Try this one mate

open.substack.com/pub/trentend...

Thanks for your kind words Jamie - enjoying putting the pieces together post game, always a bit daunting to press 'post thread' but words like this make it worthwhile.

The crossroads - the result today may well have zero impact on the discussions to be held over the break. However, the regression which is we are witnissing below paired with the relationship breakdown - could well see talks going in a different direction.

This is massively highlighted when focusing on the below visual - we created just two key passes from 50 passes in either zone 14 or the half spaces - compared to West Ham's three from 16.

We closed the game with 25 sequences which had over 10+ passes. However, both Bowen and Diouf both had double the threat of any Forest player via the pass.

Our inability to break down the block showed again.

This compact shape provided us with freedom on the flanks. However, our ability to only complete 10% of our crosses meant that this freedom would not hurt our opponents.

Far too often crosses were delivered not first time - often deliveries lacked pace, making it easy to defend.

West Ham had a game plan - there was an initial ambition to keep it tight and compact centrally. This is reflected in the 'dominating zone' visual.

West Ham only looking for outlets in the space left down the flanks, space outside our rest defence.

Space which Sangare struggles to defend.

As you can see Forest not only had plenty of the ball - they also dominated the field tilt statistic - showing the majority of play was inside the West Ham half.

However, as we demonstrated last year - possession doesn't direclty corroloate to goals. West Ham created more shots, xG, and goals.

He will no doubt look to pocket Füllkrug.

I'd expect to adopt a more rigid structure when in possession - ensuring we have a solid rest defence (3 man) to ensure we don't get overloaded centrally, especially on transitions.

Three players have been highlighted at the final phase - communication could have been the key between Anderson and Sangare who both picked up the same man.

Whilst Aina lacked that central defender instinct in the area to extinguish the threat.

Munoz in possession, we still have the key scoring zone under control. Forest have a 3v3 in the central area - more importantly all players are goal side.

If they were all able to lock on - it would have made the chance for Sarr significantly harder to convert.

A lack of decisiveness from both Sangare and CHO provided Wharton all the time in the world to play his pass into Munoz.

Given the action was in the first half, it is hard to place this error down to mental fatigue. Let's call it rustiness being game week 2 and all.

The moment MGW lost the ball we should have had enough defensive cover to stop the chance from being created.

We had superiority within the key scoring zone, outnumbering Palace by two players (6 vs 4).