Agree,I was a bit worried when I saw DCL's arm hit Yorro and I don't think you could complain if it was given as a foul on field. On the whole I thought the ref was quite generous to Man Utd re the DCL challenges over the whole game.
Great thread. Thanks very much Will!
He was second two years running be4 this. Apparently pulled out of current Bg trip to Far East for personal reasons ( not worth him risking injury maybe).
Paul Tierney was in the middle at Villa yesterday. Don't know if he missed any head high judo moves.
See Dopey Thomas Bramall got the 4th official job too.
Objective -ve I think his Leeds teams have tended to underperform their xG in attack and defence. Subjective - would prefer more expansive football at times, but recognise there would be downside.
Self- reflection. Presumably if "we all see the tactical problems", that applies to the players too & we would not by now have the harmonious group that you acknowledge. Also respect shown to DF by his peers does not fit with an overly negative view of DF's capabilities at this level.
Agree. Quick calc shows our xG difference since then, over 10 games, is about -2 ( not bad really).
Stach one is also very interesting. A small creative, no 10 type be4 a late mega growth spurt. Got the impression he still prefers playing higher up the pitch.
Seen other criticisms so must have missed a few errors because I thought he was pretty good too. Thought he was trying hard to regain the ball, follow runners & be robust in challenges. Was encouraged because dont think we can afford weaknesses in that area in ANY PL game. Okafor be4 inj also better
DCL has a slight knee problem & Joe rested as a precaution after that slight hamstring problem.Thats according to Adam Pope.
Excellent, I remember he said once he isn't a big believer in passports.
Agree, that's one of the reasons I like them both. Found ⚽️ of both entertaining if v different. Regardless of their claimed flaws which we all have, both made better teams look ordinary when, our unified team played them (more often than not).
Yes, Guardiola seems to only see what he wants to see & i think City benefit from big club big manager bias in their favour. Only agree with his remark on judgement of some fouls in England. Think LUFC are losing out because we tend to play quite fair ( or am I being biased?)
Doesn't detract in any way from my comments regarding the blame culture. Ciao4now
Thanks for the necessary clarification. Maybe that was an unjustified assumption on my part.
Often I prefer a different selection or set-up to DF, but do not pretend that I can know outcomes with my preferences. Also listen to pretty much all the managers comments to understand his approach & will call out those who don't bother & demean him alongside their own hubristic,untestable claims.
Another oversimplification to to think that "blue sky crowd" thinking is a thing. Your way of thinking fits a toxic blame culture which defies the complexity of the game and undermines club success, but undeniably has a market you are tapping in to. There are various factors feeding into outcomes.
You say if course, but journos always asking "why did that happen". DF has to say, well its probably not just one thing. Sorry , getting a bit philosophical. Will end here. Regards.
No need to apologise, I am trying to explain where I am.coming from.
There are a lot variables which determine the outcome of football matches so, imo, not wise to be too sure about anything judgements or criticisms you make.Plus as fans we never have as much information as the people making decisions.
We saw what happened at the end, not at the start or at half time - so still uncertain. Football is not an exact science- i am trained in those.
Im not being nasty, just think a lot of discussion might be better if it was presented in a less " dogmatic" way, because a lot of the subject matter is at least partly subjective. Imo more attempt needed to think why someone else might disagree eg DF, incl listening to what he actually says.
Think back to Liverpool and Newcastle away. Ridiculous to claim attacking involvement is a one off. You say wasn't needed against Sunderland when you dont know what would have happened with diff formation. Bright lad u are but not nostradamus. Once again , interesting pts but some humility.
I remember the pod casting serious doubts his abilities to cope prior to the home game against Newcastle (tbh the attitude was rather belittling of him).Would you now accept that he has proved his value in such games?
If he's as limited as you say, to me, it makes no sense to play him at all because the other players could do better given the same instructions by the manager.
I think Gruev is alongside Aaronson as being the fittest at the club. You criticise him for taking up positions he likely has been instructed to take up. It doesn't need saying that you are entitled to your opinion, but if it is that low, dont see how it makes sense to play him at all. Cheers 4 chat
Think its important not to ignore, to me, pretty obvious development in Gruev's involvement in attacking play ( loads of egs not just Forest). Tanaka scored some goals but otherwise has been erratic and quite often poor. Gruev for me deserves to be an option even in a more progressive role.
Loosening shackles a bit is 1 thing-unwise to take liberties with any team (incl Wolves) Tho weakened, S'land still put out a decent side counter attacking side - think we were a bit too cautious but poor execution/choices also issue. Their negativity a surprise compliment we didn't adapt well too.
When the Ramadan pause is booed again on Sunday #Lufc, I just hope the honest, decent, none racist, Leeds Fans call out the knuckle draggers this time, instead of making excuses about tactical talks, and other crap!
Just look at the comments again!
www.facebook.com/share/187wSs...