Jump to content

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, purpleronnie said:

I'd imagine home advantage won't be as strong either, just 2 home wins out of 8 in the Prem, more away wins than home wins in the championship too.

Most results weren't surprising really, I'd expect us, Arsenal, Chelsea and Wolves to have won our games. Only surprise was probably Everton, West Ham v Newcastle was a much of a muchness match

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whilst it doesn’t mean a lot, it is worth mentioning that Sky and BT are now four days late in announcing televised fixtures. 
 

Understandably they may be awaiting to see if the games are behind closed doors but it’s baffling that they continually argue through this process. Personally it’s handy for me to know regardless because of work etc 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, StanSP said:

Vanessa Feltz :claude:

 

I had no idea Zoe Ball was so popular with her show.

:nigel:Feltz is absolutely stealing a living 400k  a year for what exactly?She is utterly dreadful.

 

At least Lineker has skill in his field.

 

I thought Zoe Ball had lost viewers since taking over from Evan's.

Edited by Foxin_Mad
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Raw Dykes said:

We got a 34-year old Cambiasso when we came up. Genius signing. That reasoning isn't nonsense. You have to get the right player, though.

 

18 minutes ago, The Bear said:

WBA sign 36 year old Ivanovic lol

 

We did exactly the same in 2003 when we signed 35 year old Luzhny from Arsenal. The exact same "experienced, knows the league" nonsense reasoning. He was shite and we still went down. 

There is such a variant in those types of signings isnt there though?

 

The Rio Ferdinand to QPR was a disaster but I cant remember why.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, The Bear said:

WBA sign 36 year old Ivanovic lol

 

We did exactly the same in 2003 when we signed 35 year old Luzhny from Arsenal. The exact same "experienced, knows the league" nonsense reasoning. He was shite and we still went down. 

Loved him at Chelsea, genuinely superb right back. But yeah it's a strange signing at that age

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Nalis said:

 

There is such a variant in those types of signings isnt there though?

 

The Rio Ferdinand to QPR was a disaster but I cant remember why.

I think with defenders their deterioration as a player is easily exposed at that age. Cambiasso wasn't the most mobile with us but he could still influence games with his immense technical ability

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Corky said:

Most results weren't surprising really, I'd expect us, Arsenal, Chelsea and Wolves to have won our games. Only surprise was probably Everton, West Ham v Newcastle was a much of a muchness match

I'm aware of that but i'd imagine having no home fans must help the away teams, guess we'll see.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On a slightly unrelated note, I thought we had a team of codgers in 2003/04 but looking at their ages at the time I was surprised to see Dickov was 31, Thatcher was 30 and Gillespie was only 28!

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Lots of chat on Twitter about an XI of English right-backs, which is a valid question in itself. But on a slightly more important note, I was wondering how many RBs England could genuinely field in an international match whilst remaining competitive against the likes of Iceland, Wales, Kosovo, etc.

 

I’d go for:

 

Pope

 

Trippier

Walker

Wan-Bissaka

Justin

 

Reece James 

TAA

Foden

 

Lamptey

Rashford

Sterling

 

There’s a potential case to be made that Maitland-Niles could cut it at LW, or should be ahead of Lamptey wide right at the very least, but I think that team could be competitive. I’m just not sure that KWP or Max Aarons are quite ready yet. Thoughts? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, theessexfox said:

Lots of chat on Twitter about an XI of English right-backs, which is a valid question in itself. But on a slightly more important note, I was wondering how many RBs England could genuinely field in an international match whilst remaining competitive against the likes of Iceland, Wales, Kosovo, etc.

 

I’d go for:

 

Pope

 

Trippier

Walker

Wan-Bissaka

Justin

 

Reece James 

TAA

Foden

 

Lamptey

Rashford

Sterling

 

There’s a potential case to be made that Maitland-Niles could cut it at LW, or should be ahead of Lamptey wide right at the very least, but I think that team could be competitive. I’m just not sure that KWP or Max Aarons are quite ready yet. Thoughts? 

It's not a Team of RBs if you include players in there that never play there :dunno:

 

Walker can go in goal.

Maitland-Niles can go in.

 

I don't get how Foden/Rashford/Sterling can go in lol 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, StanSP said:

It's not a Team of RBs if you include players in there that never play there :dunno:

 

Walker can go in goal.

Maitland-Niles can go in.

 

I don't get how Foden/Rashford/Sterling can go in lol 

No no I’m not going for a team of RBs, I’m trying to imagine how many RBs could fit into a genuine England XI without taking the piss. Hence Pope and Rashford are musts, none of the cohort would be any good in goal or up top I think. I also think CAM is beyond them - none of them are too well suited to receiving the ball on the half turn and playing cute passes, but I’m happy to be outvoted on that one.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure if i've missed a rule change or something but Steve Bruce was quoted in an interview the other day saying "I can only register 22, so some will move on" or something along those lines.


Is that personal preference or has it been brought down from 25 this season?

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, AjcW said:

Not sure if i've missed a rule change or something but Steve Bruce was quoted in an interview the other day saying "I can only register 22, so some will move on" or something along those lines.


Is that personal preference or has it been brought down from 25 this season?

Still 25. I'm guessing he practically can't register more than 22 due to age or nationality of some players?

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, AjcW said:

Not sure if i've missed a rule change or something but Steve Bruce was quoted in an interview the other day saying "I can only register 22, so some will move on" or something along those lines.


Is that personal preference or has it been brought down from 25 this season?

Could he be talking about outfield players, maybe?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...