comment by THFC1882 (U4452)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Father Luka Bosh Brasi (U22178)
posted 38 minutes ago
You forget about the schedule and not being able to rest players.
We have played 3 times a week since Nov.
Also the fact that Ange was left short in certain areas of the squad.
But yeah Injuries are an excuse and a valid one.
You can be angry all you like but it's a valid excuse.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Twice a week, not three.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Or three times in eight days like recently.
Brentford
LIverpool
Aston Villa
All away as well.
Agree with the OP re the pressing. You literally see Solanke going hell for leather chasing the keeper down etc but no one else following up in unison pressing the outlets. I sometimes wonder why does he bother!
Even Tel was beckoning our players forward to press against Pool last week and he only been there 5 mins.
Having said all this, doubt most of these weaklings can tackle much anyway. The ease in which opponents breeze through them like they don't exist is at times embarrassing. Le Ar$e , sadly are the best at it and you could tell well drilled. Practically every outfield player can put a foot in and they press to WIN the ball.
Ange has had a lot of these players to work with consistently since early December. Yes they are not first choice but they have nearly lost every. Single. Game. They have not improved. If anything they have got worse. They have no idea what they are supposed to be doing. The holes in the shape when we lose the ball are amateur. A conference level manager would expose them.
Injuries or no injuries, how we are playing and the results it is bringing are unacceptable.
Our midfield is just without Maddison.
There is no injury crisis for a midfield to be so poor and tired, it's just a midfield that is so poor and playing in a system that is just so poor.
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 1 hour, 58 minutes ago
comment by THFC1882 (U4452)
posted 57 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by He who Dares, waits for Trophies (U15748)
posted 10 minutes ago
My opinion is that even factoring our injuries this season, we should be around mid tabl
---------------------------------
Explain why Liverpool lost to Plymouth when they dropped their mainstay players from their game?
And how you think therefore without our backfour, most of the midfield and strikers, we should be winning games?
Liverpool who won every game almost and yet the first time their recognised first team players are rested, they lose the game to a team like Plymouth?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh and the last time they went with a weakened team was in CL a couple of weeks back. And guess what they lost that as well.
You would have to be extremely stupid to not know that having half a dozen of your regular starters missing from your line up is not going to affect performances and results. To have them all missing for three plus months is nothing short of catastrophic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Were Liverpool not already guaranteed to finish top when they played PSV? Not the best example.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We are not arguing about whether they were guaranteed to finish top. We are saying if you take half a dozen players out of any team, even the best, then results will suffer. Liverpool being the perfect example. Two weakened teams, lost both games. Yet Spurs play a weakened team for months on end, but are expected to win every game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sandy nobody was expects Spurs to win every game with it without the injuries. What people do expect is a manger able to adapt and help the team set up differently.
comment by Grinch (U23226)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 1 hour, 58 minutes ago
comment by THFC1882 (U4452)
posted 57 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by He who Dares, waits for Trophies (U15748)
posted 10 minutes ago
My opinion is that even factoring our injuries this season, we should be around mid tabl
---------------------------------
Explain why Liverpool lost to Plymouth when they dropped their mainstay players from their game?
And how you think therefore without our backfour, most of the midfield and strikers, we should be winning games?
Liverpool who won every game almost and yet the first time their recognised first team players are rested, they lose the game to a team like Plymouth?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh and the last time they went with a weakened team was in CL a couple of weeks back. And guess what they lost that as well.
You would have to be extremely stupid to not know that having half a dozen of your regular starters missing from your line up is not going to affect performances and results. To have them all missing for three plus months is nothing short of catastrophic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Were Liverpool not already guaranteed to finish top when they played PSV? Not the best example.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We are not arguing about whether they were guaranteed to finish top. We are saying if you take half a dozen players out of any team, even the best, then results will suffer. Liverpool being the perfect example. Two weakened teams, lost both games. Yet Spurs play a weakened team for months on end, but are expected to win every game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sandy nobody was expects Spurs to win every game with it without the injuries. What people do expect is a manger able to adapt and help the team set up differently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the players are inferior to the players they have replaced, then it will make next to no difference how they are set up.
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 46 minutes ago
comment by Grinch (U23226)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 1 hour, 58 minutes ago
comment by THFC1882 (U4452)
posted 57 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by He who Dares, waits for Trophies (U15748)
posted 10 minutes ago
My opinion is that even factoring our injuries this season, we should be around mid tabl
---------------------------------
Explain why Liverpool lost to Plymouth when they dropped their mainstay players from their game?
And how you think therefore without our backfour, most of the midfield and strikers, we should be winning games?
Liverpool who won every game almost and yet the first time their recognised first team players are rested, they lose the game to a team like Plymouth?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh and the last time they went with a weakened team was in CL a couple of weeks back. And guess what they lost that as well.
You would have to be extremely stupid to not know that having half a dozen of your regular starters missing from your line up is not going to affect performances and results. To have them all missing for three plus months is nothing short of catastrophic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Were Liverpool not already guaranteed to finish top when they played PSV? Not the best example.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We are not arguing about whether they were guaranteed to finish top. We are saying if you take half a dozen players out of any team, even the best, then results will suffer. Liverpool being the perfect example. Two weakened teams, lost both games. Yet Spurs play a weakened team for months on end, but are expected to win every game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sandy nobody was expects Spurs to win every game with it without the injuries. What people do expect is a manger able to adapt and help the team set up differently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the players are inferior to the players they have replaced, then it will make next to no difference how they are set up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But they aren't inferior. Elfsborg?
And before you say, "Elfsborg? They're not exactly PL!" Then I'll double down with "Tamworth?"
Players aren't necessarily "inferior". Any team in any league can show how man-marking and parking the bus can practically make it impossible to score against because again, Tamworth.
Stop freaking defending the manager and being stubbon/adamant/headstrong about "injuries".
The manager left our midfield wide open last night, all he needed to do was shout out "close them down!", "mark your man!"
Completely agree with the OP.
Ange said last night that it's impossible for these players to play two games a week without rotation with a high press policy. He's basically highlighted his own flaw. If you don't have the players to do it, either through bad luck, training methods or just simply low numbers, maybe try a different way. At the end of the day, the goal isn't to play the same way, it's to win football matches. It's almost as if he's accepted losing during this period and doesn't want to change anything, preferring to just sit tight and wait for the players to come back. It's white flag stuff. What kind of message does that send out to the players on the pitch?
The fact of the matter is that you can have your philosophy and that's fine but ultimately playing in the Premier League with Spurs is not the same as playing in the Scottish League with Celtic. Any PL side will give us a rough ride whereas Celtic can get past the likes of St Johnstone in 2nd gear. The exertions aren't the same. The demand is far greater in the PL regarding sprinting so I've no doubt that the injuries are a consequence of his style. I don't think we'll ever be clear of injuries for that reason. 4 might come back but then we'll lose another 2 or so. Some will say I'm guessing but we had it bad last year too and frankly I can't think of a time where we didn't have injuries under Ange. At some point you have to question your own methods. That's how you grow.
Being tied to one way is the 'jack of all trades/master of none' illusion. The fact is that you CAN have your preferred way of playing but still have other weapons in your arsenal should you hit issues with your first choice. That's how winning works. Even Pep isn't tied to one way. He used to insist on cultured ball-carriers at full back, now he likes to employ centre halves in those areas. He's becoming more defensive-minded since he first joined City, such is the competitiveness of the PL. Same for Arteta. Teams evolve. Tactics evolve. If you stand still you go backwards. A lot of fans see Ange's single-mindedness as a good attribute which is true to a certain extent, but not if loss follows loss follows loss.
