Alexander Isak

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Also no striker can really operate well when he's up field on his own and everyone else is camped on the edge of the box. I know that wasn't the case for the whole second half, but it was for a lot of it. 

[huss9]

6 hours ago, r0cafella said:

He’s far from full fitness, I think it’s pretty obvious. And once again we are running him into the ground. 
 

When he’s fully fit he has great link up play. No player is perfect mind. 

criticising this lads performance at PSG, man. ffs.

if wilson was fit he'd still likley be coming on as sub to get his fitness back 

[Ronaldo]

Mental take by TCD. He’s obviously nowhere near 100%. 
 

I do think he needs a more advanced, creative midfielder behind him to see 100% mind. That would make us pretty unstoppable. 

[Strawberry]

How low can we go. We dont have any reason to go at the eleven players who played amazingly against Paris.

[TheBrownBottle]

A half-fit Isak scores two in two games vs Chelsea and PSG, and ran himself out so much he could barely stand by the end of the PSG match.

 

Yep, I think we should dogpile the fucker 

[The College Dropout]

It’s not an attack or ‘going at him’. He’s coming back from injury and struggles a bit physically with our style and he was totally knackered so there are good reasons for what we saw. But he was poor in that second half. He needs to get to a point where he’s an outlet for us when defending leads. He needs to be a lot fitter to do that.  
 

We were robbed of a famous win. But for valid reasons - our performance was far from ‘amazing’ in that second half.  The number one thing we could’ve done better is keep the ball and Isak was one of the worst culprits for giving it up again and again. To the point it might have been better to take him off for anyone that could run.  

[NWMag]

7 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

It’s not an attack or ‘going at him’. He’s coming back from injury and struggles a bit physically with our style and he was totally knackered so there are good reasons for what we saw. But he was poor in that second half. He needs to get to a point where he’s an outlet for us when defending leads. He needs to be a lot fitter to do that.  
 

We were robbed of a famous win. But for valid reasons - our performance was far from ‘amazing’ in that second half.  The number one thing we could’ve done better is keep the ball and Isak was one of the worst culprits for giving it up again and again. To the point it might have been better to take him off for anyone that could run.  

The only reason we didn’t win the game is because of a refereeing fuck up. 

[madras]

3 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

It’s not an attack or ‘going at him’. He’s coming back from injury and struggles a bit physically with our style and he was totally knackered so there are good reasons for what we saw. But he was poor in that second half. He needs to get to a point where he’s an outlet for us when defending leads. He needs to be a lot fitter to do that.  
 

We were robbed of a famous win. But for valid reasons - our performance was far from ‘amazing’ in that second half.  The number one thing we could’ve done better is keep the ball and Isak was one of the worst culprits for giving it up again and again. To the point it might have been better to take him off for anyone that could run.  

I'm not sure he will get the physical strength to play 90mins regularly at the intensity we want, I'm not sure many can. There was an interview last season when he said Eddie tells him to give it both burners from the off and we'll take him off when he's empty (partially why I wanted another forward/wide forward). Last season I think only Brentford made more subs and I'll bet ours were massively weighted towards forward players, it's how we kept the intensity up. 

[The Butcher]

51 minutes ago, NWMag said:

The only reason we didn’t win the game is because of a refereeing fuck up. 

And piss poor finishing. They should've been well out of sight before the pen.

 

[madras]

11 minutes ago, The Butcher said:

And piss poor finishing. They should've been well out of sight before the pen.

 

Piss poor finishing and having a good keeper are features of the game. It's why teams buy certain better players. Mbappe didn't play like his reputation, nor did Dembele. Pope's saves were very Scmichealish, cover as much area as you can, nothing in the corners, placed or well hit.

[r0cafella]

36 minutes ago, The Butcher said:

And piss poor finishing. They should've been well out of sight before the pen.

 

He’s one of the best finishers in the league. 
 

I don’t get this place sometimes. Always must critique. 

[Ronaldo]

He meant PSG.

[r0cafella]

4 minutes ago, Ronaldo said:

He meant PSG.

Fair play. The criticism of a player who clearly isn’t fully fit and is giving everything and still scoring got my back up

[cubaricho]

On 29/11/2023 at 10:21, Lotus said:

Watching him last night, it reminded me of a Simeone tactic. Where the forwards (was a front 2 then, I think) save their legs for any attacking play and the midfield has to work its bollox off ?

 

Understand we’re looking after Isak due to our circumstances but I did wonder a good few weeks ago if this might come up.

 

Still, probably just a case of him being knackered, fragile and our only hope…

 

Most definitely tactics. Did everyone miss the three or so times they showed Isak over there talking to Eddie about tactics and Eddie showing him where he wanted to be? I don't think it was particularly him being gassed - he might've been - but his positions in the second half were absolutely down to Eddie telling him where to be.

[Lush Vlad]

Considering that by his standards. He looked like he was towing a caravan when he tried to sprint. I would say he was gassed, yeah. 

