Hell I hope not, The point is this! Why would you want to swap your BMW for a Ford? I rest my case, the Scousers are welcome to the tart!............ PS: Oh and Dai is too!............... please log in to view this image
Norway - I feel you have missed the point in what many have said about the perfomances recently. I for one haven't moaned that we adjusted our tactics to play the 'bigger' teams, rather it's that I was bitterly disappointed in the way we played. Basically we defended really well for those games but the problem was that we couldn't string 2 passes together for about an hour in those games. We constantly gave the ball away and invited more pressure on ourselves. A defensive display is just that - a team set up to prevent the other team from creating too many chances. Part of that is keeping the ball - and we just haven't been able to do that with the pressure other teams put on is. Stoke allowed us to play our game more than any team in recent weeks and consequently we knocked the ball around beautifully and created chances. It's not perceived negativitiy that has got me down, just what I consider to be dissapointing performances in terms of passing and controlling the ball. Pablo Hernandez has been the worst culprit of this. As for Mike Dean.. I watched the match, but I'm unsure what decisions are making people unhappy ? Surely not the ball to hand decisions ? I can't remember being enraged by any of the decisions he made really.....
they say if you do not notice a player he must be having a good game, i didnt realise monk was playing till midway thru the 2nd half, well played sir
Agreed with almost all of this, Stereo. Not sure what the fuss was with Dean. Not keen on him as he loves the limelight (the worst type of ref) but can't remember any controversial decisions on Saturday. Laudrup's tactics have been spot on but I think you're dead right on us giving the ball away so cheaply in those tough games. It's hard enough without gifting the ball back to top players. Glad to see we were much better on the weekend. The only thing I disagree with? Dyer was the worst culprit imo.
he had an excellent game ,kept it simple ,I was suprised that he started in front of Bartley if only for his height against the perceived threat from Stoke at set pieces .I felt we dealt with Stoke well and looked comfortable although to concede so late was due to players waiting for the whistle to blow was the only disappointment on the day .
I Think we all agree that giving the ball away is not good, im sure tyve players never intended to do it but thats what happens with many changes and a new approach/tactics. I understood the points Made about this stereo, im glad that everyone now seems to understand our different approach but a few days back that wasnt quite the case with some. As has been pointed out There Are different opinions on here and thats great ,
I'm in this camp. I fully understand and support Laudrup's motives regarding team selection and tactics. My gripe always has been about the PERFORMANCE of the team in general and certain midfield individuals in particular. A change of formation and even personnel should not result in players suddenly being unable to tackle, or shovelling away possession as though the ball was an unexpected present from Al-Qaeda. With regard to Mike Dean, he wasn't outrageous, imo, but neither was he interested in giving us a thing, in that the benefit of the doubt always seemed to favour Stoke.
Wigan conceded a penalty on Saturday much the same as the two that we were denied. One way or the other consistency should be the goal.
Ivor you always call it how you see it and you have 100% respect from me for that, we normally agree on nearly every aspect of the team and in fairness its hard to argue against the points you make regarding preformance. I was of the thinking that Arsenal was maybe a game too far but what we sometimes forget is the strength of the opposition! Arsenal really wanted that game and it showed in their performance, it was vital for them to get the win where i feel for us we were probably mentally below our standard which was fatal. As i think we all agree on the fact a dip in our perfomance levels of just 5% is enough to make a team like Arsenal wipe the floor with us! thats pretty much what happened and couple that with a constant change of personell and a minds on other things it wasnt really a suprise that the game turned out the way it did. We will never agree on everything and all posters sometimes see things different, right or wrong. I have been accused of being too negative in the past but like you i sometimes feel the need to highlight the things i see, after all the objective veiwpoint is far more intresting than talking about how great we are ! .. Where i have differed from some on this is the fact that IMO the recent performances and tactics have been understandable considering the workload of the squad mentally and physically, i saw the viewpoints of others a little bit harsh considering the above. Of course this is the essence of a forum, and i wouldnt want it any other way, sometimes we see things different and also interpretate opinons different, this is normal . More often than not most of the fellow Jacks on here sing from the same hymm sheet sometimes we see things different Mike Dean is a good example actually , i thought he was a total cnut to us, you didnt see much wrong with him and others thought there was no problem with him! Thats the beauty of football i guess
Actually, Norway, I wasn't impressed with Dean and probably rated him a cnu as opposed to the cnut you "awarded" him. Being human, I suppose my view was tempered by the fact that we won. Had we lost, I'm sure I would have been more vitriolic. As it is, I agree with you in that he didn't give us a thing all game.
