ohmelads

Forget about the clock. Liverpool fans would prefer to talk about the clock because it deflects attention from VAR and the disallowed goal. VAR chose to rule it out in spite of the evidence. Manually drawing the lines wherever you feel like on a blurry image isn't a scientific method and everyone knows this is a flaw with it. When you're left guessing and it's clearly impossible to call, the benefit of the doubt rightly goes to the attacker now (in other words you play on). It's a very dodgy decision.

Could be he was after mental wages that only West Ham were willing to pay? He's a regular in the Brazil first XI. Would guess he's on a lot more than Isak.

As others have said, think our hand's been forced by the player but if it turns out we get Pope for 10m and lose Dubs for 5m, that's solid business from where we were last season. Pope's 3 years younger and has been far less injury prone. As the list of keepers further up shows, loads of clubs have sub-standard backup. Most keepers aren't as injury prone as Dubravka, so most clubs get away with it. It's not easy to keep a good second-choice keeper happy as we've found out here. Usually it's either an inexperienced youngster or an old head who's been around and can do a job in a pinch. For the positives, it frees up quite a lot in wages. People go on about transfer fees more but having Dubs on the bench takes a lot of wages away from strengthening elsewhere. Man U can throw that money around but we're light in midfield and attack. And I really rate Dubravka but having injury prone backup is also a gamble in itself. Yes it could come back to bite us but so could keeping him, using up that squad place and not getting an outfield player we need because of his wages. He's only getting older and could be injured when Man U need him.

Gutting news about Bruno and Isak but we're a well drilled side. Could be another long one like Brighton. Keep it tight and try and do them on the break with ASM/Almiron or a set piece.

Buying and selling houses doesn't involve a transfer deadline day that affects one and all though.

"Whataboutery/Whataboutism" is a lazy twitter term pulled out when someone's losing a debate and wants their point to be accepted devoid of context, logic or scrutiny.

Think our transfer strategy is opportunism at this point. If we can't get any of the targets from our list then it seems we're trying to play the market to stretch our money, exploit circumstances and punch above our weight in terms of what we can attract. That's how I see the Maddison bids, because he isn't exactly what we were looking for, he probably eats up our whole budget, and he might force a change in system to get the best out of him. But he is far above what a midtable side should be attracting, he's a safe bet and more or less guarantees goals or assists if he stays fit. Opportunism isn't how the very top sides operate because they have the luxury of pinpointing players that fit their needs and system and usually get their man, but that didn't work out for us (Ekitike, Diaby, etc). That doesn't mean opportunism leads to failure though. You could say we got Trippier like that, exploiting the Howe connection and the lack of clubs needing a RB at that time. As we get to the end of the window, there'll be a lot of clubs trying to push surplus players, and some fringe players for national teams who aren't getting game time in a world cup year (Werner, Maddison etc). It will hopefully become a better market for opportunists with cash to spend, like us. Clearly it hasn't gone to plan since the Botman success and there's no point in dressing it up, but let's wait until September before we evaluate the window. Far from ideal but have a feeling we'll pull something off because it could become a buyer's market with the world cup coming up.

I reckon we're holding our nerve in talks, be it fees or wages. In the final weeks of the window, something will give and I reckon we'll get our remaining deals done at the end of August. Not ideal but better longer term. I agree that someone like Sarr would upgrade us and cover several positions, and could remain further down the line should we upgrade again. I prefer players who see us as a step up rather than a Werner type who is a failed cast off from above.

Weren't FFP rules non-existent or being slowly phased in back then? City were able to spend far more freely and quickly than we can and could afford to take the approach you've shown. We have to box clever a bit more. We might be loaded, but we're chasing teams decades ahead of us, rich on almost guaranteed Champions League money every year and global fanbased. The top 6 are now like a cartel desperate to kick away the ladder and FFP seems a lot more serious now than it was back then.

As crap as he's been, he fits the profile of a 3rd choice in his position. Not his fee, but we've lost loads on that whatever we do. He won't moan on the bench, has tons of league experience, a good attitude and work ethic, part of a happy squad, has had few injuries in his career. Sure, we might get 10M from a promoted side or risk losing him for nowt later on, but if we do that then we need to find another third choice who ticks all those boxes. There's also the chance that he improves on the last 6 months, if not in terms of goals then his hold up play. His game has never depended on pace, so I don't think he's necessarily on the decline already. A full pre-season and less pressure and I reckon it's plausible he can offer more off the bench when we need height. The fewer changes we have to make, the better I reckon. We're on the right track and need evolution not revolution.

It's his shocking injury record. Backup players are supposed to be available when needed.

And that's the reason why we don't have straight knockouts in European competitions. Straight knockout, random draw home or away is the most fun and unpredictable format but it turns out what's best for fans isn't what's best for the cartel of richest clubs, or the organisation in cahoots with them. I'm sure Liverpool and Man City fans will not agree, which tells you all you need to know.

