Manchester United

[SteV]

2 hours ago, Paully said:

 

Already regretting not keeping Martial, especially given his G/A record in 22/23.

[SweMag]

 

[r0cafella]

40 minutes ago, Froggy said:

 

If you don't think we had the worst injury crisis last season you need your head checked like. But I've went over it 10 times already with indisputable facts and don't need to revisit.  

 

You aren’t getting me

[Froggy]

18 minutes ago, SweMag said:

 

 

Ehhh. We can live with this one.

[Dr.Spaceman]

[Geogaddi]

6 minutes ago, r0cafella said:

You aren’t getting me

He's making it too obvious now .

[gbandit]

Hojlund does seem extremely fragile 

[Dr Venkman]

8 minutes ago, gbandit said:

Hojlund does seem extremely fragile 

And shit.

[gbandit]

3 minutes ago, Dr Venkman said:

And shit.

I think his finishing is still a long way off but physically he’s really strong, overpowering a lot of defenders. Think that side of his game might fade quickly though if he keeps picking up injuries 

[Froggy]

1 minute ago, Geogaddi said:

He's making it too obvious now .

 

I am not trolling. We had the worst injury crisis. Newcastle fans seem to think it was them, despite never being down to even third choice in any position.  We were on our 7th choice centre back. 

 

Most time-loss injuries = Man United (Chelsea were second, Newcastle third)

Most individual injuries = Spurs (Man United joint second, Newcastle joint third with Chelsea)

Most players out injured in a single week = Man United/Newcastle/Chelsea/Luton all joint first

 

Now to the only metric that Newcastle were clear at the top of, which was days lost to injury. It's there on BBC to see, but if you don't look at it through black and white tinted sunglasses, it clearly states that it doesn't include players who were injured before the season began, so it doesn't include Mainoo, Malacia etc. for us, and it doesn't include Fofana for Chelsea.

 

So, most days lost to injury, if you include players injured from before the season started = Man United (Chelsea second, Newcastle third)

 

Yes, we all know about Tonali. It wasn't an injury. Yes we all know Man United and Chelsea have squads that cost hundreds of quintillions. I mean, didn't you hear Man United paid £89m for Pogba? It doesn't matter and it's not the debate at hand. Man United had, by some way, the worst injury crisis last season and Chelsea were next, not Newcastle.

 

I mean, don't get me wrong, I'm only going on facts, but if you want to use something else to justify it that's cool too. It is a forum for sharing opinions.

[Ghandis Flip-Flop]

1 hour ago, Froggy said:

 

If you don't think we had the worst injury crisis last season you need your head checked like. But I've went over it 10 times already with indisputable facts and don't need to revisit.  

 

Your opinion does not equal indisputable facts like 😂

[Froggy]

Just now, Ghandis Flip-Flop said:

Your opinion does not equal indisputable facts like 😂

 

See above for indisputable facts, all on the BBC website. Cheers.

[Ghandis Flip-Flop]

Just now, Froggy said:

 

I am not trolling. We had the worst injury crisis. Newcastle fans seem to think it was them, despite never being down to even third choice in any position.  We were on our 7th choice centre back. 

 

Most time-loss injuries = Man United (Chelsea were second, Newcastle third)

Most individual injuries = Spurs (Man United joint second, Newcastle joint third with Chelsea)

Most players out injured in a single week = Man United/Newcastle/Chelsea/Luton all joint first

 

Now to the only metric that Newcastle were clear at the top of, which was days lost to injury. It's there on BBC to see, but if you don't look at it through black and white tinted sunglasses, it clearly states that it doesn't include players who were injured before the season began, so it doesn't include Mainoo, Malacia etc. for us, and it doesn't include Fofana for Chelsea.

 

So, most days lost to injury, if you include players injured from before the season started = Man United (Chelsea second, Newcastle third)

 

Yes, we all know about Tonali. It wasn't an injury. Yes we all know Man United and Chelsea have squads that cost hundreds of quintillions. I mean, didn't you hear Man United paid £89m for Pogba? It doesn't matter and it's not the debate at hand. Man United had, by some way, the worst injury crisis last season and Chelsea were next, not Newcastle.

 

I mean, don't get me wrong, I'm only going on facts, but if you want to use something else to justify it that's cool too. It is a forum for sharing opinions.

