All those doom mongers, told you so, Jack Cork haters and so on, take a breath, make a cup of tea and wait until the morning before you come on here and rant. PLEASE!

I feel very down after watching that but anyone criticising Cork in isolation definitely needs to have a think. The remainder of our alleged midfield tonight were totally invisible. Is it possible to be a Burnley fan and a "Jack Cork hater" ??? Not if you know anything about football surely.

You read the post right?

Does make you wonder how we can beat spurs then be dominated by this lot. It's gonna be fun at work tomorrow!

Don't hate Cork. He can be brilliant. Tonight he was invisible. Honestly don't really remember hearing his name more than twice in 90 minutes. He was far from the only poor player and was not the worst as Tarkowski was awful tonight.

Westwood a big miss tonight.

We were always going to lose a game at some point .... we go again at the weekend.

I thought we looked tired, especially in the first half.

Danieljwaterhouse wrote:You read the post right?

Yes..the thrust of my reply was to defend Cork as you had referenced Cork-haters.

Stalbansclaret wrote:Yes..the thrust of my reply was to defend Cork as you had referenced Cork-haters.

I don't hate Corks ... in fact I much prefer them to rubber or screw on Wine bottle caps. A good old Cork is superior in every way.

Jack missed Westy alongside him tonight ...

On saying that apart from a wonder goal and then the 2nd one that killed us.... yeah OK we were bloody awful at times.

Tarka coulda shoulda and a Pen for the challenge on Guddy and we would all be having a very different conversation.

Results went our way tonight so can't get "too depressed" .... lets face it after Saturday and doing Spurs we felt as though tonight we could repeat it.

We go again Saturday ... lets get behind the lads and bury tonight where it belongs "in the past".

Come on you Clarets

Morning all
Look it could be worse and remember we will put this wrong right on Saturday then some of us will be happy

On reflection, 1 word:

Whhhhhoooooossssshhhhhhh

On reflection, we looked tired and probably were after the efforts to beat Spurs. We missed Westwood, but even without him this game could have ended up 0-0 or 2-2. Their first was a worldy, and their second, as SD rightly points out, there was a foul on Cork in the lead up so it may have gone our way on another night. We also had Tarks miss a sitter and the save from Wood was sublime (even if Wood did hit it straight at him, he still had to save it).

When Saturdays comes... We go again...

Tribesmen wrote:Morning all
Look it could be worse and remember we will put this wrong right on Saturday then some of us will be happy

"Some" - I like it.

Jack Cork has (as far as I can remember) played every minute of every Premier league game since he rejoined us. More games than Ben Mee, more games than Tom Heaton. He is never subbed and has only been rested for cup and Euro games and even then brought on from the bench when things are not going well.

HE IS IN DANGER OF BURN OUT.
We don’t have anyone who can take his place - Westwood has only just emerged as a capable partner, Defour has gone absent and Hendrick is being used as a utility player. All of them (Cork included) lightweight and easily muscled out.

We are at a critical point of the season where we can’t now experiment and have missed the opportunity to try someone like Tarks as the holding midfielder.

If we survive the drop the priority during the summer must be to find a least two strong, fit, young midfield enforcers. Then you will get the best out of a refreshed Jack Cork and more creativity in the midfield as a result.

I wonder if the message will get through ??

On the predicted score thread I said it would be a game after the Lord Mayors show. I did say a 3-1 defeat. But got that wrong.
It was kinda like we had used all our energy against Spurs and losing Westy did not help.
As going to happen sooner or later.
Let’s get behind them on Sat

Fact of the matter is Cork clicks better with Defour and Westwood at CM

Mcneil.looked nackered after 15 mins

IWOODLOVETT wrote:Jack Cork has (as far as I can remember) played every minute of every Premier league game since he rejoined us. More games than Ben Mee, more games than Tom Heaton. He is never subbed and has only been rested for cup and Euro games and even then brought on from the bench when things are not going well.

I don’t get much support for this type of observation because people believe it is different at Burnley but, to use an example, Bernardo Silva has played 2,981 minutes this season. Jack has played 2,413.

