Lillehamring

Maybe, but you don't make your bad luck. What possible influence, for example, could we have had on the linesman not blowing that call? None. That's not down to us, that's just bad luck.

You mean the last 2 games, right, because if you look at our last 5, 6 and 10 games we have the 6th, 5th and 4th best form. And even then, the Leeds game, we played superbly, Leeds just got all the breaks.

Toi be fair, technically we scored 3 goals in the Leeds game! But, joking aside, we scored twice away to a team unbeaten at home, and who had only conceded 11 goals in 17 matches - not our fault that one was disallowed.

I think we'll see that. After the rather flat performance against Boro, we certainly responded against Leeds. Sure it didn't pan out great, but we came out determined to win and played like we were bound to do so.

Exactly, even a draw could be costly for Leeds, right now.

You can't help but feel it was all building up to the game with us - now the real work for Leeds starts. Suddenly, there's a lot of pressure and expectation on them. And we saw against us that defensively they are bang average.

Oh yeah, the way they figured us out by knowing that if they let us have 21 shots, one would hit the woodwork one would be a save and the other 19 would be missed or blocked. Yes, and the tactical master class of kicking the ball at the defender from outside the box and knowing it would deflect in. Yes, by god, they had us figured out.

Nonsense. The way we played against Leeds, 99 times out of 100 that's a comfortable win. It's not every game you have a legit goal disallowed, or concede a late deflected goal - the odds on both those happening (twice with the deflection) in one game must be off the scale.

Also worth noting, this was their biggest game of the season, on a great run, unbeaten at home and, despite some decent but ineffective stuff early on and some lucky goals, they were fortunate to get the result and looked to have completely bottles it whilst we literally ran through them. The motivation in their 'easy' games won't be so easy to come by, and the longer that winning run goes on the harder it'll be and the more the pressure will be.

- i didn't start the debate, i just joined in. The result is obviously all that matters, but when you get a game like this it's inevitable that there're going to be lots of issues worthy of discussion

Archaic? Wait a minute, now - i'm not happy with that!

At the risk of starting a needless debate - i've always used the word soccer, not exclusively but now and again. Look at it this way, would you expect american's to call the NFL 'American' football, of course not - you do see why american's have to use soccer, which always used to be a perfectly acceptable term.

Well if leeds knew 'how to play us' they had a funny way of showing it - realistically they could have been 4-0 down before they'd even managed a shot on target. You talk like we were out played and out thought, but the reality is: one bad call, two bad misses and two deflected goals. And as for your final question: it's happened in six games: the two ipswich games, sheffield, the 1st boro game, tonight and (understandably) the coventry game. Three draws and three losses from 34 matches - it's almost like teams just need to turn up!

To be fair though, when he made the changes we were 1-0 up and looking the most likely to score - mavi and daka looked knackered and that's probably why they blew their chances. So he chose a like for like swap to see if fresh legs could be more productive in front of goal, to get at their tyring defenders. It was the natural choice. Bringing on praet or coady would have reeked of shutting up shop with 10+ minutes to go - the game was not heading that way. Unfortunately, we immediately concede and the momentum shifts. But at the time there was nothing to indicate that leeds were going to get a goal, let alone three - they'd only managed 1 shot on target at that point, 10 minutes before he made the changes. I think the subs were right, but they should have come 10 minutes earlier, straight after the daka miss.

The problem is though, our finishing is wildly inconsistent - we missed sitters tonight and against boro, but we're averaging 2 goals a game. Why we have these weird bad games I don't know, but I don't think it's a reflection of what is happening on the training field - i think it's just bad judgement on the day - i think in the heat of the action players just make bad calls. I'd almost argue that it's not really a problem in general, i think it's more that these games seem to stand out because for one reason or another they tend to be in games we end up losing or dropping points. For example - Hull we were woeful and got punished by a defelected goal, tonight, two deflected goals, boro a worldie free kick and so on. So we tend to focus on the missed chances, but as a team we actually have the 2nd highest shot conversion rate in the league and only villa and newcastle have higher rates in the PL.

I think we'd all like to have seen a better return, but that's still 5 points from 5 games - if you can manage that against your nearest three rivals, the rest should be simple. Besides, in four of those games we were the better side, so i'm not sure, from a tactical perspective, what we could have done differently. In all 5 games, 3 points was achievable.

Funnily enough it's exactly these fans in meltdown who are calling out the players for a lack of mental strength and for bottling it. Pots and kettles and all that....

Again, if you'd follow the whole discussion this was a debate on a very specific element of tonight's performance, not about the result.

Sure, never suggested anything but that being the case - the discussion was about our performance 2nd half rather than the result. And even then, i didn't think we were crap in the last 10 minutes. I think we might have come back from the first goal, or at least held on for a draw, if we hadn't conceded such a ridiculous second. after that it was always going to be a struggle. And the 3rd (again ridiculous) goal kind of made the last ten minutes look a lot worse than it really was.

Poor execution and bottling it are not in any way shape or form the same thing. I get that you're upset but whining and melodramatic histrionics aren't going to change anything. You seem to be incapable of dealing with reality - but i admire your persistence in utter negativity to get you through it

But players lose the ball all the time, there were numerous opportunities to tackle the guy or force him backwards, in the end he's desperate and just whacks it, it probably isn't even going in until it hits hamza, and then still not going int until it hits faes. The final goal also took a massive deflection off a shot not on target, does that mean we should be blaming vestergaard for giving away the foul? Of course, the actions of these players create situations, but unless it's a genuine error that's led to the goal we need to quit with the blame culture. If blaming people for events makes you happy then you go for it - but posting that kind of BS on here will be shot down time and again.

Not only that but we still looked in total control for some time after the misses, and the most likely looking team to score - leeds looked lost. Unfortunately we got sucker punched far too late for us to really regain the momentum that we lost.

But that's the thing, it isn't that often - the games we've lost have generally been down to poor finishing (tonight that's hurt us again) - but tonight genuinely does feel like what ever we did, it wasn't meant to be. I think from the moment ricardo gets booked i'm thinking, something's going to føkk us over tonight.

Yeah, i've only seen the one replay but his body shape seems to hint that he was actually trying to pass it back across goal - either way, unacceptable.

I've no idea what you mean - i'm just saying it's wrong to sum up the 2nd half by what happened in the last 10 minutes. The last 10 minutes shouldn't take away (from a performance perspective, such was the initial observation) how well we played in the 2nd half.