Never even down to third choice? So I guess 17 year old Lewis Miley playing almost every game for half a season, was due to Eddie's choice. FFS man you’re getting to how do you know Froggy is talking shite, because his lips are moving territory here like 🤦🏻

[KingArthur]

9 minutes ago, Froggy said:

 

I am not trolling. We had the worst injury crisis. Newcastle fans seem to think it was them, despite never being down to even third choice in any position.  We were on our 7th choice centre back. 

 

Most time-loss injuries = Man United (Chelsea were second, Newcastle third)

Most individual injuries = Spurs (Man United joint second, Newcastle joint third with Chelsea)

Most players out injured in a single week = Man United/Newcastle/Chelsea/Luton all joint first

 

Now to the only metric that Newcastle were clear at the top of, which was days lost to injury. It's there on BBC to see, but if you don't look at it through black and white tinted sunglasses, it clearly states that it doesn't include players who were injured before the season began, so it doesn't include Mainoo, Malacia etc. for us, and it doesn't include Fofana for Chelsea.

 

So, most days lost to injury, if you include players injured from before the season started = Man United (Chelsea second, Newcastle third)

 

Yes, we all know about Tonali. It wasn't an injury. Yes we all know Man United and Chelsea have squads that cost hundreds of quintillions. I mean, didn't you hear Man United paid £89m for Pogba? It doesn't matter and it's not the debate at hand. Man United had, by some way, the worst injury crisis last season and Chelsea were next, not Newcastle.

 

I mean, don't get me wrong, I'm only going on facts, but if you want to use something else to justify it that's cool too. It is a forum for sharing opinions.

"Most individual injuries" is really ridiculous stat.

 

Which is worse, getting your back broken like Andersson and being out for months (1 injury) or having a flu or slight niggle every week (x number of injuries)

If you are out for months, it also takes longer to get back in shape.

 

Newcastle had until January clearly the most days lost, and you can argue our season was done there already. Players were dead playing 3 times a week whole November-December and we were out of Europe.

Source for stat above https://onefootball.com/es/noticias/every-premier-league-team-ranked-by-how-much-they-have-suffered-from-injuries-in-2324-38857417
edit. Chelsea didn't play in Europe last season? Huge difference also.

 

 

Edited August 1, 2024 by KingArthur

[r0cafella]

You guys are biting

[Froggy]

1 minute ago, Ghandis Flip-Flop said:

Never even down to third choice? So I guess 17 year old Lewis Miley playing almost every game for half a season, was due to Eddie's choice. FFS man you’re getting to how do you know Froggy is talking shite, because his lips are moving territory here like 🤦🏻

 

Miley played the 1200 minutes across the entire Premier League season. It's barely a third of games. Remember please, facts, not opinions.

[Ghandis Flip-Flop]

Not to mention the fact that the most expensively assembled squad in history, might be expected to have a bit more depth to it than a squad which still saw Paul Dummett and Matt Ritchie get minutes last season. And please try to tell me they’re not lower than third choice with a straight face FFS

[Froggy]

3 minutes ago, KingArthur said:

"Most individual injuries" is really ridiculous stat.

 

Which is worse, getting your back broken like Andersson and being out for months (1 injury) or having a flu or slight niggle every week (x number of injuries)

If you are out for months, it also takes longer to get back in shape.

 

Newcastle had until January clearly the most days lost, and you can argue our season was done there already. Players were dead playing 3 times a week whole November-December and we were out of Europe.

Source for stat above https://onefootball.com/es/noticias/every-premier-league-team-ranked-by-how-much-they-have-suffered-from-injuries-in-2324-38857417

 

Not my stats to be fair.

 

Also your link, it doesn't include players injured before the season started. Same as the BBC one, so you're not top even at that point, Man United and Chelsea are. And I wouldn't say your season was over. You were 3 points behind us in January and 4 off the European spots.

[Ghandis Flip-Flop]

1 minute ago, Froggy said:

 

Not my stats to be fair.

 

Also your link, it doesn't include players injured before the season started. Same as the BBC one, so you're not top even at that point, Man United and Chelsea are. And I wouldn't say your season was over. You were 3 points behind us in January and 4 off the European spots.

It doesn’t matter if they were injured before the season starts, they’re still not available to play in games during that season. Honestly at this point you’re twisting more than a Mackem over their official attendances being clearly bollocks

[Froggy]

4 minutes ago, Ghandis Flip-Flop said:

Not to mention the fact that the most expensively assembled squad in history, might be expected to have a bit more depth to it than a squad which still saw Paul Dummett and Matt Ritchie get minutes last season. And please try to tell me they’re not lower than third choice with a straight face FFS

 

You brought on Paul Dummet 5 times, 4 of those were for 1 minute each when you were winning the game. Paul Dummett was never forced to start a game for you. 

