Relegation

[blue blood]

After picking up 2 from 6 pts available against our direct rivals - Leeds and Everton, I’m deflated.

 

That being said both teams raised their game and both games were scraps and fights.

 

The only hope I have left to hold on to is we wont be playing 6 pointers  for a couple of games.  Maybe that will mean - particularly v Fulham, it will be a different kind of game.  Maybe more like v Wolves.

 

Time will tell.  
 

It is what it is and hopefully we won’t be writing a eulogy covering the greatest period in our history.

 

 

[Fox 4 Life]

The supercomputer is broken. It's all good saying we just need to match the teams below us but that's easier said than done with the fixtures we have vs theirs (except Leeds).

[Aus Fox]

31 minutes ago, baldeagle said:

For me  we’re down we couldn’t win against Leeds or Everton and had to rely on Iversen to get a point , there’s no way we will beat any of the remaining teams . 

It’s interesting how you focus on the negative, we had to rely on Iversen to get a point - Everton had to rely on us missing a penalty to get a point. 
Leeds had to rely on VAR to get a point. There are two teams in the game and Iversen is part of ours.

We could easily have won both games, we could easily have lost both games.

 

At the minute we don’t know what will happen in any of the remaining games, but what we do know is there are 4 teams below us. We could in theory now not win another game this season and as long as two of Forest, Everton or Forest do the same, we are safe.

[Pliskin]

2 minutes ago, Fox 4 Life said:

The supercomputer is broken. It's all good saying we just need to match the teams below us but that's easier said than done with the fixtures we have vs theirs (except Leeds).

And Forest. Chelsea and Arsenal aren’t easy fixtures….. which a lot of people are seemingly forgetting. 

[LCFCJohn]

2 minutes ago, Aus Fox said:

It’s interesting how you focus on the negative, we had to rely on Iversen to get a point - Everton had to rely on us missing a penalty to get a point. 
Leeds had to rely on VAR to get a point. There are two teams in the game and Iversen is part of ours.

We could easily have won both games, we could easily have lost both games.

 

At the minute we don’t know what will happen in any of the remaining games, but what we do know is there are 4 teams below us. We could in theory now not win another game this season and as long as two of Forest, Everton or Forest do the same, we are safe.

I agree about Everton although we were at home so the onus was on us.

 

Re Leeds, VAR or not, each team scored one legitimate goal and we hung on at the end.

 

As others have said, given the main issue with us seems to be mentality, hopefully we play with more freedom against the likes of Fulham which could bode well for us.

[Le Renard]

Our goal difference might just save us.  Let's hope it will count for something at the end of the season.

[baldeagle]

3 minutes ago, Aus Fox said:

It’s interesting how you focus on the negative, we had to rely on Iversen to get a point - Everton had to rely on us missing a penalty to get a point. 
Leeds had to rely on VAR to get a point. There are two teams in the game and Iversen is part of ours.

We could easily have won both games, we could easily have lost both games.

 

At the minute we don’t know what will happen in any of the remaining games, but what we do know is there are 4 teams below us. We could in theory now not win another game this season and as long as two of Forest, Everton or Forest do the same, we are safe.

There’s not a lot of positives to focus on to be fair 

[Fox 4 Life]

6 minutes ago, Pliskin said:

And Forest. Chelsea and Arsenal aren’t easy fixtures….. which a lot of people are seemingly forgetting. 

Agreed but I would rather play Chelsea at home than Liverpool or Newcastle.... 

[Chrysalis]

1 minute ago, baldeagle said:

There’s not a lot of positives to focus on to be fair 

We now out of the bottom 3, with even a team between us and the bottom 3.

Vardy back on form.

Maddison playing better.

Iverson on form.

Creating chances again, and scoring more goals.

On last 3 games, best form out of bottom 5.

Suyuncu not only back but playing well.

 

Plus more, is plenty of positives.

[Pliskin]

1 minute ago, Fox 4 Life said:

Agreed but I would rather play Chelsea at home than Liverpool or Newcastle.... 

I wouldn’t, Chelsea are bound to start winning again. And they will definitely be looking at that game as a win. 
 

We need to remember that teams around us aren’t winning. Forest have wok once since February and Leeds are all over the place.  

[Finnegan]

23 minutes ago, stu said:

Our chances of stopping up apparently improved after last nights game. 

 

Yeah that makes sense. 

 

Look at how we stand now with four games left and look at who the teams below us have left to play. 

 

Ourselves and Everton have got kinder run ins than Forest and Leeds and in our case a noticeably better team on paper. 

 

Forest and Leeds have pretty horrendous games remaining. I know it feels to us that we're absolutely doomed but if I was a neutral looking at these remaining fixtures I'd probably say Leeds are gone already and Forest will be if they don't beat Southampton. 

 

If we take 4 more points I think we're safe. Maybe even just 3. West Ham and Fulham are both winnable and it's not beyond us to salvage a draw in any of these matches. 

