tom_avfc

I'd also add Jack Nowell to the list of players who can consider themselves a bit unlucky. For me he's looked the most effective winger on the tour so far but he's not been given a go against the all blacks. Hopefully he'll get some proper game time tomorrow to show what he can do. He seems more suited to the game plan that Gatland was looking to use than someone like Anthony Watson for example.

I think I'm with you on the first point but not the second. Te'o can consider himself extremely unlucky not to be in and he linked up nicely with Davies in the first test. Sexton and Farrell could well have storming games though to be fair and I suppose gatland doesn't want to go down wondering what if. However, for me Kruis can't feel hard done by. He's lost form at completely the wrong time and made handling errors in both the first test and the Maoris game. I'd potentially have gone for Lawes and Itoje but not sure how well they'd complement each other and also Lawes played 60 minutes in the week.

As far as I can see this was never actually said. I think this fad for putting made up quotes next to pictures of famous people is pretty worrying but only another example of how easy it is to present fiction as fact to influence people. Feel free to correct me if there's any actual quotes.

I agree with you that at least they've tried but I'd say the reason they're getting hammered on it is because they are placing a "costed manifesto" as such a large part of their campaign. In fact the manifesto was described as "the biggest star we have" by shadow Home Secretary Emily Thornberry. If things are then identified which haven't been costed or if independent financial bodies identify weaknesses in the costings then I think its inevitable that you're going to take a bit of a hammering. Like I said, I'm glad they tried to provide a costing but I'm not sure they should ever have placed such importance on it as its left them wide open to easy attacks.

I think this is a bit of an oversimplification of the issue. Yes, Labour have provided a "costed" manifesto. However in this manifesto not everything is actually costed and what is costed is inevitably based on a large amount of guesswork. So yes fair play to them for attempting to provide an estimated cost on some of what is in their manifesto but I think it would be naive to simply "believe" the figures provided. The IFS have already commented that they don't believe that Labour would raise as much tax as they've said they will and some policies will inevitably cost more than estimated. This costed manifesto seems to be a huge thing for Labour and is mentioned quite often but in reality means very little if the costing is inaccurate. I do like the idea that manifestos should be costed (although a completely independent costing of all manifestos would be more ideal) and Labour have at least made an attempt (more than the Conservatives) but why on Earth would anybody suddenly start just believing politicians in an age where we seem to have some of the least capable and least believable politicians.

Is this what most of us are feeling? It might just be me but I'm not laying the blame directly at the door of the Tories but rather at the tosser who blew himself and innocent kids up. With all the talk earlier on about the government politicising the attack id have thought that this kind of post is fairly hypocritical. An attack of this nature could happen anywhere and at any time. It's happened in many other countries and I wouldn't want our foreign policy to be decided based on such attacks. Corbyn's statement is also nice in that it states "we need a smarter way to reduce the threat" without actuallly giving any kind of smarter way. Provide an alternative and give people something to vote for. I genuinely feel about as out of touch with any politician as I ever have to the extent where I'm not sure I can even be bothered to go and spoil my vote.

I agree with the majority of this but 'who's doing the sums?' isnt really a trivial point to me. I won't be voting Tory (probably won't be voting at all) but it does come across as a labour manifesto which hasn't been costed at all and probably doesn't need to be as they know they're not going to get in. Anybody could come up with a great list of things they'd do knowing that they won't get in so will never be held to account for it. It's like the nick clegg tuition fee promise which ruined his reputation as it was never going to be feasible. Now maybe this labour manifesto has been costed properly and is achievable but when you have prominent labour politicians who can't do basic sums on the cost of one proposal it doesn't give off the best idea. As I said I probably won't be voting. I have no trust in any party at all and the move to the right from the tories and to the wishful thinking left of labour means I find myself with much less interest in politics as someone who would sit much more central on the political scale.

