80

From memory - and apologies if I'm wrong, but if it doesn't apply to you it does apply to probably a dozen supporters on our forum - you'd largely take the view that Israel is an illegitimate apartheid state executing a genocide on the Palestinian people. That the Palestinians have a right of return to their former properties and Israel should not be allowed to characterise itself as an ethnostate. That the Israeli security services and powerful international Zionist sympathisers wage campaigns of misinformation and political power plays to disorient, isolate and destroy the reputations of those who sympathise with the Palestinians and seek to force Israel to comply with UN resolutions. As you'll surely know, in the current environment, there are plenty of influential people ready and willing to portray someone with those views as being an anti-Semitic, conspiritorially-minded, terrorist enabling, genocide sympathiser. The kind of person a business, whether in football, telecommunications or banking, might think twice about accepting the business of. So, if someone were banned from football grounds for expressing those views, what would you think?

Sorry, was intended mainly for @christ

What would your view be on the contents of our Gaza thread being used to bar you and others from SJP?

Will be a laugh when people who contextualise Palestinian attacks against Israel start getting banned from grounds.

Yeah, this is where I'm at. I think almost anything is permissable this season given the highs we've had already and the injuries we've endured along with Tonali's situation etc. I'd hope to see signs of maturity next season though, assuming he has a reasonably free hand in the transfer market this summer. I've said for about 12 months now that this season was going to be about learning lessons from loads of new experiences it would bring - for everyone in the club. So long as they're learned from, everything is forgivable.

Everything you're saying is right. But I just always have this question in my mind - is our midfield (which, injuries aside, is pretty stacked) good enough to win the league? If not, realistically, certain well loved players will have to go if we want to improve and they don't want to spend the best years of their career in Matt Richie's role. So it's going to come down to questions like Big Joe vs. Little Joe sooner than we'd like.

Yeah he's been pretty explicit that that's his aim. He likes the idea of more classic centre midfielders who do a bit of everything. That's close to a direct quote. Whether he does anything different in the short to medium term is another matter, but I think full fluidity is his ultimate vision.

Archive.ph is another way.

The circumstances are very different. I'm not throwing my toys out of the pram anytime soon, but I think performances should be taken much more seriously from now on than they were Nov-Jan. Even in spite of the injuries, players have much more recovery and preparation time, so there's less excuse for falling apart as we did against Luton away. I say less excuse, there's still a bit of wiggle room as we'll still have a hangover from that 3 month period, but that will fade in time.

Yes, I've got no serious criticisms of how he handles his current role. It's just a question of whether he'd be more devastating if he spends more time closer to the opposition's goal. I'm sure he would. We'd need new players or a tactical rethink to do that though.

100% this. It's been a big option we've been eschewing for a long time. Pretty sure, based on interviews, Guimaraes thinks of it as his favourite position too.

Not had a player who can reliably score like that for a long time. Isak maybe, but he's usually playing a different role.

Don't see anything really wrong with chanting for Tino. Not ideal, but yesterday's match wasn't ideal. Booing Burn is over the line but calling for a difference maker to be brought on without specifically saying who he should be replacing is fine, unless the fans can't even make constructive criticisms. I mean, I've often thought the Botman at the back, Isak in attack song is a bit shit when we've got Wilson or Lascelles playing - which has happened many many times - but there's no point in getting upset about it. Personally, I was shocked - in a good way - he came on directly for Burn. I was imagining Howe would plonk him on the left wing in front of him for extra protection. It's why I've got hope Livramento will be starting against Forest.

Arguably he'd work better with Almiron on the left too, restoring our ability to cut in from the wing that we otherwise lose with Miggy playing there.

In all fairness, we'd see what it contributes to our attack if Burn stopped doing it. Despite all his massive limitations, we have scored many goals as a result of him pulling defenders out of position on the wing. The issue is if/the obvious fact that Livramento could do it better.

My gut feeling is he will start. I'd be disappointed if he doesn't. I think we're past the point of excuses for not starting him now.

Did a lot of decent things today which seem to be getting forgotten. But yeah, composure is foreign to him.

Maybe he didn't want to?

Needs to inspire a flag, surely? @Heron

Hopefully a good lesson for him

We needed more protection tonight. Villa were just taking out their frustrations and hammering us in the last 20 minutes.

That's more like it! Pretty much the performance I was hoping to see against Fulham. We had it spot on from the first minute. Played a very cerebral game in the first half. Bit more ragged as we got tired in the second half, but no complaints in the circumstances. I'm delighted with the reactive substitution, bringing on Livramento to kill off Bailey's threat.

Fair point, although let's see him get through half a dozen matches before we count our chickens

Quintessential arsehole. Why was he in your mind?