Dangermouth

Would I take Koeman back? No. Given the state of the league at that time and especially the first season when we were still in the top 3 in January (I think), he grossly under-achieved. Had he not we would have had what Leicester had or been much closer and been set up much better to kick on. I don't rate him as a manager; I did like the fact that he was a strict disciplinarian and he probably wouldn't play Redmond/Tadic/anyone else who was playing utterly ****.

I wanted Viera before he went to Man City New York. Think he'll turn out to be a damn good manager.

I went to the Everton game. Had 0-0 written all over it with us being a bit better in parts until we conceded and then it was obvious to everyone we weren't going to score. The same applies to the Burnley game. Both games were crap with nothing to write home about and pedestrian, organised, functional pretty **** teams. In neither game were we demonstrably better nor were we actually any good at all. Having looked at our fixtures I have started to lean very heavily towards "Allardyce in", which shows how dire I view our chances.

Rose - he actually moves like a goalie and dives and all VVD - fastest defender, best coverer, gobbiest Stephens Hoedt - wide when attacking, compress when not. All 3 defenders can carry the ball Romeu - rotates with Hojbjerg and/or Boufal if he goes forward, can also cover either full back if only one goes up Cedric Hojbjerg Boufal Bertrand the middle 2 rotate with each other, the two on the outsides rotate with each other, the three in the middle rotate with each other (behind and in front; I like fluid teams) Gabbiadini can rotate and float with the two behind him, can move up with Austin or move away and past him so form a normal 2 or part of an attacking 4/5 (as if MP would be so adventurous). Austin doesn't go wider than the 18 yard box. He can do the target man role a bit if it's played right.

I voted for the goal that I thought was the best, isn't that the point of the thing? It did just happen to be Boufal's but I did look at them all and some of them were pretty good and some of them weren't really that much although the odds do seem to favour a Man City player.

These 3 will or should do ok. I actually think of those 3 Stephens is the worst. Of the others still to be convinced by Slattery but I've not seen much of him and he is a bit young for the under 23s. The rest will make it in the game I think but either have yet to show enough for me to think they're top tier standard or have shown enough for me to think they aren't. Part of it is due to the fact that we did seem to like blonde midgets at one point and you know they'll struggle with leagues and players where a physical presence (e.g. Lemina) is a prerequisite. On the whole it does seem that the academy has dropped markedly since Prost left and if people are saying that it's because the kids aren't very good then surely the strategy should be just to get in good footballers and leave the coaching to our coaching teams (who have still to convince me they actually have anything other than badges i.e. they're bulk standard coaches the numbers of which are probably in the majority). Yes, I am underwhelmed by Jaidi but I think if we don't see a marked improvement in two years then we can say the horse has bolted and perhaps we need to start again.

The TV companies will cream themselves over any old ****e. They have done for years now. City are 'big' because they spend money like it comes out of the ground in a hole and never stops. Our trajectory was upwards, there was little reason why we couldn't continue to do as we had as despite what many say this league really isn't a particularly good or difficult one and actually probably exists as it does because of the lack of decent players overall. Stoke and WBA fans can say what they want; arguably the former have a much better history than we do. Had City not been bought by the Middle East they'd be nothing. It's very unlikely and I hope it doesn't occur, but were we to experience the same we could do the same. Furthermore, the arguments are not about being 'big' per se, but about producing entertaining football, enjoying the game, the play, the match day itself as that not an 'experience', about being competitive and that against everyone and other things. If we want we could compare ourselves with Newcastle but they really do have potential to be what we aspire to and are easily a bigger club (with a pretty bare trophy cabinet) than we are.

I do think you're right and had Boufal not scored the goal he did no doubt he would be warming the bench for most of the next 6 months.

