Other Games 21/22

[Saint Keef]

With Man City 3-0 up against Leeds before half-time, it looks like we've just moved up a place in the league.  Come on City (never thought I'd say that!)

[Toussaint]

Leeds are competing with Saints 0-6 with 15 to go

[Toussaint]

1 minute ago, Toussaint said:

Leeds are competing with Saints 0-6 with 15 to go

7

[M271]

We want 10, we want 10......................

[badgerx16]

2 minutes ago, Toussaint said:

Leeds are competing with Saints 0-6 with 15 to go

 

1 minute ago, Toussaint said:

7

Now below us in the table.

[Chez]

1 minute ago, M271 said:

We want 10, we want 10......................

we sure do, and you never know, goal difference might be the difference

[Turkish]

10 mins plus injury time for 3 goals, Come on city!

[Toussaint]

Crap as we are we aren’t the crappiest at the moment. 

[CB Fry]

We want 10

[FarehamSaintJames]

Leeds have been shocking. Atrocious. Dismal.

One of the worst performances I’ve seen since our 9-0’s.

[Toussaint]

Just now, FarehamSaintJames said:

Leeds have been shocking. Atrocious. Dismal.

One of the worst performances I’ve seen since our 9-0’s.

And we had the excuse of ten men for most of both games

[LuckyNumber7]

Norwich were dire tonight too. Still irks me that we lost to them.

[TWar]

1 minute ago, LuckyNumber7 said:

Norwich were dire tonight too. Still irks me that we lost to them.

Same, I was relatively calm about the goalkeeping situation until that game, thinking we could see out the season and buy one in the summer but after Macca through away 3 points there (and subsequently two at Leicester) I want a keeper lined up for the beginning of January. Won't happen though.

[CB Fry]

Dean Smith could be the first Prem manager to lose 5 in a row for two different clubs in the same season. And he might even achieve that before Christmas.

Already on 3 on the spin, with away at WHU and home to Arsenal to come.

I think he was absolutely mad to jump straight back in with a team that were pretty certain go down anyway.

Edited 14 December, 2021 by CB Fry

[Daft Kerplunk]

Good fortune for the club as there are clearly worse teams than us. Perfect for profits too where minimal spend equals hanging on to the big bank carriage of the PL gravy train. 

[Bob76]

42 minutes ago, TWar said:

Same, I was relatively calm about the goalkeeping situation until that game, thinking we could see out the season and buy one in the summer but after Macca through away 3 points there (and subsequently two at Leicester) I want a keeper lined up for the beginning of January. Won't happen though.

So still think it was just the keeper to blame not the other ten players or, God forbid, the manager and tactics😂😂

[TWar]

3 minutes ago, Bob76 said:

So still think it was just the keeper to blame not the other ten players or, God forbid, the manager and tactics😂😂

There were a number of weaker players that game, but there isn't another keeper in the league that doesn't save both of those routinely (who doesn't play for us!). Our strikers could have been more clinical, our attacking mids could have made more chances but lets be real, there was one player that performed at an abysmal level that game and cost us the points comfortably more than anyone else.

Certainly not the tactics. We had over double their shots and way ahead on possession, xG, etc. Our strikers could have put a second away but our keeper fucked it.

Edited 14 December, 2021 by TWar

[Teddeer]

46 minutes ago, CB Fry said:

Dean Smith could be the first Prem manager to lose 5 in a row for two different clubs in the same season. And he might even achieve that before Christmas.

Already on 3 on the spin, with away at WHU and home to Arsenal to come.

I think he was absolutely mad to jump straight back in with a team that were pretty certain go down anyway.

Lucky for him we gifted them 3 points in typical benevolent fashion.

[Bob76]

8 hours ago, TWar said:

There were a number of weaker players that game, but there isn't another keeper in the league that doesn't save both of those routinely (who doesn't play for us!). Our strikers could have been more clinical, our attacking mids could have made more chances but lets be real, there was one player that performed at an abysmal level that game and cost us the points comfortably more than anyone else.

Certainly not the tactics. We had over double their shots and way ahead on possession, xG, etc. Our strikers could have put a second away but our keeper fucked it.

