bobzy

15 minutes ago, VillaJ100 said:

The bottom three need 12 points from 9 games combined to avoid being the worst bottom three ever.

And, despite this, Sheffield United need “only” 2 points to have a better points total than we did when we went down.

7 minutes ago, meregreen said:

And my self respect

I did it against Coventry

2 minutes ago, duke313 said:

This is a good point.  They haven't been playing like a top 4 side since November, whereas we have.

When we beat them in November, we went ahead of them by 2 points. They have 2 games in hand on us now and are 7 points behind.

Its been incredibly similar, no?

2 minutes ago, osmark86 said:

We do, but we have a terrible record with Olsen in goal. I really do not trust him in goal, but I hope I'm proven wrong.

It's not that terrible.  Strangely, as well, he's played a comparatively large amount of games against the better sides:

Wins with Olsen in goal:  Spurs, Hibs (twice), Legia, Burnley
Draws with Olsen in goal:  Brentford, Chelsea
Losses with Olsen in goal:  Man City, Stevenage, Liverpool, Man Utd, Newcastle, Everton

He's not a great keeper, he won't be here after this season but he's not a completely hopeless guy in goal at all.  The drop off from Martinez to Olsen is big, but he's still good enough for us to beat, say, Brighton.  If we can't do that it'll be because the rest of the starting eleven haven't turned up rather than just Olsen.

On 25/04/2024 at 08:10, Exeter Fan Too said:

 

Fantastic character here - absolutely the right mindset and speaks so well for a footballer, let alone one who (presumably) has English as his second language.

Viljami Sinisalo said his season at Exeter City has been "the best year" of his life.

The Finland goalkeeper, 22, has spent the season on loan at St James Park from Aston Villa and played 50 games.

He started all but one of Exeter's League One matches and helped the club reach the last 16 of the Carabao Cup, knocking out Premier League side Luton Town on the way.

He was named both the players' and supporters' player of the year as he won six awards at the Grecians' end-of-season awards night.

"It's been the best year of my life, the best footballing season of my life," he told BBC Radio Devon.

"It's been brilliant. I owe so much to the football club and everyone around here.

"All I can say is thank you and I love this football club and hopefully one day, I don't know when, I can return here."

(Link:  https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/c6py9m6lqyqo)

12 hours ago, villa89 said:

Will he win manager of the year? He should but will he actually get it? If we win the conference league I think he will but if city do the double pep will probably get it. 

There’s two things that could happen this season which I feel should (but won’t) dictate who gets MOTS.

We get top 4.
Luton survive.

Given the points deduction that Forest have taken, it feels like Luton surviving would be a lesser achievement (and I don’t think it happens) but no-one had them surviving really. Similarly, no-one had us finishing top 4 (bar Troy Townsend).

I also think O’Neil and Iraola have had very good seasons but not MOTS level. 

13 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

I don't really think it's different.

it was a behavioural thing for us as well. When my parents were kids they hardly had any children's TV. Or TV in general. Kids sitting around watching TV or playing video games all day was a completely alien concept. Kids in my generation were addicted to cartoons and video games. We were constantly told that behaviour was different and wrong. Now it's normal and this new behaviour is different and wrong

I think it's just the standard thing that happens in every generation, people think the changes in the new generation are bad and their generation was better.

 

It almost never is

I know they didn’t have those things, but their entertainment (whatever it was) was focussed on <something>. When kids (or we, whoever) watch a cartoon or programme, their (our) mind is focussed on that thing that they’re watching. So whilst it’s a different “thing”, the behaviour is the same.

With the “quick flick” dopamine hit stuff, that behaviour is not the same. There’s a lack of focus, it’s a shift to the next thing because you can and “need to”. That isn’t the same as parents not having TV but then kids having TV, it’s an entire change in how the mind is settling on something.

It may not be a problem but given what I see in myself and other adults a lack of focus is becoming a real issue. To the point now where I’m working, but replying on a forum because I can and it’s there.

This sort of thing is just going to be exacerbated if kids are picking it up. It may be inevitable, it might not even be an issue, but I think it’s a very different beast from “we had cartoons and we turned out fine” - and that’s ignoring things such as the (potentially scary) rabbit holes that algorithms will send kids down. 

30 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

My parents would have said the same thing about what I was watching.

And my son will say the same thing about what his kids are watching

I don’t think that’s quite right - or, rather, not the same thing.

There are so many “quick flick” things out there that kids are getting addicted in the same manner that my (late 30s) generation seem to be with phones now. Just habitual scrolling through stuff rather than an intent to look for a particular thing.

My parents might have had a “screen time” worry, but I reckon this is an actual behaviour shift and is a different beast. 

YouTube is horrific to be honest. Our girls watch YouTube Kids occasionally but it’s only ever to watch the drawing/colouring or baking things and after one has finished, it’s goes off. Their main watching is Disney+ (Bluey and Doc McStuffins are the current favourites) although my eldest (6) prefers to do something rather than watch - could be drawing/writing, could be playing on her tablet.

