I think there is a real difficulty exposed here for some supporters ? like Tony Marsh and John Doolan ? who perhaps believe that football is still about winning trophies. Or at least making an effort to do so in the belief that you still can. If they had to accept what you are saying, then there really is very little point in playing the 38 games ? just give the trophy to the team with the most money! Same for the Cups. Really, what is the point???

The difference is between fans who still believe that we should strive to be the best, and fans who accept our new role as also-rans, and who crow endlessly about the success achieved through being "the Best of The Rest".

Defined like that, it's no wonder there is such a large gap develpoping on here between those who accept that we are as good as we can ever be expected to be, and those who have this old latin phrase doing their heads in... Nil Satus Nisi Optimum!

This is a genuine question as im interested in gaining an insight into how other fans think. Michael you make the point that some fans still believe football is about winning trophies otherwise what is the point in playing your 38 league games. Do you believe we should be competing for the league? Im not having a go im just interested to see what other peoples expectations are.

Alan already this season Villa have beaten Chelski and drawn against them, the mighty Fulham managed a draw against them as did Blackburn. No team are invincible if you get amongst them and as Villa have proven they are certainly capable of shipping goals. Would you say Villa, Blackburn or especially Fulham are a better team than Everton? Perpetuating this shite about invincible rich teams just starts the defeatist and over respectful games too many teams give them and the subsequent defeats. The only team you should believe are invincible is the one whose colours you are wearing.

Spot on Gavin. Also, I?m getting sick of the money excuse now, everytime we get beat by one of the so called big 4. We are getting worse than the redshite fans, who have an excuse everytime they are beaten. We are always spouting how close we are to the top 3 (4) but then winge about money when we get beat. I think some of you forget we just paid nearly £12M for the Yak, £6M for Baines and if Manny turns out to be as good as we all know he is, what?s he going to cost, £8M - 10M? Not bad for a club, whose manager has to work (so we are always being reminded) on a shoe-string budget...

I think the point that was being made was not that Everton had no chance before the match was played, but that if Chelsea played as well as they could, then it would be nigh on impossible for this current Everton team to beat them. Unfortunately for us, they did play to the best of their ability, adopting tactics that nullified our best players (e.g. Arteta). In these circumstances, I believe we did the best we could with the players available and lost to a better (and yes, more expensively assembled) Chelsea team. If we keep on making the progress we have been and sign a couple more quality players who gives us a couple more options, then maybe we will be able to beat Chelsea even when they play well. Until then, the reality is that we need them to have an off day before we can do so.

Gavin good points about who have taken points off Chelski but on the other hand Villa beat us at their gaffe, Blackburn drew with us at ours and we unfortunately know what happens when we play Fulham away (every time in the Premiership)

I don’t think we showed Chelski too much respect, I just think they were simply too good and too strong for us. This is the only team in the "Sky 4" that Moyes has been unable to beat, we have done for the Shite, ManUre and Arsenal in his tenure, but never Chelski.

I think he put the best side he could out on the night, I mean look at the bench and tell me that Vic or Vaughan should have started before AJ, who has scored, I think 4 in about 8/9 games.

What people are forgetting also is that Moyes was about to bring on Vic when Cole scored.

As I mentioned in a previous thread the thing that pissed me off is that they lose Drogba for the ACoN and simply go out and but a £15m striker for a quick fix, whilst we get a loan deal for a player who has hardly played.

Chelski are certainly not a team of Supermen and if they are we are still searching for that little sliver of kryptonite that will give us the edge over them.

Hopefully it will be at Goodison when they return here and we will have our Africans back

I agree Brian lots of excuses have been used for Wednesday but the three players you have mentioned, only one played and he was nowhere near match fit.

We are not close to the top 3 at all and probably won?t be for some time but the money spending issue is a complicated one, as you look at the money Chelski and ManUre spend and you say it must work but then you look at the Spuds and the Barcodes and just recently the Shite and say it doesn?t work.

There is no jump out answer but it certainly helps to have a rich sugardaddy funding your every need

Good point there Tony, about how the money has worked for some, but not for other clubs. I think I’ll go and make myself a large Jack Daniels, and try to fathom that one out. I’ll use any exscuse (there I go, making exscuses ) to have a nip of old Jack.

