MessiWillSignForVilla

It's a word filter referring to Peter Bone MP who has particularly knobheady views, so you can probably guess what the four letter word it replaces is.

Liverpool losing, reckon they'd go for a manager swap?

Can't remember it's name, but there is a 5hr fan cut that is supposedly very good, I remember going to download it then realising I couldn't be arsed to watch a 5hr movie. I think the main takeaway from the synopsis was more Bilbo, less Thorin and the dwarves, no LOTR stuff where possible.

Nah, I would've had to do work, this was a much better use of time

I'll preface this by saying I want Gerrard out, but to be fair, I can see what is supposed to be happening with those tactical choices, I just think it's down to poor coaching for why it's not coming off. Essentially the full backs are required to provide the width as the tactic is initially based off the idea of the 2 10s Gerrard used at Rangers - wide players that cut inside and operate more centrally than where they line up. So the full backs push high up the pitch to provide options on the wing when a team can't be broken down centrally, something that refocuses the attack and presents opportunities to stretch and open up stubborn defences. This leads to the team being vunerable on the counter with just 2 CBs back, so the CMs will fill these gaps whilst the ball is on their side so that they can be both an option to recycle the ball and to drop back if the ball is lost. The other CM would be more central when the ball is on the other side of the pitch to help with possession. Usually teams with high attacking full backs make up for this with either 3 CBs or a DM that drops between the defence, and I actually think if done properly, the intended style is a good innovation to try to maintain defensive stability on the counter whilst keeping numbers in midfield. However, this clearly also requires two further things, the aforementioned 2 10s operating centrally and occupying the attacking roles CMs would often take up, and a DM sat centrally to offer an option to recycle the ball whilst being able to break up any midfield counters, and this is where the way we currently do it breaks down, especially when you add in the CMs staying wide instead of moving inside when they are needed. By going with 2 STs and an AM, we sacrifice a player that is dropping into the midfield area to provide possession options. We then have a DM that seems to be instructed to drop between the defenders, which gives us the worst of both worlds as when we gain possession it's as if our midfield 3 run away from each as fast as possible, when they should be working in tandem. This results in our midfield being completely abandoned and resembling a donut more than a structured attacking set up. It also results in our AM being required to drop far deeper than he should just to collect the ball, and when he does, he doesn't have options. Below are 3 visualisations of how I think we should look approaching the final third, but the system has been implemented awfully which results in what we actually see. Notice how the ball holder in the three examples always has 6 short passing options, with options forward, left, right and back? Obviously I have just chosen where to put the players to facilitate that and a game scenario would change things, but I think by judging Gerrard's Rangers team and the tactical decisions we do see, those shapes are the intended outcome of the tactics. The problem is we don't see it due to a combination of poor coaching, shoe-horning in players, muddled instructions and not adapting the style to the personnel changes to the line up. I think it is right to criticise Gerrard for those tactical choices, especially when they are poorly implemented, but I can see the intent there and how a competent manager might get it to work. As I finish this I realise this should probably be in the team shape thread, so apologies to the mods if you want to move it.

Yes, but because the £15m was split up between a £3m loan fee and £12m transfer fee it doesn't count for some reason Also, I'm pretty sure the fee reported when we signed him was £11m anyway?

It's almost like losing 9-0 and basically saying "I'll do it again" doesn't instill the board with confidence that you're up for the job. That post match interview was one of the most ridiculous interviews I've seen from a manager, up there with Moyes' "we're in a relegation battle" after 3 games and Sherwood's "I ain't never felt this bad ever".

From what I can tell, loss %, both Gerrard and Garde would have lost 13/23 games, but Gerrard would've won 8 opposed to Garde's 3.

It really is. Some stats for you; Grealish played 19 of Smith's 34 games that season (56%), we picked up 82% of our wins (14/17) and 74% of our points (45/61) during those games. With Grealish we were 14/3/2, without him we were 3/7/5, with 71% of our losses coming when he didn't play. First season back he missed just two games, we lost both. Second season he played 26 games (68%), we got 81% of our wins with him (13/16) and 78% of our points (43/55). With Grealish, 13/4/9, without 3/3/6. After Grealish left, from 11 games we went 3/1/7. With Grealish, Smith's Win% was 44%, without 23%. He made a massive difference, and he very much did define Smith's tenure, hence why he ended up getting sacked after Grealish left as he proved he couldn't perform for us without Grealish.

Nonsense. We went on a 10 game winning run when Grealish returned from injury and had gotten just 2 wins from the previous 13 without him. Not to mention our run of good form before his injury coincided with him getting 2 goals and 3 assists from 6 games. Smith deserves a lot of credit for getting Grealish to realise his potential, but it's completely revisionist to suggest Grealish didn't make much difference that season.

to be fair I've avoided on topic as much as possible recently, so I don't actually know what the common consensus would be of him right now

We're looking good so far so I'm gonna throw out my hot take. For all his qualities, Ramsey is not suited to CM, especially the way we play. He's still young and I'm sure he will become a much better CM in time, but he needs to mature as a player to play there imo. He doesn't have the positional discipline, consistency in passing ability or defensive abiliy to operate effectively in that role, the first two I think McGinn shares too, so when the two play in midfield we look far too open and without options in build up. We need someone like Luiz to play otherwise Kamara ends up far too isolated far too often. I think he'd be much better suited to playing further up the pitch where he can utilise his dribbling and close control that he excels at, without risking too much defensively in the midfield. He's still only 21, I think he just needs a couple more seasons to mature as a player before consistently starting in the midfield.

It's used at golf ranges that have ball tracking equipment to give you details about your shot. Because teams famously don't use corners as goal scoring opportunities

This is what I really hate about this City team, they can be getting well beaten and then just suddenly have a 5 minute period where they turn the game on it's head. Pisses me off, just be shit occasionally like the rest of us.

The other is that we've just add two players to our defensive unit that don't speak fluent English

that was a fantastic tackle by Holgate tbf

great start

Not a proposal for a new permanent badge, but next season will include our 150th anniversary, so it would be cool to have a one off badge next season to commemorate that. My photoshop skills aren't great but I quickly put together this rough one based off of what seems to be our first ever badge. Then perhaps the new permanent one could be a stylised version of it. Also want a half and half kit next year for it too, or hoops, with an all black away shirt.

Kingsley is the greatest mascot of all time!

Possibly one of the greatest pieces of shithousery I've ever seen.

Despite being a colour combination that's very easy to get right, Fulham have managed to get it really wrong in the past, but when they get it right they produce some belters like this one. Not sure about the away though. I think it's part of the current trend of having football shirts double as everyday streetwear, so having the badges and sponsors getting washed away and lost are a feature of the design as that way they aren't immediately noticeable as football shirts, at least from a distance.

Not just that, but because of their miracle everyone glosses over the fact they were bankrolled by their owner and violated FFP when they got promoted, and since his death the belts have been tightened a bit. Not to mention previous transfer were also funded by Mahrez, Maguire and Chilwell sales. No big sale this window and I doubt they bring many in. It's not necessarily a bad thing with the owner, glass houses and all that, just that I'm not sure his son is as willing to pump money in.

"Was there a Norwegian community?" Such Ronny Johnsen slander is unacceptable! Edit - Actually, I bet Carew did leave behind a pretty substantial Norwegian community when he was here