mrfahaji

The concern is still the fact that we have to play three though. Would be ok if our wing backs were great, but as it stands Valery doesn't look composed enough in attacking areas (maybe this will come in time).

I've always liked Austin, but can't help feel that if he is unhappy at his lack of first team chances, maybe he should work harder on his fitness. Ironically, 15 minutes sub appearances probably increase his likelihood of scoring rather than starting games, and Hasenhuttl is the first manager who has realised this.

Not actually true. Hughes was in charge - and was also in charge for the Wigan game (his first match). Appreciate that the club as a whole was still in the doldrums, but still surprising people would pass up the opportunity to see their team in an FA Cup semi final, it's not like that comes along very often for us!

Is strength in bowls an issue once you get beyond a certain point though? If (and I'm happy to be proved wrong but I think it's true) you are strong enough to bowl to the end of the lane and/or strong enough to knock another ball out the way, surely that's sufficient? It's like 2 people taking part in the fairground game 'High Striker'. If they can both ding the bell, then does it matter which person is stronger?

I think Lemina is a great player, but I'd have reservations about his discipline playing in a full back position. Not sure we can risk him having one of those days where he doesn't fancy chasing back after an attack breaks down...

I saw him with his kids at Winchester station once. It was a long time ago, back when he wasn't such a household name (i.e. 15 years ago). I want to say I've heard he lives in West Meon - that's not far from Bishops Waltham so perhaps it's true.

There's not one part of that sentence that makes me think we've done well in the negotiations (if it's true).

Lol, not sure how intentional it was to make sound like "I'm working from home, so obviously I'm not working" Funny, I saw an article on BBC about some women playing in a snooker tournament (as you can probably tell, I didn't read it thoroughly) and it made me think how snooker is surely a sport where women could be as good as men.

Who are they voting for then? Not a flippant remark - it feels like there aren't any legitimate parties to vote for any more unless you have extreme views (I'm not a Tory voter, but there's a similar predicament facing Labour at the moment, while the Lib Dems has become something of a non-entity).

Would be surprised/disappointed if we couldn't shift Cedric on a permanent deal. I understand why the likes of Boufal and Hoedt have had to go out on loan, but Cedric has proven credentials (even if many of us think they don't reflect his true ability) and he would probably be in the first team if a move wasn't in the offing.

I read that Inter want Cedric because Vrsaljko hasn't delivered in his loan spell from Atletico. Thought he was brilliant for Croatia in the World Cup - if a loan to Inter is above him, perhaps a loan to us isn't? It does sound like he has struggled with injuries though, so perhaps too big a risk (if even viable).

There's good news and there's irrelevant news.

I didn't think he was too bad in that Fulham game actually, but he made one or two dreadful errors. Which admittedly, is not acceptable, especially when you seem to do it every game. But he also did a lot of decent things in that match. I saw him play a lot worse, but by Fulham everyone had decided he was public enemy number 1 so anything good was ignored and anything bad was jumped on.

Hey - did you sign up? I normally get notified but only if you use the link. Have had 3 sign ups from Saintsweb so am pleasantly surprised! I managed to score points in my very first race, but it depends what group you land in. Rookie groups are more competitive than they were when I joined but in general if you get your race strategy about right, that's normally enough to score points or even podiums in Rookie. There are teams that you can join (through application, but there are always teams looking), and it's probably the best way to learn/improve. I definitely wouldn't jump into one straight away though. I did things alone for just over a season and eventually felt I needed a team to take my understanding to the next level. My friend joined the same team but he plays GPRO a bit more casually than I do and he's commented to me that he doesn't really like being in a team that much! Re helping each other - not in the sense of being able to trade resources within the game, and they have ways of tracking people who set up double accounts, but definitely in regard to messages, advice etc. One of the reasons I didn't join a team for ages was that I was able to find a lot of stuff out just by searching the forums (or google!). Most people on the forums are looking to help people out, especially those new to the game, and if you sign up I'll send you a message just in case you have any burning questions! There is also a mentor scheme, which I joined almost straight away. Looking back, my mentor wasn't actually that good at the game and didn't necessarily give the best advice, but he was really helpful for that initial few races.

