Checko

Thought the ref was fine. Surprising actually as someone posted his record and the enormous number of yellows he gives. Hall's seemed a bit soft, the linesman didn't even flag. Thought Sabitzer probably should have been yellowed near half time for taking down Longstaff, but no major gripes at all. Mind you - throw in given again Willock when he clearly kept it in. FUCK YOU OFFICIALS, YOU'RE A DISGRACE. IT COST US THREE POINTS TODAY. I'M EMBARRASSED TO BE IN THIS COMPETITION.

Dortmund's protest seems about the champions league reforms: https://nein-zur-cl-reform.de/en/ [in english]

But you know Eddie himself will be thinking ... why did it go wrong? What could we have done better? That's why he's awesome.

We tend to defend with a flat row of five midfielders (when not pressing high) I think when we look vulnerable when teams get players into that pocket of space that's left between defence and midfield. Dortmund kept getting 2/3 even four players in that area and that causes chaos. It wasn't just one striker dropping deep or one AM getting up there. Think at the top level, when teams are technically excellent it's harder to stop them playing through like that. The press isn't generally as effective against really good technical teams and we just don't have the energy to do it as well with so many games and injuries. It's where a real specialist DM dropping deep may help. Or maybe a shift to a more 4231 formation at times to plug that space a bit with 2 CMs and allow us to have one midfielder a bit higher up to support the striker when we play out. Plus I do think our squad just hasn't been built up yet to include enough really top level technical players so there is that disadvantage to overcome as well. I'm sure we'll evolve and improve any way.

Have we ever won the Eddie Howe Circle Jerk Derby?

I guess the question is, were we tactically outdone, or did they ultimately just have more experience and quality on the pitch? Or a bit of both? Sometimes as well, you just don't play well. I thought there was a bit of that first game v Dortmund as well.

He does look very bloody good. The defensive side of his game is far better than I expected, seems a really good tackler. Edit: Was replying to pedro - can't see how to cut and paste a quote in

Yeah definitely been struggling. Last few games especially.

I'd feel bad giving someone a 6.3 if I felt they deserved a 6.33

Player Ratings (scale of 1 - 11): Pope: 6.34 - Probably saved the ones he should save. Let in the ones he probably shouldn't save. Trippier: 5.53 - Champions League Trips isn't as good as premier league Trips! Bit off it today. Moved to LB and couldn't cope with their winger so was moved back again. Newcastle United Fan Lewis Hall: 5.63 - Didn't think he did too much wrong, particularly considering his inexperience. Trips couldn't handle their winger either. Good to see him get a start. Lascelles: 5.84 - Did ok, lost a couple of high balls which is usually his strength. Schar: 6.25 - One lovely through ball to Joelinton. Did ok. Bruno: 6.41 - Didn't really control the game or make a key attaking contribution that I can remember but generally tidy. Longstaff: 5.23 - Sort of drifts then gets a little bit involved. Made a couple of runs off the ball, but didn't really see him do anything. Improved a lot over the last year but I'd like to see him be more assertive and demand to influence the game. Willock: 5.74 - Some promising moments but ultimately didn't really create anything. Looked gassed near the end so obviously not up to full fitness yet. Joelinton: 6.42 - Big Joe in the box man he's usually one of our better headers as well. I thought a lot of what we did well offensively tended to come through him, particularly first half. Not dominating by any means but some nice touches and on the rare occasions we did anything he was often part of it. *Tino - 7.94: Not quite as good on the wing (though did ok), but at full back thought he was excellent: made some good tackles, beautiful cross for Joelinton. Got moved to left back I thought because Trips wasn't handling their winger. He could. Man of the Match- he wins a virtual bottle of babysham. Wilson - 4.93: Feel he's having a bit of a form slump, bit like last year. Perhaps he has SAD. He's barely retained possession for 3 games now. Not helped by the fact we don't really play with anyone supporting the striker but telling he was subbed at half time. You know he'll still grab goals though so not concerned. Subs: Miggy: 6.38 - Added some energy and tempo. Got himself a couple of half chances. No really telling attacking contribution. Gordon: 5.90 Bit like Miggy but being the striker wasn't able to get quite as involved. Miley: Too late to rate. Good to see him on though. Overall: Looked a bit tired and a lacking in technical quality. Felt there was often a lack of movement in central midfield when we had the ball so no real interplay there. Maybe the lineup was a bit defensive and that filtered through to the mentality, though understandable. They only let us into the game once they'd scored. They were often getting two or three up to support the striker when they hit long balls or played through the lines. They were able to exploit that pocket between the midfield and back four a lot. When we struggle teams are doing this. We definitely need to add a couple of really top technical creative players to be consistently competing at this level, hopefully a job for the summer, but some of the young lads got a champions league blooding and hopefully that'll do them good in the long run. Two more games to go. Better luck next time.

