leffe186

You’re dancing round the point. He’s not picking based on some Top 10 ranking - which you yourself highlight in the first part of your sentence by pointing out it’s not like for like. They are very different full backs, and Tuchel is clearly looking at what a player can do for him and how they fit in to his system. He values versatility on the pitch but within his system. The better question is what somebody else asked - why pick both Livramento and Spence? They do seem to perform similar roles, although from what you guys say Livramento has struggled this year at times (and obviously the injury). I wonder if in a squad of 26 you have room to pick players who do different things at a position and players who can be a direct replacement.

We absolutely could. RDZ is basically getting everything he can out of the available squad, but that’s showing the limitations. It’s exemplified by the Chelsea match. We had 25 touches in their box versus their 11 in ours, and an xG of 1.72 against their 0.63. RDZ just doesn’t have the attacking/creative players available. Richarlison, Tel and Kolo Muani wouldn’t get into even West Ham’s first XI, and everyone else is injured. Kolo Muani is where our attacks go to die, Richarlison is technically deficient and running on fumes, and Tel is still learning. These are players you might throw on at the end of a game to win something (Kolo Muani’s not even that) and yet they are playing every possible minute. We are generating opportunities (or more accurately, potential opportunities) with some nice play, but the final ball or touch has been desperately poor. Simons brilliantly created and scored the goals against Brighton then was crocked. Since then we’ve typically relied on a bit of luck, like a shitty Richarlison shot that Palhinha deflects in or a worldie from Gallagher. You’d expect RDZ to bring a forward on to freshen things up, but there’s nobody left. If we aren’t ahead by 60 mins or so we’re fucked. He’s ended up having to wait until 70mins to bring Maddison on because the docs have said 20mins is his maximum, and the difference is incredible. Then when you’re relying on that little bit of luck the abject refereeing has a disproportionate effect - the rugby tackle on VDV, the absurd decision not to send off a player who for all intents and purposes deliberately broke another player’s jaw. Obviously the odds are in our favour, but that’s as much because West Ham could struggle to beat Leeds as us avoiding defeat. Our home record is W2 D6 L10. It’s not like we’ve played any better than that record suggests either.

Everyone’s been terrible in general. You’d argue that Man C, Chelsea, Liverpool, us, you, have all been worse than expected. Villa, Arsenal, Fulham, maybe Palace and Forest, Leeds, Burnley, Wolves, West Ham, Brighton, Everton about as expected (generally not great with Europe being a factor with some). Just leaving Sunderland, Man U, Brentford and Bournemouth playing probably better than expected, all of whom benefitting from no Europe. It’s ended up with us all being much of a muchness.

In the world where Tuchel doesn’t want to play a system that accommodates Trent’s pluses and minuses. The revisionist attempt to suggest Trent is actually not as bad a defender as we think is not convincing to me. His defensive positioning is poor, he struggles one-on-one and his positional discipline within Tuchel’s system is questionable. Do you think that is not the case?

Yeah I’d say this was almost entirely my thinking. Anybody saying they can’t see any reason why Jordan Henderson or Spence (for example) have been picked is either being dim or disingenuous. You can disagree with the decisions but the reasons are obvious. I think Tuchel’s earned some trust. At various points in the last year I’ve seen or had arguments with people who swear that at least 10 players now not going should be locks. It’s very clear that Tuchel is mainly concerned with the team and systems both on and off the pitch. I think you’d struggle to argue with him just based on his competitive results. I’d absolutely disagree with him on a few choices but again, each time I can see his thinking. I haven’t seen all that much of each player individually but I can guarantee he has, and I haven’t seen anything of how they’ve been working with him and obviously he has. Generally there’s an emphasis on versatility, ball-playing and positional discipline. There are a handful of decisions that seem very close to me but will have been tipped by how they performed with him in practice and in games. There are also one or two players who it feels like are there not because they’re the best football player but because they’re the best person to fulfil a particular role on or off the pitch. Henderson obviously, Toney, and I think Spence. Henderson was always going to go and it’s bizarre that people still think there was a chance he wouldn't. Aside from Pickford and Kane he’s probably the third name in the squad. We all know why, we might disagree, but Tuchel has told us. I think Toney is there because there’s simply nobody else that can lead the line in his style who’s ready. I wouldn’t have been surprised with DCL, but he’s a very different player. Spence is there because he’s incredibly fast, can do a job across the whole back line and is an extremely good defender one-on-one. And he’s done well for England and presumably well in training. Again, you can disagree, but those are the reasons. Of the others, the ones that I’m on the fence with are Mainoo and Eze in midfield, Madueke up front and some of the defence. You guys probably have the other two keepers in the mix and everything you’ve said this year means I guess those three are the best options. I don’t know enough about Mainoo or Eze to def take them over Wharton, Palmer, Foden, MGW or anyone else I’ve forgotten there but I’d say he’s picked two from those guys and you could probably toss a coin as to which two. Madueke up front feels like a guy who can do a particular role and has done it well for Tuchel. The other choices would be presumably Bowen or Barnes (anyone else?) and again it’s close but not a surprise. The defence is the one with the most question marks but again there aren’t any wild surprises. We’ve got a lot of guys who are very similar and that’s part of the reason why toys have gone out of the pram. I’m surprised Tuchel didn’t pick Hall because he’s a proper left back and I know you’ve fallen out of love with Livramento a bit, but clearly Tuchel rates him and his versatility. I feel like it was something of a choice between Burn and Maguire, and despite Maguire being a man with a very particular set of skills I think he gets found out at the very top level on a regular basis. I can’t help but feel that the reaction to his omission tells a bit of a story about him off the field. The other defenders have been picked for versatility partly because there aren’t many standout exceptional players - they’re all about the same. Versatile, decent on the ball, disciplined. The ones I’m on the fence with are Stones and Quansah but again they fit that mould.