[The College Dropout]

2 hours ago, Lush Vlad said:

Considering that by his standards. He looked like he was towing a caravan when he tried to sprint. I would say he was gassed, yeah. 

He was absolutely gassed.  He wasn’t able to try and go long after 60 minutes. And when he came deep he wasn’t able to hold the ball or find a team mate with a pass.  
 

I don’t get this idea that it’s negative to offer constructive criticism of our best players.  Just be objective about every performance good or bad, win or lose. Favourable player or current pariah. That way you don’t get carried away by your emotions.  

[Theregulars]

10 hours ago, r0cafella said:

He’s one of the best finishers in the league. 
 

I don’t get this place sometimes. Always must critique. 

Or is it that any critique or dissonant thought is met with a persistently unimaginative allegation of blasphemy or entitlement? 

[r0cafella]

Just now, Theregulars said:

Or is it that any critique or dissonant thought is met with a persistently unimaginative allegation of blasphemy or entitlement? 

Not really no. Critiquing a player who is 2-2 despite being far from fully fit and rushing back from Injury to support the team just makes no sense. 

[Erikse]

5 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

He was absolutely gassed.  He wasn’t able to try and go long after 60 minutes. And when he came deep he wasn’t able to hold the ball or find a team mate with a pass.  
 

I don’t get this idea that it’s negative to offer constructive criticism of our best players.  Just be objective about every performance good or bad, win or lose. Favourable player or current pariah. That way you don’t get carried away by your emotions.  

 

That's basically the Steve Bruce mentality: result was great, players fought hard, jobs done, nothing to reflect on.

 

 

Edited December 2, 2023 by Erikse

[Theregulars]

2 minutes ago, r0cafella said:

Not really no. Critiquing a player who is 2-2 despite being far from fully fit and rushing back from Injury to support the team just makes no sense. 

But it’s accurate to say that he didn’t contribute much in the second half. Yes, he has the excuse of fatigue, but it’s still an accurate comment to say he didn’t contribute much. Why does that have to be viewed as poisonously negative? He scored a goal, missed a sitter, and played quite well for 45 mins but not for the remainder. 
 

There is definitely a weird sense on this forum that criticism of player or manager means you’re not one of the team, you’re entitled, you’re difficult etc. 

 

for example - I love joelinton, but he’s been not as good this year as he was last year. I still love him and support him, but he needs to be better (particularly his close range finishing). 

[r0cafella]

35 minutes ago, Theregulars said:

But it’s accurate to say that he didn’t contribute much in the second half. Yes, he has the excuse of fatigue, but it’s still an accurate comment to say he didn’t contribute much. Why does that have to be viewed as poisonously negative? He scored a goal, missed a sitter, and played quite well for 45 mins but not for the remainder. 
 

There is definitely a weird sense on this forum that criticism of player or manager means you’re not one of the team, you’re entitled, you’re difficult etc. 

 

for example - I love joelinton, but he’s been not as good this year as he was last year. I still love him and support him, but he needs to be better (particularly his close range finishing). 

The particular criticism being made doesn’t make sense that’s why. It totally disregards the facts he has been rushed back and is far from fully fit as is clear to everyone. On top of that he’s also scored two in two and he’s one of the best finishers in the league imo. 
 

No striker scores every chance they get and if I wasn’t lazy I’d look it up but I’m sure he’s got one of the best strike rates in Europe. 
 

Rushing players back from injury and then flogging them for 90 minutes is a receipt for further injury but it’s all good, we got to point out how much of a bad second half he had.

 

 

Edited December 2, 2023 by r0cafella

[Menace]

My heart skips a beat when I see this thread bumped...

[Choppy Chop Chop]

I've been listening to `boo boys` for 60 years, sometimes it gets through to a player I remember Tommy Gibb losing his confidence and his form never recovered 

 

 

Edited December 2, 2023 by Choppy Chop Chop
grammar

[Tiresias]

6 minutes ago, r0cafella said:

The particular criticism being made doesn’t make sense that’s why. It totally disregards the facts he has been rushed back and is far from fully fit as is clear to everyone. On top of that he’s also scored two in two and he’s one of the best fingers in the league imo. 
 

No striker scores every chance they get and if I wasn’t lazy I’d look it up but I’m sure he’s got one of the best strike rates in Europe. 
 

Rushing players back from injury and then flogging them for 90 minutes is a receipt for further injury but it’s all good, we got to point out how much of a bad second half he had.

 

[Theregulars]

23 minutes ago, r0cafella said:

The particular criticism being made doesn’t make sense that’s why. It totally disregards the facts he has been rushed back and is far from fully fit as is clear to everyone. On top of that he’s also scored two in two and he’s one of the best fingers in the league imo. 
 

No striker scores every chance they get and if I wasn’t lazy I’d look it up but I’m sure he’s got one of the best strike rates in Europe. 
 

Rushing players back from injury and then flogging them for 90 minutes is a receipt for further injury but it’s all good, we got to point out how much of a bad second half he had.

Can you conceive of a reality where he makes both positive and negative contributions to a match?