MK: please don’t withdraw from this debate by attacking a point not made! You defended TM by pointing out that he wrote about Everton - so did Alan Clarke. He (IMO) points to several questions raised in connection to TM’s (havn’t read JD’s) last post. Doing as you then do - to skip those questions and jump to a perceived schism between those who believe in winning trophies and those who don’t - is frankly not up to the standards of debate TW is about

Michael, I would love to believe that you are right, and that teams from outside the Rich4 could win the Premiership. But let’s face facts. No team outside the Rich4 has been in the top 3 for the last ten seasons (I believe - Newcastle were I think the last, certainly in the top 2?). In cups, two teams outside the Rich4 have won the FA Cup in the last 21 years!! (Spurs were the other way back in 1991, with of course us fairly far back in 1995.)

Pretty sobering eh? This is completely unprecedented dominance of the English game by a few clubs. Never remotely happened before. Not just a few teams dominating and others coming close occasionally. No, this is the Rich4 largely playing for the major trophies AMONGST THEMSELVES, year after year. (6 of the last 14 FA Cup finals even between members of the Rich4.) This is a complete change in the competitive realities of the English game, brought about almost entirely by the concentration of financial resources in these few clubs.

I would love to believe that someone could beat these teams. But the facts don’t lie. They are utterly dominant and they are getting relatively richer and more dominant. If I were offered a bet of say £250 at 10/1 odds that any team outside the Rich4 would win the Premiership in the next five years, I wouldn’t take it. Would you?

I find it depressing too!

Ã?ystein Lemvik (sorry those funny letters probably didn?t come through properly), I was responding to the part of Alan?s post that had resonnance for me. I did not respond to the rest for a couple of reasons.

Firstly, many of those questions were answered in other threads and in numerous ways. Some of which have merit (in hindsight); some not. Such is the nature of post-match analysis from a wide diversity of viewspoints.

The main reason, though, is that I believe in identifying mistakes made in a game, not so that you can go back and fix ?em ? you can?t! But so that you can hopefully learn something for the next time.

To me, it all fits in with the cozy idea that Moyes is still learning his trade ? something some of his ardent supporters are desparately keen to reiterate at every opportunity. Then again you have his other supporters who claim he did his best and that we could never have beaten Chelsea ? in which case there will be no learning opportunity whatsoever. Hope this helps!

Fair comment, Michael. And btw, the funny letters came through, at least on my computer :)

Come on Michael,

No one is saying that Moyes is the perfect manager, he makes mistakes, big mistakes I would add, but every time when we lose or draw a couple of us are on his back regardless of the circumstances.

We may be missing key players 1-2-3 - it doesn?t matter, we may lack a squad depth ? it doesn?t matter, we may be beaten by a better side ? it doesn?t matter. When we lose its always Moyes fault, when we are on good run we must ?keep a perspective?

DM makes mistakes and will be making but one thing I admire in him is that he comes every time stronger and hopefully this is only the beginning of series of such an important games.
Maybe the learning curve is too slow for some of us and its disappointing but the guy never gets credit for anything.

Marsh is coming here making bold statements - he is negative; coward; championship level etc and never engages in some constructive discussion, resorting to ?grow up?, ?don?t be such a girl? , personal abuse etc.

How can you state that Moyes is not striving for the best when in fast every interview he states how he wants to compete with the best, bridge the gap, win trophies?

Yes it didn?t happen this time, yes 6 years are a lot of time but it may happen in May or next season; he lost his first semi-final and he is looser, coward, inept ? for me this is knee-jerk reaction.

Stefan, by my rough reckoning there are many, many contributors to this website who feel as you do and who have no difficulty reaffirming their faith in Moyes. Nor listing off the myriad of excuses they always have ready when we lose a game we could have won. They praise Moyes from here to eternity as the most wonderful manager in the world. Personally, I’m sick and tired of reading all that gushing twaddle because it means nothing to me if we lose games we could have won. That’s what football is all about and to continually make excuses for failing to win really is not the way forward.