Let's see now. Ignoring the fans the club's stated position vis a vis success in the sporting competition that is the Premier League and not forgetting other ones such as the FA cup is that its intention is to do what you have said we will not do and look to then augment its resources and capabilities to further enhance its ability to compete at the top of the league. So good old Les Reed himself has pretty much said the opposite of your conclusion. The caveat was that it would take a lot for that to happen but such things such as the arrival of the Gao family are yet another suggestion that that stated aim is not considered to be one that has been cast aside. I do think, from reading this forum, that many and perhaps most of the fanbase would like to see scintillating football, a large measure of success - it is better to be the belle of the ball than the lowly drinks server, no? - which may very well not be winning titles (although that was at the time Cortese's intention; he remarked on how bare the trophy cabinet was I recollect), but at least is continually being the best of those teams that do not have limitless funds to simply buy their success and probably take some pride in the academy and its homegrown products. Overall, I'd say that was far more down to earth than, say, the PSG fan. We are also not defeatist: the established order is one to be challenged and beaten; hence Leicester's popularity and this is a competitive sport. "Accepting our place" (whatever that might be) is to have all but given up and I can think of few, if any, (worthwhile) sports fans and participants who would even think like that, let alone accept it. Otherwise their time would be better spent reading a dictionary. There's a typo: 'there' rather than the correct 'their'. As for a journey to division one: it depends. Would you rather be a faceless nothing club like e.g. WBA, Stoke, whoever and just be happy to take whatever scraps are thrown your way so you can brag (and con yourself) that you're competitive? My view is that that makes you a plastic/prawn sandwich kind of person. The alternative might have its undoubted failings, but as many of these are perceptual and so can be ignored by those who like football (and the way the team's played for quite a while is pretty atrocious now, isn't it?) all we would be would be a club that just went up and down the leagues and, as is now still probably the case, for the most part would be ignored by most people but the fans might well get a better experience both in terms of game play, fan interaction, good away days and less drivel from the marketing department but which would be a club whose fans had more exciting and interesting experiences overall. As for the size of the club, Man City aren't a big club; they're a rich club. If we win enough I'm sure we can do comparably in some ways and there really aren't that many 'big clubs' any more. In the past of course there were more chances for the less large clubs to do well, although that would be sporadic so there's no reason why we can't do more as a club and we as fans can't expect and hope for more than we currently get. I also think there are far more interesting and exciting teams to watch than Barcelona and think that in terms of entitlement we currently get (as fans) what we are entitled to because the club seems to have dropped a number of ******** over a period of time.

His feet aren't that quick and the most important bit (between his ears) is still living in 1970.

I'll disagree with you (and Puel and Pellegrino and I don't give **** if they have the top coaching badge and have played footy at the top of the professional game from what we've seen whatever good that might have done them has been lost on their reliance on a 'system' which indicates they don't have a farging clue about football) on this one. He's got far more football nous than Tadic and Redmond combined and if played properly would be a good asset. Notice how often we play so very far apart from each other, especially in midfield, so that any type of intelligent combination ('give and go') play is very difficult to pull off. That should be obvious even to many a fan who doesn't get anything at all about football. You, actually, do. They may not like him for other reasons and I'm not one to 'build a team' around him because that's a stupid idea at any time as for one thing all you need to do is put Martin Keown on MLT and the team disappear but we and he in particular did play football not 'coached ball' for a while and that is what is both needed and is more fun to watch (and play in). I've already said he won't be one of the very best players going but by virtue of his ability and the lack of ability of many others in our team he should be played in order to make things happen that otherwise wouldn't. So tell me (bit of a trick question, but so what): JWP or Boufal. You have to pick one to start for the rest of the season, which one? Me? Boufal.

