Other PL Round 4 Matches - 27-28th August, 2022

[OrangeKhrush]

Leicester didn't deserve that,  but the result puts more pressure on Rogers.   I still think they should have bailed and sold all their expensive high wage assets and recruit younger cheaper players and rebuild.   

City and Liverpool are alright,  so much for crisis. 

[Dan+]

4 minutes ago, True Blue said:

What are the odds he would get sacked if this form continues, not saying you lot did bad today but obviously against ten men reagrdless.

His days are numbered. I've seen this before. We're in a relegation battle if he stays frankly.

[Stan]

7 minutes ago, True Blue said:

What are the odds he would get sacked if this form continues, not saying you lot did bad today but obviously against ten men reagrdless.

Very high chance if we don't pick up points soon. 

2 minutes ago, OrangeKhrush said:

Leicester didn't deserve that,  but the result puts more pressure on Rogers.   I still think they should have bailed and sold all their expensive high wage assets and recruit younger cheaper players and rebuild.   

City and Liverpool are alright,  so much for crisis. 

Yeah, selling all our expensive assets will be fantastic business and really wise for where we want to be. You just want one of them to come to you

 

[True Blue]

2 minutes ago, Dan said:

His days are numbered. I've seen this before. We're in a relegation battle if he stays frankly.

Yeah agreed, but i doubt Leicester will be in danger. Too much quality in this team to go down.

[OrangeKhrush]

Just now, Stan said:

Very high chance if we don't pick up points soon. 

Yeah, selling all our expensive assets will be fantastic business and really wise for where we want to be. You just want one of them to come to you

 

at this rate one is going to chelsea and spurs want maddison.    You would have killed your bloated payroll and been able to rebuild with young ambitious players.   Not sure what is so outlandish about it.   You will lose Tielemans in January when he signs a pre contract elsewhere and then next season Maddison will be in the same position.    

Your window is closing,  reset it by restocking and rebuilding.    There is about 0% chance we will move for maddison now irrespective of whether I want him or not. 

[Stan]

2 minutes ago, OrangeKhrush said:

at this rate one is going to chelsea and spurs want maddison.    You would have killed your bloated payroll and been able to rebuild with young ambitious players.   Not sure what is so outlandish about it.   You will lose Tielemans in January when he signs a pre contract elsewhere and then next season Maddison will be in the same position.    

Your window is closing,  reset it by restocking and rebuilding.    There is about 0% chance we will move for maddison now irrespective of whether I want him or not. 

Because you seem to ignore the fact, no matter how many times I will say, that there are far more disposable assets to get rid of - Vestergaard, Bertrand, Soumare, Amartey. 

You also want us to sell all our best players so that there's one less challenger for you in the table. 

It makes absolutely no sense to sell them all at once. Would be utterly stupid. There's no guarantee any kind of dramatic rebuild you suggest would work. 

I know Tielemans and Maddison will eventually go, but we'd end up with an average squad if all the star players leave. 

[OrangeKhrush]

1 minute ago, Stan said:

Because you seem to ignore the fact, no matter how many times I will say, that there are far more disposable assets to get rid of - Vestergaard, Bertrand, Soumare, Amartey. 

You also want us to sell all our best players so that there's one less challenger for you in the table. 

It makes absolutely no sense to sell them all at once. Would be utterly stupid. There's no guarantee any kind of dramatic rebuild you suggest would work. 

I know Tielemans and Maddison will eventually go, but we'd end up with an average squad if all the star players leave. 

Everyone will be running for those names,  at a junk 'r' us sale. 

[Stan]

Just now, OrangeKhrush said:

Everyone will be running for those names,  at a junk 'r' us sale. 

Never mind. You don't get it. 

[OrangeKhrush]

4 minutes ago, Stan said:

Never mind. You don't get it. 

True,  nothing is certain.   

Keep players,  linger around the bottom and ambitious players want to leave,  like Fofana who doesn't want to play for a club that cannot improve the playing staff,  maybe stay up and what will make next season different? alternatively you can also get dragged into that relegation dog fight. 

Leeds didn't have to sell their players,  they did and bought smartly. 

[Dave]

For about half hour I thought we were going to win the league.

[Bluewolf]

2 minutes ago, The Palace Fan said:

For about half hour I thought we were going to win the league.

I am beginning to suspect that City have just thought Haaland was going to be doing all the work and have totally sat back in the first half their last two games until they were reminded at half time there is more than one player in a team... 

[Bluewolf]

When the team you picked in 'place your bets' was City for goals to points and they are 2-0 down at half time only to win 4-2 in the second half.. 

[Stan]

32 minutes ago, OrangeKhrush said:

True,  nothing is certain.   

Keep players,  linger around the bottom and ambitious players want to leave,  like Fofana who doesn't want to play for a club that cannot improve the playing staff,  maybe stay up and what will make next season different? alternatively you can also get dragged into that relegation dog fight. 

Leeds didn't have to sell their players,  they did and bought smartly. 

You act like you know everything about every player at Leicester. Like me coming in to the debate and telling you what Newcastle players want to do and what they should do. 

Can you imagine where we'd be if we sold Maddison, Tielemans, Fofana all in same window? Worse than where we are now most likely. 

Fofana wants to move because he's a spoilt brat and apparently always wanted to play for Chelsea. So he gets his 'dream' move. 

Still waiting by the way for proof or evidence of when you said Maddison has said he wants to leave. Oh wait, he hasn't and you're just assuming he does. 

