David Edgar

Murphy, man.

ASM isn't gonna be trusted to defend.

There is one that shows he is tripped. It isn't the arm/body contact to look for.

That was a bit of a shitty insult. Think, not you necessarily, there can be a general trend where people put players in categories of good or shit and then use that to heavily weight what they think can or can't be said about a player. So I think it is fair for people to say Trippier was shit - cos they're basing it on a certain series of things he did badly in the game- but also for some to say, "hang on, he also did some solid stuff." It's actually been a solid, non-rawk, discussion overall and we've sort of landed in the same region.

Bit of an overreaction here. Think criticism of some of his game yesterday is valid. That's the crux of it. You don't need to have some rawkish narrative control. Like, I get that he is a really good player and by default did a lot of good work yesterday. But he also served up some notable shit. I do like the weather excuse. Think that's valid. Their tiny winger being given yellow card immunity also didn't help.

No, anyone with eyes can interpret everything precisely.

XG is mega limited. There are loads of XG models and they all give varying results. As one example. And even then that can be flawed. XG is fine as a general idea of how a game went, but eye test will always be king.

Not at all true. Metrics can be flawed. You don't just use data in isolation without an eye test. Laughing face emoji.

He's Prem quality, but limited. We'll probably outgrow him soon. Cannot fault his effort. Maybe he surprises us and improved. I'd love that.

Didn't pass the eye test for me today. Stats feel misleading. For his very high standards, his delivery was below par.

If we have the Leeds ref, we can just kick him all night.

That's true and what I said still applies. We could do with a new LB.

I can't criticise the effort or approach. I think a few players played below their best. Trippier for one was awful at times with his final ball or set piece delivery. We lack some quality, which was my main frustration. And the referee got a lot wrong. I think we'd have been better with a proper left back out there as well. Burn limited us. Bruno was superb and was also playing against the referee. Joelinton was solid as usual. The back two and Pope were on it. Think Almiron was shut out of the game. Wood is Wood. Willock ever frustrating with his play.

For negative posting, yes. But the reputation is an exaggeration. And you're not being particularly kind here. Maybe try attempting to disagree with me when I post a criticism? Instead of just getting all worked up and name calling. Take what I've written and see if you think there is any merit. If not, point out why you think there isn't. Don't just go, "oh you're a negative cunt." Cos that's just a waste of everyone's time.

This is gas lighting. I make negative posts, but I reckon if you read back, you'd see I make a lot more positive posts. You've got a bias you need to shake.

Peak insight from this guy

But I'm not? I do point out things I don't like and I can be glass half full when things are nervy. But it gets really shit that people like you shit your pants the second I make one criticism. Just insufferable and a bit dim. Like, you've got the blinkers on to most of my posts and then start screaming if I dare be negative or critical. Just ignore me and stop your whining.

But I'm not relentlessly negative. Just have to open your eyes and read my post history. It is just that people, like you, freak out at the slightest negative thing I post. You need to chill out and just ignore my posts if you don't like them.

His delivery has been way below his usual standards.

I hate Longstaff.

Calm down? Think I can post what I'm thinking, you know.

Stop being an arse.

Trippier has been shit. Really bad ball playing.

And poor quality spurned a lot of them.

Nah, will continue to post my thoughts. Cheers.