VectisSaint

Of course, having not played a pro game since last season (except PL2) we would sign him and he would walk straight into the team for a semi-final. It really makes you wonder what planet some people inhabit.

Les says a lot of stuff.

Bad: Wigan's second, A ugust 2012 (Kone). Appalling error when we were pushing for an equaliser late on to get back in the game. This was the time when he was prone to errors like this quite regularly, much like Yoshida is supposed to be now. The days when many on here thought he was rubbish and would gladly have seen him sold (the days that many seem to have forgotten about now). Good: Many good games, especially in the last 3 seasons.

Actually Stephens at least probably is the long term answer, that's why he is still here and being developed. He's not the short term answer, perhaps that's what you meant. Yoshida is both, though I would hope we have someone else lined up as well.

I find it hard to go along with this view. Andy Townsend said he had a deal sorted, because footballers don't hand in transfer requests if they haven't. When I questioned this wisdom I was told that he (Townsend) was the expert because he was an ex pro and that tits on message boards cannot possibly know more than Andy Townsend. [incidentally, in case of doubt, I am not calling you a tit]

Liverpool are winning :-) Match thread these days really don't have anything that gives anyone any idea of what is happening.

Would be interesting. Total lack of leaders. Who would be Captain? I suppose Gawd help us, it would be JWP. The only other potential on field leader there is Yoshida. Once you take VvD, Fonte, Davis and Romeu out of the team there is no one left that has the leadership qualities needed on the pitch.

Oh dear Whitey, clearly you have been spending too much time deciding how many cavalrymen will be killed by kicks from horses each year, rather than watching games. All four goals against Spurs for example were savable (that's not to say Forster should have saved all four but an average PL keeper would have got to one or two of them). Ironically a lot of people on here blame Forster for the Burnley goal which cost us 2 points last weekend, when in fact it was one of the few this season which he really didn't have much chance with because of the deflection (though some argue with a modicum of sense that his starting position was not the best). The metrics gathered in the OPTA Stats that are being used as the basis of the analysis being argued may not be statistically significant to a statistician, but they are an indicator that what most people are observing (that Forster makes very few saves) is borne out by the metrics to an extent. What you cannot use these metrics for really is to say categorically that Forster is the worst. The metrics indicate that he is the worst this season (and second worst since the stats began, a few years ago) but in truth the difference between his metrics and those of Bravo for instance and some of the others at the bottom end of that scale, are minute and therefore not statistically significant (the difference between Bravo and Forster is less that 1%). But to try to dismiss the basic metric (shots save against shots not saved) on the grounds that the sample is not statistically significant is pushing it a bit. It will be interesting to the figures again at the end of the season when the number of games will have almost doubled. The basic point is that at present any shot on target has almost as much chance of resulting in a goal as being saved by Fraser (46% vs 54%) which is a fair indication of someone not doing their job very well. The interesting stat to me is that this is a trend for keepers in the PL over the last few years. Is this because the standard of keepers has fallen, or is it because strikers are better, or what? We are seeing less saves in the PL these days on average than we were a few years ago. Personally I don't think it is the former, not when we have keepers such as De Gea, Cech, Lloris and Courtois, unless it is the huge drop off of quality once you take these out of the equation. Incidentally arguing that the quality of strikes makes the metrics insignificant is really weak, the quality also applies to the shots saved. Some of the ones Forster is able to count as saves this season have been absolute dollies, but these still count as saves.

No, wasn't joking But admittedly I did mix up the BBC article with the Guardian article read earlier which showed that Bravo wasn't the worst. That was Forster, almost the worst in the history of the PL Stats (2nd only). https://www.theguardian.com/football/who-scored-blog/2017/jan/17/claudio-bravo-worst-goalkeeper-premier-league-manchester-city Last season he was 3rd best. Something has gone wrong, perhaps the rumour of him carrying an injury is correct.

Because they were trying to make the point of how bad Bravo is. Then they realised that there was someone worse. They left him off because otherwise the impact of their point would be diminished. Forster has the second worst saves per on target shots since records began apparently.

No surprise to those who have watched him this season. England's No 1, not even England's No 5 or 6 at the moment. A good few of the saves he has made have been very straightforward. As for McCarthy who knows, should have recovered from hamstring by now. But news from the Club is as ever deafening, mustn't let anyone know.

This is about JWP. No idea who you're on about.

Well, I would argue that any tit knows more about transfers than Andy ****ing Townsend. Even you. Just because he's an ex pro (and former Saint even though he is in denial about the latter) doesn't mean he knows how things are working with Fonte, things have changed a helluvalot in the 20 years or so since he retired. I wouldn't have made a point if you had quoted anyone else that I can think of by the way.

Ah the old chestnut, no one who posts on a forum (other than you of course) knows anything about football. We look forward to your next expert comment. Quoting a tit like Townsend says it all really.

It will probably actually have the opposite effect in truth. The big clubs will have even more money to spend on players from the selling clubs like us, paying silly amounts for players that do not attract the absolute top money now.

Andy Townsend. Must be right if that tit says so.

More importantly it was also the game where Ronald changed the system to have 3 CBs, a tactical change that he eventually had to make to arrest the slide. The change was a great success but did not endear Koeman to the powers that be.

Absolutely certain it wasn't given that Pardew was manager at the time.

He's also given up playing football and is now singing/playing in a band.

Luke Shaw. Great win tonight, frustrating it wasn't more when it so easily could have been.

Not a problem at all, they show themselves to be tw_ats (as opposed to making someone look like) far more often as most sensible people on here recognise.

Excellent the sooner you are gone the better. Don't forget to take the king of wit and wisdom, the self proclaimed intelligentsia, Whelk, with you. Welcome back Bearsy.

Think its been obvious for a while, because it means both Fonte and Les can be seen as being truthful. He has almost certainly had 2 offers. One was a pay rise and the second was an extension (it could have been the other way round that's not important). But he hasn't been offered both together. Man U were certainly after him in the Summer, but they aren't now, and that's why Fonte has probably shot himself in the foot. Don't think he would go to Palace (or anyone else outside the Top 6 in England), and China seems to be a disappearing destination. Unless Benfica are prepared to take him (or Porto or Sporting) I think he may well still be here on 1st Feb with some egg on his face.

Can't decide from Claude's comments whether he had an operation or whether there was a problem with how his knee operates. Trouble with Franglais. 3 weeks, strange that's the time roughly till Morocco's last group game. Wish someone would help Claude out with the Transfer Mercator thing.

It is a lame excuse because it was known before the season started and Puel was appointed. The Conte situation is not comparable, Chelsea knew (and crucially understood) exactly what fixtures they had and realised that he had the time to coach his methods. But dear old Les brought in a coach that wanted to introduce different methods knowing full well that he would not have the time to do that coaching (allegedly). If this is genuinely the case (and I don't believe it anyway) it just shows poor judgement on Les' behalf. Is any one debating the fact Puel has not had as much time to coach as other managers? I'm certainly not, simply that it was known before the season started. If lack of coaching time was a serious factor then it was a mistake to bring someone in who needed to do that in a season when we knew we would not have that luxury. I don't believe it is/was such a critical factor and so using it now is just a lame excuse.