It's just Russell Martin stupidity at a slightly higher level. It's playstation football. Pragmatism is the virtue of clubs unable to compete financially. We're one of them if we stick with Levy, so you have to take that into account when creating a side. Ange is just not flexible enough.
The truth is that we routinely conceded goals in this set up with our preferred back four so I've no idea why everyone thinks it's all going to magically click when we get them back. Have we forgotten Ipswich and Palace? Schooled with most players fit. Think on that before you choose to back Ange.
The only reason I'd stick with him now is because there's no one else. Wait until the summer and then move heaven and earth for Poch. I've had enough of gambling.
I think Angeball only works if all 11 players in your side are cohesive and on it. If one part is out, it all fails. That's why most teams have holding midfielders. They don't put them in to score goals or attack. They put them in as an insurance policy should your team not be 'on it'. That's where Ange goes wrong. There is no safety net. If a player loses concentration in midfield for a split second, the opposition are in. If our full backs attack together and lose it, the opposition are in. Our only insurance really is tied to one player with the legs to mop up but because there's no one in midfield helping out, he has to do it all himself and now he's had back to back hamstring injuries.
Ange can cry all he wants about injuries but he's responsible for them. If he had more midfield security with a slightly deeper line, half of the problems we're currently having wouldn't exist.
It's so clear to me. It's just annoying so many are putting this down to bad luck without forensically analysing the detail at a more granular level.
comment by The Welsh Xavi (U15412)
posted 4 hours, 24 minutes ago
There was a graph a week or two ago in I think the Athletic that had all clubs dotted on with one axis being sprints out of possession and the other being sprints in possession.
Most clubs were around 40-60% in both with some outliers in one direction with the other reduced to compensate for it.
Then you had Spurs who were right in the top corner for both with the most sprints in possession and the most sprints put of possession. No other club was even close to Spurs on the graph.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There you go. That's the problem in a nutshell. The injuries are NOT bad luck. They're a consequence of Angeball and the schedule of playing in the PL and the cup competitions. It's so friggin obvious.
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 2 hours, 12 minutes ago
comment by Grinch (U23226)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 1 hour, 58 minutes ago
comment by THFC1882 (U4452)
posted 57 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by He who Dares, waits for Trophies (U15748)
posted 10 minutes ago
My opinion is that even factoring our injuries this season, we should be around mid tabl
---------------------------------
Explain why Liverpool lost to Plymouth when they dropped their mainstay players from their game?
And how you think therefore without our backfour, most of the midfield and strikers, we should be winning games?
Liverpool who won every game almost and yet the first time their recognised first team players are rested, they lose the game to a team like Plymouth?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh and the last time they went with a weakened team was in CL a couple of weeks back. And guess what they lost that as well.
You would have to be extremely stupid to not know that having half a dozen of your regular starters missing from your line up is not going to affect performances and results. To have them all missing for three plus months is nothing short of catastrophic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Were Liverpool not already guaranteed to finish top when they played PSV? Not the best example.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We are not arguing about whether they were guaranteed to finish top. We are saying if you take half a dozen players out of any team, even the best, then results will suffer. Liverpool being the perfect example. Two weakened teams, lost both games. Yet Spurs play a weakened team for months on end, but are expected to win every game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sandy nobody was expects Spurs to win every game with it without the injuries. What people do expect is a manger able to adapt and help the team set up differently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the players are inferior to the players they have replaced, then it will make next to no difference how they are set up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course setting up a team that’s inferior can make a difference, how do you explain results like Plymouth beating Liverpool?
comment by BottomHalf ColdSpell (U23229)
posted 1 hour, 24 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 46 minutes ago
comment by Grinch (U23226)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 1 hour, 58 minutes ago
comment by THFC1882 (U4452)
posted 57 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by He who Dares, waits for Trophies (U15748)
posted 10 minutes ago
My opinion is that even factoring our injuries this season, we should be around mid tabl
---------------------------------
Explain why Liverpool lost to Plymouth when they dropped their mainstay players from their game?
And how you think therefore without our backfour, most of the midfield and strikers, we should be winning games?
Liverpool who won every game almost and yet the first time their recognised first team players are rested, they lose the game to a team like Plymouth?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh and the last time they went with a weakened team was in CL a couple of weeks back. And guess what they lost that as well.
You would have to be extremely stupid to not know that having half a dozen of your regular starters missing from your line up is not going to affect performances and results. To have them all missing for three plus months is nothing short of catastrophic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Were Liverpool not already guaranteed to finish top when they played PSV? Not the best example.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We are not arguing about whether they were guaranteed to finish top. We are saying if you take half a dozen players out of any team, even the best, then results will suffer. Liverpool being the perfect example. Two weakened teams, lost both games. Yet Spurs play a weakened team for months on end, but are expected to win every game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sandy nobody was expects Spurs to win every game with it without the injuries. What people do expect is a manger able to adapt and help the team set up differently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the players are inferior to the players they have replaced, then it will make next to no difference how they are set up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But they aren't inferior. Elfsborg?
And before you say, "Elfsborg? They're not exactly PL!" Then I'll double down with "Tamworth?"
Players aren't necessarily "inferior". Any team in any league can show how man-marking and parking the bus can practically make it impossible to score against because again, Tamworth.
Stop freaking defending the manager and being stubbon/adamant/headstrong about "injuries".
The manager left our midfield wide open last night, all he needed to do was shout out "close them down!", "mark your man!"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s what Sandy does, likes to go against the popular opinion. So when the supporters were backing Ange this was view https://www.ja606.co.uk/articles/viewArticle/463899
Now the supporters want Ange out Sandy decides to back Ange.
comment by THFC1882 (U4452)
posted 4 hours, 48 minutes ago
If using shoddy examples of the best team in Europe comforts you and deflects you from our issues then I won't stop you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This. All we hear now is that Liverpool lost due to injuries. So what! They don’t get spanked every week like we do. They never will do under their manager, regardless of injuries. He has a brain and knows how to set his available players up accordingly. Unlike Mr ‘it’s how we play mate’ Postenoclue.
Levy is an excellent chairman.
When you look at his directive:to make money, for an owner who visits less than once a year and for all accounts does not care about footy, only maximizing his assets worth. Levy has majorly delivered.
You all rage against ange, or Nuno, or even poch, but all have been facked by a club board that’s only mission is money, not footy. That’s your real target.
comment by Grinch (U23226)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by BottomHalf ColdSpell (U23229)
posted 1 hour, 24 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 46 minutes ago
comment by Grinch (U23226)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 1 hour, 58 minutes ago
comment by THFC1882 (U4452)
posted 57 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by He who Dares, waits for Trophies (U15748)
posted 10 minutes ago
My opinion is that even factoring our injuries this season, we should be around mid tabl
---------------------------------
Explain why Liverpool lost to Plymouth when they dropped their mainstay players from their game?
And how you think therefore without our backfour, most of the midfield and strikers, we should be winning games?
Liverpool who won every game almost and yet the first time their recognised first team players are rested, they lose the game to a team like Plymouth?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh and the last time they went with a weakened team was in CL a couple of weeks back. And guess what they lost that as well.
You would have to be extremely stupid to not know that having half a dozen of your regular starters missing from your line up is not going to affect performances and results. To have them all missing for three plus months is nothing short of catastrophic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Were Liverpool not already guaranteed to finish top when they played PSV? Not the best example.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We are not arguing about whether they were guaranteed to finish top. We are saying if you take half a dozen players out of any team, even the best, then results will suffer. Liverpool being the perfect example. Two weakened teams, lost both games. Yet Spurs play a weakened team for months on end, but are expected to win every game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sandy nobody was expects Spurs to win every game with it without the injuries. What people do expect is a manger able to adapt and help the team set up differently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the players are inferior to the players they have replaced, then it will make next to no difference how they are set up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But they aren't inferior. Elfsborg?
