mrfahaji

Thing is with Elyounoussi, is I'd feel so disappointed and incredulous that he would basically get picked every game, despite repeatedly offering nothing. BUT, there's obviously a reason why he gets picked. Clearly trains well, follows instructions, is good 'against the ball' as our managers have been fond of saying. I don't think many people would say he doesn't put a shift it or try hard. He's unfortunately, just not quite good enough at this level. Maybe it's because I'm older, or a bit more detached than I used to be, but I feel a bit uncomfortable hating individuals because they can't do their job as well as we want them to and you can't blame players for getting picked. Ironically, even though on one hand I'd be happy for him not to play for us again, I actually think Elyounoussi could be quite good in the Championship, because in my opinion his biggest fault is that he isn't sharp enough in his decision making, and time is actually something you get a little bit more of in lesser divisions. There seems to be a lot of talk about unrest behind the scenes, and while clearly you get see that in the team overall, not sure it's always easy to see it in individuals, even if they 'appear' to be lazy or uncaring. You just have to hope that the ones with bad attitudes are moved on, and the rest you can put down to poor management (whether that's on a manager or board level).

Remember when all our problems were down to Eric Black? Halcyon days.

Agree with the sentiment, but £30m can still be a big gamble, we've seen lots of clubs chuck that sort of money down the drain.

Disappointing that he left and that it was clearly a slightly bitter departure. However, I get the feeling this was just the nature of the football business. Given that without him, we probably would have gone down, and weren't exactly showing progress off the field, you can't blame Ings for wanting a shot at a club in the CL, or even with a big club on the outskirts of the CL. His best (only?) shot of getting that was if one of the big clubs could get him for a reduced fee. Ergo, don't sign a new contract. From the club's point of view, why would we let him go to anyone offering less than Villa? You certainly can't blame the club for that decision. It's not the move Ings wanted though, and he probably felt a bit pissed off about it and that the club weren't doing him any favours. Villa probably looked to have more potential than us, and would no doubt offer him a lot more money. So probably thought he might as well go. In an ideal world it would have played out differently - either one of the top clubs gave us the money for him or there was no interest and he wanted to stay. But given the circumstances, I don't feel a great deal of ill towards him. Certainly don't want him to succeed at Villa, but still grateful for his goals here, both to keep us in the PL and at Fratton Park Sorry, went on a bit there and off topic...!

He was, but he always takes fractionally too long to make a decision when it comes to the important moment. Classic example earlier when Broja was crying out to be put in, and he just didn't do it and ended up wasting the chance. I actually found that more frustrating than Broja turning back, even though that was a more 'wtf' moment. Got the impression Broja didn't realise the first time shot was on, whereas I don't know what Elyounoussi's excuse for not making the blindingly obvious pass was.

True, but I'd make this counter argument: We had to decide whether to keep Forster OR McCarthy. We all know Forster's contract situation - one of the most extraordinary decisions that the club made financially in recent times, probably second behind the Carrillo purchase. He might do well from time to time, but Forster also has his own flaws as a GK so the choice purely on ability isn't an obvious one, so from a financial point of view it made sense to stick with McCarthy. So of course now we've chosen him as our number 1/future GK, we are going to stick with him unless he really falls apart. I agree that he isn't quite of the level we would like, and the Norwich goals, particular the second, were poor, but he has also played quite well in previous games and kept a few clean sheets, so he's not constantly catastrophic. So, with that in mind, do you not think the "well Ralph picked him" is a little disingenuous? If we're going to criticise selection (esp from that game), I'd look more at bringing on Walcott ahead of Tella (and his continued overlooking of Tella), who had a shocker and missed a glorious chance at the end.

I thought Puel was unlucky, I didn't love him but thought he did a decent enough job. To be honest the only manager in recent times I was really keen on us getting rid of asap was Pellegrino. No doubt there are some annoying moments with Hasenhuttl, but for the most part this season we've been enjoyable to watch. Frustrating in front of goal, sure, but in most games I have been on the edge of my seat more than I've been hiding behind my hands because of how we are playing - i.e. attacking, exciting. Being solid defensively with some good tactical decisions for a period was also reason for optimism as those areas were previously sore points with Hasenhuttl. Of course the last two results have flipped that back again, which is concerning, but on the whole this season I think our general play is decent.