 

Do you think the same can be said for our rivals that have to play Man City and Arsenal? 

 

 

Edited 2 May 2023 by Finnegan

[Fox 4 Life]

2 minutes ago, Pliskin said:

I wouldn’t, Chelsea are bound to start winning again. And they will definitely be looking at that game as a win. 
 

We need to remember that teams around us aren’t winning. Forest have wok once since February and Leeds are all over the place.  

So you would rather play a team that might start winning again vs 2 teams that are winning week to week? I agree on Leeds, they are done. Forest comfortably beat Brighton and were unlucky against Brentford.

[smudger63]

43 minutes ago, Blanchflower78 said:

club and management sensed Leeds and Everton would be our 'out' like us. It hasn't worked and in truth we look highly likely to go. 

 

Trouble is should we stay up you can't imagine next season looking any differently regardless of replacements. 

 

 

Recruitment next summer, regardless of what league we are in is crucial, and will probably define the club over the next few years. Get it right, and we can hopefully rebuild to a decent level again. Get it wrong and it will be a long road back.

[Tommy Fresh]

Just now, Fox 4 Life said:

So you would rather play a team that might start winning again vs 2 teams that are winning week to week? I agree on Leeds, they are done. Forest comfortably beat Brighton and were unlucky against Brentford.

They weren't unlucky against Brentford were they, they got battered and got what they ultimately deserved.

[Guest bennytwohats]

21 minutes ago, stu said:

Our chances of stopping up apparently improved after last nights game. 

It probably makes sense because there was one less game for Everton to make up points on us and it wasn’t taken by them. We are a point better off than we were and the opportunities for other teams to make it up will get smaller. So expect these odds to more closely reflect the table at the time as the number of games ebbs away.

 

The kicker is that if we’d have won then our chances of relegation would have reduced significantly, but we didn’t take it.

 

So as it stands we are just under a 1 in 3 chance. Put that in context it’s like saying roll a dice, if it’s a 1 or 2 we stay up, anything else we go down. Of course it’s not over, but it’s an incredibly uncomfortable roll of the dice.

 

The big fear I have is that our best chance of points is on the final day and I just don’t think this team is mentally equipped to turn up in a game like that, which we’ve seen time and again over the past few years. I suspect the odds don’t reflect that, albeit the fans of other teams in the battle may feel the same way.

[ian__marshall]

2 hours ago, smudger63 said:

The worry for me is how disorganised we look, mainly in midfield, where we are so open and easy to play through it's unreal.  Our left side is also a major issue. Defensively our left backs are not great and also get zero help from Barnes, which doesn't help either, and teams have identified that side to target. We probably have picked up more points than if we had kept that clown Rodgers, but it's not really been the bounce we would have hoped for, and I'm not seeing anything from Smith to suggest that we should keep him beyond this season.

Completely agree with this. Have been mulling it over all morning. Wondering if if it's worth switching to a 4-5-1, and doubling up on the full backs, with Kristiansen and Amartey (ideally Ricci but not sure how far off he is with his injury) at Left and Right back, then going with Thomas and Castagne as the wide players in the midfield five. Have Mendy and Soumare or KDH to add work rate to the centre mid with Maddison sitting in front of them two feeding Vardy. It'd stifle a bit of our attacking play but at least give the full backs the cover that they so desperately need. It'd also give us the option to switch to a more attacking style and unleash pace on tired opponents later in the game, whilst allowing us to make like for like subs (N'didi for Mendy, Tielemans/Praet for Maddison) to keep the energy in our play. 

[smudger63]

26 minutes ago, baldeagle said:

I know but both of those teams are truly terrible and we struggled . Fulham are flying and so are Newcastle. Liverpool will just be typical Liverpool against us and get a last minute goal with a pen or free kick and West Ham are scrapping as you say also . So I can see a max of 1 point against West Ham . 

West Ham will be easily safe by the time they play us, possibly with a Europeon Final to play, and if so, their team selection and commitment will be interesting to see. Either way, we have had plenty of chances to get out of the mess we are in already, and failed to take them.  For me, our only hope is that 3 of the other 4 fail worse than we do in the next 4 games 

[Mickyblueeyes]

I do think out of the group of fixtures Forest have the better ones. Chelsea are not Chelsea of previous seasons. Only we made them look like they are. Southampton is a massive game. They buckled against Brentford (who were not great on Saturday) under that pressure. 

 

Everton next two games are tough. Brighton at home is a horrible place to go to when you cant control a game (like yesterday) and the opposition team is pretty good at doing it (unlike yesterday). Man C after that. The last two, pot luck - I am hoping two defeats completely knackers them. 

 

Its quite weird, with 5 teams still in it, I cant quite call who will finish in the bottom 3 or what order that will be. 