Some thoughts from start to finish. What's with the Sky bulls hit where the players pose 'gangsta-stylee' and look like to$$ers? As soon as I saw the midfield I thought there was no point having forwards on: too lightweight and going to get overrun. When I saw the position of the free-kick I thought JWP was bound to score. Thankfully Davis got him out of a hole and got him an 'assist' (hooray). We seemed to have ignored the 'play by numbers' game and actually made forward passes and all. Good (ish). Only that because we didn't really do much with them. It's clear Bertrand prefers playing with Boufal than Redmond. I decided that any team that finishes below Brighton is almost certainly relegated and that if that is the Premier League it's now bordering on league one standard: there really wasn't much football talent/nous/skill/style on show. I watched out for the pressing game: nope, not at all. Looked like 5 year olds chasing the ball in a headless fashion at times. But. But because Brighton couldn't pass the ball went to one of us or got intercepted so I guess that the post made elsewhere about 'pressing' is more bs. Marks out of 10. Forster. Last time I gave someone a zero, people took umbrage. In my book, turning up and wearing a green shirt and a scowl does not get you marks. Doing more than expected gets you over a 4 or 5 out of ten an doing as expected gets you a 4 or a 5. I would have expected a cone to save that header from Murray. But to keep people happy I'll just ask for Forster to do the decent thing and emigrate to the moon. Or Portsmouth. Cedric. He's average. 5/10 because he smiled in his pre-match 'gangsta photo'. We need a new (decent) right-back. VVD. 6/10 to show there's no hard feelings and he did laugh when he got the ball in his stomach from a shot/cross. Obviously a decent player. Can understand why he'd like to have some more in the team with him. Hoedt. I've heard he kind of 'expects' to play. He's not actually that good from what I've seen and personally I wouldn't have bought him. He pushed Murray (good point, he showed some passion) but he made a slightly akward tackle which a better defender wouldn't have and wouldn't have had to do. 5/10 overall. Bertrand. Did ok. He's good so I expect more from him. 6/10 partly because he didn't look permanently ****ed off this game. JWP. Not. A. Footballer. 5/10. No more to say about him; he's just patently the antithesis of Boufal (who is a footballer). Davis. Yep, you can see he's starting to slow down/lose it a bit. Would look to replace him next season. 6/10 because he reacted quickest and scored the goal and had a nice celebration prepared. Ah, sod it. He can have a 7 just for that. Romeu. Ok. Still not at his best, not sure why. 6/10. Tadic. Waste of space mostly. As always. He should go back to Dutch football. 5/10 because he did a couple of ok-ish things but he's really not that good and it shows. Boufal. I saw Eric Black coaching Pochettino on the sideline in the first half. Then later I saw Redmond about to come on and assumed it might be in place of the largely anonymous Tadic or JWP if we were going for it. Cannot for the life of me see why our patently best player who did make things happen was taken off. 6/10 because he did well. Which I'll increase to a 7 because he was by and large our best player. The team performance was overall poor but he has a lot more that he can do so I'm going to mark him hard and expect him to do it. I think he should start (and probably stay on). Gabbiadini. The invisible man who plays by himself. All that talent wasted because our team set-up is ****e, etc. 6/10 because he did try (always does), keeps making the runs etc and probably feels very lonely. Might want to try some Boss aftershave. Redmond. Please find another club. Long/Hojbjerg. Not on long enough. What's the point in giving players 10 minutes or less? 20 minutes minimum. Pellegrino. Now I liked Puel up until Christmas and the way we left the EL with our tail shoved up our backside. Then I disliked his management and got very fed up with him very quickly. I do like the fact that Pellegrini does think (or appear to) about everything and gives it consideration. I dislike the fact that he either cannot find the answer(s) or is fixed in his view of a way of playing (because, why? Why play like robots? This isn't football manager!). Someone else mentioned BFS somewhere. If he can get us playing like his Bolton team did, yes please. I understand Huddersfield are looking for someone to help with their scouting; off you go Ross. And take Les with you. I do think they won't be here much longer anyway with the new 'majority partners' and our very probable lack of success. Our only saving grace, as like last year is that this league is starting to resemble other leagues far more than it did before: a few rich/powerful teams who monopolise everything (which is no different) but a load of other teams who are pretty much just 'cannon-fodder' which was not always the case.

Or that the league is poor, we spend too much money on a lot of poor to average players as a league and country and the 'big' clubs do usually manage to buy good players because Man City have bottomles pockets and some of the others aren't too shy to spend a ton either.

Are you saying he's thinking he's thinking when he's not thinking or that he has a genetic predisposition to be risk averse due to low seratonin as measured by his own subjective view in a questionnaire?

