If Bamford hadn’t missed that sitter (not sure it was but hey ho) we wouldn’t have scored our goal, so may have been 2-0 at half time. Allsopp wouldn’t have come up for the corner. Summerville may not have attacked with tempo if they weren’t drawing. Who knows what would have happened. We could have won 5-2 from 2-0 down at half time.
As I said ifs but and maybes but my point is we didn’t have the chances/on target to claim ifs buts and maybes And I’m just relaying what was said
They were all, bar Fletch, asking the same searching questions and basically making the same observations that we have been asking/ making, on here. Burnsey was the most direct.
I took no issue with the questions they raised, firstly because they were questions, not pronouncements and secondly, because they've waited for an issue to become apparent before expressing concern, as opposed to looking for something from day 1, be it style, naivety, being unable to attract decent players, goalscoring etc then setting on whatever sticks, like some have.
Either that, or some suffer from a serious case of confirmation bias. Like when you've completely ignore Prutts asking some serious questions of the players, not just the manager.
Burnsy being negative? Must be a day ending in Y. This is the same Burnsy who said we should be starting Sharp because Vardy is still able to score goals as if the two are remotely near the same type of player. Baz basically laughed him off the podcast when he suggested that.
I'm not sure he has, but thats the expectation which comes with hype, and the 10 role, where hebwas played a different positions at Fulham. But I think that's the point Prutts was making on 1904 asking basically whether we've signed players who need to be in an already great team to shine?
I don't know why you would expect a player to completely change the way they play just because they're hyped. He's a finisher, always has been. He pops up and scores goals. He's not a main man.
He has the ability to pull strings in the final third, not necessarily dictate play but is more than just a finisher for sure.
Perhaps he has the ability, but at Fulham and Liverpool he was never expected to do that. He was the guy who would be on the break to score the fourth goal in a route. Or would pop up with a moment of magic to break the deadlock. I'm suggesting that expecting him to all of a sudden flick the switch and be the one pulling the strings on no run up was a bit strange.
Its certainly a good point in reference to Liverpool, I think he did a bit more at Fulham to be fair. But yeah, I agree expectations seem a little off and he's being judged harshly.
I'm not saying it's any one individual, but I think there's an argument for us going all out for flair in Jan, but have lost a little substance as a result. Obviously the Delap thing is massive in that, as January would have been planned around a physical no 9 to break lines.
Burnsy knows how to play a certain role to create content. It's what he does. If he triggers you he's doing his job.
He plays dumb? Fair enough to him. I don't know about 'triggering' but if criticising someone means they've 'triggered' you and that means they're doing the right thing, then that's a bit circular. Me commenting on him on here has no bearing on his job and metrics so not sure how that means he's doing his job well. I don't view his content more to tell him he's an idiot.
He ran the show one time against us, and I guess that's where some of the expectation is. But I take Syd's point that it's not a typical performance in isolation.
Not sure he cares that much anymore, but he's doing what he's been doing for years to try and trigger some sort of engagement for better or worse. Criticism is all part of the discourse. So the theory goes.
