Heron

Noticed that in the commentary it was all about how Gordon moved on to try and achieve better things. Not that he was being chased down the street and threatened in his car. Or the fact he's gone to Newcastle and played in the Champions League instead of fighting relegation.

That's fair. I too thought we were sloppy at times on the ball - particularly Trippier and Tonali but that is perhaps because I hold them in such high regard/expectation. I was just trying to lay out the managerial options we supposedly had in a basic form and for me, as desribed, I don't feel we did all that much wrong with regards to tactics and strategy. It was more individual playing errors.

Personally, I feel we're one player doing better (yesterday) from folks' perceptions being entirely different. We've had folk (myself included) saying previously we needed to demonstrate we could control a game without going hell for leather. Yesterday, we did that. We missed a pen, had a fortunate off the line clearance and missed a sitter of a one on one, along with a few other situations where on another day and a bit more composure or quality we'd have comfortably won. Sitting in and looking for the counter, where we are currently most dangerous, (with space in behind the opposition to burst into) would have led to a bombardment of balls in the box from Everton where they'd have ultimately been stronger in the end and a plethora of long distance shots to deal with from the likes of McNeil. Instead they did virtually nowt, with only the "penalty" chance. Had we have played with our "supposed" identity it would have stretched the game and been shit or bust. We didn't, we opted to control the game and that, we did. A safer approach to not being beat and potentially getting the win. Which was achieved, albeit not with the three points owing to said lack of individual composure and quality in the moments that mattered. I think before the game a lot of folk would have taken that performance and that point, to be honest, but because we didn't win despite said dominance are now looking for folk to blame (again myself included). That lies predominantly with Gordon for me, who ironically had a really good game, but cost us on two key moments. Otherwise we'd be hailing this is a solid, comfortable, tactical win on Howes behalf.

Hardly derby day is it Got nee interest in Durham.

Fotmob has it as 4 3 3 but for me it was more of a 4 2 3 1 with Willock pushing into the 3 and us being entirely over ran across midfield owing to a lack of cohesion. Get the point being made about Bruno and Tonali or a double pivot or whatever. Just think it all depends on our personnel and who we're playing.

We played 4 2 3 1 against Fulham in essence and got completely over ran if I remember correctly. Our one defeat of the season. EDIT: Not according to FOTMOB tbf but it certainly looked that way when watching.

Was pleasantly surprised by some of his defending yesterday. Positionally and simply not diving in and waiting for his chance to knick the ball. Great to see.

It's shocking like. When you look at Man City and Chelsea in particular - why are all those charges taking so long to be investigated and how have Chelsea managed to side step the rule book? Makes you sick.

One thing I found noticeable yesterday was the lack of carrying the ball from midfield. Instead, we slowed play down a bit generally and made a controlled progression up the pitch. I think a part of this is that we aren't as good passing the ball out from defence at present - so the midfield drop to receive it and ultimately this allows the opposition to reset, defensively. When we break at speed this is when we are most dangerous, playing direct and isolating defenders man for man with our pace, on the break. Yesterday felt like a Wilson game where a 'proper', old fashioned striker probably makes the difference, we didn't have that so instead we relied on that pace and quick transition. Irrespective, we did enough to win and just didn't show the composure - Gordon in particular.

😱 Yeah...he's gone.

Delicious

For me we were simply lacking Isak's calm composure in the final third or wed have been out of sight. That being said Wilson would have also done the job, I reckon. We did enough to win that game and win it comfortably. Sadly, there wasn't players in the right positions in the box more often than not and with a mix of bad fortune (Bruno's cleared attempt and numerous where the ball didn't quite fall right) and a lack of composure (Gordon) we didn't get the goals we should have. I'd have taken a draw pre-match. I think winning home games and drawing away is where "we are at" as a club, picking up the occasional win on the road and maybe the occasional loss which hopefully more than offset in our favour (see Wolves and Fulham). We're ahead of where I'd expect us to be I think, by a single point, which is good and hopefully with players returning and time to work together for those not on international duty then hopefully we can continue the toward trajectory of performances and maintain the same level of results going into the next section of games.

He is according to stats on the FOTMOB app too.

So did Livramento, Willock and Almiron who also achieved less percentage wise and in terms of number of attempts, purely from a passing point of view. Tonali is undoubtedly the better option, that's not my point, but the point I am trying to make is folk (not necessarily you) would seemingly prefer to highlight how shit he (Longstaff) has or has not been as opposed to simply saying he did well when he came on.

Unlucky not to score, good all round performance I thought.

Tonali pass success 33/45 (73%) Trippier pass success 62/75 (83%) Bruno pass success 71/79 (90%) Joelinton pass success 47/51 (92%) Longstaff pass success 19/20 (95%) Longstaff was only on the pitch for 23 minutes as well. I thought Trippier and Tonali were both actually a bit more sloppy with possession than usual, as they have very, very high standards and ability and were often under hitting passes or simply trying difficult balls which they are capable of achieving but simply didn't. Longstaff did virtually nowt wrong when he came on.

When I think of Goalkeeping greats I tend to think of Peter Schmeichel, Manuel Neuer and Mike Hooper.

It's the sort of thing where Pep would play John Stones as a keeper had be hailed a mastermind.

I mean...why would you even buy Goalkeepers if their prime objective was to be good on the ball? Just hoy an outfield player in

Love this. Entirely correct.

I actually thought that was poor decision making to be honest. Probably need to see it again like. There was certainly an element of misfortune though.

Probably, but he's French. It's not diving when it's not by an English man.

Behave man it was two.

Speak for yourself.