I agree with the majority of this but 'who's doing the sums?' isnt really a trivial point to me. I won't be voting Tory (probably won't be voting at all) but it does come across as a labour manifesto which hasn't been costed at all and probably doesn't need to be as they know they're not going to get in. Anybody could come up with a great list of things they'd do knowing that they won't get in so will never be held to account for it. It's like the nick clegg tuition fee promise which ruined his reputation as it was never going to be feasible. Now maybe this labour manifesto has been costed properly and is achievable but when you have prominent labour politicians who can't do basic sums on the cost of one proposal it doesn't give off the best idea. As I said I probably won't be voting. I have no trust in any party at all and the move to the right from the tories and to the wishful thinking left of labour means I find myself with much less interest in politics as someone who would sit much more central on the political scale.

Oh, I kind of agree with you financially although I have no idea how much either would be on. As I said, I wouldn't put them in the same team but being able to rest both and share out the minutes would be good from a squad perspective. But again as I mentioned above, I'm convinced there's better value out there and as good as Jedinak has been there's better value than him also.

Why? I can understand not putting them in the same team but why can't we have both in the squad? For what it's worth I'm not massively keen on signing Barry. He's decent but there must be better out there for the wages that he'd probably cost.

I disagree with almost all of this post. I don't understand the part about playing worse clubs. He had a poor first 8 or 9 games which included playing teams like Forest, Wolves and Barnsley who I wouldn't call great clubs. After that he's been pretty consistent including in games against Sheffield Wednesday, Reading and Brighton. He's got better as he's settled in imo. Gollini played with Baker, Chester and Jedinak in the majority of games. Cissokho played in less than half of the games which Gollini played in. Hutton had played consistently since October and before that we had de laet who most would consider a better player. You've just picked the worst players that have played with Gollini and the best that have played with Johnstone. I would say that the organisation in front of Johnstone is better under Bruce than RDM but that's not really to do with the personnel and more the tactics. I actually thought Gollini was starting to settle but I see more potential in Johnstone, the way he's played recently. My only issue is I'm not convinced we'll be able to sign Johnstone and developing players for other teams is frustrating to me.

I hope he becomes the squad player which he should have been this season but there's plenty I hope never play for us again before Bacuna. He cares (probably a bit too much for his own good at times), was at least as good as the rest of the midfield today and offers a solid substitute option in a number of positions. I was actually disappointed to see the boo boys back at him again after his small strop over the free kick. The fact that he still gives his all after the rubbish about his 'champions league' quotes last season makes me find it difficult to understand why some have such a strong hate for him. He's no worse than many players we have in the squad at the moment and certainly looks like he cares more than many.

I think it's the style of football more than anything that people will hammer Mourinho with. Rightly or wrongly people will look at the amount of money United have spent and see 30% possession and 3 shots as unacceptable. I'm with you though to be fair. Job well done and a solid point. Personality wise I don't see Mourinho as any worse than Guardiola, who has been petulant at best this season, but he does seem to be hated by most for one reason or another.

Can't argue too much with the squad selected. Potentially, Ford would have been a better call as he could continue his partnership with Farrell if Sexton were to get injured (and he's bound to be a target for the All Blacks). I don't see too much between Ringrose and Davies and this Lions tour may have just come a bit early for Ringrose. If the tour was in a year's time I'd be pretty sure he'd be in. I thought Moriarty had a pretty decent Six Nations and ultimately Robshaw's lack of big game time has probably cost him as well. Had Robshaw not been injured for almost all of the serious matches this season he may well have found himself on the tour. I would add that Launchbury can consider himself unlucky not to make it but he is in the most competitive position on the whole tour.

I wouldn't say Norwich played us off the park. They had a lot of the ball but did nothing with it and Johnstone only had a couple of shots to save. We had a Hourihane header off the bar, a good save from Hogan's shot and Kodjia's chance which went just wide as well as the two goals we scored. QPR was more of a struggle but even then it was more a case of us sitting back at 60 minutes in.

This is odd. If we take away 8 wins we don't have a play off ppg. That's not exactly surprising is it. If we take away 8 defeats we'd be on to win the league. Means about as much as your example. Stevo has done a ppg based on actual results not taking away results which don't fit the agenda. Seems more reliable to me.

