Ponz

Anyone who has actually watched Karius since he regained his place would know he's not shite. With Mignolet, Jones and Bogdan, we've seen what shite really is. Karius is 10 times the keeper any of that lot is. I'm not saying he's great, but he's definitely good enough for any of the Premier League's "big six" clubs.

 

Man City 2nd leg - costs us the first goal after stupid throw to VVD who was signalling for him to kick it up the field

Man City 2nd leg - poor punch results in goal, saved by wrong offside decision

Roma 1st leg - fluffs simple save from distance, very lucky after rebound onto cross bar

Roma 2nd leg - should have been sent off for mistimed dive on Dzeko, saved by wrong offside

Roma 2nd leg - fails to push relatively simple save to safety, Dzeko scores rebound

Add the final and that's 7 major errors in the space of 8 weeks - and these are just the ones I can recall off the top of my head.

People have been grading this guy on a curve because of his own/Mignolets' dismal pre-New Year standards. He has never been close to top 6 standard. He's made some good saves - to be fair - but lacks the concentration & composure of a top keeper.

Shelvey has found his level at Newcastle. A return wouldn't be good for us or him.

A few observations

- We have some wonderful attacking talent but still need a clinical striker who can put away the first chance in a tight game. Our front 3 generally need 2-3 chances to warm up. 

- Coutinho will be missed much more in these games than vs. top 6. You break these defences down with a defence splitting pass, quality shot from outside the box or mazing run from midfield. None of our remaning midfield are capable of this with any consistency (if at all). 

- Klopp's in-game management can be too flat footed at times. Why not shift Salah out wide instead of umpteen failed attempts to thread their central defensive needle? Lallana on too late when midfield creativity badly needed. Ings is not good enough but if you're going to play him, give him meaningful game time to contribute - the 15 minute cameos are pointless. 

- We don't appear to have a plan B when sides sit back, hoof out of defence and don't conform to Klopp's idea of playing football. Unfortunately, this applies to approx 14 teams in the league. 

He's had 27 games and been utter crap in most of them. I don't think he's made 5 notable saves in 2 years. 

Mig is not good enough but at least puts together the odd solid run and occasionally attempts to make a save. 

Yes, there is. The previous was much worse as we had zero good players to cover. Sorry, going with Klopp on this one if that’s what he chooses to do.

We'll find out soon enough - he's created a massive rod for his own back if we don't get top 4... 

Yes, our lack of a need for a CB was well documented.

There's a difference between waiting a few months to address an existing gap and actively creating a gap mid-season without a replacement lined up. 

I think his overwhelming incompetence in the summer was worse, isn’t it Big Virg.

 

Wait for the right player. No half measure

We didn't sell a world class CB in the summer so the analogy doesn't really work...

It's pretty clear he says "puta" and that's what gets Holgate agitated - he hadn't reacted at all until that point in the clip. Holgate thinks that's a racist term and so mis-translates into the n-word.

Explains why no one else in proximity reacted and why Holgate was composed in the second half (assume someone corrected him at half time as per the Mirror article). 

'Clear' is strong. The first one was a lot more debatable than the other 2, probably should've been given but the other 2 are not penalties for me

 

He was a typical European ref. Didn't allow contact and a physical game. It's up to our players to adapt to the situation. Benteke came on and all he did was give fouls away, which he would've gotten away with in the Prem

No 3 was a stonewall penalty. He was dragging his arm along the ground in a completely unnatural position and denied a clear goal scoring opportunity. No 1 probably was too but marginal enough to excuse.

The train companies are privatised. The rail network is fullly owned and operated by the government via Network Rail, which is largely responsible for the issues at Kings Cross/Finsbury Park (missing engineering work deadlines). 

Everton have only lost 2 games at home all season. If their players approach next week like a normal game, I'd says its about 50/50 on City dropping points. If they approach it the way the majority of their fanbase will, we're in big trouble. The one silver lining is that it's Martinez and not Moyes in charge or else we would be well and truly fucked.

IMO, biggest win of the season so far given how the other results went and fact that this was our second most difficult remaining away game. 

Just glanced at the log - we've now played every team in the top 13 away apart from Southampton and Man U (not particularly intimidating fixtures these days). Great advantage to have for the run-in with the top 6 so bunched together.

I didn't say leave to the private sector, I said leave to the greedy private sector. I would imagine that gives away what it means, doesn't it? Surely we can agree we don't want our governments dictating what clothes should look like or what music should sound like, leave that to private enterprises. Surely we can also agree that sometimes we don't want to leave basics necessities exposed to corporate greediness.

If by "corporate greediness" you mean seeking to maximise profit, then the vast majority of basic necessities (food, clothing, basic consumables, medicines etc.) are already exposed to this. Most governments accept that private companies are able to provide these more efficiently and at better quality than they can.

There may be a separate case for nationalising certain industries (e.g. public goods, which to be tend under provided by the private sector) but it has no relationship to how greedy companies are or whether the goods themselves are necessities. Either the private sector is better at supplying them or not.

