CanadaSaint

I think they won the toss and picked ends.

And I think he'll play even less after that. MP's a smart cookie and I don't think it will be lost on him that his presence disrupted us far more than it helped us. I'm just shocked that he even dressed him for Stoke.

After watching Ashley Cole against Newcastle today, when he looked both physically and mentally slow, I don't think Chelsea will be waiting for it to get much worse. Meanwhile, Shaw looks good against virtually every kind of opponent and in pretty much every third of the pitch. So much so that his age is seldom mentioned any more. Unless they have their eyes on someone else, or the MP/Mourinho relationship helps us out, I'm expecting them to go full-bore for Shaw in January.

1. I'm pretty sure that Foy was the homer POS who gave the penalty against Fox at Newcastle last year for far less than that. 2. That game made it clear, not that it was in much doubt IMO, that Ramirez is talented but far too lightweight and uncommitted for the way we play. I'm amazed that MP put him on the bench for a game at Stoke and even more amazed that he brought him on.

I've always wondered what it felt like to be a gynecologist. Thanks for posting it.

In fairness I don't think Usain Bolt would stick around if Lawro beat him in the hundred meters.

If it was down to a lot of the folks on here we'd still be searching for chemistry next March. We've only played four - of which we could easily have won three. We have three high profile new players whose presence changes a lot of things, and our vitally important full back duo are back playing. We're gradually improving, and we created at least four clear-cut chances against WHU but came up against a very hot keeper. So I can't for the life of me understand why on earth we'd start chopping and changing now.

I don't think there's anyone in the game whose opinion I respect more than Gary Neville. I hated him as a player but I love him as a balanced commentator who's willing to go against the grain and who's not caught up in the Big Four/Big Name adulation of his peers. His match analyses and observations put virtually all others to shame. So that was a cracking read.

Nutshell. I'd be inclined to add the fact that Ramirez for Lallana removed any chance that we could compensate. Wanyama did his job for the most part, but without two of his immediate pass options on the flanks.

On the good side, Rickie's chances of starting/coming on are improving big-time. On the bad side, the injuries to starters are really mounting and the chances of England getting beaten are rising with them. The fickle media who were singing his praises two weeks ago could be cutting him and everyone else to ribbons.

As you get older you'll hopefully realize that people who don't share your opinion are not necessarily stupid. Within weeks of him arriving here, if he ever does, this forum (including "WTF Delldays") will be saying he has tons of skill but his final ball is often very poor. That doesn't represent any kind of improvement, never mind a "massive" one. All of this knee-jerkery is happening because our two fullbacks - vital to our system - didn't play yesterday. Just my opinion.

Surprised at the enthusiasm for Lennon. Bags of pace, loads of trickery, crap final ball. Net improvement - zero.

How can you talk about "upsetting the balance" when we're only three games in? And sitting on four points?

I'd give one nut to see Ince come in but we've not even been linked have we?

A very poorly managed game from MP, although being without Clyne and Shaw is a huge blow under our system. Credit to Norwich - a nice side with the pace we lack. I've bitten my tongue about Ramirez, preferring to settle for "he doesn't suit our style." Now, though, I'm convinced that he's really not a very good player - lightweight, self-centered and lacking in passion. And he doesn't suit our style. We lost a lot when he came on.

A very poorly managed game from MP, although being without Clyne and Shaw is a huge blow under our system. Credit to Norwich - a nice side with the pace we lack. I've bitten my tongue about Ramirez, preferring to settle for "he doesn't suit our style." Now, though, I'm convinced that he's really not a very good player - lightweight, self-centered and lacking in passion. And he doesn't suit our style. We lost a lot when he came on.

Pochettino's supposedly close relationship with Mourinho could be very helpful.

If you like a good giggle at a piece of supreme irony, try reading this: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2401978/Graham-Poll-Commentators-need-responsibility-say-refs.html Unless they changed it after I submitted a comment, Poll's article - a claim that TV commentators are often wrong when they criticize refereeing decisions - includes the following: I'm not too sure what "replays" Poll was looking at, or even which game, but I do agree that his position should be in jeopardy after getting that so spectacularly wrong.

There are lots of pros and cons but I'd certainly be inclined to use a near-post defender against teams like Sunderland that habitually hit killer in-swingers. Let's not forget that we were nearly "done" again a few minutes later when Boruc just managed to scramble another Larsson corner away just before it crossed the line. But, on the goal, we had six defenders sucked to beyond the near post to compete with three Sunderland players. That will leave you short of markers much more than using one or two men on the posts.

It's really surprising in this online age that there isn't a much-visited and influential site on which fans can rate referees. All I could find was http://www.ratetheref.net, which doesn't seem that well used. I found this quite interesting once I got past the propaganda dimensions: http://www.premierleague.com/en-gb/news/news/2013-14/aug/riley-pleased-with-improved-refereeing-standards.html But things can't be that good if referees like Mason and Friend just seem to go on, week after week, without any sign of improvement or reassignment to a lower league.

I really like what he brings to the table, other than the petulance and histrionics, and I agree with the underlined bit. However, what we've built here is a very strong commitment to the team ethic, with a big emphasis on what's best described by that old chestnut "There's no 'I' in team." Wanyama slotted right into it, but it could take quite a while for NP to integrate Osvaldo into the squad if Dani is slow to recognize that he also has to integrate himself into the squad and the self-discipline that's a big part of it. This isn't a case of the squad building itself around Osvaldo. Having said that, I don't think it helped Osvaldo to have Rodriguez on the pitch, because that took away a lot of the space that he likes to attack.

One thing that struck me today was the animated touchline discussion he had with Wanyama and (I think it was) JWP. Methinks he can hablar Inglés much better than he'd like us to think.

Wes, he wasn't Lovren's man - he was too busy marking the big guys towards the front post. You can't waste someone like Lovren on a midget. I think he was JWP's man, but I was less than impressed with Boruc as well. It wasn't a clanger by him but I've seen him come for much tougher cross balls than that one.

Mason and Friend are, by far, the two worst referees in the PL, but I think Osvaldo deserved his booking - it was a rather nasty, unnecessary little ankle clip. And he's lucky he didn't get a second yellow - you could almost see Mason thinking about it. Osvaldo's class shone through but he's going to be a marked man for the refs inside three games if he goes on like this.

I think his feet were onside but his body, leaning forward, was offside. Tight decision but you win some, you lose some. Yes, JWP was superb - again - but did anyone else think he was the one who lost his mark for the goal? And Chambers seems to be acclimatizing to this level very fast.