And before you say, "Elfsborg? They're not exactly PL!" Then I'll double down with "Tamworth?"
Players aren't necessarily "inferior". Any team in any league can show how man-marking and parking the bus can practically make it impossible to score against because again, Tamworth.
Stop freaking defending the manager and being stubbon/adamant/headstrong about "injuries".
The manager left our midfield wide open last night, all he needed to do was shout out "close them down!", "mark your man!"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s what Sandy does, likes to go against the popular opinion. So when the supporters were backing Ange this was view https://www.ja606.co.uk/articles/viewArticle/463899
Now the supporters want Ange out Sandy decides to back Ange.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What a find . He ALWAYS goes against the majority / popular opinion. Why, because it gives him the most attention. It’s either a personality defect or he’s a masterful WUM. Possibly both.
comment by BottomHalf ColdSpell (U23229)
posted 1 hour, 52 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 46 minutes ago
comment by Grinch (U23226)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 1 hour, 58 minutes ago
comment by THFC1882 (U4452)
posted 57 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by He who Dares, waits for Trophies (U15748)
posted 10 minutes ago
My opinion is that even factoring our injuries this season, we should be around mid tabl
---------------------------------
Explain why Liverpool lost to Plymouth when they dropped their mainstay players from their game?
And how you think therefore without our backfour, most of the midfield and strikers, we should be winning games?
Liverpool who won every game almost and yet the first time their recognised first team players are rested, they lose the game to a team like Plymouth?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh and the last time they went with a weakened team was in CL a couple of weeks back. And guess what they lost that as well.
You would have to be extremely stupid to not know that having half a dozen of your regular starters missing from your line up is not going to affect performances and results. To have them all missing for three plus months is nothing short of catastrophic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Were Liverpool not already guaranteed to finish top when they played PSV? Not the best example.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We are not arguing about whether they were guaranteed to finish top. We are saying if you take half a dozen players out of any team, even the best, then results will suffer. Liverpool being the perfect example. Two weakened teams, lost both games. Yet Spurs play a weakened team for months on end, but are expected to win every game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sandy nobody was expects Spurs to win every game with it without the injuries. What people do expect is a manger able to adapt and help the team set up differently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the players are inferior to the players they have replaced, then it will make next to no difference how they are set up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But they aren't inferior. Elfsborg?
And before you say, "Elfsborg? They're not exactly PL!" Then I'll double down with "Tamworth?"
Players aren't necessarily "inferior". Any team in any league can show how man-marking and parking the bus can practically make it impossible to score against because again, Tamworth.
Stop freaking defending the manager and being stubbon/adamant/headstrong about "injuries".
The manager left our midfield wide open last night, all he needed to do was shout out "close them down!", "mark your man!"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Spurs beat both Tamworth and Elsfborg 3-0. So why are you even mentioning those games?
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 1 hour, 17 minutes ago
I think Angeball only works if all 11 players in your side are cohesive and on it. If one part is out, it all fails. That's why most teams have holding midfielders. They don't put them in to score goals or attack. They put them in as an insurance policy should your team not be 'on it'. That's where Ange goes wrong. There is no safety net. If a player loses concentration in midfield for a split second, the opposition are in. If our full backs attack together and lose it, the opposition are in. Our only insurance really is tied to one player with the legs to mop up but because there's no one in midfield helping out, he has to do it all himself and now he's had back to back hamstring injuries.
Ange can cry all he wants about injuries but he's responsible for them. If he had more midfield security with a slightly deeper line, half of the problems we're currently having wouldn't exist.
It's so clear to me. It's just annoying so many are putting this down to bad luck without forensically analysing the detail at a more granular level.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Poch.
You have to let it go Fridge.
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 1 hour, 19 minutes ago
I think Angeball only works if all 11 players in your side are cohesive and on it. If one part is out, it all fails. That's why most teams have holding midfielders. They don't put them in to score goals or attack. They put them in as an insurance policy should your team not be 'on it'. That's where Ange goes wrong. There is no safety net. If a player loses concentration in midfield for a split second, the opposition are in. If our full backs attack together and lose it, the opposition are in. Our only insurance really is tied to one player with the legs to mop up but because there's no one in midfield helping out, he has to do it all himself and now he's had back to back hamstring injuries.
Ange can cry all he wants about injuries but he's responsible for them. If he had more midfield security with a slightly deeper line, half of the problems we're currently having wouldn't exist.
It's so clear to me. It's just annoying so many are putting this down to bad luck without forensically analysing the detail at a more granular level.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hear here
comment by Don’s Dinner (U11802)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by THFC1882 (U4452)
posted 4 hours, 48 minutes ago
If using shoddy examples of the best team in Europe comforts you and deflects you from our issues then I won't stop you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This. All we hear now is that Liverpool lost due to injuries. So what! They don’t get spanked every week like we do. They never will do under their manager, regardless of injuries. He has a brain and knows how to set his available players up accordingly. Unlike Mr ‘it’s how we play mate’ Postenoclue.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not "all you hear". Stop being dramatic karen.
Liverpool losing at Plymouth and also at PSV are examples of weakened teams not being at the same level as when they are at full strength.
Its a simple concept which is factually accurate but you & others have dismissed entirely.
comment by Grinch (U23226)
posted 33 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 2 hours, 12 minutes ago
comment by Grinch (U23226)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 1 hour, 58 minutes ago
comment by THFC1882 (U4452)
posted 57 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by He who Dares, waits for Trophies (U15748)
posted 10 minutes ago
My opinion is that even factoring our injuries this season, we should be around mid tabl
---------------------------------
Explain why Liverpool lost to Plymouth when they dropped their mainstay players from their game?
And how you think therefore without our backfour, most of the midfield and strikers, we should be winning games?
Liverpool who won every game almost and yet the first time their recognised first team players are rested, they lose the game to a team like Plymouth?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh and the last time they went with a weakened team was in CL a couple of weeks back. And guess what they lost that as well.
You would have to be extremely stupid to not know that having half a dozen of your regular starters missing from your line up is not going to affect performances and results. To have them all missing for three plus months is nothing short of catastrophic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Were Liverpool not already guaranteed to finish top when they played PSV? Not the best example.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We are not arguing about whether they were guaranteed to finish top. We are saying if you take half a dozen players out of any team, even the best, then results will suffer. Liverpool being the perfect example. Two weakened teams, lost both games. Yet Spurs play a weakened team for months on end, but are expected to win every game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sandy nobody was expects Spurs to win every game with it without the injuries. What people do expect is a manger able to adapt and help the team set up differently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the players are inferior to the players they have replaced, then it will make next to no difference how they are set up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course setting up a team that’s inferior can make a difference, how do you explain results like Plymouth beating Liverpool?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Liverpool resting their entire team. Then having none of them on the bench to rescue the game. Always gives the opposition a chance.
comment by Grinch (U23226)
posted 35 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 2 hours, 12 minutes ago
comment by Grinch (U23226)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 1 hour, 58 minutes ago
comment by THFC1882 (U4452)
posted 57 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by He who Dares, waits for Trophies (U15748)
posted 10 minutes ago
My opinion is that even factoring our injuries this season, we should be around mid tabl
---------------------------------
Explain why Liverpool lost to Plymouth when they dropped their mainstay players from their game?
And how you think therefore without our backfour, most of the midfield and strikers, we should be winning games?
