shurlock

Different amounts or structured differently? A lower fee if they don't qualify?

Both Cedric and Pelle's chances were from very tight angles and would have taken sonething v.special or an almighty gaffe from the keeper to go in at the near post (Cedric's had little power behind it). If you want hang things on those chances or the odd glancing header (tight angle, berated by DM) or a shot under pressure from the edge of the box, go ahead, fill your boots. Perhaps Long could have done a bit more with his chance in the first half; but got the ball caught under his feet as he was twisting inside with two players on him. Am sure you can cite the number of chances a team needs to create on average in order to score. You'll know that number is pretty high, especially from the areas of the pitch we worked our limited chances. Tell yourself what you like but we really did not do enough to score, though things might have been different if Mane had stayed on the pitch.

Agree- he tended to be more clinical in his early days - didn't dwell on the ball; but released it early with plenty of zip. That's critical for a player who likes to stand a player up rather than hover and find space in the pockets. Partly, he's struggled as the team has struggled and our buildup has tended to slow down.

Tadic says that he began to experience problems in the second half of the season; whereas his form began to dip in November and December. He also says that it was only the last two months that things got really bad; before that, there were times he felt better, though he probably tried to overdo things as a result.

Tadic took (and missed) penalties and got four assists in a meaningless game (in terms of points contribution and consistency). Lallana also missed large parts of last season. We got an excellent fee for Lallana; he's nowhere near a £25m player (something for which I was criticised at the time for saying). But Lallana isn't really the point. Tadic's 2/3 months of good form is too short to draw any kind of conclusions, especially as teams begin to game-plan for you at some point. It's how a player responds to the extra attention that marks out whether their performances are sustainable.

His dip in form predated his injury; either way, I've been looking forward to see what he can do this season, with a full summer break.

Yep; also ended up taking the longer train service from Copenhagen airport rather than d**king around with replacement buses. If only I had known before.

Ffs. Arriving later and time's a bit tight to go into Herning itself.

Who said we should slag him off? His form is too short to conclude that he's our creative spark or better than 2013/14 vintage Lallana (though some clowns have done just that); its just as ridiculous as calling him a complete bust. Jury's still out, that's all.

No he hasn't shown anything. Three months is no sort of track-record.

They were not decent chances in my book. Mané was running away from goal and would have had to thread a cross on the run past two defenders to Pelle who was on his heels. From memory, the closest their keeper was tested was Wanyama's shot from distance that swerved a bit but was largely down his throat. We also may have had a few other long range shots, including Caulker's header from the edge of the box that padded the stats; whereas Watford should have scored from the free header and a shot-come-cross that Caulker and Soares nearly bundled into their own. Not saying Watford deserved the win - both teams were s***e going forward. But there's a deluded school of thought that believes that as long as we keep things tight, we'll do enough to score because that's somehow inevitable over 90mins of to-and-fro football.

We'll see but I'm sure we run blood tests for all kinds of routine reasons. Nothing needs to be seriously wrong or out of whack to decide to rest a player given how focussed we are on small margins. He was still on the bench, after all. Hopefully it's just that.

Slightly disingenuous coming from someone who regularly reminds posters that success is correlated with spending. It might be that you can unearth the odd diamond at a reduced price. But you generally get what you pay for and we've been spending materially less than we've been generating in transfer fees as a trend.

We did not do enough to win it. We didn't do enough even to create a decent chance. If any team should have won it on your reasoning, it was Watford.

It's all relative. There's still a big difference between selling a left back for £30m and signing one for £10m; or generating £25m for your star midfielder (£28m if you include the Cork money) and spending £13m on their replacements; or buying a right back for £3.5m when you got £10m for one.

As I said months ago, our success last season arguably owed less to our transfer business and more to the parts of the team we hadn't sold off, the elements of continuity starting with the two DMs, Clyne and Fonte. Time is showing there's something in that.

What's the hardman act in aid of, pal? Didn't realise you had a little gathering going and my absence rattled you. It's not something I overthink. More than happy to meet up, though Europa League nights tend to be no good as I go to matches

Switch the 8 and 12 and its finishing 12th and a cup run are better than finishing 8th. Perhaps that was the point...

Finishing 8th and a cup run is better than 12th - who'd have thought it...

Not to mention the nob in the united shirt.

No.

Back from the game, that was f**king dire. When the only exciting thing is Longy charging down a back pass or chasing a defender down the channels, then something's up.

True. Tortuous as it is, I can see how that's different.

Surely a rag like the star still has minimum standards - 'being linked' is cheap talk, perfect for plausible deniability. Everyone does it; everyone gets away with it. But claiming that someone's actually signed - that's slightly different.

Not in today's squad.