I can’t believe I’m gonna say this but I like Carragher.
Great responseAll 5 of those goals were conceded in the absence of Romero + VDV (i.e. both starting CBs) and Sarr + Maddison (i.e. starting CMs who are key to us sustaining our high press that usually minimises the pressure on our defence). Bissouma was also missing for 3 of those 5 goals and Udogie was missing for the other 2 (i.e. at least 5 of our starting 11 missing for all 5 goals). We didn't have two recognised CBs on the pitch for any of those goals.
Our system and style of play was criticised, with it implied that this was the cause of our recent poor results. This point was made without any mention of us being without numerous key players, despite the downturn in results (and the increase in late goals conceded) strongly correlating to the absence of these players. It wasn't suggested that Ange needs to temporarily adjust his tactics for the duration of this crisis, but that his tactics aren't viable in general - even though these tactics had us out-performing Man City before our fairly unprecedented injury/suspension crisis. I'm not sure whether to call this lazy, ignorant, naïve or biased...perhaps it's all of them.
A disproportionate amount of goals are scored late throughout professional football. Perhaps our make-shift defence, that was also lacking the protection that our high-press has previously provided, deserved praise for holding out until stoppage time, rather than criticism for failing to buck the trend of all football teams ever.
We conceded late under Jose because we sat deep and then, understandably, made more mistakes at the end of games when we were tired than we did during the earlier periods when our defence was fresher.
We have conceded late under Ange because we've had a make-shift defence on the pitch and then, understandably, have made more mistakes at the end of games when we were tired than we did during the earlier periods when our defence was fresher.
Same outcome but two different causations.
The SSN pundit in question suggested that we need to sit deeper, yet this could actually compound the issue, as our make-shift defence would be under the same barrage of pressure that we failed to cope with under Jose. Would we really concede fewer late goals if both of the above causations were stacked rather than us only having one of the two to contend with?
All day long mate, this is bang on the money. Any criticism of anything Spurs or Ange right now and you face a full on defensive. Doesn't matter how many other things you are positive about it's the one negative that over rides it. I've even been accused of hating Ange by one knob goblin, despite repeatedly saying I 100% think he's the right man for the job.And lo!
Plenty of credit was given to how we played. They did bang on about City but what do you expect? Them to whop their cocks out and thrash around the studio waxing lyrical about Spurs?
The city thing is a fair enough topic and the question was being asked given their recent results too. It doesn't mean anything
And there's the problem, we're too fragile about this stuff. But I know i'm farting against thunder here and not many people will agree, but I think people expect too much, take stuff way to literally and are far too easily offended by it. It's all generally fairly balanced stuff. It's a thing that in the scheme of things ought to be fuck all and I just don't understand it
1 a consolation goal for Palace (that should’ve been ruled out for handball)
Yeah and the first was the goal of the season so far
TBF Carragher was a much better footballer than Neville.
Disagree, and I think Neville gets massively under rated personally because of how he is as a pundit. He's top 5 RB's in the Prem era for me and Carragher is nowhere near that as a CB. He was a solid dependable pro but no more than that. He wasn't even the best CB at Pool when he was at his peak.
Nah, Neville made a great career of tracking wingers, then passing it up the line to Beckham then Ronaldo. The very definition of unfussy dependability.
I kind of like that in my defenders......
At no point have I said that I thought he was shite or I didn't rate him.
No you didn't. and my apology if any offense taken. I happen to be old school when it comes to defenders. Yes, the modern game has passed our era as the maraudiing defender is a necessary feature in the modern game. I've just always valued mistake free defense above and beyond anything else. I like boring effective defenders. That's why prime Spurs Kyle Walker (as opposed to Man City Kyle) was a very good defender but never a great one because he gave the ball away in our third far too often.
Don’t agree with that at all. Although Neville was a bellend he was a very good player indeed. Carragher was a good solid player but nothing overly special imvho.
He could also cross a ball. People forget because obviously when you have Beckham next to you your going to let him do it but when needed Neville could play a killer ball. He was a class player. But he talks a load of biased narrative driven bollacks.
