yet everything he said was factually accurate. Perhaps this board is far too sensitive and thinks everything is a WUM
I don't think it was a wum, I think he meant it. As for 'factually accurate', I'm not so sure. Set aside the fact that Everton are well below par atm, they have a decent record at home to city and a history of being poor away from home when playing anyone. That makes it more likely that they get a result against city than Watford. The heavy fixture point Bobby made doesn't stack up either unless you can tell me when Everton ever rest players. The very packed Christmas period saw them play full strength sides every game, even [bar one player] against lowly little Lincoln in the cup [no offence to them].
Well well well. I was going to let it settle but: 1.There home form recently has been worse than there away (past ten games) and the crowd has deffo turned on them as everton have been abject There current home form reads 6 3 5 compared to 3 3 6 (playing the big 5 away from home and 2 of the big 6 at home) 2.Duri the christmas period against burnley and brighton they rested richarlison and sigi 1 game each during the christmas period although not during the same game. Arguably he needed legs in the side against city as sigis a bit more luxury than davies who works far harder. I suspect he probably could have started richarlison although hes terrible at holding up the ball. Thought everton played alright last night but i can see why they would prioritise watford over city (like most of the non top 6 sides do)
Bottom line - you don't 'rest' your best players at home against city. Tell me any team that rests their best players in the biggest games.
so Bobby was right? btw I did actually check back before I commented and they played weekend mid week for a bit there with those losses etc. fa.cup did impact. and factually 3 points off Watford is better than a 5% shout at 3 off city then getting maybe 1 as your best players are gone. you have to get yourself out of a winning mentality and think small time mate then it will make sense.
Was giving a balanced argument fella. I mitigated there away record playing united, city, arsenal, liverpool and chelsea away compared to just spurs and city at home. Recently though they have been horrendous both home and away Since losing to pool, 1 2 4 vs 2, 0, 3 Loads of smaller clubs (yea i put everton here) rest their players against the top 6 when theres a fixture pile up (normally mass changes let alone 2 of their "better" players).
if you want 40 points.... prioritise the mid to lower table sides. this is why we say city get an easy ride. this is why lfc need to get the foot on the throat of shots like west ham and keep it there. sides turn up to just keep score Dow
You think you boys have it bad, you only have one smaller side who want to turn up (everton). In london theres loads of "derbies". Chelsea have to put up with all their smaller sides busting a gut. Currently watford, fulham, west ham and palace.
They would turn up anyway as you would with united. Yea they are derbies but they would put their full team out anyway
Interestingly in a fixture list of 26 Jan, 29 Jan, 2 Feb, 6 Feb, they rest their players on the 6 Feb I appreciate the alternative view on this. The 'truth' of the matter lies somewhere in between.
With Everton. We've been in a few title races in the last decade or so, and they always fold and support the other team now. They never would have done that in the 80's.
Very true. There's still some level headed blues who would support us but it's the noisy ones with chips on their shoulders who get the attention.
Erm palace isn’t a derby for Chelsea. And I wouldn’t even say Watford is a derby either. Fulham is in theory but they’re **** and wouldn’t say they raise their game cos it’s chelsea.
