Cronky

At international level, he started off in central midfield, and then became a sweeper, playing behind an orthodox centre back. I don't think he had to put in many tackles from there, but could control the game from behind his team mates. (That probably wouldn't work in modern football) That's my recollection, anyway. Another one of my near-contemporaries gone. (Sigh)

Thanks for posting that. Interesting, like you say. Two things struck me - Eddie was very focused and absorbed in his work, and that seemed to rub off on the players. There was no messing about. There was also plenty of praise and encouragement. Any criticism was constructive. Very professional - no surprise there.

He's still stuck in an adolescent mind-set where he expects more of other people than he's willing to expect from himself. He then gets stuck in squabbles where he justifies his own behaviour by citing supposedly bad behaviour on the part of others. The guy has some intelligence, but he seems to have been brought up in an eye-for-an-eye environment. He hasn't twigged that you have to set your own standards for your actions, and not be governed by what you think others have done.

I was expecting the win, but wasn't expecting it to be so comprehensive. The Mackems had every psychological advantage, being the underdogs, playing at home, in a local derby and facing a rival that had not won in a while. Somehow, it looked like we wanted it more, and they were the ones who were more scared. In terms of both tactics and motivational skills, our man has no superior.

Yeah, with the first goal he had the confidence to hit the ball first time with his weaker foot, and it went straight into the top corner. No mistake. I feel very confident about his penalties - I don't think he's missed one for us yet. It's very difficult to tell from his approach where he's going to put the ball.

Get ready for this take on it in the Sunday media. The-game-has-been-ruined-by-money-brave-Sunderland-uphold-the-true-values-of-football-moral-victory-against-petro-dollars-Stanley-Matthews-only-eared-tuppence-a-week.

I think this is a timely reminder of why VAR was brought in. We should be 2-0 up and against 10 men. I don't blame the ref because there's a tangle of bodies and it's a difficult spot. But the replay 100% shows that Ballard deliberately fell against Isak to bring him down.

Yeah, Southgate was a missed opportunity. Great defender.

We already have a world class manager.

Hmm... I did think about him, but didn't have the nerve. Obviously, he did have a good career, but he could have been even better, yes. Playing through injuries cost him his pace, I think.

Mason Greenwood. He still might make it, but probably not in the Premiership. Huge talent. On the opposite scale, the first time I saw Chris Waddle, I turned to my mate and told him that the lad would never make the grade in a million years.

Not much to complain about. They simply had better players, all over the pitch.

First 25 minutes was awful. I know we're up against a good side, but we seemed to lack composure. Tino - when you're fouled, go down. If you struggle to stay on your feet and lose it, you won't get the free kick. Gordon - You often seem to half a yard away from being in the right position to make a tackle. Very frustrating. However, when the pace died down a bit, we managed to get one or two chances. Something to cling on to in the second half, at least.

Thank you. I wasn't being sarcastic. Although born in Newcastle, I left when still in nappies, so there is much of local culture that is unfamiliar.

I don't get it. Can someone help?

You're right, we do lose out defensively when he's played there, which was why I used the term 'anchor role'. I think the problem is that, at Premiership level, you can't afford to have a player in that role who is limited to winning the ball. They will tend to get a lot of possession, and if they can't get the ball forward or support the attack when the chance arises, then too many opportunities are wasted. So despite his defensive limitations, Bruno is not easily replaced in that position. And to complicate things further, when in possession, he may be more effective with his team mates in front of him, where his passing and reading of the game come to the fore. There is speculation about how it would be better to free him up to receive the ball in more forward positions, but it's hard to tell how well that would work. FWIW, I think that Phillips is a bit more than a defensive player, so maybe if he comes, it'll be with a view to the two of them regularly alternating positions in the course of the game. Where that might all leave Tonali is a moot point, of course.

‘Keep striving for more’ is the message that all great players give themselves. Well said.

There's a rumour that City are holding out for a loan with an obligation to buy in the summer, which makes the decision a lot more tricky. With the potential size of the transfer fee and wages, that would obviously restrict us in the summer. A question mark for me would be how well he would combine with Bruno, who is doing well in that anchor role despite not being a defensive midfielder. I guess that's a potential problem with whoever we might look to slot in alongside - and that includes Tonali. Obviously it's been difficult for Phillips to get into that City side, with Rodri for competition, but there has been a hint that Pep is dubious about the player's general attitude. My money would be on Eddie's ability to motivate him though.

Just wanted to add to this post. Eddie did mention the lack of training time in a recent interview, and I think that he does rely a lot on good, detailed training to get the most out of his players. He's very thorough in this area. In his time here, I've never quite been able to figure out why we don't concede more goals, because the back four lacks pace and no-one in the midfield is a good tackler. The answer has to be in the area of organisation, and Eddie has lately had to deal with the double whammy of limited training time, and a back four plus keeper that has not been the stable unit that we managed to maintain last season. In this respect, I'm intrigued and mildly encouraged to see how we do against Liverpool. Eventual defeat is likely of course, but I'm hoping we'll be tougher to break down than in recent games.

Good point.

As I understand it, what Tonali was doing was not just against the football regulations, but also against the law of the land in Italy. That may have inhibited many in the know from telling tales.

I can’t speak for what went on at Bournemouth, but last season with us, thanks to clever tactics and good mental preparation, he overachieved massively with the squad he had. It helped that we were relatively free of significant injuries and fixture congestion, but over the last few weeks we’ve had both. The modest quality of some of our players has been exposed and the lack of preparation time and options have prevented Eddie from using his considerable skills. It’s not like we had a great side that suddenly looks ordinary. We had an ordinary side that Eddie made look great. Unless we are able to play at our peak, a lot of our methods don’t work well. This may be what’s behind the ‘streaks’

Bit nervy because it reminds me of Bournemouth - an away game against an athletic, if limited side, with many of our big hitters missing.

There's always the risk that Man U will offer to triple his salary, which would be very tempting for anyone. I don't think anything else will entice him, because Man U have problems which this new structure involving Ratcliffe and Brailsford is unlikely to improve.

I don't think Chelsea are a better team than us, but they do have better individual players - they ought to, with the money they've spent. With home advantage, and our tiredness, that took its toll. Even then, let's face it, in the vast majority of seasons, an away draw at Chelsea would be treated as a good result. And we were two minutes away from winning.