David Moyes’ delusional but troubling assessment of Newcastle’s defeat
In his post-match interviews, West Ham manager David Moyes acknowledged that his choice to start Kalvin Phillips in place of Michail Antonio backfired. In a normal situation, I would welcome the manager’s admission of mistakes. Sadly, in this case, it didn’t seem from his remarks that he knew exactly why the substitution hadn’t worked.
The Hammers manager stated, “I actually thought at that time when we went 3-1 up, Newcastle were the better team and still were.” We would have more control over the middle of the pitch if we had an additional midfield player, in my opinion. It was obviously ineffective.
“We required a defense system that could hold its ground and get us through. We turned Phillips on in an attempt to locate it. We looked for something that would help us become a little more organized and structured.
This is completely absurd. Before the replacements, Moyes’s team was controlling the ball and put together a 20-pass sequence that ended in a shot. I don’t quite see why he thought we were having trouble, because Newcastle was clearly in trouble and all we needed to do was deliver the decisive blow.
Furthermore, Antonio’s strength and pace were posing a major challenge to Eddie Howe’s temporarily injured defence.
The fact is that Moyes was unable to control himself. There was nothing wrong with the manager’s claim that West Ham required more defensive structure—they were performing just fine with four attacking players.
The basic truth is that West Ham only gave up one goal when they attacked, and three goals when they defended.