Liverpool who won every game almost and yet the first time their recognised first team players are rested, they lose the game to a team like Plymouth?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh and the last time they went with a weakened team was in CL a couple of weeks back. And guess what they lost that as well.
You would have to be extremely stupid to not know that having half a dozen of your regular starters missing from your line up is not going to affect performances and results. To have them all missing for three plus months is nothing short of catastrophic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Were Liverpool not already guaranteed to finish top when they played PSV? Not the best example.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We are not arguing about whether they were guaranteed to finish top. We are saying if you take half a dozen players out of any team, even the best, then results will suffer. Liverpool being the perfect example. Two weakened teams, lost both games. Yet Spurs play a weakened team for months on end, but are expected to win every game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sandy nobody was expects Spurs to win every game with it without the injuries. What people do expect is a manger able to adapt and help the team set up differently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the players are inferior to the players they have replaced, then it will make next to no difference how they are set up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course setting up a team that’s inferior can make a difference, how do you explain results like Plymouth beating Liverpool?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So basically no inferior team should ever lose a game, if it is that simple.
comment by Grinch (U23226)
posted 30 minutes ago
comment by BottomHalf ColdSpell (U23229)
posted 1 hour, 24 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 46 minutes ago
comment by Grinch (U23226)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 1 hour, 58 minutes ago
comment by THFC1882 (U4452)
posted 57 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by He who Dares, waits for Trophies (U15748)
posted 10 minutes ago
My opinion is that even factoring our injuries this season, we should be around mid tabl
---------------------------------
Explain why Liverpool lost to Plymouth when they dropped their mainstay players from their game?
And how you think therefore without our backfour, most of the midfield and strikers, we should be winning games?
Liverpool who won every game almost and yet the first time their recognised first team players are rested, they lose the game to a team like Plymouth?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh and the last time they went with a weakened team was in CL a couple of weeks back. And guess what they lost that as well.
You would have to be extremely stupid to not know that having half a dozen of your regular starters missing from your line up is not going to affect performances and results. To have them all missing for three plus months is nothing short of catastrophic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Were Liverpool not already guaranteed to finish top when they played PSV? Not the best example.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We are not arguing about whether they were guaranteed to finish top. We are saying if you take half a dozen players out of any team, even the best, then results will suffer. Liverpool being the perfect example. Two weakened teams, lost both games. Yet Spurs play a weakened team for months on end, but are expected to win every game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sandy nobody was expects Spurs to win every game with it without the injuries. What people do expect is a manger able to adapt and help the team set up differently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the players are inferior to the players they have replaced, then it will make next to no difference how they are set up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But they aren't inferior. Elfsborg?
And before you say, "Elfsborg? They're not exactly PL!" Then I'll double down with "Tamworth?"
Players aren't necessarily "inferior". Any team in any league can show how man-marking and parking the bus can practically make it impossible to score against because again, Tamworth.
Stop freaking defending the manager and being stubbon/adamant/headstrong about "injuries".
The manager left our midfield wide open last night, all he needed to do was shout out "close them down!", "mark your man!"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s what Sandy does, likes to go against the popular opinion. So when the supporters were backing Ange this was view https://www.ja606.co.uk/articles/viewArticle/463899
Now the supporters want Ange out Sandy decides to back Ange.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Difference is I have backed him all season, bar the poor showing at Coventry. Try to keep up.
I shall continue to back him and Levy for a bit yet.
comment by Grinch (U23226)
posted 29 minutes ago
comment by BottomHalf ColdSpell (U23229)
posted 1 hour, 24 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 46 minutes ago
comment by Grinch (U23226)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 1 hour, 58 minutes ago
comment by THFC1882 (U4452)
posted 57 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by He who Dares, waits for Trophies (U15748)
posted 10 minutes ago
My opinion is that even factoring our injuries this season, we should be around mid tabl
---------------------------------
Explain why Liverpool lost to Plymouth when they dropped their mainstay players from their game?
And how you think therefore without our backfour, most of the midfield and strikers, we should be winning games?
Liverpool who won every game almost and yet the first time their recognised first team players are rested, they lose the game to a team like Plymouth?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh and the last time they went with a weakened team was in CL a couple of weeks back. And guess what they lost that as well.
You would have to be extremely stupid to not know that having half a dozen of your regular starters missing from your line up is not going to affect performances and results. To have them all missing for three plus months is nothing short of catastrophic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Were Liverpool not already guaranteed to finish top when they played PSV? Not the best example.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We are not arguing about whether they were guaranteed to finish top. We are saying if you take half a dozen players out of any team, even the best, then results will suffer. Liverpool being the perfect example. Two weakened teams, lost both games. Yet Spurs play a weakened team for months on end, but are expected to win every game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sandy nobody was expects Spurs to win every game with it without the injuries. What people do expect is a manger able to adapt and help the team set up differently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the players are inferior to the players they have replaced, then it will make next to no difference how they are set up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But they aren't inferior. Elfsborg?
And before you say, "Elfsborg? They're not exactly PL!" Then I'll double down with "Tamworth?"
Players aren't necessarily "inferior". Any team in any league can show how man-marking and parking the bus can practically make it impossible to score against because again, Tamworth.
Stop freaking defending the manager and being stubbon/adamant/headstrong about "injuries".
The manager left our midfield wide open last night, all he needed to do was shout out "close them down!", "mark your man!"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s what Sandy does, likes to go against the popular opinion. So when the supporters were backing Ange this was view https://www.ja606.co.uk/articles/viewArticle/463899
Now the supporters want Ange out Sandy decides to back Ange.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well well well, what do we have here?
Simon says, with a spit n shine and Sand it down:
"Manager has to go. Total shambles and utter embarrassment... Manager is out if his depth. Worse than the final six months of Pochettino." ~golden boot winner fa cup 1901
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Don’s Dinner (U11802)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by THFC1882 (U4452)
posted 4 hours, 48 minutes ago
If using shoddy examples of the best team in Europe comforts you and deflects you from our issues then I won't stop you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This. All we hear now is that Liverpool lost due to injuries. So what! They don’t get spanked every week like we do. They never will do under their manager, regardless of injuries. He has a brain and knows how to set his available players up accordingly. Unlike Mr ‘it’s how we play mate’ Postenoclue.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not "all you hear". Stop being dramatic karen.
Liverpool losing at Plymouth and also at PSV are examples of weakened teams not being at the same level as when they are at full strength.
Its a simple concept which is factually accurate but you & others have dismissed entirely.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Problem is none of them like actual facts. They just waffle on about all teams get injuries, like every team has up to a dozen players missing for like three months, whilst trying to compete in four competitions.
Without being unkind, I think we have some of the dumbest supporters in the country, if they cannot see what the main problem is. INJURIES.
Our current form is injuries yeah no doubt…..but I can’t shake how bad we were when we were pretty much fully fit
Unless my memory is that bad and we weren’t as bad as I’m thinking but I remember being shat
I like Ange the bloke and want him to succeed but he does seem a bit clueless
I’ve said it a few times ….he gets til the injuries are back for one last bash but if we are still awful I’ll be shouting Ange out as loud as the rest
Doesn’t mean I’m against change quicker ….i just won’t jump up and down about it yet
Sign in if you want to comment
Injuries Only Partly To Blame
Page 2 of 4
posted on 10/2/25
comment by THFC1882 (U4452)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Father Luka Bosh Brasi (U22178)
posted 38 minutes ago
You forget about the schedule and not being able to rest players.
We have played 3 times a week since Nov.
Also the fact that Ange was left short in certain areas of the squad.
