sheepyvillian

3 minutes ago, Django_Zooms said:

Portsmouth Grammar School made it to the UCL SF? Formidable.

Reliable as ever. 

Had a feeling Dortmund might get past PGS. I hope they do, would hate to see another "Plastic Team'" win it again.

3 hours ago, Rob182 said:

Did you have this post in your drafts for 7 years?

My ex Partner was always on to me to give it a go, but you know how it is, the more someone tells you to watch the less you want to. 

Started it the other day, and I can understand the appeal. 

2 hours ago, Nor-Cal Villan said:

Midnight Run is very funny in this day 

I think it was the first time RD did straight comedy. I know he did King of Comedy but that was rather dark, whereas, MR was funny all the way through. 

The wierd thing about Stranger Things is, the first season actually looks like it was made in the 80s. It has that ET kind of atmosphere. 

4 hours ago, duke313 said:

The only reason we'd even consider selling Ramsey is for FFP, that's it.

Common sense really. I think most of us would rather he stay.

2 hours ago, Vancvillan said:

Football Insider linking us with Callum O'Hare.

lol

That doesn't count as speculation, just "Bollocks".

Regarding The Bear. Richie, that's spot - on how a "Manic Depressive" behaves. 

Having reached episode 6, S-1 of The Bear, I was quite surprised to see Jon Bernthal appear. Always admired his ability to bring a certain amount of honesty to the characters he plays.

1 hour ago, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said:

Then if Rogers has an injury plagued season through no fault of his own, and doesn't reach the heights he has shown he can because of it, do we then prepare to sell and replace him asap as well?

I would be happy for JJ to stay, but someone has to go to generate funds. JJ seems like the only one, of the possibiles, who could demand a hefty fee. 

Who would you choose?

I know it's had 5 seasons but I have decided to watch Stranger Things. One thing that took me by surprise was how terribly Mathew Modine has aged.

46 minutes ago, ChicagoVillan1983 said:

JJ who? I wouldn't be upset for a second if we can get a decent price.

Some would differ from that opinion. Myself, I have a soft spot for "Our Own" but as sad as I would be to see him go, Rodgers would provide the sliver lining. 

This Town. It's supposed to be set in the early 80s. The only place you could get Heroin from in 80s Birmingham was the Hobmoor pub in South Yardley and maybe a few hippies in Moseley. In contrast to today it was virtually non - existent. Honestly, the writing on this show is as cringeworthy as it gets.

4 hours ago, duke313 said:

, who are we selling

Carlos, Cash, Tim, Duran (sadly) and probably a player that will cause some consternation amongst us at VT, whoever that may be, but if I was pushed to guess, maybe JJ.

37 minutes ago, TRO said:

I respect your opinion, Sheepy.....but I think it's a stretch to suggest, that Emi could influence, what was wrong with us in that second half....you could be right, after all....but I didn't see it that way.

Jackson had a close offside too, first half.....I thought Olsen saved a worldie, from Palmer too. He is never going to give us the assurance Emi does, but their goals came from passive play, from us.

I'm not suggesting you are wrong about Emi, we will always miss him....but I think the midfield, was a central culprit in our poor night.

just opinions.

The fact that Chelsea looked a lot more dangerous in the 2nd half than they did in the first, I think, adds weight to my opinion. 

You're right, they are just opinions. 

16 hours ago, switters said:

What Emi would have added 2nd half is his ability to slow it down and relieve some pressure. He's willing to keep the ball that bit longer, under pressure, wait until the pass is on before releasing.

Not sure it would changed the result ultimately. They did a good job on staying tight on Luiz and McGinn and wingers pushing high on full backs to not really allow the short options, Pau was forced to go long quite often as well and he's not one for low % hoofs normally, that was kind of forced by them.

 

But for all their possession in that first - half, aside from hitting the post, they never really looked like scoring. We were disciplined in our defensive organisation. Not so in the second  - half. The confidence had evaporated and we lost our structure. I honestly don't believe that would have been the case has Emi not departed. 

18 hours ago, AntrimBlack said:

Is there talk of Archer coming back?

I have no idea how he has performed this season.

Sheffield seemed to be a difficult choice for a young striker.

Agreed. Of all the clubs, depresses me just to say "Sheffield United"!

9 hours ago, ben1505 said:

Saw this online ..... Tottenham have won just once in the league at Stamford Bridge in the last 34 years.... so they're probably due....

