At your selective best Since when did being the League cup holders mean ****? Did you judge the ability of your team last season on beating Birmingham? Half time stops the other team's momentum and gave us a chance to change our formation and make 2 subs. Trying to do that any earlier would have been chaotic so I think the idea to defend was right but as we've seen a few times this season, the players simply didn't execute it and the midfield crashed into the defence.
I judge teams on their ability to win things, so nothing selective about that Your misunderstanding me YV, I am actually on your side here. It isn't AVB's fault you lost the game, read through my last posts.
It is being selective because you're judging teams on there performances against teams that won trophies last season. Arsenal's ability to perform against United would have far more importance than Liverpool. United with or without a trophy are still a top side and pretending that winning one trophy makes them a team more able to win things is just daft, especially since all I said was that United found beating them easy going. If you're going to persist at least respond to my question I wasn't disagreeing with you, just adding what I thought went wrong for us with 10 men in the first half and what improved in the second as I didn't think you covered it all.
Beating Liverpool at Anfield is as tough as beating United at Old Trafford though. Only difference being the man advantage United always have there. To win 2-0 at Anfield is a great result for any side and a measure of how good you are. I'd expect just about any team to lose at Old Trafford if ridiculous ref decisions go against them, no team should be judged on how they perform against United because the playing field isn't level.
Sorry, but I simply cannot agree with that statement, DL. United are in a different league to 'Pool, home and away. Yes, they slipped up this weekend (taking nothing away from Norwich), but you've got to pity QPR who go there next weekend. SAF will be demanding a response from his players, and you know he is going to get it. With 'Pool, I'm sorry, but teams no longer fear playing them at Klanfield; those days are long gone.
It's easy to get a point at Anfield, but not 3. Ask Newcastle, Chelsea, United or City how easy it is to win there. However poor they are nobody can deny that for a top side Anfield is the hardest place to get a result. Spurs have been one of few top sides that have found going to Anfield easy lately.
Man Utd have lost once at home (who was that, again? ), whereas Liverpool have lost twice. Man Utd are yet to draw, Liverpool have drawn three times. Last season Man Utd lost twice at home, whereas Liverpool lost four times. Man Utd drew twice and Liverpool drew nine. It's clearly not harder to win at Anfield than Old Trafford and it's far easier to get a draw.
Actually, it is quite possible that QPR will be humiliated at OT, next weekend, and that would have to be the end of Sparky's reign of mediocrity.
The whole MOTD thing about the QPR job and Redknapp was pretty ugly. Can't say that he really did anything wrong himself, but I doubt Hughes was too happy. please log in to view this image
Liverpool wouldn't get turned over 6-1 on their own patch that's for certain. They are definitely easier to get a point off but wins at Anfield are still hard for any team to come by. There's no doubt United are better than them overall but I don't think Old Trafford is anymore daunting than Anfield apart from the refereeing aspect. Maybe that's just my experience as a Chelsea fan as OT has always been a happy hunting ground for us (pre-Abramovich far moreso).
A new manager will be in place soon that's near certain. Morale seems to be at an all time low. Southampton to be frank were by a mile the better side from the limited bits we saw.
Chelsea's game plan is less forgiving for United than ours; for me, it's the main reason we've struggled to beat them, over the years. We like to use width and pace, but it leaves us open through the middle of the park, where United traditionally are very strong; Chelsea play are far more compact game in mid-field, and United have a far harder time breaking you down, DL.
I,m one who said the goon's are overated,and i still stand by that,had we not been reduced to ten men so early in the game,we wouldn't have conceded 5.I think we would have drawn,you could se how dodgy their defence was when we attacked them,and mosy of their goals were scored late on,when we were tired
I got quite a telling off for daring to suggest to a QPR fan that Dawson was too good for them and that Hughes was a crap manager. He looked good at Wales and Blackburn but since then it's all been failure. Hopefully if 'Arry's put in charge he'll sign some players we want rid of. Bentley might be a bit unlikely given that he hates him but maybe he'll give us some good money for Huddlestone.
****tier teams have had good 15 minute spells against us, doesn't mean they went on to win. Hell I'd be surprised if championship sides haven't done that against us in the Carling Cup. I'm sorry, since when is it respectable to go from 0-1 to 5-2 with a man down? Scoring more goals takes a hit, yes, but conceding? And even then you are well equipped for counters with Bale and Lennon. A couple years back Eboue got sent off in the first half against you guys and we held to a 0-0 draw. You lost 5-2 not 2-1, for your manager to come out with what he said is pretty surreal IMO.
That season we were a midtable side that you drew against. When you lose, you lose. 5-2 or 2-1 there isn't much difference you still get 0 points. Your last 2 goals were the result of us over comitting as we had to do, sometimes it works, often it won't but there's no pride in defending to try and see out the game when you're losing.
Right 3 - 2 or 5-2 or 2- 1 it makes no difference. Settling for a 2 - 1 loss to save some kind of distorted face that I would hate, I'd rather have the 5 - 2 knowing it was because we tried to win it.
Damn straight. I'd rather see us go down fighting and lose more heavily than try and close out with half the damn game to go
That wasn't the point I was making. You were in a decent position to either hold on to the lead or a draw by the half time, after which anything would be possible. After Man. Utd your team is probably best suited to a counter attacking game. I don't agree that the man used the right tactics after the sending off.