You're not some kind of know it all on how every player thinks and what their motivation is. Stop acting like it. You base everything of rumours anyway. 

[Happy Blue]

1 hour ago, Bluewolf said:

I am beginning to suspect that City have just thought Haaland was going to be doing all the work and have totally sat back in the first half their last two games until they were reminded at half time there is more than one player in a team... 

First half was a freak score line, massively against the run of play they had one shot at goal but ended up 2-0 infront 

[Dan+]

3 hours ago, True Blue said:

Yeah agreed, but i doubt Leicester will be in danger. Too much quality in this team to go down.

I think so and think that will prove to be the case but you can't help but worry. We've got all the hallmarks of a crisis season. Fans unhappy, squad has indisputably been weakened, manager has lost virtually all support (see Stan for example who has been a far heavier backer of his than me and even he's saying it). There's a real rot set in here. It's just negative negative negative about us at the minute. I think we could salvage ourselves from any serious danger with 2/3 good signings in the next few days / January and a change of manager. I just think we need a freshen up and that'll get us back into some kind of gear. But it's a lot easier said than done and we're not in a great position to do it.

Said it in another thread but there only being another 10 games until the January window is surely going to work in our favour.

 

3 hours ago, OrangeKhrush said:

at this rate one is going to chelsea and spurs want maddison.    You would have killed your bloated payroll and been able to rebuild with young ambitious players.   Not sure what is so outlandish about it.   You will lose Tielemans in January when he signs a pre contract elsewhere and then next season Maddison will be in the same position.    

Your window is closing,  reset it by restocking and rebuilding.    There is about 0% chance we will move for maddison now irrespective of whether I want him or not. 

Our problem is recruiting badly and paying contracts to players at bad ages who aren't that good. If we're going to get rid of players I'd prefer not to get rid of our actual good ones.

Why fire sale the good ones? I don't trust us to replenish like I once did.

[Dan+]

I actually think today in isolation we were a little unlucky and I don't often say that. I saw very little wrong on that disallowed goal, we actually gave Vardy chances and he didn't take them, we hit the underside of the bar. For me though the big concern is the mentality. It's like they cannot mentally process capitalising and winning. When Chelsea went down to 10 men that put a bit of pressure on us to get a result and as everybody feared, we buckled and went 2-0 down. There is not a jot of confidence in any of them. It's been completely sapped and I put it largely down to this manager.

[Dan+]

OK I think that penalty cancels out that the disallowed goal.

[...Dan]

Why did they disallow the 3rd Palace goal? Nothing wrong with that is there? It's the same as the Karius CL final one.

[Stan]

@Spike I've seen the Barnes goal from better angle.

No doubt Barnes has an arm on Mendy. And I can see why the goal is disallowed, fair enough, by the rules which allow minimal at best contact on goalkeepers. 

But my question then becomes why is Mendy allowed to be all over Barnes and push him around? Why is Barnes not allowed to hold his ground in return? 

To me Mendy was too busy grappling with Barnes as much as Barnes did to him. Mendy was still able to jump and just missed the ball. Barnes got his head on it fairly. 

Goes back to one of my original points - goalkeepers get far too much protection. 

[Spike]

14 minutes ago, Stan said:

@Spike I've seen the Barnes goal from better angle.

No doubt Barnes has an arm on Mendy. And I can see why the goal is disallowed, fair enough, by the rules which allow minimal at best contact on goalkeepers. 

But my question then becomes why is Mendy allowed to be all over Barnes and push him around? Why is Barnes not allowed to hold his ground in return? 

To me Mendy was too busy grappling with Barnes as much as Barnes did to him. Mendy was still able to jump and just missed the ball. Barnes got his head on it fairly. 

Goes back to one of my original points - goalkeepers get far too much protection. 

Otherwise you’d have players explicitly trying to foul the goalie for a shot

[Devil-Dick Willie]

7 hours ago, 6666 said:

To be fair to Bournemouth, their tactic of keeping Salah quiet worked...

@nudge Here's a blast from the past, back in 2012 I think it was, 2012/13 season, When Stefan KeiBling was in hot shit form, our shit former Leverkusen manager, Dutt was like "I have the perfect plan to stop him from scoring" 

He did not score. 

We lost 4-1

[Dan+]

Goalkeepers get too much protection. Everyone knows there's nothing wrong with that.

[True Blue]

9 hours ago, Dan said:

OK I think that penalty cancels out that the disallowed goal.

Hardly mate i am usually very realistic but that pen would be soft, very soft. The disallowed goal would be 50-50 in most games however they just usually give the foul as the keeper can fly out like a mad man and be given a foul. Think both teams had their share of fortune as well, Chelsea having Vardy on his bad day, and Perez smashing the crossbar. With James hitting the post in the first half and Sterling being denied his best chance of the game by hitting the post. Shame about Gallagher as he really started well, however both yellows were spot on no discussion there he just wanted it too much.

[Reluctant Striker]

Keepers do somehow get to grapple with & jostle with opponent players more than any other position. And recklessly take out several players to get the ball.

They do also get far, far more protection from obstruction, not just fouls.

You occasionally see obstruction given if a defender just kind of remains in the path of an attacker & ref decides it's intentional. They give it much more often when a side has that 1 player standing near a keeper. But there appears to be zero consistency or clarity around. More open to vast interpretation than any other rule I can think of.

[Azeem]