YouUnastanFren

Me neither but first season under him BT got 18 goals 7 assists, that would suit us just fine

True but if we're basing it on a theoretical possibility that he isn't ever going to regain fitness then we don't need to worry about selling him because nobody will buy him until he's fit again. Imo if he's fit he's useful and we should keep him and if he's not then nobody will buy him. I think anyone can work in a high press system as long as the fitness coaching is up to snuff. I have a feeling we'll see the best of Traore under a stricter manager like Gerrard.

Traore is a long way down the list of wingers who we'll be looking to shift I would think. He is both better and more versatile than most, can act as cover up front as well.

I'm happy he scored because goals are good and it has already happened but adjudging decisions by the success of the outcome rather than their probability of success will be detrimental in the long term. I would prefer him to pass in an identical situation in the future. The two options (shoot and pass) have not got greatly differing probability of success here but think of it like this: you sold your house and placed your life savings on number 10 on a roulette table and won. Was this a sensible decision? No. Was it a successful outcome? Yes. Because it was successful should you lump all of your money onto number 10 again? No

I have faith that this will be pointed out to him in the post match debrief. It's nice that he scored and regained confidence but the objectively higher percentage chance of scoring as a team was to make the pass. It's not a glaring error as he still got a strong foot shot from inside the area at a good angle but our new coaching team have already mentioned looking for marginal gains a few times and over the course of a season this type of decision is one of those gains that could be made.

Pleasantly surprised that overtaking was more achievable than it looked like it was going to be but the penalties killed the chance for a race up front and BOT's tyre explosion killed the chance of a constructor battle for points but at least it benefitted Alonso. I really really hope Renault make him a competitive car for next year. Would be a great storyline.

The repeated egg on face from saying he couldn't get us promoted, then that he couldn't keep us up, then that he couldn't re-establish us as a PL team all while eating humble pie over events like the Old Trafford win, the double over Arsenal, and hammering reigning champions 7-2 would have been pretty humiliating to be fair. Bit of a laughing stock for a few years there, some of them. Only natural when you've taken that kind of prolonged hammering you want to lash out.

The team showed what in my opinion is the most important things to see in the first game under the new management: Effort and commitment. On this evidence the squad seem to have bought in 100% to this regime which will give it the best possible chance of success. Even the players who didn't play particularly well (mainly Buendia) seemed to be trying really **** hard. Hopefully we can see them get back on that upward trajectory we were on.

Weird to see F1 cars going round Losail. Not sure the track really works for it, definitely better suited to the MotoGP bikes. Can understand that this GP was added at short notice but I'm worried that overtaking in a car here will be bloody hard. At least they've ditched the numberwang of corners that they'll enforce track limits on and just said they'll enforce them all though. Will make it much easier to spot infringements.

Click on Account and then Ignored Users and add their username.

At least the squad will be used to their manager not taking training

First chance I've had to watch the full press conference and obviously it is almost impossible to glean anything useful from a first press conference but I was very pleased with how they controlled the narrative and shut down the wanking over Liverpool as quickly as possible every time one of the journalists tried to start it. Good job Gerrard and Purslow.

Mercedes right to review denied outright so no decision even needs to be made and all the data and analysis is irrelevant. Probably the best option they could have gone for really, other than admitting fault and then saying this will usually be a penalty but not this time because they **** up. If they'd have given a punishment it would've had far more effect than if they'd just given it at the time which is unfair on RB and VER. If they'd have reviewed it and decided that it was okay we'd have seen every overtake on the outside countered by just running them off the road without penalty.

But it doesn't take away anything from the actual event itself though does it? If you don't like the talking heads you can just ignore them. I can't stand Eddie Hearn but I still watch cards he promotes, just not his press conferences or interviews.

It's the exact same thing as every single football manager saying they were robbed by the refs and VAR every week. Same thing happens in combat sports about every single judges decision and even half of the stoppages. Competitive people try and bend the rules and influence the officials in their own favour.

Might be just me that gets driven **** nuts by Crofty shoehorning in the contractually required mention of Sky Glass every 5 laps even in the middle of an overtake or someone rejoining from the pits. He says the exact words from Sky Q onwards 20 times a race I think.

Completely agree about the hard racing and about how good this season has been. Best since 2012 I'd say. I just would like the current rules enforced accurately because if they're not I think it will actually put people off attempting overtakes. If drivers can force off anyone who tries to overtake them without penalty then that is all we are going to see. I am hyped for next season's cars that should hopefully allow closer racing and if we can be in a position where racing and defending hard within the confines of the track are condoned and encouraged by the officials then it could be the best season ever, provided one team doesn't have a much better car than the rest of course.

Some good analysis of it here from Jolyon Palmer. https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/video.jolyon-palmers-analysis-did-verstappen-deserve-a-penalty-for-clash-with-hamilton-at-interlagos.1716614097935388221.html He does also mention analysing the telemetry but that part of the video is behind the F1TV paywall by the sound of it. Edit - He also shows us a clip of the Rosberg one in Austria and it is far worse than I remembered. Absolutely comical, this one was nowhere near that level of obviousness, I was wrong.

This the point though, this is only allowed as a defence if you can do it while staying on the track. You can't just plough through the corner and miss the exit by 20 yards and take another car with you. The braking point he usually used was the latest point he could brake while working the throttle up right off the apex and staying on the track. If he attacked the corner from a narrower angle and braked as later or later he has two options for after the apex: continue braking far past/use very little throttle on the exit and lose speed but stay on track or accelerate as normal off the corner and leave the track. I saw a telemetry overlay video that implied he stopped braking just after the apex and accelerated normally directly off the track to keep Hamilton behind. The more I see the more I am convinced it should be a 5 second penalty. It's not quite Rosberg in Austria level of obvious but it's getting there. Edit - Here's the video Would be nice to have it be longer so it includes the usual braking point, turn in angle and acceleration but it's clear to see from the throttle that no attempt was made to stay on track despite it being very possible.

The normal laps should give them his maximum late braking point and maximum apex speed. If he's dived underneath making the corner sharper and his apex speed is still higher than usual then it's a slam dunk penalty then surely? Defending (legally) by taking the inside line means you travel less distance to the apex but necessitates braking harder and/or trail braking longer to take the corner more slowly and using your car as a roadblock to prevent the overtake. If you're hitting an early apex from a narrow line faster than you hit the late apex on your optimum line then you can't stay on the track without braking well past the apex. If he's done that then that should be more than enough evidence to show he intentionally left the track to gain an advantage.

I suppose if they can show with the telemetry that VER approached, braked and turned in to this corner the same every lap except for this one it supports that it was on purpose. The shape of the corner means that maximum steering angle should be right close to the apex but VER clearly removes steering angle well before then. Definitely not clear cut but worth it for Mercedes to make Red Bull waste energy fighting this.

Signed another sponsorship deal which will no doubt allow them to break more transfer records and stay within FFP. They don't even seem to be bothered about making them seem realistic anymore

Yeah, it's not clear cut enough for a retroactive penalty. Very likely it was intentional but subtle enough to get away it. Cynical but solid racecraft

Tough gig that as well. Seems like Bottas with no pressure on him in the other Alfa is going to be fast as ****.