Match of the Day 2018/19

[Foxboy]

1 hour ago, baldeagle said:

Pundits still no clue apparently we originally set up as 4-5-1 ? then changed once Maddison got the note

The team sat in a 4-5-1 for its defensive shape and then did change once Maddison got the note. Hence hamza moving to RM/RW albrighton moving to the left and Maddison coming central. Have you ever stopped to think that the pundits are actually right and you’re wrong? 

[baldeagle]

5 minutes ago, Foxboy said:

The team sat in a 4-5-1 for its defensive shape and then did change once Maddison got the note. Hence hamza moving to RM/RW albrighton moving to the left and Maddison coming central. Have you ever stopped to think that the pundits are actually right and you’re wrong? 

No not really as we set up like the last match as 4-3–3 moving to 4-5-1 when defending so we didnt t originally set up as 4-5-1

[Foxboy]

3 minutes ago, baldeagle said:

No not really as we set up like the last match as 4-3–3 moving to 4-5-1 when defending so we didnt t originally set up as 4-5-1

So the team did “originally” set up as a 4-5-1, whilst Man City were on the ball, just as Murphy said. He even showed a clip of Man City with the ball and our back 4 with 5 in front and 1 up top.

[baldeagle]

7 minutes ago, Foxboy said:

So the team did “originally” set up as a 4-5-1, whilst Man City were on the ball, just as Murphy said. He even showed a clip of Man City with the ball and our back 4 with 5 in front and 1 up top.

No we originally set up as 4-3-3 from the start so that is the original formation regardless if we then dropped to 4-5-1 when defending . The key word being originally 

[AlloverthefloorYesNdidi]

2 minutes ago, baldeagle said:

No we originally set up as 4-3-3 form the start so that is the original formation regardless if we then dropped to 4-5-1 when defending . The key word being originally 

It really looked so 451 

[baldeagle]

1 minute ago, AlloverthefloorYesNdidi said:

It really looked so 451 

And that’s the beauty of football everyone looks at it differently 

[Foxboy]

5 minutes ago, baldeagle said:

No we originally set up as 4-3-3 from the start so that is the original formation regardless if we then dropped to 4-5-1 when defending . The key word being originally 

But he was quite obviously talking about our defensive shape, hence the clip of us defending. You’ve just come here to tell everyone how sh!t pundits are and how much more you know about football then them. As if they haven’t played at the top level for many years whilst you’ve been sat at home scratching and sniffing.

[baldeagle]

1 minute ago, Foxboy said:

But he was quite obviously talking about our defensive shape, hence the clip of us defending. You’ve just come here to tell everyone how sh!t pundits are and how much more you know about football then them. As if they haven’t played at the top level for many years whilst you’ve been sat at home scratching and sniffing.

No he was on about our original set up and I don’t recall me saying I know more or have more experience than pundits  even sky agree with me 

[trabuch]

FWIW Gordon Strachan on Talk Sport was all over Puel changing from 433 to 4411. (By the way - he absolutely loved his day in Leicester - he was all like - great match - amazing fans - lovely atmosphere - so far from 70s football - Leicester fans should be very proud).

 

Imagine being having to be happy because Solskaer is your manager!

[Stadt]

 

433 and 451 are the same. It's semantics 

[ThingsCouldGetMessi]

Dyche "If Tarkowski hadn't have put that over the bar at 3-1 then it could have been a different game" 

 

Yes he's right but I'm still rather baffled. You can't concede 3 goals inside the opening 25 minutes of a game and expect a result at any level. I could also see about 3 different reasons why the penalty was given. There are certainly many other things to blame for the loss before blaming the centre back for missing the target. I don't really follow what goes on at Burnley but perhaps his failure to look at the real problems are why they sit in 18th? 

[HighPeakFox]

I noticed on the commentary that Ricardo got the credit for a crucial defensive header by Mendy. It annoyed me more than it should be doing!

[SheppyFox]

9 hours ago, HighPeakFox said:

I noticed on the commentary that Ricardo got the credit for a crucial defensive header by Mendy. It annoyed me more than it should be doing!

I love your avatar, I have only just realised it was Luis and not Freddy  

[volpeazzurro]

6 minutes ago, SheppyFox said:

I love your avatar, I have only just realised it was Luis and not Freddy  

Oh yes, think it's from his later track 'I want to bite three'?

[Wasyls Pec Deck]

Phil Neville’s top notch analysis that Burnley need to be better defensively and more formidable. He also repeated the point that Shearer made about Fernandinho - what’s the point of Phil Neville?

[Langston]

4 minutes ago, bmouth_fox said:

Phil Neville’s top notch analysis that Burnley need to be better defensively and more formidable. He also repeated the point that Shearer made about Fernandinho - what’s the point of Phil Neville?

 

I noticed that - he just stated the obvious, essentially said Burnley need to be better at football than they have been to stay up, top insight. 

[MGLCFC]

14 minutes ago, bmouth_fox said:

Phil Neville’s top notch analysis that Burnley need to be better defensively and more formidable. He also repeated the point that Shearer made about Fernandinho - what’s the point of Phil Neville?

He also stated that Harry Kane was the best striker in the world at the moment. Think there are Numerous ahead of him. Messi, Ronaldo, Neymar, Mbappe, Suarez, Salah, Aguero, Hazard

[nwl fox]

10 hours ago, HighPeakFox said:

I noticed on the commentary that Ricardo got the credit for a crucial defensive header by Mendy. It annoyed me more than it should be doing!

I was annoyed by that as well, but then I watched the match choice highlights on sky straight after and their commentary identified Mendy correctly so that appeased me!

[UniFox21]

1 hour ago, bmouth_fox said:

Phil Neville’s top notch analysis that Burnley need to be better defensively and more formidable. He also repeated the point that Shearer made about Fernandinho - what’s the point of Phil Neville?

I'd been saying the same thing to my dad and brother about missing Fernandinho; when they heard it on MOTD they saw the smug look on my face and all left the room 

[baldeagle]

20 hours ago, Foxboy said:

But he was quite obviously talking about our defensive shape, hence the clip of us defending. You’ve just come here to tell everyone how sh!t pundits are and how much more you know about football then them. As if they haven’t played at the top level for many years whilst you’ve been sat at home scratching and sniffing.

You might want to read this .....

 

[baldeagle]

20 hours ago, AlloverthefloorYesNdidi said:

It really looked so 451 

You may also what to read Strider’s tactic thread 

[AlloverthefloorYesNdidi]

55 minutes ago, baldeagle said:

You may also what to read Strider’s tactic thread 

Yeah I did, was decent

[davieG]

#MOTD running order NEW v MUN BOU v WAT HUD v BUR WOL v PAL WHU v BRI CHE v SOU ARS v FUL CAR v TOT EVE v LEI

 

So MU 1st

[Cincinnati Fox]

2 minutes ago, davieG said:

#MOTD running order NEW v MUN BOU v WAT HUD v BUR WOL v PAL WHU v BRI CHE v SOU ARS v FUL CAR v TOT EVE v LEI

 

So MU 1st

Really should be Watford v Bournemouth 1st

[davieG]

As everyone will be keen to watch the highlights

 

1) Brighton 0-1 Liverpool

2) West Ham 1-0 Arsenal

3) Chelsea 2-1 Newcastle

4) Burnley 2-1 Fulham

5) Leicester 1-2 Southampton

6) Crystal Palace 1-2 Watford

7) Cardiff 0-0 Huddersfield