team in it and Fulham poured forward whenever possible, with both full-backs raiding with purpose and Bobby Zamora leading the line like Didier Drogba on a good day. The whites finally and gloriously went ahead when Duff cut inside onto his favoured left foot and sent a laserbeam of a strike into Tim Howard’s net from 25 yards. The crowd went ballistic: good times are back at the Cottage. Not that they had ever really gone away.
Click on the cover to order.
If you enjoyed this and are in a position to dole out writing work, please get in touch!  | Mike H on Jamie’s Report: Chelsea … |
 | George H on Jamie’s Report: Chelsea … |
 | Adam S. on Fulham 0-0 Spurs |
 | John Fischer on Jamie’s Report: Chelsea … |
 | Josh on Fulham 0-0 Spurs |
 | Tommy on Merry Christmas from CCN |
| Tommy on Fulham 0-0 Spurs |