NO!!!!

On 27/04/2024 at 12:07, chrisp65 said:

Watched season 5 of Fargo and it was a real return to form, did everything I want Fargo to do.

So, considering that season 4 had left me a bit meh and I hadn’t made it past the first couple, I’ve given it another go.

It’s ok, perhaps on its own I’d even think it was good. But lined up against everything else branded Fargo, it’s the poor relation.

I recently re - watched season 4, and enjoyed more than I did the first time. I really don't think there's been a poor season, just some a lot better than others. For me, all seasons are extremely watchable. 

Just reading an article about a film with Matt Damon and Casey Affleck. A heist movie apparently, in their words, "Influenced by Midnight Run and Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid. I loved Midnight Run, a proper 80s flick.very funny in it's day.

Just now, tinker said:

Tyson will KO him, his style is to aggressive for Jake to hide, step inside and bang hes out, Jake's a fool.

I get the feeling it will be kind of staged. A kind of wrestling outlook. It certainly doesn't interest me in the least. 

4 hours ago, ChicagoVillan1983 said:

I get it, it's just hard to say you have, literally, the best player in the world at GK and to not build around that. I understand it makes us massively weaker when he is not on the pitch, but I don't think the answer is to change our style of play in a manner that makes us more resilient when he is not on the pitch.

We'd be nowhere near 4th without him - NOWHERE. 

That's right, we didn't do in the second  - half what we did in the first. For me, that was a result of being without the calming presence of our keeper. 

1 minute ago, TRO said:

The top 3 have only averaged just over 2 goals per game this season......with all their fire power....Arsenal and Man city 2.4 and Liverpool with 2.2

I don't think it's reasonable to assume, we can keep scoring so freely.

I can't offer an explanation, as to why, we let them back in, but if we couldn't secure the ball, maybe it's one answer.

I ask the question, did we go defensive? by design or by necessity or did we just retreat, because we couldn't get the ball?

I think we tried not to concede, because we couldn't get the ball, to launch an attack, we effectively lost the midfield.....I do get your point, our strength is attack, and the "goals for" column supports that.....but when we couldn't get the ball, the only alternative is to keep what you already have.....but sadly, Chelsea had different ideas.

 

 

 

I have given my opinion. Offensively, the contrast from the first - half to the second  - half was startling. We didn't have the same self - belief in the second  - half, hence the lack of cohesion. We allowed ourselves to become over defensive, and imo, that was a consequence of losing our captain and keeper. 

Plenty of teams have had less that 30 per cent of the possession and still managed to get the victory. It just requires defensive discipline and confidence. Unfortunately, we didn't have those qualities in the second  - half, hence the result.

That's just my take on the game as I saw it, nothing more.

1 hour ago, Avfc96 said:

Just when boxing seems to being getting it's act together (albeit it thanks to Saudi blood money), it goes and shoots itself in the foot again by making Mike Tyson vs that absolute w***** Jake Paul an official licensed bout that goes on both of their records. FFS

It's an exhibition fight. It's money orientated, nothing more. Saying that, it would be hilarious if Tyson chinned the muggy word removed. 

43 minutes ago, TRO said:

I can't argue Sheepy, with all that.

I can tell you, at 2-0 up, I was still nervy.

I accept the magnitude that Emi exudes in every aspect of his play, but I thought it was coming, like another Brentford.

You are right, possession is only one aspect of a game, and sometimes it is for possessions sake, but when you haven't got the ball, you can't affect the game and the frustration builds.....and it's like boxing, the body punches, rarely knock you out, but they wear you down.....and they wore us down.

But there have been countless games where we have surrendered possession and still managed the game to our advantage. Spurs away, Arsenal at home and away, in the first - half. 

In that first - half against Chelsea, every time we hit them on the counter we looked like we would score. However, that dangerous weapon was almost non - existent in the second  - half. We became fixated on trying not to concede, to the point where we forgot about trying to get a third goal. We allowed ourselves to become overwhelmed and Chelsea sensed the fear and panic that consumed our players. Like I said, even the crowd sensed the change in our approach, and sadly, the inevitable happened. Without confidence there's no cohesion, instead of asserting ourselves, we kind of crossed our fingers and just hoped we didn't concede. I really don't think that would have happened had Emi not been replaced. He's the captain for a reason, he brings that assured presence, that sadly, Olsen doesn't.