[smudger63]

2 minutes ago, ian__marshall said:

Completely agree with this. Have been mulling it over all morning. Wondering if if it's worth switching to a 4-5-1, and doubling up on the full backs, with Kristiansen and Amartey (ideally Ricci but not sure how far off he is with his injury) at Left and Right back, then going with Thomas and Castagne as the wide players in the midfield five. Have Mendy and Soumare or KDH to add work rate to the centre mid with Maddison sitting in front of them two feeding Vardy. It'd stifle a bit of our attacking play but at least give the full backs the cover that they so desperately need. It'd also give us the option to switch to a more attacking style and unleash pace on tired opponents later in the game, whilst allowing us to make like for like subs (N'didi for Mendy, Tielemans/Praet for Maddison) to keep the energy in our play. 

Let's be honest, we don't have any decent wingers at the moment do we, so why not. I really hoped Barnes would step up when we needed him, but since coming back from his injury, and so far under Smith, he has been a waste of a starting spot. As for Tete, the fact they are now moving Maddison back out to the right, and then putting a striker on to play in his position off the bench, tells us everything we need to know about him. What a shambles!

[MattFox]

16 minutes ago, Pliskin said:

I wouldn’t, Chelsea are bound to start winning again. And they will definitely be looking at that game as a win. 
 

We need to remember that teams around us aren’t winning. Forest have wok once since February and Leeds are all over the place.  

Chelsea are dogshit

 

Only team they have looked half decent against this season is us

[Chelmofox]

20 minutes ago, baldeagle said:

I know but both of those teams are truly terrible and we struggled . Fulham are flying and so are Newcastle. Liverpool will just be typical Liverpool against us and get a last minute goal with a pen or free kick and West Ham are scrapping as you say also . So I can see a max of 1 point against West Ham . 

We are terrible too - i don't get why people dont understand this. There is a reason why we are only 1 point above Everton and equal with the others. There is no 'they are terrible and we should just be beating them' now. For all teams at the bottom, its a scrap for survival.

 

Probably a very unpopular opinion but we did turn up in the last 2 games, and so did our opponents. It wasn't long ago we lost 0-1 to the Saints without registering a shot on target, or got bullied by Bournmouth at home. We are seeing improvements from Deans setup, but its baby steps. 

 

We've got 5 points from 3 games. I have to believe these aren't the only points we are getting. Fulham are a very different proposition. There is a big chance we get 3 points there. If we do that its a massive leap forward.

[Pliskin]

12 minutes ago, Fox 4 Life said:

So you would rather play a team that might start winning again vs 2 teams that are winning week to week? I agree on Leeds, they are done. Forest comfortably beat Brighton and were unlucky against Brentford.

I’m fairly happy with our run of games and form. We’re not losing, and I’m confident we will get a win V Fulham. Liverpool at home under the lights can bizarrely present an opportunity for us. 
 

Well that depends how you view it…. Brighton had just come off the back of FA cup disappointment… and had they been on form they would have won that game. Forest ended up losing two players to injury because they went too hard. 
 

I wouldn’t say they were unlucky against Brentford, their goal was a fluke and then Brentford battered them for the best part of 90 minutes, Forest lost more players to injury and ended up with 10 men on the pitch as a result and conceded two late goals. For me, they’ve gone too hard and have now presented themselves with a situation where key players are missing. 
 

We’re ahead of the pack which is where we need to be. And we will still be out of the bottom three when we play Fulham, because Leeds ain’t beating Man City. We then play at 3pm before anyone else, beat Fulham and it heaps the pressure on the other teams. 

[Pliskin]

4 minutes ago, MattFox said:

Chelsea are dogshit

 

Only team they have looked half decent against this season is us

Forest are also dog shit. 

[ClaphamFox]

3 minutes ago, Mickyblueeyes said:

I do think out of the group of fixtures Forest have the better ones. Chelsea are not Chelsea of previous seasons. Only we made them look like they are. Southampton is a massive game. They buckled against Brentford (who were not great on Saturday) under that pressure. 

 

Everton next two games are tough. Brighton at home is a horrible place to go to when you cant control a game (like yesterday) and the opposition team is pretty good at doing it (unlike yesterday). Man C after that. The last two, pot luck - I am hoping two defeats completely knackers them. 

 

Its quite weird, with 5 teams still in it, I cant quite call who will finish in the bottom 3 or what order that will be. 

As implausible as it may be, Southampton can still get out of it if they win their remaining games. They'll regard the game at Forest as a last chance saloon and will hopefully give it a proper go.

[st albans fox]

14 minutes ago, bennytwohats said:

 

So as it stands we are just under a 1 in 3 chance. Put that in context it’s like saying roll a dice, if it’s a 1 or 2 we stay up, anything else we go down. Of course it’s not over, but it’s an incredibly uncomfortable roll of the dice.

 

It’s a one in three chance of going down …. Not staying up !