Search results

I'm more than happy for people to disagree with me but when they argue in bad faith then I have no time for them.

Yet all those posts were right that our front line was not good enough and that Propper was not effective on the right wing. And we played no striker and didn't score. That's called criticism not abuse. It is also shown to be right for that game. There's a difference between blind faith and...

We controlled the game but didn't make clear cut chances. And if we had an actual striker on the pitch maybe we could have taken one of those half chances... We had 4 strikers on the bench and brought 1 on. Hardly a statement of intent to attack... And we took of Mac Allister who was our most...

Spurs had a game off in the middle, ridiculous comparison. I'd also take winning one game and losing one over losing both...

I did listen to the interview. I'm questioning the decisionaking and how we worked this out beyond just the Arsenal game You fundamentally missed my point. Maupay could have played one and Welbeck the other. But he put all his eggs in the West Ham basket. We also have to question why Maupay...

If you have two fit strikers you are happy to play, does it make sense to play both in one game and neither in the next? Or better to play one in either? Then play Maupay both and leave him out against Wolves. This is when it counts, especially when you don't beat West Ham and NEED goals...