Guys look tired. Dortmund clearly deserved to win. Just more technical quality on the ball than anything. Hopefully a good experience for some of our young players. Thought Tino impressed again & was our best players, particularly at fullback, which I think suits him better than winger.

Overall general thoughts: 1. We can't press as intensively because of injuries/schedule/top teams are better as passing through it. 2. We need more top technical skill in the midfield. Struggle to move it quickly and not enough urgency. When we can't make chances buy winning the ball high up the pitch we struggle. 3. They get more players in supporting their striker. Our striker is usually very isolated and I don't think I've seen Wilson retain posession since palace. 4. Feel like most things good have come through Joelinton 5. Generally we look short of ideas on the ball resorting to low % long straight balls forward. 6. Please buy an elite playmaker. 7. Hopefully we've been pacing ourselves a little and pick it up next half

? That's his name.

I'd have thought big Joe as main LW, though rotating with Willock like last season

Also can we please sign Schlotterbeck. No idea if he's any good but such a fun name to say.

The fact their guy isn't focused fills me with confidence. They'll probably batter us now

Wasn't expecting that line-up! Newcastle United fan Lewis Hall LB and Tino on the right wing I'm guessing. Maybe focusing on defensive solidity and then bring on the speedsters when people start tiring. Big for Newcatle United fan Lewis Hall to be getting a start here as well. Hope he smashes it.

Pretty sure Italian ultras being able to knife foreign football fans is on UNESCO's Intangible Cultural Heritage List.

Yeah the classic 'we're not expecting him back 'til after the international break. Oh he's back. How... unexpected.'

Could be a business opportunity there. 'BonesJones vasectomy clinic. Never miss a match again.'

Anyone else feel that bloke might not make it to the game?

In British English we'd say 'are', think in American English they'd use 'is'. In Americanese seems you refer to a sports team with 'is' if you're referring to the city [one thing], but when their names include plural thingys [not sure what the word is here] (eg the patriots/cowboys/yankees), it's plural. Eg: republican English: Dallas is a good fooball team. The Cowboys are a good football team. Arsenal is a right bunch of whingeing bastards. The Gunners are a right bunch of whingeing bastards. Whereas in royalist English using is/are seems to depend on whether it's seen more as a group of individuals making up something (eg a football team - plural) or one entity (eg a department - singlular), so we'd say: Arsenal are a right bunch of whingeing bastards. The FA's disciplinary committee is satisfied that Arsenal are a right bunch of whingeing bastards. See for some bbc examples: https://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/learningenglish/grammar/learnit/learnitv358.shtml As ESPN is American 'Chelsea is' would probably be their editorial style. Americans can correct me if I'm wrong here. Ultimately though I don't think it really matters, no-one's going to confuse your meaning so I would say just put what feels natural, and be thankful for the opportunities it gives to have arguments over the internet about it. Also, don't do what the Americans do because that would obviously be wrong.

Think the point is that it should read: 'Is Chelsea better than wot we think?'

Yeah, then the camera pans away and he walks off fist bumping Arteta.

I don't like him. His surname's too hard to spell.