If he has a 'great XG' that could actually be evidence of him not being very good (because it's saying he has had lots of presentable chances and yet hasn't scored any of them). I get the sense you think it would imply the opposite!

Decent fee. Didn't go to Spurs. Perhaps I was naive in thinking that he genuinely wanted to challenge himself "at the top level", even if that meant being a back up. Villa seems an odd move. Just because it's decent business doesn't mean we shouldn't be a bit wary of how it will impact us on the field though, I'm finding the dismissive tone here rather surprising. He's clearly a class above most of our players, and when that class is in front of goal it's going to be hard to replace. Adams has qualities, but composure in front of goal isn't one them unfortunately. We will struggle to replace him, even for £25m, unless our recruitment is really firing. That being said, at least with £25m we have a chance to find someone decent, or bolster the squad elsewhere.

Huh? You're worried about 'looking like mugs' more than the millions it will cost us to sack him? If you would prefer him not to be manager, fine. But surely him resigning (which he won't) is a much better outcome for the club - especially as we have no money - than having to pay him off.

I don't think your observations are unreasonable. Strikes me that his biggest weakness is composure. He scores scruffy goals and he scores great goals, but he doesn't score too many "calmly slotting the ball away" goals... and he has had a few notable chances like in that way that he's fluffed. As soon as he has time to think about what he's going to do, he makes a mess of it. I'm probably in the camp of thinking we could definitely do better, but equally he's not someone we should be itching to get rid of. I'm never going to think "oh no, Adams is playing" but equally I'm not going to be massively worried if he's dropped or injured for the odd game.

Not sure I agree with that actually. When I saw the team I thought it looked very lightweight and it struck me that Ralph was hoping to stick to his (footballing) principles and just picked players who would most likely manage to deploy our 'forward' pressing. However the risk is with that approach you're likely to leave yourself open. Perhaps at the moment, especially away from home against a side doing well in Everton (even if they're not actually that good), we would be better off taking fewer risks and keeping it tight. Making ourselves hard to beat and trying to nick a goal. Obviously at some point in the game you do need to be more adventurous, and fair enough to say we should have done so earlier, but with a side low on confidence, I'm not sure 'risk taking' from the start is actually the right approach.

It’s not always easy to tell if someone is making a joke on here, apologies I thought you were being serious at first 😆

In which case, time to start playing Obafemi and get rid of the other two.

Someone with photoshop skills could edit out Dunk, add wings and a halo to Vestergaard and it would all look rather deferential.

Didn't they say they planned to do it to the end of the (calendar) year and then stop? If that's the case, surely people who don't like it could just deal with it for a few weeks... I'm sure there are plenty of other things that happen that people just put up with*. Let those who feel it's important take part, those who don't can just let it wash over them. It's like wearing a poppy in November - no-one should have to wear one, they shouldn't be chastised for it. But equally, if people do want to wear one, then good for them! * I'm not generally for the idea of turning a blind eye to bad things that happen, but the core of this movement is not a 'bad' thing. It's footballers trying to raise awareness of prejudice. Even if you don't agree with the sentiment, or the way it's being done, that's still the main reason it is happening.

I know that Bearsy posts lots of sarcastic posts - I wasn't quite sure what side he was coming down on but realised it was a joke. Nevertheless I felt I should add quite an important aspect to the story!

Ha, fair point - I was getting ever more full of frustration as I typed! And after I did wonder if I was guilty of 'lumping' myself. However, the 'vile' accusation was specifically reserved for those booing, because of course there are plenty of Millwall fans who didn't and were equally appalled by it. But this about the ones that did, and they are Millwall fans, and Millwall fans (again, not all of them, but 'in general') have a history of racist behaviour. In other words, there are sections of racists amongst Millwall fans, and I have little doubt that many of them were booing. To be honest I've never really liked the idea of clubs having a particular 'type' of fan, because there's is obviously a mix everywhere. However, whether it's to do with location or something else more complex, there's little doubt that Millwall are synonymous with a fanbase with a bad reputation. I just find it astounding that so many people are so quick to make excuses. Sorry if you (or anyone) does, but I just do not buy the argument that this booing is a well researched protest against some sort of political agenda. These are football fans who don't like a particular type of message - which at its core is anti-racism - and are reacting to it happening in front of them. You may not agree with the kneeling, and I can understand that. I'm not even massively pro- myself. But to show an act of defiance rather than apathy towards it to me suggests people are pushing back on strives for equality (unless you buy the 'alternative' reasons argument) and I don't think it's a good thing at all.

