As you didn't see the game I'll enlighten you.
I agree with you. Of the two, Costa is the one closer to getting a start, imo. This is purely based on Harrison being a bit flat on both sides of the international break. Bamford has not been in any way poor enough to be replaced.
Is our season truncated because we'll be promoted with 4 games to go ?Someone mentioned Eddies stats earlier and read somewhere today that he scores every 39 minutes which is huge.
We have another 35 matches to play and if Eddie plays a full 90 minutes I estimate he can score another 81 goals
Bamford played great and is different from Eddie and having all that pace I still say he could do a job on the left allowing him to create and take chances with Bamford. Costa is better on the right and that as a front 3 would scare the crap out of Derby. Could Eddie do to defenders what Bamford does? No he's different. Bamford who looks slight seems more powerful this season and really gets stuck into big defenders.
Interesting to hear that Bielsa loved todays game. He said he loves this league where bottom of the league can mix it with the top. He praised Barnsley's commitment, manager, players and tactics and said he is in love with this league. So we sit there biting our nails whilst he gets the horn watching a chess match seeing beauty in the art of press and endeavour.
I'm probably going to take pelters for this. I simply don't agree about Eddie & Costa.
Let's start with Costa. I was sat with Leeds60 watching the match. I remember saying that I was disappointed in Costa, as he'd been on for 25 minutes & done nothing of any significance. Leeds60 corrected me, as he had one decent run. OK, so I was wrong. He had ONE good run against a tiring, inexperienced team with his fresh legs and the result was that he produced NOTHING. A bit like Harrison. But of course, being part of the 'played subs who brought victory', he gets plaudits & Harrison gets vilified. For exactly the same end product. Next to nowt. Has it occurred to anyone that it might just have been good work by Barnsley that stymied them, and not their own personal capabilities? Tin hat in place.
Now I suspect a tin hat will be no use for this one, so let me type this from a bunker. So, to start in a Monty Python-ish fashion: 'What did Eddie ever give us in that match', which would no doubt elicit a very smug response of ' a goal and a penalty, muppet!'. And you'd be right to say that. That is ALL he gave us. Did he pull defenders away to free up others? Did he hold up the ball? Did he do anything else that would suggest he could play up front on his own? No. Am I upset? No. That's not what he was signed for. He was signed to score goals. And he does! But we still need someone to do what Bamford does so well. That defence was battle-weary after him battering them (Halme's nose!
Just finish up by being absolutely clear. Costa & Eddie are both brilliant players and will do wonders for us. I have no doubt about that. But let's not get carried away with the performances you THINK they would have put in whilst sitting on the bench. Bielsa, more than anyone, is perfectly aware of what they bring to the party. HE signed them, remember? Also ask yourself how things would have panned out if the subbings had been reversed.
Totally agree, thought Costa had a positive impact on the game.
Yes but they started with half the youth team, if no one gives them the ball they can't do anything.
What was trouble with stewards
Pace will always trouble a tiring team - particularly a poor one.
Pretty much agree with you. Interesting that it only seems to be you & I that didn't see Costa as a 9. I would have given him a 7, but hey!
Costa wasn't great, but was as good as any in midfield,the reason I would want him to start is because I believe he can produce a bit of magic more than the others.So about the same but more potential. IMO. Cooper didn't think he was awful, but if they had scored from his falls I might have, goals change games and opinions.Pretty much agree with you. Interesting that it only seems to be you & I that didn't see Costa as a 9. I would have given him a 7, but hey!
Where I do disagree with you is Cooper. Tbf, I was slightly distracted at times as I tried (unsuccessfully) to fix his laptop. But I didn't see a particularly poor performance from Cooper & most certainly not a 5 rating. I can remember him slipping twice, but that could happen to anyone. What on earth did he do (or not do) to earn a 5? I get the feeling he's always going to get a 5 from you unless he does something spectacular. And btw, he was rock solid for Scotland, and as I expounded elsewhere, that was not just my assessment, the guys around me who didn't know I was Leeds kept complimenting him whilst ripping the pish out of everyone else. Everyone. Quite an accolade, believe me.
I did mean to give Cooper 6/10 & have now ammended my rating.Pretty much agree with you. Interesting that it only seems to be you & I that didn't see Costa as a 9. I would have given him a 7, but hey!
Where I do disagree with you is Cooper. Tbf, I was slightly distracted at times as I tried (unsuccessfully) to fix his laptop. But I didn't see a particularly poor performance from Cooper & most certainly not a 5 rating. I can remember him slipping twice, but that could happen to anyone. What on earth did he do (or not do) to earn a 5? I get the feeling he's always going to get a 5 from you unless he does something spectacular. And btw, he was rock solid for Scotland, and as I expounded elsewhere, that was not just my assessment, the guys around me who didn't know I was Leeds kept complimenting him whilst ripping the pish out of everyone else. Everyone. Quite an accolade, believe me.
I'd like to raise a point with you if I may ?