Surely, with all the internet space we have, isn’t there room for a couple of people who have a different perspective to express that viewpoint without being muzzled? Without it being labeled a "knee-jerk reaction"??? Really, why is that so bad? That’s what having a discussion and airing different views is all about. Embrace it... coz as long as I’m here it ain’t going away...

Michael, you make a really good point that we should not give up on beating the richer teams than us. And you say the Chelsea game is a game "we could have won". No disagreement there. Of course we COULD have won it. (Hey, Havant were ahead twice against the RS today!)

I think the more emotional reactions to you and others are that you really sound as if you are saying that we SHOULD have won it (if only Moyes were a better manager...).

I think if we are at the top of our game we certainly CAN beat sides like Chelsea. But it is unrealistic, especially with three of our key players missing and two semifit midfielders on the pitch, to say that we SHOULD beat a side that has one player alone costing our entire team (and has just bought one of the world’s top strikers to temporarily replace perhaps the world’s top striker...).

And once SHOULD changes to COULD, we can of course criticize Moyes and indeed some of the players - but it is only sensible to also acknowledge what they were up against. In fact, I hesitate to say it, but given their greater resources Chelsea should beat us every time - just the same as we should beat Middlesboro and Wigan...

I feel we may be going down a blind alley here.
The reason the rich 3 have been so successful is 3 main reasons. They get the biggest funding from Sky, sponsorship etc. and they attract the best players who normally want trophies as well as the attraction of top wages. And they also have the power that puts fear into the FA and referees. So unless something significantly changes the rich and successful will get richer and more successful.

The power of marketing and globalisation should not be overlooked either in the modern game. How else could Beckham get £25 million a year for playing in a moderate team in a moderate league? So rather than berate Moyes we should be looking upstairs at people who couldn't market a Van Gogh for nothing. We should be courting the media(like Shankly did years ago) and seizing every opportunity to push the name and history of Everton.

I do not want to start a Kirkby thread all over again but going to a mediocre stadium on an out-of-town retail park will hinder us even further.

Every time we get a modicum of success we fail to build on it. The time to push the club forward is NOW!!!
NSNO

Coulda.. shoulda... subtle one, Neil! But once you go down that final path, you?re playing the game on paper, or on computer ? not on the field.

The difference in resources is what it is. The difference in player valuations is what it is. The difference in player abilities is what it is... The challenge Moyes has taken on, and has (I believe) accepted is to penetrate the top four using what he has, by his own guile, on his own wits.

What people like me, and John Doolan, Brian Waring, Zac Percy, Tony Marsh... and a fair number of others are effectively saying is: "Hey Moyesy, if you?re gonna break ?em down, there?s a few things you are going to have to do a bit differently. What you are doing now is coming close but it ain?t good enough to go that extra step."

All I?m asking is that they be allowed to voice that opinion on this website without the ridiculous reactions from these other fans who feel they have a mission to protect a pair of tender Scottish ears from such "agressive and unconstructive" feedback ? which is all moot anyway as I feel sure the last thing in the world David Moyes would be doing with his time is reading anything on this website!!!

I thought Moyes actually got it nearly right on Wed.
The line up included Manny (an attacking, ball-playing midfielder) which was a brave move. Also, as already mentioned he was ABOUT to bring on Big Vic before Chelsea scored. if Cole misses, it would, in my eyes been seen as an attacking substitution.
But he didnt and the rest is history. I just dont think there is a need to constantly slate him. He is the BEST we could have, and he is doing an EXCELLENT job. with the odd exception most teams in the league would do anything to have Moyes as their leader and I for one am proud he is! COYB

And once you cut through a lot of the rhetoric and emotion of the exchanges post Chelsea, perhaps Michael it does come down to difference views about what Moyes "could do a bit differently".

On the one hand it there is a perfectly good view (which I see but have my doubts about) that Moyes should ’go for it’ more to beat the better sides. On the other, the view that ’going for it’ is too likely to open us up to counter-attacks and clinical finishing. Another reasonable view!

For what it’s worth, I do not think our side on Wednesday had enough strength in it ’to go for it’. And Moyes would surely have been castigated if we’d been 2 or 3 down by half time.

