egg

This is boring. You've seen my earlier posts on it, and I have said that I appreciate what you meant. I'm not arguing on Ducks behalf, he's a big boy and can do that himself. Imo judging a player on selective stats only tells you half the story. If JWP was the player some on here believe him to be, he'd be playing for one of the big boys and in the Euros. There's a reason why that's not the case.

Yep. Boufal tore that league apart but struggled in a proper league.

Two points : 1. Duck interpreted your words correctly. I appreciate that you meant something else, but his interpretation of your words was correct. 2. To be fair to Duck, he argues the merits of a footballer based on what he sees on a pitch rather than stats focusing on a few select figures.

That's a strange move, a relegation fight in a poor league. Good luck to him nonetheless

We'll have to agree to differ pal. Armstrong will be in our starting eleven when fit.

Stick Armstrong in the middle with Romeu holding, and a fit and on form Ings up top, I'd be very happy that we'll lose no creativity from open play. We'll also have running between the lines which JWP doesn't give us. Talk of Armstrong not making our first eleven is crazy.

You think he's a better player than I do, that's cool. Watch Armstrong with the ball at his feet running at the opposition. JWP can't do that. That's attacking play where Armstrong is better. Judging players on stats alone isn't the way to judge a player. As I say, we have different views. Mine is that he ain't all that.

You said that it all falls apart without him. It does not as we're never without him, he's played every minute. What he does defensively could be done better by Romeu. What he does offensively could be done better by Armstrong. I'm in the he's neat, tidy, great at free kicks, but replaceable camp. I appreciate that's the minority view which is fine with me.

Eh? He's never missing, so I'm not sure what that's based on.

Ditto.

So you're saying that the lad shouldn't have played the ball because there was a player behind the ball? That's not football as I recognise it.

Explain what he was supposed to with his foot after winning the ball?! Trousers is correct. He went for the ball and won it.

If you win the ball, you win the ball. His leg was in a natural position after. It hurt the lad, but not a red for me.

Not for me, the ref has been very trigger happy with the cards. The lad got the ball there, and had no chance of getting his foot out of the way

The

Alarm

He couldn't have complained if he'd been hauled off though. Sure he scored, but he was shit.

Yep. Some people would prefer a 4-3 defeat to a 1-0 win. He's in the results business, not entertainment.

We'll not get a better chance than we've got this year.

Yep, absolutely brilliant. Nice to see and hear a proper ish amount of fans back in an English stadium.

Ha!! Grealish on I had no issue with, it was Saka off. Worked out well in the end though.

Game. Set. Match. Nice.

Yep. That's why pointless back passes are pointless.

What a shit change. Saka was decent. Should have been brave and dragged off Kane. Sterling or even Saka through the middle to give us some movement. Fuck knows who Grealish is expected to pick out.

Or Watkins. Or Ings. We need someone who can lead the line and make runs.