The reason people think it is different is they think that City players do less running and sprinting. I don’t think that is true. Bernardo ran 13.7km in the Liverpool game last month - the most by anyone in the Premier League this season. They are driven hard by Pep. So I don’t buy into this “tired” theory. Yes, Cork may have been tired yesterday 3 days after a game, but not because of his whole season efforts.

I take your point but I don’t think Man City players can be a good comparison. Bernardo may do the minutes and cover the yardage but he has quality all around him - players that are always available, can accept an awkward pass and help with the tackling.
Jack does all of the spadework in midfield and is expected to make some 50/50 tackles and last ditch blocks - as well as pushing forward to provide some creativity. Man City have specialist, multi-million pound stars to carry out these tasks.

theroyaldyche wrote:Mcneil.looked nackered after 15 mins

Since he first played he looks nowhere near fit enough for the PL.

The second goal he should have been back putting presure on the scoring at least but he was walking back. Hopefully Brady is fit enough to start and McNeil can get a long rest and work on his fitness levels.

Dyched wrote:Since he first played he looks nowhere near fit enough for the PL.

The second goal he should have been back putting presure on the scoring at least but he was walking back. Hopefully Brady is fit enough to start and McNeil can get a long rest and work on his fitness levels.

Both Cork and McNeil a bit slow to track back for the second goal, but McNeil was well up field of Cork when Cork ran into trouble and was tackled/fouled by the man who ultimately scored the goal. I'd have expected Cork to be up quicker, back quicker and to keep stride with the player who was clearly his man. The fact Cork thought he was fouled is no defence here.

That said, no one needs to go overboard here. Cork is a good, middle-third Premier League midfielder. That means he's no world beater and he'll have good games, and occasionally bad ones. Last night was a bad one, but it was a bad one partly because he was a bit lethargic and partly because Newcastle's intensity and tactical shape meant his weaknesses were more on show than his strengths. That happens.

Mcneil should have closed dowm their first goal

I’m not too sore about last night. Ultimately we were lethargic and were missing a key player in Westwood, and Rafa focussed on stopping McNeil, who we do rely on too much to be positive with the ball.

We were out-thought, Newcastle’s gameplan worked very well and they got what they deserved. I won’t read too much into it for now, but a response is needed against Palace.

Think its worth mentioning that another team on an eight match unbeaten run looked equally lethargic and sluggish and ended up losing last night.

Wolves.

It happens

I'll leave it to the afternoon, the observations remain the same. We are lightweight and short in numbers in midfield. Anyone who was pinning their hopes on the return of Brady and Defour to add strength were sadly misled. I doubt Defour will play for us again, he has barely featured since the turn of last year and when he does make it onto the pitch he is incapable of playing for more than 60 minutes and more than once a week. Unbelievably we gave this guy a one year contract extension. Brady has rarely shown any kind of end product or looked remotely like fulfilling the transfer fee we paid for him.

These are the reasons we resorted last night to aimless long balls up field and sadly, when I look back on my Facebook feeds from 2 years ago, I was making exactly the same kind of comments. No pace, strength or creativity in midfield, repeatedly unable to hold onto possession or make forward passes. Eventually turn inside, back to the centre half who lumps it long. Look back a couple of years further and I find we have a transfer window where we fail to strengthen a midfield short in numbers. The very next game Deano did his cruciate, no cover so Scotty Arf filled in. I don't need to remind anyone how that season ended.

Herts Clarets wrote:These are the reasons we resorted last night to aimless long balls up field and sadly, when I look back on my Facebook feeds from 2 years ago, I was making exactly the same kind of comments. No pace, strength or creativity in midfield, repeatedly unable to hold onto possession or make forward passes. Eventually turn inside, back to the centre half who lumps it long. Look back a couple of years further and I find we have a transfer window where we fail to strengthen a midfield short in numbers. The very next game Deano did his cruciate, no cover so Scotty Arf filled in. I don't need to remind anyone how that season ended.

We didn't get relegated two seasons ago. As for lack of midfield we still have various options, whereas when Dean Marney got injured we had none.

Hasn't JBG played there?

As for getting relegated we need 4-5 point from ten matches.