But I also think we do not need Chelsea’s resources to beat them (which is good, since we sure as hell aren’t going to get them!) We are maybe one or two players short of competing very strongly. I would have been very disappointed if a fit Fernandes, plus Pienaar and the Yak hadn’t run them much closer on Wednesday. And I think Moyes would have ’gone for it’ a little more with those players on the pitch.

You pose the ultimate questions correctly in the first paragraph of your first post, Michael. I believe that football should be about winning trophies, and I want it to be like that. However, for the reasons outlined by Neil, I have to accept that to believe that us winning the EPL is actually possible in present circumstances is a delusion. It has nothing to do with Moyes ? who I believe is achieving miracles with the resources he has compared to everyone else. It would not happen for us or anybody else outside the Big 3 even if Ferguson, Grant, Mourinho, Wenger or Winston Churchill were at the helm.

Nobody else, and certainly not us, can afford the quality of playing staff that they can. The only trophies we "others" can realistically hope to win are the Carling Cup (and that?s only if the Big 3 decide to field their reserves with a few academy players thrown in because they can?t be bothered) or the Uefa cup (because they aren?t in it).

You and Paul ask, "what is the point in playing your 38 league games"? The answer is one or other of the following. First, you maintain the delusion. Perhaps there?s nothing wrong with that; indeed, it might be good for you: many people put their happy, fulfilling lives down to a belief in God ? a delusion if you?re convinced by Dawkins, but something that keeps you happy nonetheless. And if life is about being happy then, hey, one way of looking at it is that founding it on a delusion is, somewhat paradoxically, a rational choice.

Alternatively, if you accept that actually being able to win a domestic trophy in present circumstances is a delusion (again, look at the facts outlined by Neil) and you are not going to allow yourself to found your life on it, then, to answer to your question, the point of playing 38 league games is so that people can watch football every Saturday, and they get more pleasure out of so doing if the teams are closely matched then if they aren?t, and that?s why you have a league instead of each team arranging matches on an invitational basis from week to week.

The rest of the pleasure is found in seeing your team win, or at least play well in, the particular match it?s playing in at the moment. You don?t look beyond that. If you want to follow a sport that has a league where most teams have a realistic chance at the start of the season of winning the trophy then follow rugby or rugby league (as well as keeping on supporting Everton, of course!).

I see. So the motto is the reason "fans" use to criticise the team after going out on the odd goal against a team that has had a quarter of a billion spent on it? Because nothing but the best will do? Lordie. Well I?m just relieved that the carping that passes for constructive criticism on this site is wholly unrepresentative of the Blues support. I?m sure there was the odd supporter moaning about Moyes at the Final whistle on Wednesday, but the vast majority were rightly applauding the team and a manager who had come within a whisker of taking us to the final.

?All I?m asking is that they be allowed to voice that opinion on this website?

Michael,

Thanks to your team, all Evertonians can voice their opinions, I can't require someone to be declined the option of voicing his opinion. At the end of the day, that?s what matters and what ToffeeWeb is about. I just want them to be engaged in some constructive discussion and not resorting to name-calling and bold statements.

I can't remember what was the tread about 2-3 months ago when we were 8 or 9th but Brian Noble stated: Moyes has found his level fact - mid-table mediocrity (that was all)

This for me isn?t constructive discussion, give your opinion but back it with some facts or analysis. I don?t know whether I made my point clear but I hope that in the future we can have reasonable discussions, not just bold statements

Having the extra money does not guarantee success but not having the money guarantees failure. When was the last time a small spending team won the league? Doesn’t mean I think Moyes should gets a free pass from criticism.

If you have the match to watch again, please look at Cahill missing a diving header in the first five minutes, and the 4 saves that Cech made in the second half. All game changers...we would not be having this discussion if Cech had missed one of those shots. Sorry, but it is down to luck sometimes. We created and ddnt score. Joe Cole scored a brilliant goal. He?s a world class player. It has nothing to do with Moyes and tactics when their ?keeper makes great stops and an international creates a brilliant goal.

I would like to ask MK if he saw the saves Cech made and if he thought they were fantastic and game changers?

