egg

However you cut it, the only people in those boats who just want to be safe and secure are the kids. The adults all left war / genocide / persecution behind many countries ago, and are seeking to land on these shores for economic reasons. Sure, the French make life bloody uncomfortable for them, but they've been through numerous safe countries before arriving there.

Agreed. Lock stock in my top 10 of all time. Only 1 part of the film ages it...and did they get the bag?

That's a big claim. What's the basis of it?

Close, that was from Snatch. Great line, great movie.

Can't speak for others, but for me the fact that he left us set up to get battered, which we did.

Their 3 in midfield were able to do what they wanted both with the ball and movement off it. Another body in there reduces that. If, as you say, a back 5 gives more protection than a back 4, care to explain why we were better in the second half with less defenders? You've said above that someone can't possibly know the inner workings of Ralph's mind but here you are saying that you do, and also you are essentially saying that he lied when he admitted the that he got his tactics wrong. The mind boggles.

Let's see how he goes. He's no Dan N'lundulu, but he's a million miles away from the young Dan Ings that people suggest he is imo. For our budget he was worth a punt so I don't see him as a bad signing as such, but I'm not sure he's got much room for improvement.

It's as simple as this - if you concede the midfield, you're inviting one way traffic and leave the defence to deal with the floods of attacks, but if you can compete in midfield, those waves reduce. We'd never have won the midfield, but setting up as attack against defence was mental. Anyways, why are you still defending tactics that Ralph admits were the wrong ones? I know you're a fan of his, but this attempt is more than a bit odd.

Yep. He's not remotely cultured - hectic is a great description. He's got pace, movement, energy, but players need that plus touch, turn and technique to become a good top flight player.

That was ridiculous. The only surprise was that it took so long for them to go down to 6. There's a pic somewhere with Benfica lining up with 7 across the front. Farce.

Yep. There's not much to analyse about his admission other than he accepts he messed it up; and his tactics involved a line of defenders with no wide protection, two in midfield against 3, a forward dropping off and looking a bit lost, and two other forwards feeding off whatever scraps the others could feed them when we had the ball. Only on planet Ralph was that ever a good idea.

That formation never had any prospect of competing, mainly because it conceded midfield by being a man short. That's not hindsight, I and others said it in the build up thread as it was obvious what would happen. The hilarious part of you defending yesterdays tactics is that Ralph isn't even defending them. I expected to lose yesterday, but I didn't expect Ralph to hand them the midfield, thus the game, and that's exactly what he did.

Yep. I'm not sure how anyone can't see that today was a shocker tactically. 2 in midfield against their 3 was never going to end well.

He got it wrong, pure and simple. He gave away the midfield, Adams as a kind of false 9 went as badly as you'd expect, 3 at the back went badly. Staggering that you defend that tactical clusterfuck.

Give it a fucking rest mate. People don't have to explain every opinion they have.

Agreed. We'll be more direct I think, balls into the channels for the 3 up top, also expect to see them coming deep to almost play as 10's and play on the turn. Really interesting line up.

The Dutch managed it.

Yep, "in you come, and do a little test when you get a chance". Crazy.

Brave is the kindest word I can think of. If ever there was a game for 3 in the middle it was today.

Possibly...but not sure why you assume that's an ego caused by an agent. Could well be poor man management.

Want to jump to any more conclusions?!

Sutton to beat Barrow in league 2 looks pretty nailed on to me.

Not at all. You're supporting a vile killer. I'm not.

Having a gun means there's a prospect of using it, but that's different to "looking for action". It's a fine ish line though.

Bollox did he. He's a family man, and can't point to what was apparently said in evidence. I don't believe a word of it.