There is always a risk with this strategy, but it's also the only realistic way of improving over time. I know we managed it with Lovren/Alderweireld/van Dijk, but the chances of us finding an upgrade on van Dijk were extremely slim, no matter what we spent. But perhaps if we bought 3 new players and they all turned out to be half decent then our team might be stronger overall. I don't think there's anything wrong with our business model per se, but clearly it relies on the scouting department being reasonably good. The answer to the debate really lies with how much luck there is with finding the right players. Were we just fortunate that the likes of Mane, Wanyama and Tadic were good players, or did we have different people or different criteria in place then? Or perhaps the environment has changed - maybe we were ahead of the game with this 'black box' idea but now other teams are just as sophisticated, plus you have the issue that the big clubs hoover up about 3 team's worth of talent so there simply isn't enough leftover for everyone else? This last thought only came to me as I scrolled through the list of PL transfers in summer 17/18 looking for alternative £10-£15m signings to Wesley Hoedt. Surely there would be loads... but Maguire was the only obvious one I could see.

True. I know it shouldn’t make a difference, but perhaps Oliver should have considered there was a minute till HT too. His pull back was a bit silly but it wasn’t dangerous play. The crowd was baying for blood, I’m surprised a decent red like Oliver was so easily swayed.

I'm not saying I agree with the decision, just that I can see how it unfolded that way.

I think the problem with the second yellow was that he had already tried to pull him back once, it was in an attacking position and right in front of the referee. It might have been a soft 'challenge', but I can see why he was given a second booking for those circumstances.

Seriously? If you want to make the argument that Salah shouldn't have got a penalty, then fine (I haven't seen it). But I can't believe anyone would think that Valery went down in a natural way from that challenge. The best dive I have ever seen was Jay Rodriguez away at Villa. Earned us a crucial win, I didn't like winning in that manner, but I was massively impressed with how convincing his dive was.

Thought I'd post here in case anyone was interested. I don't have enough time for games which require hours on end of gameplay just to get into the story, but a year or two ago I stumbled across this online game and have been playing it ever since. http://www.gpro.net/?id=16B43F5391E5 It's an F1 management game - it's definitely not about graphics - and there are two races per week (Tuesday & Friday evenings). You can spend ages on analysis if you like, but each race takes between 15 minutes and an hour to prepare for, so it's not a huge time drain unless you want it to be. The game is difficult, so won't appeal to those who expect to turn up and start winning after a few weeks. It's generally accepted that you 'find things out by yourself' (although there are FAQs, Newbie guides, Mentors, Forums etc to help) and this can take time. But it also means there is a lot of satisfaction when things do work out! Oh, and the other thing - the game is genuinely free to play! You can make 'supporter' donations and in return gets access to features, but they are not features which increase your chances of winning. I am in my 8th season and haven't made any contribution. I'm not sure there will be any interest, but perhaps a few people enjoy the same kind of things as me (football manager, f1, board games, excel...) and would love it. Reply here or send me a PM (or sign up and message me on GPRO itself!) if you have any more questions - I don't want to make this post too long!

Scale of acceptability for 'diving': 1) Not possible to stay on feet (i.e. not a dive) 2) Knocked off balance and don't attempt to stay on feet even though it might be possible to carry on 3) Exaggerated but still natural reaction to a foul 4) Choosing to fall over following contact (e.g. someone pushes you, you aren't unbalanced but you fall over anyway) 5) React to some contact by throwing yourself to the ground (VALERY) 6) Trail leg to 'initiate' contact with defender when defender is not impeding 7) Falling to the ground pretending there has been contact when there hasn't been (VARDY) This is just off the top of my head, maybe some people could dispute it. I think (4) is the grey area between being acceptable or not (personally I only find 1 and maybe 2 acceptable, but appreciate I am being rather quixotic with that view).

Why does contact (in a contact sport) necessarily equate to a foul? Surely it's only a foul if the contact is sufficient enough to prevent the other player continuing to play. Valery could have continued running but elected to throw himself to the ground. I cannot stand this "there was contact!" or "he's entitled to go down there" argument that seems commonplace now. It was clearly a dive, because there is no way that the nature of Chilwell's contact caused that reaction from Valery, he went down as if he had been pushed/clattered rather than tripped. That doesn't excuse Vardy though, absolutely no contact and a premeditated attempt to con the referee. I don't think his "leg breaker" challenge was that bad though. If you pause the replay at the right moment it looks shocking, but I don't think there are many scenarios where that challenge leads to serious injury, as Valery wasn't using a huge amount of force - and he actually gets the ball without getting Chilwell at all until he treads on his foot).

Hmmm I think he was looking for a penalty but knew not to make a meal out of it so as not to get booked.

He wasn't diving, he was "anticipating a challenge".

Trying to understand why Vestergaard just stops and watches as Gray (?) runs on to square it back.