Foxy DK

You have to distinguish between using statistics for one match and over time. If you have 15 shots on target you are 3 times as likely to score than if you only have 5 - all else being equal, ie. the same shooters, same positions etc. I’m certain we stood out in many stats that season - for example how many shots we let the opponent take, headers won, clearances and counters.

How often will that happen, do you think? Yes, there are meaningless stats out there, but most of it is useful if you know what it means and, more importantly, what it doesn’t mean. Claiming that statistics don’t matter in football is like the emperor in Amadeus telling Mozart “there are simply too many notes.”

I disagree. Thought he did fine.

In a setup like Denmark’s last night he anticipates the game very well

Am I missing irony here? If not - Denmark played with a back 4, very aggressive and constantly playing the ball forward. Cut through the Portuguese like a knife through warm butter

There’s a big difference between keepers and outfield players tbf. Kasper is still very, very good, he knows the squad, has experience from big games and is a great leader. Last night he made a very athletic save showing he still got it, and even though Hermansen is better with his feet I’m not sure Andersen and Vestergaard would be as secure with him behind them - yet. The reason Vestergaard starts is simply a lack of alternatives. Christensen is injured more or less permanently, Kjaer has stopped his career, Nelsson hasn’t impressed and Zanka no longer plays for the NT - the latter was a backup anyway with Vestergaard as first sub for the back 3. Now we play with a back 4 and the next in line is a youngster playing for a Danish club. Contrast that with Hermansen’sposition where we have at least three very good players and Kristiansen who competes with Maehle and Dorgu.

I agree. Denmark played their best game in years - maybe a decade or more - and Vestergaard still stood out as motm-contender. He was immense

I, for one, understood what you meant quite clearly. Think most others did as well

It’s very hard for many people to keep two thoughts in their heads at the same time. He was very good last season, he’s very bad this season.

Harsh. - 9 more accurate

I think it’s two things. 1. It’s really hard to assess the level of some of the players when they play in a team as bad as this. Football is a relations game and things like positioning and tactical understanding are so dependent on functioning relations. So for instance a player may seem to be out of possession in the build up for a goal against, even if he is actually just doing what’s he’s supposed to do. Add to that the confidence factor and insecurity that comes from losing all the time which easily can affect a player’s overall game from carrying the ball to passing and shooting. 2. There’s a difference between criticism however harsh and scapegoating. That’s what you’re saying as well, I think. But the former can be overdone and become the latter. I think that’s what some people think happens here. With my first point in mind, any player can look horrible if you put him under a microscope and don’t consider context. For me this means that an informed opinion of a player’s general ability needs context, ie. not just the eye test. It’s stats, team form and, in VK’s case, the fact that he did well in a strong league last season - and yes, his attitude and fighting spirit as well as that is always a good indicator of a player’s chance to improve.

Yeah, a significantly smaller one.

Had Vardy been clinical we’d got a point

Ffs, just shoot from there - anything can happen. Instead of trying to play fancy Barca-ball.

Bilal mustard, Haaland bastard