But yeah Injuries are an excuse and a valid one.
You can be angry all you like but it's a valid excuse.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Twice a week, not three.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Or three times in eight days like recently.
Brentford
LIverpool
Aston Villa
All away as well.
posted on 10/2/25
Agree with the OP re the pressing. You literally see Solanke going hell for leather chasing the keeper down etc but no one else following up in unison pressing the outlets. I sometimes wonder why does he bother!
Even Tel was beckoning our players forward to press against Pool last week and he only been there 5 mins.
Having said all this, doubt most of these weaklings can tackle much anyway. The ease in which opponents breeze through them like they don't exist is at times embarrassing. Le Ar$e , sadly are the best at it and you could tell well drilled. Practically every outfield player can put a foot in and they press to WIN the ball.
posted on 10/2/25
Ange has had a lot of these players to work with consistently since early December. Yes they are not first choice but they have nearly lost every. Single. Game. They have not improved. If anything they have got worse. They have no idea what they are supposed to be doing. The holes in the shape when we lose the ball are amateur. A conference level manager would expose them.
Injuries or no injuries, how we are playing and the results it is bringing are unacceptable.
posted on 10/2/25
Our midfield is just without Maddison.
There is no injury crisis for a midfield to be so poor and tired, it's just a midfield that is so poor and playing in a system that is just so poor.
posted on 10/2/25
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 1 hour, 58 minutes ago
comment by THFC1882 (U4452)
posted 57 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by He who Dares, waits for Trophies (U15748)
posted 10 minutes ago
My opinion is that even factoring our injuries this season, we should be around mid tabl
---------------------------------
Explain why Liverpool lost to Plymouth when they dropped their mainstay players from their game?
And how you think therefore without our backfour, most of the midfield and strikers, we should be winning games?
Liverpool who won every game almost and yet the first time their recognised first team players are rested, they lose the game to a team like Plymouth?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh and the last time they went with a weakened team was in CL a couple of weeks back. And guess what they lost that as well.
You would have to be extremely stupid to not know that having half a dozen of your regular starters missing from your line up is not going to affect performances and results. To have them all missing for three plus months is nothing short of catastrophic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Were Liverpool not already guaranteed to finish top when they played PSV? Not the best example.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We are not arguing about whether they were guaranteed to finish top. We are saying if you take half a dozen players out of any team, even the best, then results will suffer. Liverpool being the perfect example. Two weakened teams, lost both games. Yet Spurs play a weakened team for months on end, but are expected to win every game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sandy nobody was expects Spurs to win every game with it without the injuries. What people do expect is a manger able to adapt and help the team set up differently.
posted on 10/2/25
comment by Grinch (U23226)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 1 hour, 58 minutes ago
comment by THFC1882 (U4452)
posted 57 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by He who Dares, waits for Trophies (U15748)
posted 10 minutes ago
My opinion is that even factoring our injuries this season, we should be around mid tabl
---------------------------------
Explain why Liverpool lost to Plymouth when they dropped their mainstay players from their game?
And how you think therefore without our backfour, most of the midfield and strikers, we should be winning games?
Liverpool who won every game almost and yet the first time their recognised first team players are rested, they lose the game to a team like Plymouth?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh and the last time they went with a weakened team was in CL a couple of weeks back. And guess what they lost that as well.
You would have to be extremely stupid to not know that having half a dozen of your regular starters missing from your line up is not going to affect performances and results. To have them all missing for three plus months is nothing short of catastrophic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Were Liverpool not already guaranteed to finish top when they played PSV? Not the best example.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We are not arguing about whether they were guaranteed to finish top. We are saying if you take half a dozen players out of any team, even the best, then results will suffer. Liverpool being the perfect example. Two weakened teams, lost both games. Yet Spurs play a weakened team for months on end, but are expected to win every game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sandy nobody was expects Spurs to win every game with it without the injuries. What people do expect is a manger able to adapt and help the team set up differently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the players are inferior to the players they have replaced, then it will make next to no difference how they are set up.
posted on 10/2/25
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 46 minutes ago
comment by Grinch (U23226)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 1 hour, 58 minutes ago
comment by THFC1882 (U4452)
posted 57 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by He who Dares, waits for Trophies (U15748)
posted 10 minutes ago
My opinion is that even factoring our injuries this season, we should be around mid tabl
---------------------------------
Explain why Liverpool lost to Plymouth when they dropped their mainstay players from their game?
And how you think therefore without our backfour, most of the midfield and strikers, we should be winning games?
Liverpool who won every game almost and yet the first time their recognised first team players are rested, they lose the game to a team like Plymouth?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh and the last time they went with a weakened team was in CL a couple of weeks back. And guess what they lost that as well.
You would have to be extremely stupid to not know that having half a dozen of your regular starters missing from your line up is not going to affect performances and results. To have them all missing for three plus months is nothing short of catastrophic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Were Liverpool not already guaranteed to finish top when they played PSV? Not the best example.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We are not arguing about whether they were guaranteed to finish top. We are saying if you take half a dozen players out of any team, even the best, then results will suffer. Liverpool being the perfect example. Two weakened teams, lost both games. Yet Spurs play a weakened team for months on end, but are expected to win every game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sandy nobody was expects Spurs to win every game with it without the injuries. What people do expect is a manger able to adapt and help the team set up differently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the players are inferior to the players they have replaced, then it will make next to no difference how they are set up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But they aren't inferior. Elfsborg?
And before you say, "Elfsborg? They're not exactly PL!" Then I'll double down with "Tamworth?"
Players aren't necessarily "inferior". Any team in any league can show how man-marking and parking the bus can practically make it impossible to score against because again, Tamworth.
Stop freaking defending the manager and being stubbon/adamant/headstrong about "injuries".
The manager left our midfield wide open last night, all he needed to do was shout out "close them down!", "mark your man!"
posted on 10/2/25
Completely agree with the OP.
Ange said last night that it's impossible for these players to play two games a week without rotation with a high press policy. He's basically highlighted his own flaw. If you don't have the players to do it, either through bad luck, training methods or just simply low numbers, maybe try a different way. At the end of the day, the goal isn't to play the same way, it's to win football matches. It's almost as if he's accepted losing during this period and doesn't want to change anything, preferring to just sit tight and wait for the players to come back. It's white flag stuff. What kind of message does that send out to the players on the pitch?
The fact of the matter is that you can have your philosophy and that's fine but ultimately playing in the Premier League with Spurs is not the same as playing in the Scottish League with Celtic. Any PL side will give us a rough ride whereas Celtic can get past the likes of St Johnstone in 2nd gear. The exertions aren't the same. The demand is far greater in the PL regarding sprinting so I've no doubt that the injuries are a consequence of his style. I don't think we'll ever be clear of injuries for that reason. 4 might come back but then we'll lose another 2 or so. Some will say I'm guessing but we had it bad last year too and frankly I can't think of a time where we didn't have injuries under Ange. At some point you have to question your own methods. That's how you grow.
Being tied to one way is the 'jack of all trades/master of none' illusion. The fact is that you CAN have your preferred way of playing but still have other weapons in your arsenal should you hit issues with your first choice. That's how winning works. Even Pep isn't tied to one way. He used to insist on cultured ball-carriers at full back, now he likes to employ centre halves in those areas. He's becoming more defensive-minded since he first joined City, such is the competitiveness of the PL. Same for Arteta. Teams evolve. Tactics evolve. If you stand still you go backwards. A lot of fans see Ange's single-mindedness as a good attribute which is true to a certain extent, but not if loss follows loss follows loss.