You really do have a blind spot don't you, the game is not played on a spreadsheet, we have a manager who picks the team and tactics that routinely fail, he must take at least some of the blame or why have a manager at all 

[egg]

9 hours ago, TWar said:

There were a number of weaker players that game, but there isn't another keeper in the league that doesn't save both of those routinely (who doesn't play for us!). Our strikers could have been more clinical, our attacking mids could have made more chances but lets be real, there was one player that performed at an abysmal level that game and cost us the points comfortably more than anyone else.

Certainly not the tactics. We had over double their shots and way ahead on possession, xG, etc. Our strikers could have put a second away but our keeper fucked it.

xG is bollox. People talk about people overperforming or underperforming their xG, but don't stop to think that the xG was wrong to begin with. Take Telles from Man Utd. He's had 3 shots on goal since he's been back in the team. 2 have hit the woodwork from free kicks, 1 has been on target. On a stats basis he's had 2 off target efforts so his xG is shit. In the real world though, he's on free kicks, is bloody accurate, and one of those woodwork efforts will doubtless go in soon. If it does, some numpty will say he's overperforming on his xG. 

On the rest of it, nonsense. We didn't lose that game because of one player. We lost because we blew ourselves out after 20 mins, then got picked off with our naive zonal marking again being an issue. Our players are average, ditto our manager. 

[TWar]

1 hour ago, egg said:

xG is bollox. People talk about people overperforming or underperforming their xG, but don't stop to think that the xG was wrong to begin with. Take Telles from Man Utd. He's had 3 shots on goal since he's been back in the team. 2 have hit the woodwork from free kicks, 1 has been on target. On a stats basis he's had 2 off target efforts so his xG is shit. In the real world though, he's on free kicks, is bloody accurate, and one of those woodwork efforts will doubtless go in soon. If it does, some numpty will say he's overperforming on his xG. 

On the rest of it, nonsense. We didn't lose that game because of one player. We lost because we blew ourselves out after 20 mins, then got picked off with our naive zonal marking again being an issue. Our players are average, ditto our manager. 

I feel you might not understand xG super well, based on this. xG doesn't take into account whether the shot is on or off target, it calculates how likely it is to go in the moment it is struck. The outcome of the shot doesn't effect the xG.

A free kick is a hard thing to finish, statistically speaking, as of last season JWP had the highest conversion rate of any active player in europes top 5 leagues IIRC and was only about 20%. If Dalot does score free kicks regularly he would over perform xG and it would show him to be a terrific finisher, because he would be.

[TWar]

1 hour ago, Bob76 said:

You really do have a blind spot don't you, the game is not played on a spreadsheet, we have a manager who picks the team and tactics that routinely fail, he must take at least some of the blame or why have a manager at all 

Managers aren't there to "take blame", they are there to put out the best team and coach them. He can't tell McCarthy not to play like a sunday league keeper. This has nothing to do with "spreadsheets", rewatch the norwich goals and tell me again that basically any keeper in the league would consider them both absolutely routine.

[Lord Duckhunter]

18 minutes ago, TWar said:

Managers aren't there to "take blame", they are there to put out the best team and coach them. He can't tell McCarthy not to play like a sunday league keeper. 

God, do you really believe the pony you write. This “tactical analyst “ persona is wearing a bit thin. Seeing things others can’t, doesn’t make you Arsene Wenger, more David Icke I’d say.

McCarthy played because Ralph picked him, the players played poorly second half because Ralph can’t motivate them to play 90 mins, Norwich won despite being a horrendous side because of failings with our first team, a first team that Ralph has been running for a longer period than most modern managers. The buck stops with him. The blame lies with him. 
 

Stop digging 

 

 

[TWar]

Just now, Lord Duckhunter said:

God, do you really believe the pony you write. This “tactical analyst “ persona is wearing a bit thin. Seeing things others can’t, doesn’t make you Arsene Wenger, more David Icke I’d say.

McCarthy played because Ralph picked him, the players played poorly second half because Ralph can’t motivate them to play 90 mins, Norwich won despite being a horrendous side because of failings with our first team, a first team that Ralph has been running for a longer period than most modern managers. The buck stops with him. The blame lies with him. 
 