He was looking right at Spence, ignoring the ball, smashes him with his elbow and breaks his jaw. If we go down this weekend I’ll burn Stockley Park down myself. Sick of this nonsense. Edit: safety wink, officer.

No, very old, that’s why I suggested it . If I was new I’d get sucked in.

It might all be real, it might not, but I’m fucked if I’m going to say anything until it’s actually announced. Why feed the beast?

These leaks and all the nonsense around them are incredibly tiresome.

It is still going to vary year-on-year, naturally. You guys had to face Forest, Wimbledon, Chelsea, Brentford, Arsenal and Liverpool, and Liverpool themselves faced West Ham, Brighton, Southampton, us and you. However, this year Man City won it by beating Huddersfield, Swansea, Brentford and you before beating Arsenal. Tough, but not especially gruelling. Chelsea got to the FA Cup final this year by beating Charlton, Hull, Wrexham, Port Vale and Leeds, which I'm sure Man U would rather have faced in last year's Europa than Twente, Porto, Fenerbahçe, PAOK, Bodø/Glimt, Viktoria Plzeń, Rangers, Steaua Bucharest, Real Sociedad, Lyon, and Athletic Bilbao. I broadly agree with KI but I think the Europa is harder to place becuase it's such a different competition. Ultimately to win the final of the League or FA Cup you're probably going to have to beat at least two teams better than anything you'll find in the Europa. However, the amount of obstacles you have to face to win the Europa are huge and you're not going to get many bites of the cherry.

I also remember that day because it was that crazy Isner-Mahut match at Wimbledon too. IIRC it started the day before, then we watched some of the restart before the USA game. After the game we ended up at another pub and it was still going - we might even have watched another entire World Cup match. It ended up finishing the following day.

Me, my wife and a close friend (one of our groomsmen) were on a bit of a pub crawl around London. Squeezed ourselves into a pub just off Trafalgar Square, atmosphere was mental. Turns out one of the barmaids was Slovenian so my wife was being very (drunkenly) magnanimous during the game, but when Donovan scored she lost her shit and was celebrating in her face

One argument for the Europa relative to the English trophies is that the achievement also reflects your achievement the previous year. Once you get in it it’s easier, but getting in in the first place is the tricky bit.

Yeah, it’s swings and roundabouts (unless you’re Chelsea, apparently). Don’t forget also that European sides are kept apart when they enter the League Cup which means more chance of an easy game (you got Bradford, we got Doncaster etc). In the FA Cup you can get anyone - we faced Villa in the 3rd round.

But if you’re in Europe you have to play fewer games, with the likelihood that at least a couple of Premier League teams will be out before you even start. Overall the chances are your League Cup run will be easier, if only because it will require fewer ties. The two-legged semi could make it harder or easier, depending upon your opponent.

That’s my point. If for argument’s sake they made the change then the Europa suddenly becomes incredibly exciting and prestigious, and you’d expect the relative prize funds to reflect that. Of course, it also means it will never happen.

Apart from the moral righteousness of just having the Champions in there, the Europa immediately becomes incredibly tough and I would expect it to generate more money for the clubs involved. Like, Barca or Real (whichever one it is) are not going to accept significantly lower prize money and TV money in their European campaigns and I think you would expect UEFA and the TV companies to change things to reflect that. Of course there’s less than zero chance of that happening now.

Or other countries need to look at a more equitable way to share their TV money. That said, Italy for one have improved their distribution, it’s just a smaller pie. UEFA have chased money and given in to the bigger clubs by giving more spots to the top leagues. That’s the big change they need to make. Maybe - here’s a thought - have only Champions in the Champions’ League?

Nailed it.

Yup. I think it’s probably the right decision anyway, but when you consider the incredibly slim margin by which they’ve even got this far I don’t think they’ve got a tripod leg to stand on.

With Rodri back, that Man City team looks seriously good.

Yeah, think that’s the best possible solution and I hope it survives the inevitable legal challenge. It seems like such a blatant violation of the rules.

The first shirt I’ve seen in years that looks shittier without the sponsor.

National Holiday please. We can celebrate cutting the US loose.

I have completely lost touch of the football timeline, partly being far less engaged than when I was younger and partly simply being in the US for 15 years I guess. I remember certain games because of where I was when I watched them but the ones in between just vanish from my memory