It's past the yard arm now so safe to post. Herts Clarets has 'stolen my thunder' somewhat so I'll just add that Saturday's performance looked like a team that should survive in this league. Last night's performance looked like a team that shouldn't. All the old frailties were there in abundance, no pace, no creativity but above all else seemingly no plan. Reminded me a little.bit of the debacle a few.weeks.back when City trounced us again. We weren't trounced last night but it gave the impression, as did the game at City, that it was a game we didn't really want but just had to fulfill. Watching it in front of the TV was dire,uninspiring viewing and I can't think that many neutrals would have seen out the 90 minutes. Hats off to those that travelled,though.
The finishing line is within sight but so too is the trap door and any further repeats of last night's lacklustre no show are quite simply neither acceptable nor sufficient.

When we lose it's generally awful to watch as the football isn't as good as most other premier league teams play.

theroyaldyche wrote:Mcneil should have closed dowm their first goal

Again, in our set up I reckon the finger probably points at Cork or even Barnes as the retreating centre forward there because McNeil is generally speaking the outside man - i.e. the wing back, not the advancing centre back - but in fairness to everyone, our game plan was probably that it's no bad thing to invite one of their centre backs to have the ball 30 yards from goal because in the majority of cases it is more likely he'll make a mistake that allows us to counter attack, than he'll pop a worldie in the top corner.

Great strike, but not sure anyone from Burnley can have their finger pointed at it.

Herts Clarets wrote:I'll leave it to the afternoon, the observations remain the same. We are lightweight and short in numbers in midfield. Anyone who was pinning their hopes on the return of Brady and Defour to add strength were sadly misled. I doubt Defour will play for us again, he has barely featured since the turn of last year and when he does make it onto the pitch he is incapable of playing for more than 60 minutes and more than once a week. Unbelievably we gave this guy a one year contract extension. Brady has rarely shown any kind of end product or looked remotely like fulfilling the transfer fee we paid for him.

These are the reasons we resorted last night to aimless long balls up field and sadly, when I look back on my Facebook feeds from 2 years ago, I was making exactly the same kind of comments. No pace, strength or creativity in midfield, repeatedly unable to hold onto possession or make forward passes. Eventually turn inside, back to the centre half who lumps it long. Look back a couple of years further and I find we have a transfer window where we fail to strengthen a midfield short in numbers. The very next game Deano did his cruciate, no cover so Scotty Arf filled in. I don't need to remind anyone how that season ended.

Something's changed recently in your posts Herts. I always remember you being a bit more positive about things.

The current situation is nothing like the Arfield/Marney scenario. We've got 3 central midfielders who have solid pedigree at this level and who are certainly better than you suggest - in addition to Defour, who is injured but who (certainly until the last week or so) has been expected to be fit to play a role this season. In total we've got 8 midfielders for 4 slots, of which one is out long term and one might now be. That's not a bad level of depth. Teams get injuries, it happens, and the solution is not to keep stockpiling players on top of the ones you already have unless they fit a long term plan.

As for pace, Cork and Westwood are not especially quick, but watch back the clip of Hendrick teeing up Barnes in the first half on Saturday and tell me he can't cover the ground.

You can view last night in isolation, or you can view the Spurs game in isolation, or perhaps even the Watford game (where we went to a team 7th in the league and dominated the game in midfield). Or you can look at all 3 together and conclude that we're a decent side with a decent enough pool of midfielders, but who were disrupted last night by a late reshuffle due to illness, and played against a team who did a good job of stopping us at source - and who had liberty to concentrate on stopping us rather than playing themselves once they got ahead thanks to a worldie.

Last night wasn't great but perspective is needed.

Silkyskills1 wrote:It's past the yard arm now so safe to post. Herts Clarets has 'stolen my thunder' somewhat so I'll just add that Saturday's performance looked like a team that should survive in this league. Last night's performance looked like a team that shouldn't. All the old frailties were there in abundance, no pace, no creativity but above all else seemingly no plan. Reminded me a little.bit of the debacle a few.weeks.back when City trounced us again. We weren't trounced last night but it gave the impression, as did the game at City, that it was a game we didn't really want but just had to fulfill. Watching it in front of the TV was dire,uninspiring viewing and I can't think that many neutrals would have seen out the 90 minutes. Hats off to those that travelled,though.
The finishing line is within sight but so too is the trap door and any further repeats of last night's lacklustre no show are quite simply neither acceptable nor sufficient.