It's just Russell Martin stupidity at a slightly higher level. It's playstation football. Pragmatism is the virtue of clubs unable to compete financially. We're one of them if we stick with Levy, so you have to take that into account when creating a side. Ange is just not flexible enough.
The truth is that we routinely conceded goals in this set up with our preferred back four so I've no idea why everyone thinks it's all going to magically click when we get them back. Have we forgotten Ipswich and Palace? Schooled with most players fit. Think on that before you choose to back Ange.
The only reason I'd stick with him now is because there's no one else. Wait until the summer and then move heaven and earth for Poch. I've had enough of gambling.
posted on 10/2/25
I think Angeball only works if all 11 players in your side are cohesive and on it. If one part is out, it all fails. That's why most teams have holding midfielders. They don't put them in to score goals or attack. They put them in as an insurance policy should your team not be 'on it'. That's where Ange goes wrong. There is no safety net. If a player loses concentration in midfield for a split second, the opposition are in. If our full backs attack together and lose it, the opposition are in. Our only insurance really is tied to one player with the legs to mop up but because there's no one in midfield helping out, he has to do it all himself and now he's had back to back hamstring injuries.
Ange can cry all he wants about injuries but he's responsible for them. If he had more midfield security with a slightly deeper line, half of the problems we're currently having wouldn't exist.
It's so clear to me. It's just annoying so many are putting this down to bad luck without forensically analysing the detail at a more granular level.
posted on 10/2/25
comment by The Welsh Xavi (U15412)
posted 4 hours, 24 minutes ago
There was a graph a week or two ago in I think the Athletic that had all clubs dotted on with one axis being sprints out of possession and the other being sprints in possession.
Most clubs were around 40-60% in both with some outliers in one direction with the other reduced to compensate for it.
Then you had Spurs who were right in the top corner for both with the most sprints in possession and the most sprints put of possession. No other club was even close to Spurs on the graph.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There you go. That's the problem in a nutshell. The injuries are NOT bad luck. They're a consequence of Angeball and the schedule of playing in the PL and the cup competitions. It's so friggin obvious.
posted on 10/2/25
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 2 hours, 12 minutes ago
comment by Grinch (U23226)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 1 hour, 58 minutes ago
comment by THFC1882 (U4452)
posted 57 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by He who Dares, waits for Trophies (U15748)
posted 10 minutes ago
My opinion is that even factoring our injuries this season, we should be around mid tabl
---------------------------------
Explain why Liverpool lost to Plymouth when they dropped their mainstay players from their game?
And how you think therefore without our backfour, most of the midfield and strikers, we should be winning games?
Liverpool who won every game almost and yet the first time their recognised first team players are rested, they lose the game to a team like Plymouth?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh and the last time they went with a weakened team was in CL a couple of weeks back. And guess what they lost that as well.
You would have to be extremely stupid to not know that having half a dozen of your regular starters missing from your line up is not going to affect performances and results. To have them all missing for three plus months is nothing short of catastrophic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Were Liverpool not already guaranteed to finish top when they played PSV? Not the best example.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We are not arguing about whether they were guaranteed to finish top. We are saying if you take half a dozen players out of any team, even the best, then results will suffer. Liverpool being the perfect example. Two weakened teams, lost both games. Yet Spurs play a weakened team for months on end, but are expected to win every game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sandy nobody was expects Spurs to win every game with it without the injuries. What people do expect is a manger able to adapt and help the team set up differently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the players are inferior to the players they have replaced, then it will make next to no difference how they are set up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course setting up a team that’s inferior can make a difference, how do you explain results like Plymouth beating Liverpool?
posted on 10/2/25
comment by BottomHalf ColdSpell (U23229)
posted 1 hour, 24 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 46 minutes ago
comment by Grinch (U23226)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 1 hour, 58 minutes ago
comment by THFC1882 (U4452)
posted 57 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by He who Dares, waits for Trophies (U15748)
posted 10 minutes ago
My opinion is that even factoring our injuries this season, we should be around mid tabl
---------------------------------
Explain why Liverpool lost to Plymouth when they dropped their mainstay players from their game?
And how you think therefore without our backfour, most of the midfield and strikers, we should be winning games?
Liverpool who won every game almost and yet the first time their recognised first team players are rested, they lose the game to a team like Plymouth?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh and the last time they went with a weakened team was in CL a couple of weeks back. And guess what they lost that as well.
You would have to be extremely stupid to not know that having half a dozen of your regular starters missing from your line up is not going to affect performances and results. To have them all missing for three plus months is nothing short of catastrophic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Were Liverpool not already guaranteed to finish top when they played PSV? Not the best example.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We are not arguing about whether they were guaranteed to finish top. We are saying if you take half a dozen players out of any team, even the best, then results will suffer. Liverpool being the perfect example. Two weakened teams, lost both games. Yet Spurs play a weakened team for months on end, but are expected to win every game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sandy nobody was expects Spurs to win every game with it without the injuries. What people do expect is a manger able to adapt and help the team set up differently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the players are inferior to the players they have replaced, then it will make next to no difference how they are set up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But they aren't inferior. Elfsborg?
And before you say, "Elfsborg? They're not exactly PL!" Then I'll double down with "Tamworth?"
Players aren't necessarily "inferior". Any team in any league can show how man-marking and parking the bus can practically make it impossible to score against because again, Tamworth.
Stop freaking defending the manager and being stubbon/adamant/headstrong about "injuries".
The manager left our midfield wide open last night, all he needed to do was shout out "close them down!", "mark your man!"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s what Sandy does, likes to go against the popular opinion. So when the supporters were backing Ange this was view https://www.ja606.co.uk/articles/viewArticle/463899
Now the supporters want Ange out Sandy decides to back Ange.
posted on 10/2/25
comment by THFC1882 (U4452)
posted 4 hours, 48 minutes ago
If using shoddy examples of the best team in Europe comforts you and deflects you from our issues then I won't stop you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This. All we hear now is that Liverpool lost due to injuries. So what! They don’t get spanked every week like we do. They never will do under their manager, regardless of injuries. He has a brain and knows how to set his available players up accordingly. Unlike Mr ‘it’s how we play mate’ Postenoclue.
posted on 10/2/25
Levy is an excellent chairman.
When you look at his directive:to make money, for an owner who visits less than once a year and for all accounts does not care about footy, only maximizing his assets worth. Levy has majorly delivered.
You all rage against ange, or Nuno, or even poch, but all have been facked by a club board that’s only mission is money, not footy. That’s your real target.
posted on 10/2/25
comment by Grinch (U23226)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by BottomHalf ColdSpell (U23229)
posted 1 hour, 24 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 46 minutes ago
comment by Grinch (U23226)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 1 hour, 58 minutes ago
comment by THFC1882 (U4452)
posted 57 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by He who Dares, waits for Trophies (U15748)
posted 10 minutes ago
My opinion is that even factoring our injuries this season, we should be around mid tabl
---------------------------------
Explain why Liverpool lost to Plymouth when they dropped their mainstay players from their game?
And how you think therefore without our backfour, most of the midfield and strikers, we should be winning games?
Liverpool who won every game almost and yet the first time their recognised first team players are rested, they lose the game to a team like Plymouth?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh and the last time they went with a weakened team was in CL a couple of weeks back. And guess what they lost that as well.
