verlaine1979

A significant number of racists feel that being confronted with their racism has made them more angry towards people of other races. No sh*t.

Redmond never seems to back himself to beat a fullback on the outside. If he can't drift across, he just stops and passes off square or backwards. Djenepo was hit and miss yesterday, but at least when he was one on one he tried to get by his marker several times, and we had a couple of good cut backs as a result. Redmond was isolated against his full back several times, but never even attempted to beat him.

Think that's at least five cheap giveaways by Armstrong in the first 40 mins - he has to go at h/t. Added nothing in attack so far and a liability in possession.

Three times now. Make that four. Not up to speed at all.

Keep Djenepo, possibly swap Armstrong for Walcott on the right. All Redmond did when he came on against Brighton was lean back and smack one miles over the bar, as usual.

Nobody said anything about what all footballers feel or believe - nor is it particularly important whether they're genuinely fighting for racial equality or acting prudently because of the weight of moral expectation. What is clear is that, when asked, I've yet to see a single one of them explain that they're kneeling because they are committed Marxists. And if footballers were obliged to be honest about what they think at all times, I'd imagine a great many more of them would have to explain that they think the vast majority of the paying customers are fat, ungrateful c*nts. Let's be thankful for a little of that performative civility.

All I've done is point to Millwall's rich history of violent intolerance - feel free to counter by pointing to the unusually high incidence of PhDs in political science among their fanbase.

I'm sure Millwall fans, with their long history of tolerance and non-violence, were merely protesting the intrusion of politics into the sacred apolitical realm of sport. That's definitely not the position requiring mental gymnastics to reach here.

He was slack in possession and slow on his feet against Newcastle, but a goal inevitably erases criticism. He's been below par for several games now, and looks like he needs a rest/a rethink.

As above, this is BS. Ings prospered because he's a technically good footballer with extremely good finishing. Long was just another body on the field.

He's crap, has always been crap and is an incredibly frustrating player to watch, as his boot seems to be where chances go to die. As for being bigged up by his teammates, it's hardly likely that Ings would do an interview stating that he'd like to play with a better partner who could create chances for him with, y'know, accurate passes and such, rather than just by allegedly scaring defenders so much that they forget that Ings is on the pitch. As someone said above, at £50k per week for two years, I'd much rather the club had taken a punt on an unknown quantity from another league, rather than lumping it on the known quantity of no goals whatsoever.

He explicitly said instead of Long? Long is completely spent - he doesn't look like he has a clue what he's supposed to be doing. His substitute appearances now consists of one pointless attempt to close down the keeper within the first minute of coming on (just to show that fabled effort), followed by 10-20 minutes of not even noticing him being on the pitch.

When is Redmond likely to be back? Armstrong has been poor for three games in a row now, giving up possession far too easily and looking leaden-footed. Any chance we could play with both Redmond and Djenepo when both are fit with Armstrong dropped?

We are good at pressing, but too many of our players are no good at playing when pressed. United turned up and contrary to expectations, pressed energetically from the very beginning. Our goals came against the run of play and they eventually just ground us down. Adams did well holding the ball up and Djenepo worried them, but the rest of the team looked stale and out of ideas.

Spot on. It's not his game, so what was he thinking? Plus, goal aside, he was cack against Newcastle.

So needless from Armstrong. There was an easy offload and we'd have been on the break.

Bednarek and McCarthy the only real weak links in our possession game. I never feel confident that we're going to keep the ball when play goes through either of them.

Means its unlikely to be a mental illness issue, considering all the work being done to destigmatize depression in sport. You're not exactly filling us with confidence that he's going to play a long-term part at the club by alluding to a personal misfortune so terrible that it cannot and should not ever become public knowledge.

I'd be interested to see a map of where Redmond's take-on attempts occur on the pitch. My guess would be most of it is around the half way line or immediately after throw ins, when he's quite good at shifting the ball around a defender from a standing start. He's much less effective when carrying the ball over distances bigger than 5-10 yards, especially when pace is involved (as, contrary to forum wisdom, he's not got much straight line speed).

Walcott's control is still very good, which enables him to turn more quickly than most of our attackers. His pace is obviously not what it once was, but several times against Newcastle he picked the ball up centrally and advanced to the edge of the box, driving the defense backwards and allowing our wide players to make runs. He's a different threat to Ings, and certainly won't score as many, but I do think he adds a new dimension to how we build attacks through the middle, which could unsettle teams who think they have us worked out.

Agreed - his technique is okay, but not nearly good enough to make up for his lack of acceleration, top speed and strength. Tadic was also pretty slow, but his control and awareness are miles better, which is why he's starring against the likes of Madrid in the Champion's League, and Elyounoussi is starring against Motherwell in Scotland.

Why would a club breaking even or making transfer profits find itself with a vastly elevated wage bill compared to the rest of the league? As I've said, Wolves spent a large amount of money to get promoted in the two years after their takeover, but they appear to be the exception rather than the rule.

You're just way off in your estimate of how much teams have to spend to get promoted. For instance, in the five years prior to promotion, Leeds made a net transfer profit of over £14m. In contrast, Wolves spent pretty big after their takeover, but their pre-promotion transfer outlay was still under £60m net, and 1/3 of that was buying Neves who is now worth around £50m just by himself. If anyone is spending anything close to £100m to get promoted, they are the outlier, not the likes of Sheff Utd.

Thing is, you don't have to spend as much. It doesn't cost £100m to get to the PL from the Championship, and once you do get promotion, your spending spree to stay up is funded (for now) by the vastly increased TV revenue and the safety net of parachute payments. You also seem to imply that football club owners (outside of Man U, Arsenal and a few others with massively elevated commercial incomes) earn money from their clubs' annual revenues - they don't. If you're trying to make money from buying a non-elite football club, the only game in town is asset appreciation, in which case there's almost no value in a club like Saints unless you're planning a tilt at the CL, which would be VASTLY more expensive than trying to take a Championship club into the PL.

Haha - happy to take the dings from this one.