In a one-off game or a two-legged tie, it has nothing to do with money. Sure, only a fool would argue that, over a season, a squad boasting top class cover for every position would have a distinct advantage and would therefore finish higher 99 times out of a 100. But this tie should have been over at SB.

They were down to 10, we were rampaging forward, Faddy had just hit the post and IMO it was just a question of when we took the lead ? not if. Chelsea were all over the shop, then there?s a break in play, instuctions are barked from our dugout and the minute play resumed it was obvious we were suddenly settling for what we had.

No matter how big a squad these top 3 have, they can only field 11 at a time; we have a first 11 capable of beating anyone, we can cope with a couple of absentees these days too.

DM is a magnificent manager. Was there another man in the world better suited to EFC when he arrived? However, if he is to reach the very top of his profession, he has to make the next step, he has to show belief, only then will his teams believe and we will start beating the top boys,

Interesting points. I reckon I'll be the first to say it but I'm thinking out load... AJ is awful.

When he plays, we play balls down the channels, percentage balls if you will, and as such we never dominate a game. Think of Victor. Yes, he wasn't that good against City but I'll tell you what, if AJ was playing we?d be looking at a draw at best.

While the Yak's gone, we need Victor or Vaughan just to keep keep ball, to give us the territorial advantage from a big lad holding it up and bringing our more creative players in to the game.

Somebody made the point above of the difference between "COULD have won" and "SHOULD have won". Yes we could have beaten Chelsea, but Should?

Fulham, Villa, Blackburn? Yes they got results against those sides, but I would argue that on that day the big sides did not turn up. Add to that the weaker team (Fulham, Villa etc) had outstanding games. The big sides are not only better on paper, but can produce this high standard consistently. Fulham may have got that one result but look at them, I’m sure they’d have happily swapped that result for a drubbing and 10-15 points picked up elsewhere.

I’ve said it on a previous thread, maybe Ferguson and Wenger (Avram’s not been around long enough and the fat waiter is shit) are better managers than Moyes, it’s hard to say for me as their current jobs are easier IMHO. They have large squads of huge talent, so changing things mid-game is easier for them. They still lose games to sides like Fulham, Blackburn and Villa, so how good does that make them as managers?

Pointing out flaws in Moyes’s gameplan, formation and team selection is one thing, saying that he should be sacked or "that’s as far as he can take us" because of the mistakes is silly IMHO.

Of course we shouldn’t just accept that we’re going to lose a game because the other side are better on paper, but there is no shame in losing over two tight games to one of the three sides who have completely dominated English football for the last decade or more. The facts above don’t lie. Finance is obviously a major factor of success as underlined by the winners of all the major honours in English football over the last decade or so.

I don’t think it is as simple as labelling Evertonians as either being "fans who accept our new role as also-rans" or "those who have this old latin phrase doing their heads in... Nil Satus Nisi Optimum!"

Some of us were desperate to get to the CC final and win it, but don’t necessarily think that it was thrown away by Moyes’s lack of adventure. If Chelsea hadn’t fancied it the other night we might now be discussing our chances in the final. As it is, Chelsea’s "better on paper" side played excellently and we didn’t have enough. Hopefully, the next time we are in a semi-final, we will have what it takes to go that next step.

COYB!!

Have to say Neil, I just wrote a reply to the original thread and before posting I just read what you’ve put just above me. You basically said exactly what I wanted to say and worded it much better so I will just say this:

Neil McKinney....HERE HERE!

We could have beaten Chelsea. We have beaten Liverpool, Man U and Arsenal. The problem is we didn?t beat Chelsea and we haven?t beaten the others consistently. We need luck and the other team to be having an off game.

Chelsea were never going to have an off game in a semi-final. I still hold man-for-man they were and are better than us so we didn?t have a chance.

Moyes has now got us to a level where we can consistently beat the other teams in the division - How many teams have we done the double over this season? I?m hoping that one season we?ll have our bit of luck and get results against the ?rich 4? as well. This might mean we challenge for the title but that?s all we can realistically rely on - a bit of luck. I agree with the fella above, money doesn?t guarantee success but lack of it guarantees failure.

