Graffito

There’s a small part of me that kind of gets why witless jack, who should get the sack, pulled that twat’s hair.

I think that’s wrong. As I understand it, the goal was disallowed because Armstrong made an attempt to play the ball. Therefore, had he not made an attempt to play the ball the goal would have been allowed. In other words, Armstrong’s run and his position (the point sad git has made) are relevant factors only insofar as he attempted to play the ball. The decision may be within the letter of the law but it’s complete nonsense. The ball was behind armstrong. No way does that affect the keeper’s ability to defend his goal. Common sense has gone out of the window with some of these laws and their interpretation.

Robbed by VAR. How on earth can anyone reasonably argue that Armstrong’s vain flick at a ball that’s gone behind him impact the defending or scoring of that goal?

Which gives me the opportunity to say sesquipedalian on here.

That was shit or bust. It’s now stick or twist.

Vouch for that. After many seasons of attending homes games and most away matches I cannot for personal reasons, for this season only I hope, attend matches. So I find myself fucking stuck in here. It’s like being in hospital. Totally nuts.

Dugouts dicked. Toffees tonked. When the wheels come off call the AA. A win at last. Have a pint everyone.

Whereas Archer touched the ball 5 times in the first half. Why play a centre forward if you’re not going to give him the ball (I know he’s tried to play without one). Archer’s not Haaland but he’s a decent enough finisher given half a chance.

Watching that mess was a thoroughly dismal experience. Virtually zero creativity. Stoke had a couple of kids in defence yet how often did saints put any decent balls into the box. They get into our box on a couple of occasions and panic stations from “premier league” defenders defending like schoolboys.

The vast majority of penalties are scored so surely not that surprising.

Didn’t get any laughs so not exactly a belter then. Or maybe you’re making it up as you go along. I suggest you stick to moaning about football chants, that’s a serious business.

I can think of a few posters I’d like to clap down a tunnel.

Well that’s the difference between fact (saints won) and speculation (how many might saints have won by with a different approach). We’ll never know with speculation because it’s, well….speculation. Surely we can only go with the facts.

Take your point about the number of passes. But it wasn’t of course an enforced change. The move started in our penalty area. We moved the ball quicker. Sometimes that makes all the difference. Good goal wasn’t it.

Yet the winning goal in the play off final was a 12 pass move that started in Saints penalty area. Just saying. I think this idea that there was some enforced change of tactics that led magically to positive results is overdone. Basically what happened was that McCarthy booted it long occasionally because he’s not comfortable passing the ball under pressure.

Possession football is the antithesis of good football? Really?

That’s just not credible. Martin’s primary objective is winning matches. He sees his possession based football as means to that end not an end in itself. Currently it’s failing which is why many of us would like to see more pragmatism, failing which he’ll be replaced. He knows this.

That’s a quote from Guardiola in 2011. Martin endorses it but he didn’t say it.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2024/oct/14/is-it-naive-for-a-promoted-side-to-play-possession-football-in-the-premier-league?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other When we win, the game model seems good and is not questioned. But bear in mind, we won’t always win. Then doubts will come. That is the moment when we will have to trust the model more than ever because the temptation to move away from it will be very strong.

Highlighted. This is exactly right. I like possession football but it comes down to quality on the ball. We don’t have it, especially at the back. Remains to be seen whether the recent additions improve matters.

Wtf. Why do we watch football?

Get a bucket hat. You’ll be recognised as an Englishman the world over in a bucket hat.

Yeah I’m bored of all this Mara talk. Let’s talk about his mum.

If your referring to the fourfoorTwo analysis, that’s not what I took from it. What I think it’s saying is that a combination of selection and tactics did not suit how Kane plays. In other words, no rashford or sterling who like to go beyond kane when he drops deep and who stretch play and create space, rather we had Bellingham, saka, foden who like ball to feet. In which case, play Watkins who runs in behind and creates space (England’s goal).

Really good that. Thanks for posting.