Jump to content

Wolverhampton Wanderers 2-2 Newcastle United (28/10/23)


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, McDog said:

 

 

You state that like it was a fact. Not sure any of us can say that with certainty.

 

Howe said in his post game interview about subs, "I didn't want to play people of of position as the game was close". I'm somewhat paraphrasing.

 

Seemed odd. Liv and Hall wouldn't have been out of position but hey, Eddie knows his shit so that's fine. 

No one is particularly sure of Halls position. Seems to be very versatile. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Gallowgate Toon said:

Saying 'we've lost a lot of ground' at this very early stage is canny bold.

 

Ignore Ronaldo though. Hes

Well ?...... I can't stand the suspense.

 

 

Edited by madras

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Ronaldo said:


I really didn’t go on about it religiously and I defy you to prove me wrong. I mentioned it was odd that we did that without a replacement. 
 

Bottom line, we’ve lost a lot of ground on our competitors and as much as I’d like to be positive I think not signing JM, in particular, and wasting so much of the budget is a sliding doors moment and will be scrutinised by the owner when he asks why we’ve gone backwards at the end of the season.

Go back and look for yourself. That is probably the majority of what you talked about for over a month.  And I think the going backwards theme came up quite a bit then as well. You really do appear to have selective amnesia, man.

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:


It’s not what we needed if they were signed for the future? Who says we shouldn’t sign players for the future? 


The fact we have a significantly more congested schedule this season and needed players the manager could trust to play?

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, McDog said:

 

 

You state that like it was a fact. Not sure any of us can say that with certainty.

 

Howe said in his post game interview about subs, "I didn't want to play people of of position as the game was close". I'm somewhat paraphrasing.

 

Seemed odd. Liv and Hall wouldn't have been out of position but hey, Eddie knows his shit so that's fine. 

 

Just seen that on Sky, and his comments just before were saying we didn't have many attacking options on the bench.

So I'm guessing if he was to introduce Liv and/or Hall, then they wouldn't be replacing like for like players (Tripps and Burn), and would be played further forward which may not be their natural positions.

But, I'm guessing. Kind of agree with comments made earlier, if we want to play Tripps in the CL games, then we need to rest him in the next PL match and start giving Livramento a go. Similarly with Burn, if he is Howes first choice LB, then following league game, play Targett or start trying Hall.

 

 

Edited by TK-421

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Vinny Green Balls said:

Go back and look for yourself. That is probably the majority of what you talked about for over a month.  And I think the going backwards theme came up quite a bit then as well. You really do appear to have selective amnesia, man.


I did look. You’re making things up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Think our transfer business is a little opportunistic.  We’ve seen an opportunity with Hall, very promising full back available due to a bit of a malaise at Chelsea. Same with Livra, who I think could be our right back for years to come.  In a relegated side and available

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, TK-421 said:

 

Just seen that on Sky, and his comments just befroe were saying we didn;t have many attacking options on the bench.

So I'm guessing if he was to introduce Liv and/or Hall, then they wouldn't be replacing like for liek players (Tripps and Burn), and would be played further forward which may bot be their natural positions.

But, I'm guessing. Kind of agree with comments made earlier, if we want to play Tripps in the CL games, then we need to rest him in the next PL match and start giving Livramento a go.

 

Yea, that is true. His full backs were not playing great football though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TK-421 said:

 

Just seen that on Sky, and his comments just before were saying we didn't have many attacking options on the bench.

So I'm guessing if he was to introduce Liv and/or Hall, then they wouldn't be replacing like for like players (Tripps and Burn), and would be played further forward which may not be their natural positions.

But, I'm guessing. Kind of agree with comments made earlier, if we want to play Tripps in the CL games, then we need to rest him in the next PL match and start giving Livramento a go.

 

 

 

Such bullshit though

 

Trippier has proven himself well able to play 2 games a week

 

this was probably his first poor game in about 40 and he hasn’t started 1 in the league cup

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, tgarve said:

Such bullshit though

 

Trippier has proven himself well able to play 2 games a week

 

this was probably his first poor game in about 40 and he hasn’t started 1 in the league cup


at Some point though Trippier isn’t going to be able to play two games in a week though. He looked leggy today. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, RS said:

2 seasons into our new era. People pissing themselves over an away draw.  Some heed shakes required. 

They've been very tough to beat for other good teams this season already. Combine that with injuries and suspensions and its a decent away result.

Link to post
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Turnbull2000 said:

Can't say I'm gutted based the squad we had. We would have had 3 points no problem if it weren't for the sudden injury crisis.

 

Just give the majority a rest on Wednesday please, otherwise our league performance risks falling apart.

I'd be going all out in the cup and picking the strongest team available. If we continue to pick up injuries we are going to finish somewhere between 6-8th in the league. You get no medals for that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, MrRaspberryJam said:


at Some point though Trippier isn’t going to be able to play two games in a week though. He looked leggy today. 

 

Right. 180 minutes a week at age 33 seems a bit off.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't actually see the West Ham game, but this feels less like 2 points dropped to me, possibly because the goal was later at W Ham. Quite content with this result. I'd consider W Ham away the harder match on paper as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Ronaldo said:


I did look. You’re making things up.

I am not making it up at all, dude. I remember one or two even criticizing you for beating the point into the ground , but you and I both share that tendency of belaboring a point. I can at least admit it though.
 

Look, man. I have absolutely nothing against you,  but You really do appear to be a doom merchant.  Given that I am clearly not the only one who says that, maybe it’s worth considering that there could be some truth in it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MrRaspberryJam said:


yup. And the intensity of which Dortmund played on Wednesday would no a number on any player, never mind anyone over the age of 30. 

There’s a reason Howe doesn’t ignore the 35 previous games and base all his decisions off 2

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...