You would have to be extremely stupid to not know that having half a dozen of your regular starters missing from your line up is not going to affect performances and results. To have them all missing for three plus months is nothing short of catastrophic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Were Liverpool not already guaranteed to finish top when they played PSV? Not the best example.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We are not arguing about whether they were guaranteed to finish top. We are saying if you take half a dozen players out of any team, even the best, then results will suffer. Liverpool being the perfect example. Two weakened teams, lost both games. Yet Spurs play a weakened team for months on end, but are expected to win every game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sandy nobody was expects Spurs to win every game with it without the injuries. What people do expect is a manger able to adapt and help the team set up differently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the players are inferior to the players they have replaced, then it will make next to no difference how they are set up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But they aren't inferior. Elfsborg?
And before you say, "Elfsborg? They're not exactly PL!" Then I'll double down with "Tamworth?"
Players aren't necessarily "inferior". Any team in any league can show how man-marking and parking the bus can practically make it impossible to score against because again, Tamworth.
Stop freaking defending the manager and being stubbon/adamant/headstrong about "injuries".
The manager left our midfield wide open last night, all he needed to do was shout out "close them down!", "mark your man!"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s what Sandy does, likes to go against the popular opinion. So when the supporters were backing Ange this was view https://www.ja606.co.uk/articles/viewArticle/463899
Now the supporters want Ange out Sandy decides to back Ange.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What a find . He ALWAYS goes against the majority / popular opinion. Why, because it gives him the most attention. It’s either a personality defect or he’s a masterful WUM. Possibly both.
posted on 10/2/25
comment by BottomHalf ColdSpell (U23229)
posted 1 hour, 52 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 46 minutes ago
comment by Grinch (U23226)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 1 hour, 58 minutes ago
comment by THFC1882 (U4452)
posted 57 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by He who Dares, waits for Trophies (U15748)
posted 10 minutes ago
My opinion is that even factoring our injuries this season, we should be around mid tabl
---------------------------------
Explain why Liverpool lost to Plymouth when they dropped their mainstay players from their game?
And how you think therefore without our backfour, most of the midfield and strikers, we should be winning games?
Liverpool who won every game almost and yet the first time their recognised first team players are rested, they lose the game to a team like Plymouth?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh and the last time they went with a weakened team was in CL a couple of weeks back. And guess what they lost that as well.
You would have to be extremely stupid to not know that having half a dozen of your regular starters missing from your line up is not going to affect performances and results. To have them all missing for three plus months is nothing short of catastrophic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Were Liverpool not already guaranteed to finish top when they played PSV? Not the best example.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We are not arguing about whether they were guaranteed to finish top. We are saying if you take half a dozen players out of any team, even the best, then results will suffer. Liverpool being the perfect example. Two weakened teams, lost both games. Yet Spurs play a weakened team for months on end, but are expected to win every game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sandy nobody was expects Spurs to win every game with it without the injuries. What people do expect is a manger able to adapt and help the team set up differently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the players are inferior to the players they have replaced, then it will make next to no difference how they are set up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But they aren't inferior. Elfsborg?
And before you say, "Elfsborg? They're not exactly PL!" Then I'll double down with "Tamworth?"
Players aren't necessarily "inferior". Any team in any league can show how man-marking and parking the bus can practically make it impossible to score against because again, Tamworth.
Stop freaking defending the manager and being stubbon/adamant/headstrong about "injuries".
The manager left our midfield wide open last night, all he needed to do was shout out "close them down!", "mark your man!"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Spurs beat both Tamworth and Elsfborg 3-0. So why are you even mentioning those games?
posted on 10/2/25
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 1 hour, 17 minutes ago
I think Angeball only works if all 11 players in your side are cohesive and on it. If one part is out, it all fails. That's why most teams have holding midfielders. They don't put them in to score goals or attack. They put them in as an insurance policy should your team not be 'on it'. That's where Ange goes wrong. There is no safety net. If a player loses concentration in midfield for a split second, the opposition are in. If our full backs attack together and lose it, the opposition are in. Our only insurance really is tied to one player with the legs to mop up but because there's no one in midfield helping out, he has to do it all himself and now he's had back to back hamstring injuries.
Ange can cry all he wants about injuries but he's responsible for them. If he had more midfield security with a slightly deeper line, half of the problems we're currently having wouldn't exist.
It's so clear to me. It's just annoying so many are putting this down to bad luck without forensically analysing the detail at a more granular level.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Poch.
You have to let it go Fridge.
posted on 10/2/25
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 1 hour, 19 minutes ago
I think Angeball only works if all 11 players in your side are cohesive and on it. If one part is out, it all fails. That's why most teams have holding midfielders. They don't put them in to score goals or attack. They put them in as an insurance policy should your team not be 'on it'. That's where Ange goes wrong. There is no safety net. If a player loses concentration in midfield for a split second, the opposition are in. If our full backs attack together and lose it, the opposition are in. Our only insurance really is tied to one player with the legs to mop up but because there's no one in midfield helping out, he has to do it all himself and now he's had back to back hamstring injuries.
Ange can cry all he wants about injuries but he's responsible for them. If he had more midfield security with a slightly deeper line, half of the problems we're currently having wouldn't exist.
It's so clear to me. It's just annoying so many are putting this down to bad luck without forensically analysing the detail at a more granular level.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hear here
posted on 10/2/25
comment by Don’s Dinner (U11802)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by THFC1882 (U4452)
posted 4 hours, 48 minutes ago
If using shoddy examples of the best team in Europe comforts you and deflects you from our issues then I won't stop you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This. All we hear now is that Liverpool lost due to injuries. So what! They don’t get spanked every week like we do. They never will do under their manager, regardless of injuries. He has a brain and knows how to set his available players up accordingly. Unlike Mr ‘it’s how we play mate’ Postenoclue.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not "all you hear". Stop being dramatic karen.
Liverpool losing at Plymouth and also at PSV are examples of weakened teams not being at the same level as when they are at full strength.
Its a simple concept which is factually accurate but you & others have dismissed entirely.
posted on 10/2/25
comment by Grinch (U23226)
posted 33 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 2 hours, 12 minutes ago
comment by Grinch (U23226)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 1 hour, 58 minutes ago
comment by THFC1882 (U4452)
posted 57 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by He who Dares, waits for Trophies (U15748)
posted 10 minutes ago
My opinion is that even factoring our injuries this season, we should be around mid tabl
---------------------------------
Explain why Liverpool lost to Plymouth when they dropped their mainstay players from their game?
And how you think therefore without our backfour, most of the midfield and strikers, we should be winning games?
Liverpool who won every game almost and yet the first time their recognised first team players are rested, they lose the game to a team like Plymouth?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh and the last time they went with a weakened team was in CL a couple of weeks back. And guess what they lost that as well.
You would have to be extremely stupid to not know that having half a dozen of your regular starters missing from your line up is not going to affect performances and results. To have them all missing for three plus months is nothing short of catastrophic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Were Liverpool not already guaranteed to finish top when they played PSV? Not the best example.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We are not arguing about whether they were guaranteed to finish top. We are saying if you take half a dozen players out of any team, even the best, then results will suffer. Liverpool being the perfect example. Two weakened teams, lost both games. Yet Spurs play a weakened team for months on end, but are expected to win every game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sandy nobody was expects Spurs to win every game with it without the injuries. What people do expect is a manger able to adapt and help the team set up differently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the players are inferior to the players they have replaced, then it will make next to no difference how they are set up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course setting up a team that’s inferior can make a difference, how do you explain results like Plymouth beating Liverpool?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Liverpool resting their entire team. Then having none of them on the bench to rescue the game. Always gives the opposition a chance.
posted on 10/2/25
comment by Grinch (U23226)
posted 35 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 2 hours, 12 minutes ago
comment by Grinch (U23226)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 1 hour, 58 minutes ago
comment by THFC1882 (U4452)
posted 57 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by He who Dares, waits for Trophies (U15748)
posted 10 minutes ago
My opinion is that even factoring our injuries this season, we should be around mid tabl
---------------------------------
Explain why Liverpool lost to Plymouth when they dropped their mainstay players from their game?