When he took over we had 10 points from 11 games at 0.9 points a game. Since then we've taken 48 points from 30 games at 1.6 points per game. If we'd picked up points at that rate all season we'd currently be on 66 points (3 points off the playoffs) and over a full season we'd get 74 (there or thereabouts for playoffs most seasons). Given what he inherited, could he improve on this with a full pre season and a few quality additions? I'd argue yes he could and I don't really see any argument for getting rid of him at this point. Its just a shame we had a terrible January and February as a few more points there in some very winnable games could have made all the difference

Was at Solihull Moors before Grimsby so I saw a fair bit of him. Was so far ahead of everybody at that level so it doesn't surprise me how quickly he's risen through the leagues. He's that style of player where he's always going to be a handful no matter what the level. Not sure he has the technical ability to really challenge Kodjia and Hogan for a starting position but he'd be an option and I can't imagine he'd cost much with Wigan almost certainly going back down.

It's not the praise that he gets that annoys me as much as his own arrogance and the way he's conducted himself since he's been Man City boss. Some of his press conferences this season have been particularly poor and he seems to get away with it when other managers are slated for the way they act. I also don't get the people defending him by saying Monaco are a great team. This is the last 16 of the Champions League and every team in it is going to be decent. When Monaco were beating Spurs earlier on in the tournament there was no mention of this great side. Of the teams left in only Leicester are below them with the bookmakers in the odds of winning the whole thing. I just think that if any other manager had gone out over two legs to Monaco with the money they've spent there'd be more questions being asked, particularly with the tactics that were employed in that second leg.

Completely this. If either of them get away with less than Bacuna then I just don't get it. Two premeditated attacks which were both borderline assault. I don't get the argument of if someone trod on my head then I'd deliberately try and smash an elbow into their skull either. Is it just me that finds this defence slightly disturbing.

Whilst it was only a throw in, it was a throw in from where there throw in taker could reach the middle of the box and this had looked one of their more likely ways of scoring. I'm not disagreeing with the fact that he was stupid for doing it but had they scored from that throw in it would have been difficult to take especially with it being such an easy decision to get right. As for whether he's got what he deserves, judging by the incidents highlighted in this thread (Wenger, Akpan, Bamba, Shelvey) I'd suggest he can feel like he's been treated slightly harshly whilst accepting he was an idiot for reacting as he did.

6 matches seems excessive given Akpan got 4 for pushing a referee. Not sure how these lengths of bans are arrived at. His own fault though ultimately.

Yeah he can't really win now. Even when he makes a good punch now it's "Why didn't he catch it?" The good saves he's made recently are just ignored. He doesn't come for a ball that he's never going to get and the crowd get edgy. The edginess of the crowd won't help him either. Feels a bit like Guzan in his last year. Once the crowd are decided on a keeper it makes his job infinitely harder with the edgy atmosphere it creates. Now obviously this is partly his fault for the big mistakes he did make in a few games but now it feels like a vicious circle which he's going to really struggle to get out of. I think hes done well in the last 2 or 3 games considering this and would like to see him given some kind of support.

I think Gollini's interview after leaving made it pretty clear that he didn't want to be here. After that, I suppose it's difficult to know how many options we had before signing Johnstone. I'm still hoping he continues to improve and puts himself into contention to be signed permanently. He's not a keeper that I don't see potential in but its taking him some time to get over a few big mistakes. The fact that we're playing a bit better as a team now can only help relieve some of the pressure from him.

I actually thought he did pretty well against Bristol the other day. Didn't make any big mistakes for me and was a good save from the header. Two decent games for me and hopefully he can push on. I actually feel a bit sorry for him when it comes to kicking. He's not really got a target to aim at up there as Kodjia just isn't interested in the physical battle most of the time. He couldn't really give it short as Bristol were pressing pretty high up against our defenders who aren't very good on the ball. I thought he targeted Adomah who actually was winning a few aerial battles against his full back. Yes a couple of times he kicked straight out but if your right winger is your best bet in the aerial battle that's probably inevitable. As an aside I wonder if it'd be worth pushing Jedinak slightly higher up to contest the headers from his goal kicks. We could easily move another midfielder back to cover temporarily and he seems our best bet at winning anything.