And yet we are only one point behind Newcastle, not cast adrift at the bottom of the table. Teams who go 8 unbeaten, and playing like we have simply don't go down.

A few defeats and just about surviving might not be a bad thing this year. If we finish like a train it might fool the board into thinking our squad isn't far away again, when the reality is that major surgery is required in centre mid and upfront before next season.

Spijed wrote:We didn't get relegated two seasons ago. As for lack of midfield we still have various options, whereas when Dean Marney got injured we had none.

Hasn't JBG played there?

.

I didn't say we did get relegated two seasons ago. So in midfield we have:

Westwood - ill last night
Defour - injured for the past year
JBG - tampon player. In for a week, out for 3 with any form of injury you care to think of
Lennon - long term injury
Brady - injured for the last year and struggling to make any kind of impact
Cork - ever present and it shows
Hendrick - world beater or whipping boy dependent on if you read Saturday or Tuesday's report
McNeil - very promising but also very inexperienced

That is hardly strength in depth is it?

Herts Clarets wrote:I didn't say we did get relegated two seasons ago. So in midfield we have:

Westwood - ill last night
Defour - injured for the past year
JBG - tampon player. In for a week, out for 3 with any form of injury you care to think of
Lennon - long term injury
Brady - injured for the last year and struggling to make any kind of impact
Cork - ever present and it shows
Hendrick - world beater or whipping boy dependent on if you read Saturday or Tuesday's report
McNeil - very promising but also very inexperienced

That is hardly strength in depth is it?

Westwood - illness happens. Unlucky.
JBG - This is nonsense. He's started 49, and appeared in 56, of our last 66 league games, and appeared in virtually every game last season. Admittedly, he's picked up the odd niggle this season, but he's still started 17 of 28, and made 4 sub appearances. He's been fit for at least 2 or 3 more when he's on the bench. So yes, he's had a slightly unlucky season with injuries, but lets keep it in perspective.
Lennon - yep, picked up a long term injury around Christmas. This is unfortunate. He's had no great record of injury previously.
Hendrick and Cork - good, upper bottom half players at this level. No problem there.
McNeil - he's inexperienced yes, but he's also shown he deserves a first team shirt.
Brady - he was out injured, and since then he's not really had a run of games - partly because he's picked up a niggle or two, but also partly because others have kept him out of the team.

The squad is as deep as most of our rivals in this department. You've got a point with Defour, half a point with Brady, but really nothing to go on with the rest of it. Injury crises happen - they're part and part of football, and we can't just stockpile players to buy our way out of them.

'Teams who go 8 unbeaten, and playing like we have simply don't go down.'

I can't say I have any available evidence to prove or disprove that so I'll just take your word for it.
My point is still, though,that we are not in any way,shape or form safe from relegation, 8 games unbeaten or not. Saturday saw the 'steel' in the team; last night saw a soft underbelly. A lot of blame for last night has quite rightly been aimed at our midfield but I think last night underlined for me also the lack of options up front. With Barnes and Wood both off their game there was little else to replace them. I'm in agreement with another poster who referred to Crouch as nothing more than ' a tourist attraction' and for Vydra to get some minutes illustrates how desperate we were. Time to roll up those sleeves again, starting on Saturday.

Crouch was never going to cause a problem for 3 big, strong centre halves. Almost embarrassing when we resorted to that.

I think his days of causing problems to any sort of centre half are well and truly behind him. Just thinking when Ian Wright joined us, we were two divisions below what are now,he was about three years younger and he didn't exactly terrorise defences. I'm afraid that I see his role with us as nothing more than a novelty value.

Silkyskills1 wrote:'Teams who go 8 unbeaten, and playing like we have simply don't go down.'