Stop digging 

 

 

What "tactical analyst" persona? We are all analysing the tactics?

McCarthy played because we don't have anyone better. Saying Ralph picked him so he is to blame is implying we had better options hidden away somewhere. We didn't. This is why you are so hard to take seriously. Your criticism of Ralph seems to be "I don't care if all the options were bad, he picked a bad one thus it's on him" which is the mentality of a child.

Norwich one because our keeper is shit, our second keeper is shit, our third keeper is so shit he doesn't get past the first three or even get a chance when they are injured. Also, not that it would have helped with Norwich but unfortunately by the looks of things, our emergency loan keeper looks shit too. You crying "but why didn't he just pick a good keeper" is honestly such a stupid argument. Not as stupid as you signing off every message with "stop digging" like it is a catchphrase but I guess it's better to be known for a catchphrase than to be known for being a bit dim.

[Give it to Ron]

4 minutes ago, TWar said:

What "tactical analyst" persona? We are all analysing the tactics?

McCarthy played because we don't have anyone better. Saying Ralph picked him so he is to blame is implying we had better options hidden away somewhere. We didn't. This is why you are so hard to take seriously. Your criticism of Ralph seems to be "I don't care if all the options were bad, he picked a bad one thus it's on him" which is the mentality of a child.

Norwich one because our keeper is shit, our second keeper is shit, our third keeper is so shit he doesn't get past the first three or even get a chance when they are injured. Also, not that it would have helped with Norwich but unfortunately by the looks of things, our emergency loan keeper looks shit too. You crying "but why didn't he just pick a good keeper" is honestly such a stupid argument. Not as stupid as you signing off every message with "stop digging" like it is a catchphrase but I guess it's better to be known for a catchphrase than to be known for being a bit dim.

Do you read back the bollox you write? 
If you think Forster didn’t deserve picking ahead of McCarthy says everything.

Take yourself away from xg and spreadsheets and watch the game.

Picked McCarthy because we didn’t have anyone better ….jeesh

 

[austsaint]

6 minutes ago, TWar said:

What "tactical analyst" persona? We are all analysing the tactics?

McCarthy played because we don't have anyone better. Saying Ralph picked him so he is to blame is implying we had better options hidden away somewhere. We didn't. This is why you are so hard to take seriously. Your criticism of Ralph seems to be "I don't care if all the options were bad, he picked a bad one thus it's on him" which is the mentality of a child.

Norwich one because our keeper is shit, our second keeper is shit, our third keeper is so shit he doesn't get past the first three or even get a chance when they are injured. Also, not that it would have helped with Norwich but unfortunately by the looks of things, our emergency loan keeper looks shit too. You crying "but why didn't he just pick a good keeper" is honestly such a stupid argument. Not as stupid as you signing off every message with "stop digging" like it is a catchphrase but I guess it's better to be known for a catchphrase than to be known for being a bit dim.

Your comments would be improved by putting a brake on the "bit dim" and "stupid" characterisations.   Quite a few of us disagree with some of Duck's comments yet he's a colourful poster who adds some Football wisdom from the "older generation".

[TWar]

9 minutes ago, Give it to Ron said:

Do you read back the bollox you write? 
If you think Forster didn’t deserve picking ahead of McCarthy says everything.

Take yourself away from xg and spreadsheets and watch the game.

Picked McCarthy because we didn’t have anyone better ….jeesh

 

And the cycle begins again. People will watch Macca for a while, notice he is wank and clamour for Forster, Forster will be wank for a while (just long enough for people to forget how poor Macca was) and then clamour for McCarthy, rinse and repeat ad nauseum. 

The fact of the matter is:

Macca is the worst shot stopper in the league, second worst distribution in the league, and decentish at claiming crosses (like midtable)

Forster is the second worst shot stopper in the league (unless it is low to his sides then he is fucked), actually worst distribution in the league, and can't claim crosses nearly as well as he can't catch the ball

Neither is good, whoever we had right now people would be crying for the other, and when we regularly switch like the fans ask for then they (correctly) criticise a lack of consistency. There is no right answer to the GK situation other than "spend all that money we made on Ings/Vest and didn't reinvest on someone actually half decent" but we didn't do that so here we are.

