Rival watch

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Citizen Kane. said:
You're right but this only tells part of the story.

It is demonstrable that we don't create enough good chances per game in the first place to expect a higher ROI in goals. In fact I think we're one of just two teams whose xG is lower than their GS, which suggests that we're actually quite lucky when it comes to the onion bag...which is quite scary.

And then at the other end of the pitch what remains strange is that individually and on paper, our back 4 are each up there with the best in the league, but put them on a pitch together as a unit and they seem to think that conceding 2 goals per game is sustainable at this level.
Click to expand...

The issue is quality. The players just aren’t as good as many fans think they are.

Even your point about the back 4 are each up there with the best in the league. They’re not. Porro can’t defend, Romero is a hot head and reckless, Micky isn’t great in the air and has flaws and Udogie hasn’t kicked on at all.

How the board thought the window just gone was acceptable has baffled me and imo the club could pay the biggest price for it. And if Spurs go down then I don’t see them coming back straight away as they will have to buy a whole new team whilst selling players and we know how slow the club is at that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Changing Man
The Changing Man said:
Because his 'cheating' resulted in a sending off offence called denying an obvious goal scoring opportunity from which a goal was scored meaning he didn't deny it!
Click to expand...
Only because he was subsequently fouled. Two wrongs don't make a right.
And why have you put cheating in quotes?
 
Citizen Kane. said:
You're right but this only tells part of the story.

It is demonstrable that we don't create enough good chances per game in the first place to expect a higher ROI in goals. In fact I think we're one of just two teams whose xG is lower than their GS, which suggests that we're actually quite lucky when it comes to the onion bag...which is quite scary.

And then at the other end of the pitch what remains strange is that individually and on paper, our back 4 are each up there with the best in the league, but put them on a pitch together as a unit and they seem to think that conceding 2 goals per game is sustainable at this level.
Click to expand...
One thing that stands out is we've had three straight coaches in Conte, Ange and Frank whose tactics focused on creating high xG chances instead of, you know, creating chances

It worked for Conte as he had Harry Kane in positions to score (at least until he nerfed his passing to make him a Trad 9 and cut Sonny's chances of scoring in half overnight), and it worked for Ange because enough players were getting into the box to tap in those chances (which is the exact reason Brennan Johnson was signed, as his data said if he get in the box he had a high probability of scoring), but with Frank it doesn't work if at most a couple of players are getting into the box reliably and that's why set pieces are our main source

As for GA, that one's a lot easier to explain: it's based on data that goals are rarely scored from Zone 14 so there's no need to defend that area as most shots from there go high and wide...but in leaving that area open we give players that extra second to aim their shot towards the top corner, hence the amount of goals we conceded from 20-25 yards. Weirdly that isn't even the first time that happened to us, as it frequently happened under Martin Jol where Robbo was getting beat from the same distance on the reg
 
PowerSpurs said:
Only because he was subsequently fouled. Two wrongs don't make a right.
Click to expand...
The referee had played advantage when the initial foul was made, assuming that a goal would be scored. The ball would have most likely reached crossed the line regardless of Haaland fouling the Pool player so might just has well have let it all stand.
It just made a farce if the end of the game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Diego
Left on the Shelf said:
The referee had played advantage when the initial foul was made, assuming that a goal would be scored. The ball would have most likely reached crossed the line regardless of Haaland fouling the Pool player so might just has well have let it all stand.
It just made a farce if the end of the game.
Click to expand...
I think Szoboszlai is clearing it if haaland doesn’t pull him back.

It’s a tricky one, we want the laws to be applied correctly (which they technically were in this case) but on the other hand, we want the refs to use common sense.

If the goal was allowed incorrectly and szobozslai then scores the winner against Sunderland, the Sunderland manager and fans will be saying that the rules should have been applied.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Billy The Spur
SarrMan said:
I think Szoboszlai is clearing it if haaland doesn’t pull him back.

It’s a tricky one, we want the laws to be applied correctly (which they technically were in this case) but on the other hand, we want the refs to use common sense.

If the goal was allowed incorrectly and szobozslai then scores the winner against Sunderland, the Sunderland manager and fans will be saying that the rules should have been applied.
Click to expand...

Szobozslai fouls Haaland first though
 
  • Like
Reactions: Diego and Spurlock
KingHotspur said:
Szobozslai fouls Haaland first though
Click to expand...
Maybe I didn’t explain myself correctly.

I agree that’s why he was sent off and the advantage came to nothing because haaland fouled szobozslai which stopped him clearing the ball.

Laws applied correctly but has lead to the common sense debates that have been raging on all day but how would Sunderland fans feel if refs decided to use ‘common sense’ and szoboszlai scores a winner against them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PowerSpurs
Watford appoint Edward Still as their thousandth manager of the decade.

Edward is brother of Will Still, so fans might be wondering what will happen in the event that Ed Still still can't get Watford to the PL, will the board still stick with Ed Still, or will Will Still be appointed instead of Ed?
 
  • Like
Reactions: PleaseNotPoll
Left on the Shelf said:
The referee had played advantage when the initial foul was made, assuming that a goal would be scored. The ball would have most likely reached crossed the line regardless of Haaland fouling the Pool player so might just has well have let it all stand.
It just made a farce if the end of the game.
Click to expand...
The players made a farce of it. The officials just did their jobs.
This is only a story because it's Liverpool and Gary Neville was on commentary, talking ****e.

Michael Oliver allowed play to continue in our game when Fernandes fouled Romero.
Romero was then dismissed about 2 seconds later. Great advantage.
Doesn't even get mentioned because the two pricks on that game ignored it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Left on the Shelf and SarrMan
You must log in or register to see media

No sympathy for Newcastle, of course, but I don't get the Murphy handball penalty.
Firstly, his arm's in a natural position and by his side, unlike the West Ham handball against us, for example.
Secondly, if it's a penalty and he's blocked a goalbound shot, then why isn't he sent off?

Not sure about the penalty for Newcastle's equaliser either though, to be fair. Soft.
 
The correct decision was to send Slobzaslai off, it would have been unfair on Sunderland if he was available to play the next game. Imagine if he played and scored the winning goal, when by the letter of the law he should have been banned, rules are there for a reason and should be adhered to.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mrs em, Spurlock, Diego and 1 other person
PleaseNotPoll said:
You must log in or register to see media

No sympathy for Newcastle, of course, but I don't get the Murphy handball penalty.
Firstly, his arm's in a natural position and by his side, unlike the West Ham handball against us, for example.
Secondly, if it's a penalty and he's blocked a goalbound shot, then why isn't he sent off?

Not sure about the penalty for Newcastle's equaliser either though, to be fair. Soft.
Click to expand...

Penalty?

What's a penalty?

Is it a make of biro?
 
  • Like
Reactions: PleaseNotPoll
You must log in or register to see media

Just in case anyone missed this last night, understandably.
3-0 up after 29 minutes singing We Want Nine.
Still 3-1 up with nine minutes left and lose 4-3.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spurlock and remembercolinlee
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back