I'd like to hear from both players before making judgements on Suarez and his future at the club.

 

Maybe I'm just in denial, but I dunno, if someone genuinely bit me, I'd make more of a fuss. I'd probably want to consult a doctor too. That said I haven't seen proper footage, just a picture, which obviously shows him with his gnashers around the arm, but did he bite down, did he gnaw, did he nibble?

I doubt he reached the skin given that Ivanovitch wasn't showing off any bite marks. Hardly in Tyson/Holyfield territory.

I'm no great fan of FSG but the person who compiled that needs to grasp the difference between "revenue" and "profits" (revenue net of operating costs, which includes player wages)

If it's true then it's a classy move.

 

Let's hope they don't spend it on rockets this time :whistle:

Given that Palestinian "education" consists of anti-semitic propoganda from age 3 onwards, that's probably a distinction without a difference.

There are plenty of brilliant young centre backs out there if we lose agger.

 

Watching some of you lot freaking out is quite hilarious. You seriously think we'd sell all our players and not replace them? Fucking hell.

I think we should stop selling our best players to clubs with already much stronger squads than us if we hope to challenge said clubs in the forseeable future. That's realism, not hysteria.

Great player, great man, never let us down. All the best, Dirk!

I think there's a difference between what is abhorrent and what is illegal abuse.

 

For the record, I do not condone anything Al has said in those quotes, but his opinion on John Barnes, for instance, was widely held at the time but we don't know if he now regrets that view. The BNP, like it or not, are a legal political party, and whilst he pulls no punches in his views on immigration, and to my mind crosses a line in the way he expresses them, he's hardly in a tiny minority, sadly, in this country.

 

I think we have to be careful to protect freedom of speech, whilst still vilifying racist views, but in my opinion labelling Al a racist here might be going a little far, especially whilst he is not a member of the site and therefore able to defend himself.

 

For the avoidance of confusion, I do not consider myself his friend and find some of his views personally repugnant, but I do believe in his right to them.

 

I worry, in this society, at times, that we are verging into the territory of thought crime.

Has anyone suggested he should be held criminally responsible for the statements? Freedom of speech is a defence only against legal persecution, not against (rightfully) facing personal and profressional consequences for repugnant statements.

Two cups won by a Russian oligarch. League won by an Arab sheikh. Modern football is truly fucking shit.

Unless you've met Alan no one here has any right to comment on his character.

 

That's my view anyway

Proudly proclaiming support for a party of ignorant racists tells me all I need to know about the man's character.

So it was more 'fair' that the mancs were able to outspend everyone else and steal their players, but only because they did it through having shops in Singapore?

Quite frankly? Yes. Success will always reflect a combination of sound management on and off the pitch. It's not "unfair" that they leveraged their success in the early Sky era to create a global commercial juggernaut while we were set back decades by the incompetence of Moores.

How else is anyone supposed to win the league these days without huge amounts of money to buy the best players and pay the highest wages? It's all very well saying you should 'build' but you don't get the chance too, Mascherano and Torres are proof of that, and let's see how long Newcastle's rough diamonds stick around when the wealthier clubs come knocking.

 

The only club that's managed it was Arsenal with Wenger's bargain buys and eye for a player.

 

The mancs have been trotting out the propaganda for years, especially when Blackburn won it, they'd 'bought' the league apparently even though head for head they'd spent about £4m less than the mancs (despite having to build from the ground up, unlike the mancs). The consensus seemed to be that everyone should just let the mancs win and that anything else was just cheating or bad sportsmanship.

 

Said it before but no club has dominated the league with wealth quite like the mancs have, they've been a money making machine for decades and have consistently broken transfer records, wage records, and used unscrupulous means to unsettle players to get their own way.

 

I'm glad for the city fans, they stuck with their club through successive relegations and I consider them a 'proper' club. Hats off to them, they deserve their day in the sun.

I think most don't consider it unfair if the wealth is linked to sound commercial decisions and revenue generating potential off the pitch. Big difference between that and whoring yourself to billionaires with a Champsionship Manager fetish.

Torres: 44 games - 11 goals - 12 assists

1 vs United in a defeat; misses sitter in the same game

1 vs Swansea - first in a 4-0 rout; sent off in the same game

1 vs Villa- 4th minute of injury time in a 4-2 win

3 vs QPR - scored when already 2-0 up

2 vs Genk in a 5-0 rout

2 vs Leicester- scored when Chelsea leading 2-0 and 3-1 respectively

1 vs Barca- 3rd minute of injury time, Chelsea already going through

Nope, still a bit part player.

There is no debt crisis. For example Spains debt is less than Germany's, go figure.

 

Its manufactured consent, the economic Iraq dossier.

Spain's deficit was 8.3% of GDP in 2011. Germany's was 1%. When Labour left power, the UK had the highest deficit of any OECD country at 13.3%.

It's hugely misleading to focus only on the level of debt and not the growth rate.