Also going to the game is still a good experience and there?s more to it than just trying to win all 38 games so there is a lot of point to playing all these games. I still think we should adhere to NSNO and not accept mediocrity but realistically, until we can go out and spend £50 million we won?t achieve it.

Neil says against Chelsea that "we did not have enough." I think, given what he had, Moyes did not do enough. And that’s what this is all about.

I think Neil?s spot on personally. I don?t think we had enough to beat Chelsea on the night and I do believe Moyes did enough or a better way of putting it, Moyes did all he could. I think Johnson worries defences a lot more than say Anichebe would. AJ may not have done a lot on the night, but his pace and the possibility of him getting on the end of something is enough to keep defences busy and not be too outgoing. As it was on the night, Chelsea defended very well and as a team were much better than us and I think this IS because they are just far better than us. Everton looked poor at times, but I genuinly feel that was more to do with Chelsea than Moyes?s tactics.

Giving AJ a strike partener from the off would have greatly weakend our midfield, which I think then Chelsea would have torn us apart. Some say they?d have rather got hammered trying to attack Chelsea more, but come on! You?d rather have gotten beat 6-1 on agg, but be able to say we had a go? What would that have done to our defences and teams confidence?

As it was, Chelsea were great on the night, we had our chances, but it wasn?t to be. Had the ref not blown up for that ?Foul? on Cech and had one of our other chances gone in, Moyes would have got it spot on! Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose and sometimes the odds of losing are far smaller when your playing a world class team like Chelsea.

It's all opinion, like Neil, I think given what we had, Moyes did all he could. Some of the players on the other hand have in the past proven they can and perhaps should have given a little more.

Came to this thread late, some of the stuff a bit depressing! Actually I was quite motivated by MK’s initial response as it got me thinking about football and my own world of coaching business people. There is a great writer called Jim Collins who has done a couple of major studies as to what are the attributes of those companies that after years in the doldrums make the shift from being good to being great and then stay there which is roughly what I wish for the modern EFC. One of the things he discovered was that such companies had the habit of identifying and then going for ’Big Hairy Audacious Goals’ rather than staying with mediocrity. They then make their decisions large and small consistent with those goals. I think a BHAG for us would be to aim to win the Premiership in the next three maybe four years. Another one might be to have and fill a 60,000 seater stadium every week.

I would like to see Everton operating with this kind of approach rather than slow and steady/we can’t compete because we don’t have the billions.

On the other hand... the most successful mindset for a leader is grounded optimism. There is a famous case of the POW camp in Vietnam where after the end of the war the senior American prisoner, Admiral Stockdale, was asked who were the prisoners who didn’t make it. "The optimists with no grip on the reality of the situation" he replied.

So I would like to see Everton led by people courageous enough to make plans to win the Premiership whilst retaining the necessary grip on reality.

Michael, you said you felt Moyes "did not do enough " in the game against Chelsea, and that is spot on. It was so frustating to watch, because things were not working out for us, and I was sitting there, hoping he would do something. Change tactics, move players around, go for it. But, he just seems to have this cautious streak in him, wich has me pulling my hair out at times. Also, I agree with a lot of contributors on here, when they say Moyes is doing a fine job at the moment (you can’t argue with that ) but, it does not give him immunity from criticism. They have to accept that if Moyes fucks up in a game, I will come on here, and give my opinion. I just get sick and tired of being told how far he has progressed the club, etc, etc, everytime I post a piece, that might be critical of Moyes. You guys have to realise that, I want Moyes to succeed just as much as you.

I would like to pick up on the Moyes "not doing enough" aspect.

I agree he can be frustratingly defensive and sometime over-cautious but let?s look at the game as a whole. We need to win 1-0 after 120 minutes to go through and we were trying our best but like the first leg, their midfield simply smothered ours and double-teamed our playmaker.

We were still attacking and could have conceeded a few times on the break but we were still going forward.

Moyes was about to bring on Vic when they scored, now if Cole skies the shot or falls over, it is still 0-0 and we have Vic on for a 4-4-2 and all out attack for the last 20 mins.

No-one knows how it would have went, we may have nicked the 1-0 we craved or we may have lost it 3-0 because our midfield started to develop gaps.