Well they're in different counties. Perhaps area just means European Economic Area? In which case I very much look forward to our next derby with Olympiakos and MK Dons' rivalry, sorry 'derby' with Sassuolo. Bit tasty that one. Given the size of England and how it's evolved it seems quite reasonable to restrict the word 'local' to within 30-35 miles. Outside of that they, whoever 'they' are, probably have another team that's closer, have no history or connection, have webbed feet and hands and all the other stuff that means it's just another game against another team. It's probably more of a rivalry than a derby and one, they have a problem with Crystal Palace far more than they do with us even with recent history, two they're a nothing of a club relatively speaking so why would we want to be rivals with something far beneath us that couldn't in any way compete with us? Which is why we no longer have a rivalry with anyone, just a sensible distrust of fish from the East.

Well he's still out and about and doing it so maybe not as there's more than enough to identify and find him, isn't there? Nice to read the youtube comments; he should run for president.

misnomer mɪsˈnəʊmə/ noun noun: misnomer; plural noun: misnomers a wrong or inaccurate name or designation. "‘King crab’ is a misnomer—these creatures are not crustaceans at all" a wrong or inaccurate use of a name or term. "to call this ‘neighbourhood policing’ would be a misnomer" The argument is otherwise ok, but states the obvious and shows that the over-use of the word 'statistics' for 'opinion' almost has become trite. Not that I say that's you and I agree with your post and most of your recent ones. It was just you made such a howler with 'misnoma' that I had to do a double-take on the argument you made and it was annoying to see. Anyway, back to Boufal/Redmond. Play Boufal. Give him some games and decent game time. We know what Redmond can do/does and it hasn't changed much. He wouldn't have scored the goal that Boufal did nor would he have picked out those two passes that Boufal did.

But then he might get down to those shots quicker. And he'd still be a decent size for a keeper too.

WBA were crap and at times we weren't really much better. We did better because we have better players than them but it was quite disorganised and predominantly dull as anything. Can see why Boufal got the man of the match award because his goal was good and his pass for Austin likewise. Was nice to see Austin sprint for the ball and show those who think he's slow that he isn't. Couldn't understand quite why Redmond kept falling over with his centre of gravity. I was concerned to see Eric Black seeming to be the master tactician. I do wonder if by default, bit by bit, Pellegrino will end up finding out what system and players to play and we'll have more entertaining games and plenty more wins. Liked Boufal's celebration. He has done similar before if you look at some of his previous games in France but yes, we should play him in the middle, drop Tadic who seemed more interested in flopping for a penalty or slowing it all down again and probably play an interesting front 4 of: Long Boufal Gabbiadini Austin

What world? Toytown?

It will be very interesting with many possibilities and, if we're lucky, they'll go down and never come back.

Estimated wind speed is in KMH. Still quite blustery if you're out in it in a wind corridor but would expect a bit less of an effect at the SMS bowl. Think we'll sneak a lucky win. Another dodgy penalty, no doubt.

As no doubt you will have noticed. For the most part the interviews are to an extent stage-managed. We see it all the time, people who have been taught to say the 'right thing' by the PR people, etc. That makes it a charade, not a genuine press conference with intelligent questions and answers and so on. That's the background and the reason for the description. Why interested? Because perhaps there might be something in it that separates it from the norm (as above). We might glean a bit more about the manager, the team's reaction to the result last week and the ongoing problems as regards our turgid football, we might get something of interest and value. Equally, and more likely, we won't. But a quick synopsis would mean that I could skim that, think there was nowt of interest and go back to something else. If there was something of interest, however, I might decide to then go and look it up or bear it in mind or remember it for future use or .... Someone will undoubtedly have watched it live. This means they can tell it both factually and as they see it. For example, last year a number of those whose French was of the requisite standard could (and did) make the comment that the translation of some of the questions and the answers weren't as presented to us and they made the comment that the translator was crap and this influenced the answer Puel gave. I could go on, but I imagine you have the gist of why I asked.

Anyone see the pre-match bull(****)in? Was anything other than the usual platitudes and unimaginative press waffle said?

I'm intrigued. Why did you say that? My view is that if he is allowed a long time at a club he *could* be just what every club is looking for but I don't know enough about him to have a better, more informed view.