The mood after a lot of “screen time” is ridiculous, though. Definitely something I’m more careful with now. 

I must admit, I don't understand how Ben White isn't fouling the keeper on every single corner.

59 minutes ago, StewieGriffin said:

They're going to be very good next season.

They've got some squad work to do - Silva needs replacing properly, and Cucurella, Sterling and Mudryk need binning off. If they nail that, and keep Poch then they'll be a huge threat

I don't know... they could be, but maybe not.  They still feel like a team of individuals.  Whilst dominating the game last night, they still didn't want to work brilliant chances - it was so many shots from outside the area (and, naturally, when we backed off against Gallagher he scored).  Madueke, Palmer and Gallagher were all looking for worldies rather than passing the ball around more and probing into our box.  It wouldn't surprise me if they had about 40 shots last night with 5 on target.

If they can kick that and become more of a collective, then there's a decent future there.  The players I mentioned are all good, young players and could theoretically be Chelsea's attack for 10 years or so.

6 minutes ago, imavillan said:

Pop some money on Blues staying up.  They do, you win.  They don't, it was only £10 anyway.

1 minute ago, Stevo985 said:

I think Emi stays in his box and gets the easy header from Carlos. He shares the confidence in the defence that they have in him. 
 

But I agree with you overall point. Either way that ball gets dealt with as a routine thing. It wouldn’t develop into a chance for Chelsea

Most likely.

In any case, we don't see Olsen after this season.  Hopefully he helps us win the UECL and gets a nice little send off.

4 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

They’re both at fault. If Olsen stays in his area rather than charging out then Carlos doesn’t get a chance to lose his mind because he has an easy header back to Olsen. 
 

As it was, Olsen forced Carlos into changing his mind and then Carlos **** it up. 
 

If a Bette keeper is on the pitch then that situation never happens. 

To be honest, Martinez probably comes for it and is so vocal that the back line leaves it alone and he clears.  Olsen doesn't have that confidence - he even pauses his run here as he sees Carlos is closer, which in turn then makes Carlos wonder what he should do (he's probably going to head that back then sees Olsen quite far out and panics).

It looked like a back line that hasn't played together often but, bar that incident, I don't think they did anything particularly "wrong".

1 minute ago, DJ_Villain said:

Yeah, I did pal, from start to finish… and I saw us 2-0 up with Emi on the pitch, and 2-2 at full time with 45 minutes of Olsen…

We were SHITE in the second half, collectively… but don’t tell me that we wouldn’t have stood a better chance of walking away with all three points had Emi stayed on…

Thats why he is our first choice goalkeeper…

I don’t think it massively mattered who was in goal. Martinez wouldn’t have saved either of Chelsea’s effort, although there’s a possible argument that we may have had more attacking success from the build ups we do - but that’s so marginal given we didn’t do it much in the first half either. 

6 minutes ago, Mark Albrighton said:

Annoying that Hull drawing was the ideal result for them. Means that Hull still have half a chance of the play offs so will be up for it against Plymouth but Hull are unlikely to catch Norwich so they won’t (or shouldn’t) feel the pressure to get something purely because of Hull.

It’s going to come down to how much Norwich want to avoid Leeds in the semi finals (they lost to them twice this season, drew on both occasions with Southampton).

Norwich still need to not lose, though, and Blues need to win. 

Just now, Xela said:

They have to win their 3 games in hand to go above us now. Arsenal, Chelsea and Man City. 

Arsenal (H), Chelsea (A), Liverpool (A) - they could easily get 0 points from their next 3 games.

Just now, Pinebro said:

I said before the game that Chelsea is a highly unpredictable team.

In terms of xG they are a top 4 team. They create so many chances most games.

Reason they are mid table is because some games they just decide not turning up 

Unfortunately this was one of those times they were at it.

Result dont surprise me. Chelsea are a random team knew that before the game.

They've been the better side against us on 3 occasions this season and the other (our win at Stamford Bridge) was a close game from what I remember.

They just can't finish.  Even tonight, they should've scored more (it did also help that they kept shooting from 25 yards, even if Gallagher scored from that range).

2 minutes ago, Leeroy said:

VAR saved us tonight. That nudge looked very soft to me and I think the goal should have stood.

Soft?   **** hell.

Just now, KAZZAM said:

United, Newcastle, Chelsea

All seem to do well agsint us. Defo a pattern there as they are all the teams outside of the top 5.

Unai needs to look at that. 

Man Utd just got incredibly lucky.

With Newcastle and Chelsea, it's the high-intensity press in the middle of the park.

I feel so conflicted in many ways.

We didn't deserve anything from the game...
...but it feels disappointing to throw away a 2-0 lead...
...and yet somehow rewarding that we actually got a point.

In the end, that's a big point.