Jump to content

Saint Pete

Subscribed Users
  • Content Count

    1,048
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. If he is fully fit then yes he would start. The suspicion would be it’s too soon for that to be the case. You are right about his importance to the team, which is why it’s sensible not to rush things and risk him being out for longer and more games. Suspect he will start on bench and come on for last half hour or so.
  2. I don't disagree that Vestergaard's recent form has been excellent, especially his passing. I just don't think we have seen that from him for a long enough period yet (combined with being passably good on the defensive side which is essential for a CB) to know if this can be his permanent level or just a purple patch of confidence and form. I hope he can keep this level of form when he returns but we'll see.
  3. Fair point though that not many would have been bemoaning Vestergaard being unavailable for selection just a few months ago when he was widely thought not good enough and far too slow for this league. So opinions of some at least must have changed? I'm not a massive Stephens fan but he was a regular in the side alongside Bednarek in our strong run at end of last season when he was consistently selected ahead of Vestergaard by Ralph. It's a shame Vestergaard is out as he has been in good form, but personally I don't see as huge a difference in quality of the 2 players as some are maki
  4. Possibly not but that was a shockingly bad refereeing decision. Goalkeeper clatters Burnley player who wasn’t even aware goalie was there, free kick to Leeds, goal disallowed! Er, how?
  5. It's a fair question to ask today why Ralph didn't make subs much earlier. Pretty baffling given we weren't playing well and are in the busiest period of the season. I think I heard Ralph saying recently he was in favour of allowing 5 subs, very odd given he seems so reluctant to use the 3 he is allowed! Great manager on the whole, but his attitude towards subs has been strange on occasions.
  6. In Ings case with his injury record and importance to the team, I would argue there is more reason to be risk averse than with others in the team.
  7. I know it's easy in hindsight but seems a little daft to take the risk if this was a known issue. Especially given the number of games coming up and the fact Ings is not fully back up to speed after his last injury anyway.
  8. 1 minute stoppage time. Sympathy vote from the officials to Palace there.
  9. 7-0 now! And could easily have been a good few more.
  10. He is sometimes rested though when we have these spells with lots of games so it's probably a case of rotation to avoid tiredness/injury rather than being dropped.
  11. It’s been good not having Alan Smith on Sky again this week!
  12. OK. I will allow myself a glance at the As it stands table now.
  13. Ings really not on his game today, let’s be honest.
  14. ?? Don’t think we are playing poorly at all. Only thing missing is a bit more sharpness in the box.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

View Terms of service (Terms of Use) and Privacy Policy (Privacy Policy) and Forum Guidelines ({Guidelines})