You don't have to kneel, you don't have to put your arm in the air to show support. You can just go through the motions or ignore it. In the same way that if you might not agree with having a minute's silence for some random person, or you might not care for the national anthem... you can just stand there (or sit down) knowing that you don't agree with it. To actively boo something is showing disrespect to the people who are trying to show respect - i.e. the players. People are so fucking desperate to justify the actions of fucking MILLWALL fans, you know, the ones who have a massive history of being fucking racists! But no, it's nothing to do with that, it's about "defunding the police". What they don't like is that this movement is a threat to who they are, and who they are is a bunch of vile cunts. Yes there are nuanced arguments - of course players and fans alike shouldn't be forced into protests, of course there are grey areas where something could be construed as racist which aren't meant to be, or people being lumped together for views which are quite different on the spectrum of the definition of 'racism', but if you think that these MIllwall fans are genuinely booing because their eyes have been opened to Marxist agenda rather than because it goes against the grain of who they are (i.e. racists) then you are living in cloud cuckoo land, or trying to justify your own prejudice.

Yeah, ridiculous. Even his dad not actually being dead shouldn't detract from this totally legitimate reason for the tattoo.

It's lucky we can rely on Millwall fans to have their eyes open and not fall for this leftie propaganda. They've always been such a stand up bunch too, can't possibly be any other explanation other than 'wanting to keep politics out of football'. Presumably they will also be kicking off when the players run out with poppies on their shirts. It's just a coincidence, nothing more, that those with a history of being a bit racist are now the enlightened ones, and we are so lucky that these evil Marxists (footballers) who want to spread their evil message (reminding people that black people still face prejudice) have come up against such a genuine bunch of good guys (Millwall fans) prepared to stop this continued oppression of little Englanders.

Me neither, a pretty shocking read to be honest! Probably the greatest player the world has ever seen. A bit before my time to properly judge but you only have to look at clips of him playing and realise that he could do things no-one else could (eg what Lineker talks about in that video). Maybe not the greatest 'professional footballer' in the sense that many of his years were blighted by issues and if he had coupled his talent with more professionalism and commitment he would have done more, but even despite that he is revered for clubs (Boca/Napoli) and country for what he did achieve. Not bad going really. Imagine being a 'wasted talent' yet still being the greatest ever, ha.

It does require people to show an element of acceptance. I think 30 seconds would work. Obviously there is always going to be some point where there will be displeasure, but I think most would say that was worth coping with if a) it prevented the terrible decisions and b) didn't come at the expense of the flow of the game. Although offside is close to being black and white, it's not quite - not like the ball crossing the line is - because as with Bamford's case, for e.g. at what point on the arm do you measure? Is it the armpit? If so, what point on the armpit? Offside is black and white if you can measure to the millimetre, but I don't think they can. The assistants not flagging for an offside complicates it a bit, but the result could just be that more 'slightly offside' goals are given, almost the equivalent of the old "advantage to the attacker" idea (I didn't really agree with that philosophy, but if that's the only side effect then so be it). It also works for fouls, but things like red cards can have a longer time period, because you don't have to halt the game to decide on that. Yes, there is a feasible scenario where in that time period a player who should have received a red card has scored but people would have to accept these unusual injustices (because a red card 5 mins later is still better than no red card at all). Don't get me wrong, I think there are plenty of "what about in scenario X?" arguments to be made with this too, and for my own reasoning I'd like to hear as many as possible, because maybe there is something that I haven't though of that renders the idea unworkable. But I'm not sure that the ones you've listed are included in that because the purpose of a time limit is a way of saying "it's not conclusive" without the VAR team having to say so.

Glory hunter

Or... make the most of it while it lasts, you can never take anything for granted with Saints!