This is total distance over the season mind, not distance per 90. Three West Ham players on that list, and they as a team have visibly tired towards the end of the season. A quick Google suggests both Liverpool and Man City, unsurprisingly, topped the speed and distance stats last season. https://pro.statsports.com/premier-league-review-gps-trackers-show-man-city-and-liverpool-feature-heavily-in-speed-and-distance-stats/ It may be a coincidence but that article says Eriksen covered the most distance per 90 of any player in the league last season. As we know, a few weeks after the season ended (when that article was written), he collapsed in the Euros. I don't know how relevant that is but it does make you wonder.

This is the best side in Europe after Man City so we have to take the performance in context, even if they did rest a few. Their wage bill is top 5 in Europe and most of their second XI would walk into our team. The top two thump teams like Man U who are themselves miles ahead of us. Still, I think we could've made better decisions final third. Fortunate not to lose by a few - Liverpool have 5 top class strikers and are usually ruthless. While we created little ourselves in terms of clear cut chances, there were chances to hurt them on the break where we just didn't commit enough numbers to the attack. Credit to their defence, which isn't mentioned enough, but to win against these top teams you either risk a thumping and go for the jugular or you stay in the game and have a late rally. We went for the latter but last 15 mins I felt we never really gambled. 2-0 or 1-0 means nothing to us, whereas we had a historic result to play for. Why not go all out at the end? I'd drop ASM next week. I love him but we need all hands on deck and I think he would have a bigger say off the bench if it's 1-0 going into the last 20. The type of sub that can scare teams and tired full backs.

Think the best we can hope for is the Chelsea performance and a Liverpool off day. And if that happens, there's still Marriner and Mike Dean on VAR, and we all know what happened at Stamford Bridge, or what happened a couple seasons back in very similar circumstances with Fabinho's dive when we threatened to upset the script against these. It'll take something incredible to get a result against not only a far better team, but knowing also that the league and its paymasters will be devastated if we get a result here. We have to be realistic about that. At least we can enjoy these games without pressure. Whatever nonsense happens here, I hope we can continue with another positive performance. Our record against the top 6 isn't great this season, but I hope this is more Chelsea away than Spurs home. If they end up getting a decision then there's nothing you can do.

There are virtually no penalty decisions that fans don't debate, so for pens, clear and obvious is always a subjective thing. If that took place in the centre circle, there'd be no debate. Even Carragher admitted that in commentary. Once it's in the penalty area, people seem to apply different criteria to what is and isn't a foul. If that's Salah at the other end, I'm confident it'd be given immediately by the on-field ref and if it isn't, I couldn't possibly see VAR turning a blind eye to that. Not with the slow motion replays and all the angles. Klopp would go ballistic and pile pressure on the officials and they go into these games knowing that there'll be a lot of heat if a decision like this derails their title bid. Far less heat if Everton are the victim. It's the way things are and always have been.

Would rather no music apart from Blaydon Races and Local Hero which are tradition and local. Let the fans build the atmosphere.

"Useless"? Liverpool haven't had a single chance from open play and I write this 30 mins in. A corner and a keeper howler. It's a clearly weakened City lineup though and was very predictable there'd be problems. Pep may cite tiredness but strange to play Steffen. Not sure he needed to make 3 changes to his back 5 either.

Think he had potential as an Eriksen type, in the right system.

It's one of those that should be a red but is rarely given.Consistency is a massive issue. If that's Shelvey or Hayden, that's an on field red - it wouldn't even go to VAR. The narrative would be that they've let everyone down. Fans of top 6 clubs wouldn't bat an eyelid at getting a decision like this. I doubt many Chelsea fans are still talking about our robbery, which was 10 times more legitimate than Everton's complaints. It's just so unusual to see us on the right end of one of these. Shame the team failed to take advantage.

We missed Shelvey today. Against Chelsea away that was fine because we're not going to have much of the ball, but with the time and space they gave us today, he'd have enjoyed it. Everton were really poor I thought as the home side, there for the taking, but we had no ideas and gifted them a win. It was still an OK performance overall but we need more movement up front. People are talking about defenders but I think the front 3 cost us today.

It's a strange table this year mind with all the bottom 3 still well in with a chance of staying up, so it only takes 1 of them to put a couple wins together as we just have or as Norwich did. Normally you'd be keeping an eye on the team in 17th then there's quite a dropoff. It just takes 1 of the 3 teams to get their act together. The last 5 games we have Norwich and Burnley both away either side of Man City, Liverpool and Arsenal. Vital we're clear before that final run in.

I suspect they know the laws of the game and also know that they're not applied consistently.

Surely a clause like that is against league rules you'd think.

Honestly, with the funds available, if we're going into the last 17 games praying St Max stays fit then I don't think we've maximised our window. Whether we get away with it or not we'll see. I think the likes of Watford, Burnley etc were fearing worse and will be content. Hopefully the remaining hours we can get the creativity we've needed all season so we are not a one-man attack.