Edited 15 December, 2021 by TWar

[TWar]

1 minute ago, austsaint said:

Your comments would be improved by putting a brake on the "bit dim" and "stupid" characterisations.   Quite a few of us disagree with some of Duck's comments yet he's a colourful poster who adds some Football wisdom from the "older generation".

Whereas I think Duckhunter is that awkward mix of dim, argumentative, and way over self confident that makes him fundamentally unpleasant to interact with. I also think his football wisdom boils down to "if team is bad, it's always the manager" or "he would be better if he were more of a bloke"

[Billy the Kidd]

6 minutes ago, TWar said:

And the cycle begins again. People will watch Macca for a while, notice he is wank and clamour for Forster, Forster will be wank for a while (just long enough for people to forget how poor Macca was) and then clamour for McCarthy, rinse and repeat ad nauseum. 

The fact of the matter is:

Macca is the worst shot stopper in the league, second worst distribution in the league, and decentish at claiming crosses (like midtable)

Forster is the second worst shot stopper in the league (unless it is low to his sides then he is fucked), actually worst distribution in the league, and can't claim crosses nearly as well as he can't catch the ball

Neither is good, whoever we had right now people would be crying for the other, and when we regularly switch like the fans ask for then they (correctly) criticise a lack of consistency. There is no right answer to the GK situation other than "spend all that money we made on Ings/Vest and didn't reinvest on someone actually half decent" but we didn't do that so here we are.

I agree with you on this, but Ralph chose to spend our biggest chunk of £££ on a new LB which was absolutely required, and barely plays him. 

Id be surprised if we didn’t get someone in Jan, we simply can’t go through the remaining games with the current situation, and this was something that should have been fixed last summer. 

[TWar]

5 minutes ago, Billy the Kidd said:

I agree with you on this, but Ralph chose to spend our biggest chunk of £££ on a new LB which was absolutely required, and barely plays him. 

Id be surprised if we didn’t get someone in Jan, we simply can’t go through the remaining games with the current situation, and this was something that should have been fixed last summer. 

I don't think Ralph is in charge of the money we spend, tbf, that is the director of footballs job. Unfortunately, I wouldn't be surprised at all if we didn't sign someone. We needed a first choice CB in the summer having lost Vestergaard and we instead signed a 4th choice one, despite us having a load of left over money from sales. Gao is on his was out and until he goes I suspect we are not spending at all.

And I think the playing (or not so) of Perraud is not necessarily a bad thing. We signed what we thought to be an incredibly promising back up rightback for insanely cheap and were intending to play him behind KWP I imagine. That player was so good (being nominated for prem player of the month a little while ago) that he had to play. Now we have KWP, one of our top 5 players, displaced so unfortunately for Perraud he took his spot. I imagine we fully intended for Perraud and KWP to be our pairing but no one expected Tino to be as good as he is. That's a good thing imo.

Edited 15 December, 2021 by TWar

[Lord Duckhunter]

36 minutes ago, TWar said:

What "tactical analyst" persona? We are all analysing the tactics?

McCarthy played because we don't have anyone better. Saying Ralph picked him so he is to blame is implying we had better options hidden away somewhere. We didn't. This is why you are so hard to take seriously. Your criticism of Ralph seems to be "I don't care if all the options were bad, he picked a bad one thus it's on him" which is the mentality of a child.

Norwich one because our keeper is shit, our second keeper is shit, our third keeper is so shit he doesn't get past the first three or even get a chance when they are injured. Also, not that it would have helped with Norwich but unfortunately by the looks of things, our emergency loan keeper looks shit too. You crying "but why didn't he just pick a good keeper" is honestly such a stupid argument. Not as stupid as you signing off every message with "stop digging" like it is a catchphrase but I guess it's better to be known for a catchphrase than to be known for being a bit dim.