I can't say I have any available evidence to prove or disprove that so I'll just take your word for it.
My point is still, though,that we are not in any way,shape or form safe from relegation, 8 games unbeaten or not. Saturday saw the 'steel' in the team; last night saw a soft underbelly. A lot of blame for last night has quite rightly been aimed at our midfield but I think last night underlined for me also the lack of options up front. With Barnes and Wood both off their game there was little else to replace them. I'm in agreement with another poster who referred to Crouch as nothing more than ' a tourist attraction' and for Vydra to get some minutes illustrates how desperate we were. Time to roll up those sleeves again, starting on Saturday.

All I'm going off is looking at previous seasons stats and how well teams perform/under perform. Usually one team plays themselves out of relegation and one team drags themselves in. We've recovered since the Everton game.

As for players up front it seems to be a bit of a myth that we are lacking up top. Ashley Barnes has 8 and Chris Wood 7 for this season and both look a good bet to get 10 goals each which is a good achievement for any striker outside of the top six teams.

Not doubting Barnes or Wood's contribution but it is really all down to them because there are very few goals from anywhere else.

Jack Cork isn’t a good enough footballer to play in a two, that’s my opinion.

He’s not athletic enough to cover the required areas, his game is centered on interceptions, and disrupting play and the premiership is too fast and has too many good technicians for him to be effective in a two.

He’s lightweight, and is getting beaten to and off balls by smaller players and dominated by bigger players.

My solution: play Cork Westwood and Bardsely in a midfield three with Bardsely as the anchor. This isn’t a nostalgic Alexander post, PB often drifts into the centre in front of Mee and Tarks when we have the ball on the left, he’s wants it and spends a large amount of time with his hands up wanting it. When he does get it he does something simple, sprays it to JBG or plays into Hendrick. He likes to play simple and is good at it.

He also likes to battle and win a ball,his card count might go up, but I bet that Almerion et al won’t be able to post up for a ball without being under pressure from Bardsely.

I’ve thought this for a few weeks now, allows Lowton to come back in and be expansive and it allows us to have an option in the middle that won’t play straight hoof ball

IWOODLOVETT wrote:Jack Cork has (as far as I can remember) played every minute of every Premier league game since he rejoined us. More games than Ben Mee, more games than Tom Heaton. He is never subbed and has only been rested for cup and Euro games and even then brought on from the bench when things are not going well.

HE IS IN DANGER OF BURN OUT.
We don’t have anyone who can take his place - Westwood has only just emerged as a capable partner, Defour has gone absent and Hendrick is being used as a utility player. All of them (Cork included) lightweight and easily muscled out.

We are at a critical point of the season where we can’t now experiment and have missed the opportunity to try someone like Tarks as the holding midfielder.

If we survive the drop the priority during the summer must be to find a least two strong, fit, young midfield enforcers. Then you will get the best out of a refreshed Jack Cork and more creativity in the midfield as a result.

I wonder if the message will get through ??

Jimmy McIlroy played 497 games in 13 seasons - an average, year on year, of 38 games. The same as Cork is being asked to do. Has sports science regressed so much that what was commonplace fifty years ago is impossible now?

dsr wrote:Jimmy McIlroy played 497 games in 13 seasons - an average, year on year, of 38 games. The same as Cork is being asked to do. Has sports science regressed so much that what was commonplace fifty years ago is impossible now?

...and Jimmy Mac played on a very muddy Turf Moor with wet, heavy, leather balls not to mention Maurice Setters, Eddy Clamp, Tommy Banks and Jimmy Scoular! Mentioning Jack Cork in the same breath as Jimmy Mac is risible!

jrgbfc wrote:Crouch was never going to cause a problem for 3 big, strong centre halves. Almost embarrassing when we resorted to that.

I must have imagined him getting us a penalty at the turf in his first outing...though I could he wrong

tim_noone wrote:I must have imagined him getting us a penalty at the turf in his first outing...though I could he wrong

Can you stop calling everyone m8 it's getting right on my threepenny bits! I bet you wear your hat back to front and pants hanging off your ar$e! As well

Perhaps if he unleashed a bit more of his bottle, like against Spurs. The comedy of the Barnes goal was classic Burnley.