And how you think therefore without our backfour, most of the midfield and strikers, we should be winning games?
Liverpool who won every game almost and yet the first time their recognised first team players are rested, they lose the game to a team like Plymouth?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh and the last time they went with a weakened team was in CL a couple of weeks back. And guess what they lost that as well.
You would have to be extremely stupid to not know that having half a dozen of your regular starters missing from your line up is not going to affect performances and results. To have them all missing for three plus months is nothing short of catastrophic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Were Liverpool not already guaranteed to finish top when they played PSV? Not the best example.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We are not arguing about whether they were guaranteed to finish top. We are saying if you take half a dozen players out of any team, even the best, then results will suffer. Liverpool being the perfect example. Two weakened teams, lost both games. Yet Spurs play a weakened team for months on end, but are expected to win every game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sandy nobody was expects Spurs to win every game with it without the injuries. What people do expect is a manger able to adapt and help the team set up differently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the players are inferior to the players they have replaced, then it will make next to no difference how they are set up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course setting up a team that’s inferior can make a difference, how do you explain results like Plymouth beating Liverpool?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So basically no inferior team should ever lose a game, if it is that simple.
posted on 10/2/25
comment by Grinch (U23226)
posted 30 minutes ago
comment by BottomHalf ColdSpell (U23229)
posted 1 hour, 24 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 46 minutes ago
comment by Grinch (U23226)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 1 hour, 58 minutes ago
comment by THFC1882 (U4452)
posted 57 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by He who Dares, waits for Trophies (U15748)
posted 10 minutes ago
My opinion is that even factoring our injuries this season, we should be around mid tabl
---------------------------------
Explain why Liverpool lost to Plymouth when they dropped their mainstay players from their game?
And how you think therefore without our backfour, most of the midfield and strikers, we should be winning games?
Liverpool who won every game almost and yet the first time their recognised first team players are rested, they lose the game to a team like Plymouth?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh and the last time they went with a weakened team was in CL a couple of weeks back. And guess what they lost that as well.
You would have to be extremely stupid to not know that having half a dozen of your regular starters missing from your line up is not going to affect performances and results. To have them all missing for three plus months is nothing short of catastrophic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Were Liverpool not already guaranteed to finish top when they played PSV? Not the best example.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We are not arguing about whether they were guaranteed to finish top. We are saying if you take half a dozen players out of any team, even the best, then results will suffer. Liverpool being the perfect example. Two weakened teams, lost both games. Yet Spurs play a weakened team for months on end, but are expected to win every game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sandy nobody was expects Spurs to win every game with it without the injuries. What people do expect is a manger able to adapt and help the team set up differently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the players are inferior to the players they have replaced, then it will make next to no difference how they are set up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But they aren't inferior. Elfsborg?
And before you say, "Elfsborg? They're not exactly PL!" Then I'll double down with "Tamworth?"
Players aren't necessarily "inferior". Any team in any league can show how man-marking and parking the bus can practically make it impossible to score against because again, Tamworth.
Stop freaking defending the manager and being stubbon/adamant/headstrong about "injuries".
The manager left our midfield wide open last night, all he needed to do was shout out "close them down!", "mark your man!"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s what Sandy does, likes to go against the popular opinion. So when the supporters were backing Ange this was view https://www.ja606.co.uk/articles/viewArticle/463899
Now the supporters want Ange out Sandy decides to back Ange.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Difference is I have backed him all season, bar the poor showing at Coventry. Try to keep up.
I shall continue to back him and Levy for a bit yet.
posted on 10/2/25
comment by Grinch (U23226)
posted 29 minutes ago
comment by BottomHalf ColdSpell (U23229)
posted 1 hour, 24 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 46 minutes ago
comment by Grinch (U23226)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 1 hour, 58 minutes ago
comment by THFC1882 (U4452)
posted 57 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by He who Dares, waits for Trophies (U15748)
posted 10 minutes ago
My opinion is that even factoring our injuries this season, we should be around mid tabl
---------------------------------
Explain why Liverpool lost to Plymouth when they dropped their mainstay players from their game?
And how you think therefore without our backfour, most of the midfield and strikers, we should be winning games?
Liverpool who won every game almost and yet the first time their recognised first team players are rested, they lose the game to a team like Plymouth?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh and the last time they went with a weakened team was in CL a couple of weeks back. And guess what they lost that as well.
You would have to be extremely stupid to not know that having half a dozen of your regular starters missing from your line up is not going to affect performances and results. To have them all missing for three plus months is nothing short of catastrophic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Were Liverpool not already guaranteed to finish top when they played PSV? Not the best example.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We are not arguing about whether they were guaranteed to finish top. We are saying if you take half a dozen players out of any team, even the best, then results will suffer. Liverpool being the perfect example. Two weakened teams, lost both games. Yet Spurs play a weakened team for months on end, but are expected to win every game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sandy nobody was expects Spurs to win every game with it without the injuries. What people do expect is a manger able to adapt and help the team set up differently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the players are inferior to the players they have replaced, then it will make next to no difference how they are set up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But they aren't inferior. Elfsborg?
And before you say, "Elfsborg? They're not exactly PL!" Then I'll double down with "Tamworth?"
Players aren't necessarily "inferior". Any team in any league can show how man-marking and parking the bus can practically make it impossible to score against because again, Tamworth.
Stop freaking defending the manager and being stubbon/adamant/headstrong about "injuries".
The manager left our midfield wide open last night, all he needed to do was shout out "close them down!", "mark your man!"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s what Sandy does, likes to go against the popular opinion. So when the supporters were backing Ange this was view https://www.ja606.co.uk/articles/viewArticle/463899
Now the supporters want Ange out Sandy decides to back Ange.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well well well, what do we have here?
Simon says, with a spit n shine and Sand it down:
"Manager has to go. Total shambles and utter embarrassment... Manager is out if his depth. Worse than the final six months of Pochettino." ~golden boot winner fa cup 1901
posted on 10/2/25
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Don’s Dinner (U11802)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by THFC1882 (U4452)
posted 4 hours, 48 minutes ago
If using shoddy examples of the best team in Europe comforts you and deflects you from our issues then I won't stop you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This. All we hear now is that Liverpool lost due to injuries. So what! They don’t get spanked every week like we do. They never will do under their manager, regardless of injuries. He has a brain and knows how to set his available players up accordingly. Unlike Mr ‘it’s how we play mate’ Postenoclue.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not "all you hear". Stop being dramatic karen.
Liverpool losing at Plymouth and also at PSV are examples of weakened teams not being at the same level as when they are at full strength.
Its a simple concept which is factually accurate but you & others have dismissed entirely.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Problem is none of them like actual facts. They just waffle on about all teams get injuries, like every team has up to a dozen players missing for like three months, whilst trying to compete in four competitions.
Without being unkind, I think we have some of the dumbest supporters in the country, if they cannot see what the main problem is. INJURIES.
posted on 10/2/25
Our current form is injuries yeah no doubt…..but I can’t shake how bad we were when we were pretty much fully fit
Unless my memory is that bad and we weren’t as bad as I’m thinking but I remember being shat
I like Ange the bloke and want him to succeed but he does seem a bit clueless
I’ve said it a few times ….he gets til the injuries are back for one last bash but if we are still awful I’ll be shouting Ange out as loud as the rest
Doesn’t mean I’m against change quicker ….i just won’t jump up and down about it yet
Page 2 of 4