He’s been in charge for a decent length of time, the goalkeeper situation is down to him. Either he hasn’t got the balls to take on his bosses over it, or he’s happy with muddling by. The fact McCarthy has signed a new contract, the fact he keeps playing him, leads me to believe Ralph thinks he is good enough. The day he walked into the club it was obvious the keeper situation was dire, the fact it still is now, is a reflection on the bloke in charge. The buck stops with the manager. 

[TWar]

1 minute ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

He’s been in charge for a decent length of time, the goalkeeper situation is down to him. Either he hasn’t got the balls to take on his bosses over it, or he’s happy with muddling by. The fact McCarthy has signed a new contract, the fact he keeps playing him, leads me to believe Ralph thinks he is good enough. The day he walked into the club it was obvious the keeper situation was dire, the fact it still is now, is a reflection on the bloke in charge. The buck stops with the manager. 

So Ralph says "I want a new keeper" and they say "We can't afford a good one". Then what? Do his "balls" just produce the money?

You are right, it is a reflection on the bloke in charge. The issue is, you don't seem to grasp who the "bloke in charge" of a football club is. It's the guy who signs the cheques. And that guy is looking to sell. Ralph isn't even the rung below him, that's Semmens. Signings are not on the manager, they don't control the budget, do the scouting, or make the signings. They ask for stuff, but that is that, and we have no idea what Ralph has asked for.

[Give it to Ron]

16 minutes ago, TWar said:

So Ralph says "I want a new keeper" and they say "We can't afford a good one". Then what? Do his "balls" just produce the money?

You are right, it is a reflection on the bloke in charge. The issue is, you don't seem to grasp who the "bloke in charge" of a football club is. It's the guy who signs the cheques. And that guy is looking to sell. Ralph isn't even the rung below him, that's Semmens. Signings are not on the manager, they don't control the budget, do the scouting, or make the signings. They ask for stuff, but that is that, and we have no idea what Ralph has asked for.

Can you advise then why  Ralph hasn’t brought one player with him ?

With his knowledge of German/Austrian football not one keeper is better than McCarthy or Forster that we could afford ?

 

[Give it to Ron]

19 minutes ago, TWar said:

So Ralph says "I want a new keeper" and they say "We can't afford a good one". Then what? Do his "balls" just produce the money?

You are right, it is a reflection on the bloke in charge. The issue is, you don't seem to grasp who the "bloke in charge" of a football club is. It's the guy who signs the cheques. And that guy is looking to sell. Ralph isn't even the rung below him, that's Semmens. Signings are not on the manager, they don't control the budget, do the scouting, or make the signings. They ask for stuff, but that is that, and we have no idea what Ralph has asked for.

So we buy into his playbook right across the club yet refuse his request come off it 

[saint1977]

39 minutes ago, TWar said:

So Ralph says "I want a new keeper" and they say "We can't afford a good one". Then what? Do his "balls" just produce the money?

You are right, it is a reflection on the bloke in charge. The issue is, you don't seem to grasp who the "bloke in charge" of a football club is. It's the guy who signs the cheques. And that guy is looking to sell. Ralph isn't even the rung below him, that's Semmens. Signings are not on the manager, they don't control the budget, do the scouting, or make the signings. They ask for stuff, but that is that, and we have no idea what Ralph has asked for.

In which case why the heck did RH agree to a 2 year deal for a totally past it Theo at £75k p/w? That and the wasted extension for Long - who has played even less - would have paid for a first team keeper. The first team manager has to assert himself on that with the final say, something RH doesn’t seem to struggle with as alluded to at fans forums. I get that Les did the club’s knees in on Fraser’s extension which was a strange affair all round but mistakes in the PL tend to be costly. Les has been gone 3 years, the club can’t keep blaming that now. 

Edited 15 December, 2021 by saint1977

[TWar]

27 minutes ago, Give it to Ron said:

So we buy into his playbook right across the club yet refuse his request come off it 

What? No, we'd refuse his request to spend £15m on a keeper. Because we don't have a pot to piss in. He can do what he wants with a playbook, that doesn't cost the club money.