I think he did all he could given the playing staff he had. We had no other midfielder to replace the tiring Fernandes or Osman.

We had four up top the last 8-9 mins, including Lescott, so I fail to see where he has failed to go for it.

He obviously wanted the 1-0, rightly or wrongly, but it just wasn?t to be as they were simply the better side and it is not that I accept we can?t beat the top 3, we can but just not on this night.

Brian,
in total aghreement

Tony
if’s, but’s, maybe’s, ? Sorrry mate, thats just juvenile wishful thinking

This brings me back to the original point I made in my post: Moyes didn’t do enough? Tell me then, what would you have done differently? How could we have beaten Chelsea? Would Anichebe or Vaughan have made any difference? I don’t think so. Brian, it was frustrating to watch but I wasn’t frustrated with Moyes, just our lack of options to change things.

Sorry Dave, you have lost me there, I was responding to the other posts where someone was saying play two up front or he should have gone for it and he was not "doing enough".

If, buts and maybes aswell, so I assume everyone on here is thinking like a juvenile then?

There are so many things that could be questioned regarding the Chelsea game, should Fernandes and Osman played when it was clear neither was fully fit.

Should we have had a target man upfront?

Who invented liquid soap and why?

We can endlessly dispute/argue about the choices but to call the discussion of them juvenile is a bit rich.

I have a question for everyone to consider. If DM had gone with the 4-4-2 and we had lost would as many people have complained?

The reason I ask is because I remember many threads on toffeeweb slating him for playing 4-4-2 when we are a much better attacking side when we play 4-5-1 and allow Timmy to attack the ball.

Were those the same people that are criticising the same 4-5-1 formation now?

I think that Chelsea should beat every team in the premiership every week, I also think that Everton could beat any team in the world. As for the way forward, we don’t need the money, in fact I would go as far as to say I don’t want the money. What will help Everton is to attract a better class of player to the club. This will only happen by getting further in cup competitions and finishing higher in the league. We are getting a better class of player now then we were five years ago, and if we consistently qualify for Europe over the next few years then we will attract even better players. And if we get them without spending silly money the chances are they will be playing for Everton Football Club and the fans, as opposed to most of the Chlesea players who play for the pound. If they didn’t have a big win bonus riding on the semi do you really think they would have tried as hard as they did?

Finally - some said Moysey would never play anything but hoofball, now they are complaining he has returned to hoofball. Fair enough, I hate hoofball as much as anyone. But the way I look at it is we are using it less, mainly when he has no other options, as the midfield improves and the strength in depth improves he will never have to use it again. Except, maybe, against teams like Everton, after all Chelsea and Arsenal seem to think it works

Steve, no matter what formation Moyes plays and if we lose there will always be the moaners, just like there will always be the defenders of the formation.

As can be seen I have defended his formation against Chelsea in so much as that was the best he could put out at the time due to our Africans missing and that AJ is the top scorer out of what is left and the most experienced.

That is the beauty of an anonymous forum there will be both pro and anti people on here.

Unless we win every game 5-0 with Brazil like footy there will always be your moaners. It’s just a way of life and the way it should be.

Against Chelsea the outfield players on the bench were Hibbert, Stubbs, Anichebe and Vaughan ? not a midfielder in sight. I believe this is where the problem lies, and the main one IMO is Cahill. Now don?t get me wrong I love our Tim to bits and certainly wouldn?t sell him but it?s times like last Wednesday when he should have been brought off when Victor or James came on. At this point we had three out-and-out attackers on with tim in a position that makes him ineffective.

Tony

Point taken, I withdraw the word juvenile

Brian,
Totally disagree with an earlier point. In the second half Moyes did change things around. Osman was moved in field with Fernandes down the left. Cahill was pushed further forward, and then Vic was coming on before they scored.
Was i at a different match or did i see the first half as one EVerton played some half decent football in patches. Fernandes was passing the ball around like a treat and Arteta was skinning bridge everytime.
I thought the first half an hour we played well, and if one chance goes in its a different game. Thats football, and thats why we love it!

Alex, you said " I thought the first half hour we played well " So I take it you like watching hoofball ? Because what I saw for the first 20 - 30 mins, was us just twating it up to AJ.