Leeds Fox

Thought he should have got to the 3rd but it did come through a crowd. I’d still be miffed if we conceded that (I’m annoyed Pompey conceded it tbf)

No that’s fair mate. They love that old ‘smiley’ badge too!

They all buy shirts regardless of how they look at Leeds to be fair (and seem to wear them in every situation). The yellow shirt is annoyingly smart though.

Haven’t seen any pre-season. Do we have any tactics?

Yes, but that doesn’t make the alternatives better by default.

Learn what all the higher trebles are, then just try and add the scores as the player throws. It’ll become 2nd nature in no time.

Inevitable, unfortunately.

So, I’m not sure what’s not to understand. If you pick 3 or 4 2-2s or 3-3s. Either or. Place a Yankee or a Trixie. Have a wedge on the 3/4 fold too. If at HT they’re all still to play for, you can take profit. If one’s down, the main bet is dead… but you usually have a chance at that point Goals go in and you end up with a decent cash out. I hate cash outs but these are bets to just take profit. Stick to the freezes and use your pals accounts. FWIW I’d most likely had a beer last time and didn’t articulate myself well (I am from Yorkshire)

No I’ve no idea and it’s not going to change. I just was agreeing with @Guest really. I wasn’t talking about any instance in particular. I think the crux of it was, some infringements don’t warrant an 80% (or whatever it is) chance of a goal.

It was given as a foul whichever way you look at it. Just because, as you said previously, the studs weren’t facing Kane, it’s irrelevant. They were facing the plain of his foot after striking the ball, which to me is dangerous play. You could say, Kane could’ve avoided it, but that’s impeding him. There’s no way of knowing that Kane wouldn’t have struck the ball differently if the defender hadn’t stuck his leg out. Subconsciously, it may have had an effect on his shot. Anticipating a challenge can certainly have an effect on the outcome of a shot. Nobody except Harry Kane will know, but basing it on him getting is shot off and the contact happening after isn’t definitive. The part I bolded, is what happened. The forward motion doesn’t have to be from the defender to make it a foul or be the cause of the contact. Kane played the ball, the defender failed to block it and caused the contact. It’s not worth debating really but I’m being stubborn and sticking to my opinion no harm done eh

That’s a great post. DOGSO or denying a potential GSO should be a penalty, but as you say, some infringements aren’t deserving of a penalty.

You’ve completely skewed my comment there. I think it was a foul, dangerous play and impeding an opponent. Of course all contact in the penalty area isn’t a foul, I never suggested that. Kane did blaze it over, possibly because he was expecting contact on the follow through and it affected his action (although granted, maybe not). If that was me, I’d have expected a foul to be given against me. Never won the ball, it was a desperate attempt to block but ultimately unsuccessful and a foul IMO. It’s subjective and that’s the beauty of football I suppose. I’m glad it was given either way!

Absolutely. You can’t put your studs up when someone’s playing the ball, not get the ball and make contact with the opponents shin. It’s dangerous and impacts the player playing the ball. If that was given against us, I’d have no qualms. I watched abroad, with neutrals and loads of Dutch. I said it was a penalty as soon as Kane took the shot. Was laughed at by almost everyone but it was a clear foul. As you say though, swings and roundabouts.

I wouldn’t. I’d not blame the defender because they have to go for it, but if you’re late and the player can’t play a ball fairly, it’s a foul. That happens in the middle of the pitch and it’s borderline red card. Kane was lucky not to be injured. I know this sounds soft, but that’s the laws of the game and it was genuinely dangerous play.

It was a foul. Forget whether it should’ve been a penalty as it skews opinion. It was a clear foul, late to the ball and impacted Kane challenging fairly for it.

Also, there were moments we could’ve lost that game.

They went forward for a change. No complaints.

Very true, negates a signing on fee too, which we can’t afford to be giving our unnecessarily this year. Costs are spread which suits us.

It really depends where you play. Centrally, you cannot afford to be one footed whatsoever. The ones (and im assuming) you refer to, are most likely wingers/wide players. Left wingers get away with a lot, because of the rarity and usually the quality they possess that other don’t.

How’s about a rep point then? Sweet baby Jesus what do you have to do for a +1 around here joking obvs (please like my comment).

Almost all top (let’s say, top half of the PL) players are capable enough with both feet to use both. Top professional footballers are stupidly talented, even comparing them to League 1/2 players. Someone going for £30m, which many think is lower than his value, should definitely be able to use both feet in most situations. KDH can’t and unfortunately, I think it’ll impact him at the highest level. I do hope he does well, but this stinks of a player on the market… and Chelsea being Chelsea, bought him, for no apparent reason. Maybe they think they can increase his market value and sell him for profit in a couple of years?

That doesn’t take in to account him having absolutely zero presence and possibly the worst positioning in goalkeeping history. They won’t go down as individual mistakes, but they are.

Hojlund (sp) very wasteful too unfortunately.

Wouldn’t surprise me if that was a huge factor in why he chose Germany

I think it is (or maybe was) that you couldn’t make a backwards motion, which Havertz did seem to do, albeit very marginally. Laws may have changed.