Regarding your edit, doubt it. We needed a good second choice CB and coughed up £4m. Any keeper we signed for pennies would be incredibly risky and could very easily completely flop and then we'd have another player sat on our wagebill blocking future signings. We need to spend real money if we want consistent quality, especially in goal.

Edited 15 December, 2021 by TWar

[TWar]

10 minutes ago, saint1977 said:

In which case why the heck did RH agree to a 2 year deal for a totally past it Theo at £75k p/w? That and the wasted extension for Long - who has played even less - would have paid for a first team keeper. The first team manager has to assert himself on that with the final say, something RH doesn’t seem to struggle with as alluded to at fans forums. I get that Les did the club’s knees in on Fraser’s extension which was a strange affair all round but mistakes in the PL tend to be costly. Les has been gone 3 years, the club can’t keep blaming that now. 

Ralph doesn't sign the deals, Semmens does. Theo was definitely an error, he probably thought that because it was a free transfer and only a two year deal it was a low risk signing. Definitely a bad one though. Nobodies perfect, our other signings this summer have been very good value for money imo (even Lyanco, I just wish we'd spent more and gotten better). Regarding Long, I think we thought we could loan him to the championship, he'd do really well, and we'd recoup a modest fee selling him. I don't know what Long is on but if we got Bournemouth to pay half of it and then we flogged him for £1m at the end it makes financial sense. Again, it was a poor choice, but not every choice is going to come off.

The first team manager doesn't have the final say on transfers, everyone knows that. The budget is approved from above, and the signings are approved by the director of football. I think Les did cock up with Forster, and I think a lot of his mistakes still haunt us to this day. 3 years may seem like a while but contracts tend to be for 4-5 years so Les' impact won't truly be gone from the club for a little while yet. Also post Les but pre-Semmens wasn't much better tbh.

[Fan The Flames]

2 hours ago, austsaint said:

Your comments would be improved by putting a brake on the "bit dim" and "stupid" characterisations.   Quite a few of us disagree with some of Duck's comments yet he's a colourful poster who adds some Football wisdom from the "older generation".

But LD has been digging this guy out for weeks, what do you expect. So Twar is meant to accept LD for what he is but not the other way around, I guess that's the older generation for you.

[Lord Duckhunter]

2 hours ago, TWar said:

So Ralph says "I want a new keeper" and they say "We can't afford a good one". Then what? Do his "balls" just produce the money?

You are right, it is a reflection on the bloke in charge. The issue is, you don't seem to grasp who the "bloke in charge" of a football club is. It's the guy who signs the cheques. 

Course they could afford one, It’s about priorities. Personally, I’d have used the Walcott wages to get a keeper in for this season. If I couldn’t find one, I’d have sold Golden Bollocks and got someone decent in nets with the money. The club set a budget, I don’t believe for one minute Ralph couldn’t have insisted on certain positions being strengthened within that budget. He has more control over the club than most managers, yet has to put up with sub standard goalkeepers. Here’s the thing, I’ve seen nothing to suggest that Ralph even thinks McCarthy is substandard. Plays him regularly tick. Signed a new contract tick. The idea that Ralph sits meekly by whilst having to play a goalkeeper he doesn’t rate is just pure pony, put out there by people that won’t accept Teflon ain’t that good a manager. 

[TWar]

Just now, Lord Duckhunter said:

Course they could afford one, It’s about priorities. Personally, I’d have used the Walcott wages to get a keeper in for this season. If I couldn’t find one, I’d have sold Golden Bollocks and got someone decent in nets with the money. The club set a budget, I don’t believe for one minute Ralph couldn’t have insisted on certain positions being strengthened within that budget. He has more control over the club than most managers, yet has to put up with sub standard goalkeepers. Here’s the thing, I’ve seen nothing to suggest that Ralph even thinks McCarthy is substandard. Plays him regularly tick. Signed a new contract tick. The idea that Ralph sits meekly by whilst having to play a goalkeeper he doesn’t rate is just pure pony, put out there by people that won’t accept Teflon ain’t that good a manager. 

