This is the thing: when it was Aurier/Lucas on our right it was fair to leave the blame on Aurier for leaving gaps because, while Lucas did deserve a share of blame for not covering him, the fact that Aurier was routinely our furthest player up the pitch meant that there was always going to be a gap somewhere regardless of whether Lucas, Sissoko or whoever tried to cover for him With Porro the blame is more obviously on Johnson due to him fitting into the Dempsey/Chadli role so well that the exact same criticisms that were made of them when we didn't have the ball can be made of him too
The summary of this season has not been a sieve-like defence, nor the number of opportunities the opposition have. The issue has been that too many of the opportunities presented have a high likelihood of being converted.
Now let's not say things we might regret Dempsey is the perfect fantasy football player: good for points, but in reality it was like a Where's Wally book trying to find him on the pitch
Chadli was certainly a passenger when we didn't have the ball, though - which really stuck out considering Lamela was charging down any opponent that had the ball, suggesting his vision was based on movement
Johnson does the same thing that Son does when they're pressing or tracking back. Sort of vaguely puts themselves in a position to take up space and doesn't fully commit. No tackles, no challenges, nothing physical, but plenty of running around. Eriksen was pretty similar, too.
Does he realise he’s in his second season and that the team should by now already be ‘the team we can be’ How long can he keep getting away with it? Tomorrow never comes with Ange. Absolute bluffer.
Has to be said we're also getting compilations of Archie Gray not being in line with the rest of the back four not just for last night's goal, but for a few others we've conceded Not that it would have helped last night, as Doku was pretty much on the six yard line when he played it in, but it does have to be said a lot of the goals we concede are similar to the low risk/high percentage chances we look to create because there always seems to be somebody a yard or two out of place with the rest of the backline
When we have fewer than 6 players out injured we look pretty OK usually. The simplest explanation for our league position is the injuries.
No. It's a perfectly sensible explanation of how our season has gone. We've lost many matches by a single goal. If we had better players on the pitch I think we might have won 3 or 4 of those. Depending on which matches that could put us as high as third.
Certainly an interesting way to look at it. Next season without Europe (less games) and a better manager then we should see an improvement anyway.
We've also got a very young squad which should improve as it matures. But it will still likely be only the sixth best one. Of course if we win the Europa* we will have the same number but harder matches and likely the same manager. * I think we are the best team left in it but only just so I put our chances no higher than 8 to 1.
Yeah the likes of Gray, Bergvall, Mikey Moore will have learnt a lot this year and will improve next season. I hope the club add some experienced players this summer especially in central midfield.
It would be simplistic if, say, Son or Bentancur were injured - but given our system is based on the CBs almost playing like DMs both starting attacking moves and also cutting out attacks when they head into our final third yet none of Gray, Davies or Dragusin are capable of playing in such a specific role it becomes less simplistic, especially as Danso coming in has demonstrated the difference between a CB who plays a key role in the system and a CB who is on the pitch so we can field four defenders
I'm very torn on this. I want Ange gone but I also want us (desperately I might add) to win the Europa. There's not a chance he gets the sack if he wins our first trophy in 17 years, first European trophy in 41 years and delivers CL football with it. There is compelling evidence (and a lot of it) that having CL football doesn't make an iota of difference re the calibre of player we can attract in the market, almost certainly because our wages lag behind too many other CL teams. We've signed awful players when CL football has been on offer, and brilliant players when it hasn't, so I don't think the two correlate easily. But at the same time, if we are genuinely interested in the likes of Guehi, would someone like him join if we couldn't offer CL football?
I'm very torn on this. I want Ange gone but I also want us (desperately I might add) to win the Europa. There's not a chance he gets the sack if he wins our first trophy in 17 years, first European trophy in 41 years and delivers CL football with it. There is compelling evidence (and a lot of it) that having CL football doesn't make an iota of difference re the calibre of player we can attract in the market, almost certainly because our wages lag behind too many other CL teams. We've signed awful players when CL football has been on offer, and brilliant players when it hasn't, so I don't think the two correlate easily. But at the same time, if we are genuinely interested in the likes of Guehi, would someone like him join if we couldn't offer CL football?
In the case of Guehi, the obvious issue is the Chavs have a hefty sell-on clause which means we should have one eye on a CB who offers the same qualities without the fee getting bloated by a clause like that Similar goes for Taylor Harwood-Bellis having a hefty sell-on with the Mansourites