 

Likewise, Ritchie made 13 sub appearances, many of those were 1 or 2 minutes. Never forced to start him even once.

 

Rememeber, facts facts facts. Not what you think is true.

 

2 minutes ago, Ghandis Flip-Flop said:

It doesn’t matter if they were injured before the season starts, they’re still not available to play in games during that season. Honestly at this point you’re twisting more than a Mackem over their official attendances being clearly bollocks

 

This was my point mate. You're reinforcing it. Man United and Chelsea had significant, season long injuries before the season started and they weren't included in those lists.

 

So exactly aye, it doesn't matter if they're injured before the season starts, they're still not available to play. 

[KingArthur]

4 minutes ago, Froggy said:

 

Not my stats to be fair.

 

Also your link, it doesn't include players injured before the season started. Same as the BBC one, so you're not top even at that point, Man United and Chelsea are. And I wouldn't say your season was over. You were 3 points behind us in January and 4 off the European spots.

Might be, but surely we had players injured before season started also? Krafth and Willock come to mind. Willock was out until end of October and Krafth also was out until Wolves game 28th of October.

Our season was over because same 11 players were playing every game for 2 months. That really doesn't last, like everyone could see. You can argue that same happened to you too. 

[r0cafella]

@Froggydragging people in his lair lmfao. 

[KingArthur]

1 minute ago, Froggy said:

 

You brought on Paul Dummet 5 times, 4 of those were for 1 minute each when you were winning the game. Paul Dummett was never forced to start a game for you. 

 

Likewise, Ritchie made 13 sub appearances, many of those were 1 or 2 minutes. Never forced to start him even once.

 

Rememeber, facts facts facts. Not what you think is true.

 

 

This was my point mate. You're reinforcing it. Man United and Chelsea had significant, season long injuries before the season started and they weren't included in those lists.

 

So exactly aye, it doesn't matter if they're injured before the season starts, they're still not available to play. 

To be honest, now you are twisting facts a bit. Fact is Ritchie or Dummett only played few minutes from the end, but they came on because others on the bench were keepers or kids that Howe couldn't trust.

 

So option was to bring Ritchie/Dummett or no one.

 

Dummett played the whole game in LC against City and against you.

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Froggy said:

 

You brought on Paul Dummet 5 times, 4 of those were for 1 minute each when you were winning the game. Paul Dummett was never forced to start a game for you. 

 

Likewise, Ritchie made 13 sub appearances, many of those were 1 or 2 minutes. Never forced to start him even once.

 

Rememeber, facts facts facts. Not what you think is true.

 

 

This was my point mate. You're reinforcing it. Man United and Chelsea had significant, season long injuries before the season started and they weren't included in those lists.

 

So exactly aye, it doesn't matter if they're injured before the season starts, they're still not available to play. 

 

 

The Dummett and Ritchie thing (and Gillespie) sort of exasperates our issue, though. These are Championship/League 1 level remnants of Ashley & FFP. We effectively had 22 serviceable senior players to play 50 games with. A few injuries makes it tough, 8-9 which we had at one stage is unmanageable.

 

You get to throw £100m at the drop of a hat to put things right your end, we're having to move on potentially talented players to stand still. 

[Froggy]

Just now, KingArthur said:

Might be, but surely we had players injured before season started also? Krafth and Willock come to mind. Willock was out until end of October and Krafth also was out until Wolves game 28th of October.

Our season was over because same 11 players were playing every game for 2 months. That really doesn't last, like everyone could see. You can argue that same happened to you too. 

 

I'd like to be very clear here, I'm not saying you weren't completely shafted by injuries. Your injuries were brutal, ours were just that little bit worse. We are of course better equipped to deal with them than you, but that isn't the debate. 

 

Malacia is essentially cheating in a way, as he was out an entire year but is a second choice player. It's why those lists should be taken with a pinch of salt. The reason we had the worst injury crisis was because of the centre back situation. 

 

1 minute ago, KingArthur said:

To be honest, now you are twisting facts a bit. Fact is Ritchie or Dummett only played few minutes from the end, but they came on because others on the bench were keepers or kids that Howe couldn't trust.

 

So option was to bring Ritchie/Dummett or no one.

 

Dummett played the whole game in LC against City and against you.

 

I'm not twisting facts. That's just true. You were never in a position were Ritchie or Dummett had to start.

 

And the league cup, Howe deliberately played fringe players and kids. That was a choice.