Based on what? We needed a striker to replace Ings and we needed an LB to replace Bertrand. After that, we didn't spend over £5m on anyone. What reasoning do you have to say "course they could afford one". Walcotts wages would be the same as the keepers wages, where does the transfer fee come from? Or the fact the keepers contract would be twice as long.

Presumably by "golden bollocks" you mean JWP, selling him would have been stupid as all hell.

You can believe what you want, but managers don't have the power to just "insist" on signings and then they happen.

He plays him regularly as he has no-one else, he got a new contract because otherwise he has 0 keepers next summer. One needed to stay on. Also Ralph doesn't distribute contracts.

The fact is, both our keepers are bad and despite what you might think, it is not the managers job to change that fact. The budget comes from the owner, the scouting comes from the scouting department, and the negotiating and buying is done by Semmens. I think a lot of your hate for Ralph is some strange belief that he does everything from personally funding the transfers, scouting the talent, all the way to cleaning St Mary's loos. If they run out of pies are you going to hold that over him too?

[Lord Duckhunter]

Theo Walcott

 

Stop digging 

[Lord Duckhunter]

4 minutes ago, TWar said:

 If they run out of pies are you going to hold that over him too?

Seeing as we keep running out of them second half, i reckon you’re on to something. 

[TWar]

9 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Theo Walcott

 

Stop digging 

What does this even mean?

[Bob76]

6 hours ago, TWar said:

Managers aren't there to "take blame", they are there to put out the best team and coach them. He can't tell McCarthy not to play like a sunday league keeper. This has nothing to do with "spreadsheets", rewatch the norwich goals and tell me again that basically any keeper in the league would consider them both absolutely routine.

So just to be sure then,

Ralph is not to blame for transfers.

Ralph team selection is dictated by lack of good players.

Ralph's tactics don't lose us games, that is down to individual player mistakes.

Ralph is not there to take the blame.

So what does he get paid for?

 

 

Edited 15 December, 2021 by Bob76

[Toadhall Saint]

26 minutes ago, Bob76 said:

So just to be sure then,

Ralph is not to blame for transfers.

Ralph team selection is dictated by lack of good players.

Ralph's tactics don't lose us games, that is down to individual player mistakes.

Ralph is not there to take the blame.

So what does he get paid for?

 

 

Being wank obviously 😉

[Billy the Kidd]

13 minutes ago, Toadhall Saint said:

Being wank obviously 😉

Ooo, if there is a well paid job for wanking, anyone got a link to the application form?

[LiberalCommunist]

Burnleys fixture list is going to be bonkers. Hopefully they get a cup run! 

[TWar]

1 hour ago, Bob76 said:

So just to be sure then,

Ralph is not to blame for transfers.

Ralph team selection is dictated by lack of good players.

Ralph's tactics don't lose us games, that is down to individual player mistakes.

Ralph is not there to take the blame.

So what does he get paid for?

 

 

With the money we have spent, survival. Then longer term, to work on a shoestring developing players, selling them as soon as they get good, and then rebuilding with the cheap replacements the club give him. Rinse and repeat, keep making money for the owners whilst dodging the drop.

We have spent much less than our contemporaries since he arrived and yet his win % is double that of the guys that proceeded him, he's paid for that. He's paid to keep us up with the money we spend for him. At the moment he's doing it. Fans want him to be cracking top half/europe but he can only do so much with the cash we put down, and he's doing pretty well all things considered, if you were to look at our spending.

Edited 15 December, 2021 by TWar

[Nordic Saint]

Covid is hitting attendances:

 

Chelsea 1-1 Everton

 

Attendance: 13,933

 

Chelsea 1-1 Everton: Jarrad Branthwaite equaliser gives Toffees hard-earned point - BBC Sport

[CB Fry]

6 minutes ago, Nordic Saint said:

Covid is hitting attendances:

 

Chelsea 1-1 Everton

 

Attendance: 13,933

 

Chelsea 1-1 Everton: Jarrad Branthwaite equaliser gives Toffees hard-earned point - BBC Sport

More realistically Covid causing BBC (or someone from the Press Association) to incorrectly type in a number. It won't have been 13k, they probably twice that many as that as season ticket holders alone.

Edited 16 December, 2021 by CB Fry