EPL Season 2017/8

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OwlsFan

I wonder how long will Leicester give Shakespeare? He's only a game away from dropping in to the bottom 3. Ranieri was dumped in November

---

They have played Arsenal, Man U, Chelsea (facing their own former title winning midfield duo enticed away) and Liverpool in six games so far, and to be fair were in all those games, some crackers too, so maybe a bit of breathing room a while for him. The only real result one could focus on was Huddersfield away, when they drew. Up next they have Bournemouth, West Brom, Swansea & Everton & if they are still down there after that, the questions will start I guess. Their midfielder signed to replace the Chelsea bound lad isn't available yet either as there was a delay on deadline day with his paperwork so James & King are featuring due to this, they are squad players both.

A Comedy of Errors as Shakespeare gets the sack- it was always going to happen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OwlsFan

A Comedy of Errors as Shakespeare gets the sack- it was always going to happen.

---

Last night was unwatchable v WBA & brought the jury in. A little surprised its this early but it was in the post alright.

On Lukaku: watching him against Huddersfield right now, and he's a total passenger. He's lumbering around the final third and barely getting involved. Bit of a lack of service I suppose - United generally are awful - but you'd expect more.Li

Edit: Literally pressed "Post", and he whips in a brilliant cross for Rashford to score. Never mind.

Shock, horror: Sky News was pretty much dedicated to Klopp moaning about the peno given against his team (he seemed to be under the impression that because Liverpool totally dominated the game, the peno should not have been awarded to Everton) and Mourinho complaining about the one his side didn't get from an apparent dive by one of his players. He wasn't asked about Lukaku missing a sitter and City being the better team for long spells. Then of course the banal questions by Geoff (Cliche) Shreeves to Pep Guardiola and to the City players: "Is that the league over now ?" with the stock replies that we're only in December. Why do I watch it ? Masochism perhaps ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OwlsFan

Shock, horror: Sky News was pretty much dedicated to Klopp moaning about the peno given against his team (he seemed to be under the impression that because Liverpool totally dominated the game, the peno should not have been awarded to Everton) and Mourinho complaining about the one his side didn't get from an apparent dive by one of his players. He wasn't asked about Lukaku missing a sitter and City being the better team for long spells. Then of course the banal questions by Geoff (Cliche) Shreeves to Pep Guardiola and to the City players: "Is that the league over now ?" with the stock replies that we're only in December. Why do I watch it ? Masochism perhaps ?

---

Tell me about it. Now there are less of our lads at those EPL clubs, the top ones anyway over recent seasons my interest and need to put up with what passes for coverage of it has dwindled away to recording MOTD & fast forwarding through the discussion parts to the next game. Some weeks not even that.

Watched the Bristol City vs Man United game last night. Enjoyable game particularly the last minute :) I have often bemoaned the standard in the Championship but City played really well and wanted it more than their illustrious rivals (cliche alert). David De Gea has nothing to worry about as his understudy was an accident waiting to happen.

I thought they were excellent too, they look confident and composed all through, given the atmosphere and occasion especially. Their two goals were outstanding, two beautifully weighted passes and two brilliant finishes. United's goal was never a free kick in the first place so Mourinho's talk of Bristol City being "lucky" was a bit of a stretch, unsurprising I suppose.

Romero was poor alright, he usually looks steady enough though, all through the Europa campaign last season and any time I've seen him for Argentina. The Bristol City keeper made two really fine saves from Lukaku actually and was a bit unlucky for the goal.

I don't hang round any more for the after match interviews as managers are so myopic. Arsene Wenger led the way and the rest have followed. I can't imagine why Mourinho thought BC were lucky. If Man U had won it would have been interesting all the same that the almost reserve sides of Man City, Man U, Chelsea and Arsenal could make it to the semi-final.

The Derby defeat appears to have destroyed United mentally. So many of their top players are passengers this month. Big clear out could be coming.

£75 million for Virgil van Dijk. I don't know what to say really except Celtic must be happy as they make a few bob out of the deal.

I was delighted when Hughes' gamble of playing a 2nd string XI against Chelsea didn't pay off against Newcastle. To wave the white flag at Chelsea must be very demoralising for supporters (Peadar?) in the hope that the rested players will do better against Newcastle, which of courser they didn't. Do full time professional players need to be rested when every point is vital? There was no resting in the 1970s/80s when only a couple of subs were allowed and yet English teams dominated Europe. The Tinkerman started all this sh*t in England and the sheep followed. It just irritates me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OwlsFan

The Tinkerman started all this sh*t in England and the sheep followed. It just irritates me.

---

He may have brought it to another level but the likes of Ferguson used regularly rotate his team before Ranieri even stepped foot in England. To be fair, the scheduling this Christmas was a bit over the top for a lot of clubs. They all have big squads now and and there often isn't much between the quality of the usual starters and the subs, so keeping the team fresh might be the wise approach. It didn't work out for Stoke but it probably wouldn't have if they went full strength at Chelsea either. I don't think there's much point in comparing it to the 12/13 man squads of the 70s/80s when sports science wasn't even a thing.

So Mark Hughes eventually gets the sack. Won't stop him getting another job though even though his last successful spell was about 10 years ago with Blackburn.

The Wales job maybe?

Says he's not interested http://www.bbc.com/sport/football/42609703 No enough dosh I suspect.

Last week Martin Keown branded Sánchez “football’s biggest mercenary”. FGS, just about every footballer is a mercenary - they will go where they are paid the most. They have no loyalty to football clubs and anyone who thinks otherwise is deluded. Booing of former players and managers by fans is moronic. Footballers are paid employees and which one of those fans who boo ex-players would not leave their job if offered twice the salary elsewhere ? Footballers and owners come and go - only the supporters remain. Such his how it is.

Suggesting that a player could only possibly go to Manchester United over Manchester City for money alone is a bit of a stretch also. That may well have been the main factor in this case, who truly knows, but does one good half season all of a sudden put Manchester City on such a platform that other clubs shouldn't be able to attract players ahead of them? United have won three trophies in the last year and a half, they've progressed from 6th place last season to 2nd this (so far) and Sanchez will have the confidence that he can improve them further.

They're also a far more high profile club globally and historically, had Sanchez even heard of Manchester City when he was kicking ball around the streets of Chile as a youngster? He didn't really have the best playing experience with Guardiola at Barcelona and he wouldn't be guaranteed his place in their starting line-up right now. As far as I can make out it would have been a much more risky decision to choose City over United, even if the financial rewards had been the same.

Certainly some hysteria over the Sanchez transfer, some of the commentary made it sound like Sanchez was betraying family by not going with Guardiola.

It's a gargantuan wage though, and you wonder how disruptive it might be when other contracts are negotiated. De Gea is in negotiations at the moment I believe: he'd be perfectly entitled (and correct imo) to suggest he's more valuable to the team than Sanchez, and that his wage should reflect that. I suspect Sanchez might not be spending the rest of his career at Old Trafford, and might be very much an RVP-type purchase, meant to propel the team to a league (or more) within a season or two, and then to head off somewhere else.

Also not sure about trading Mkhitarian. He's had an iffy enough season, but he was great last year. Some kind of falling out with Mourinho I suppose?

I think a combination of being incredibly inconsistent (when he's poor, he's really poor) and happening to play in a position where United have a lot of options has been his undoing. He was going to drop further still in the pecking order had Sanchez arrived without his departure. He's clearly a talented player and Mourinho owes him a lot for his contribution last season, especially in the Europa League which really turned an otherwise dismal season into a pretty satisfactory one. You would think his style will suit Arsenal and maybe he'll blossom, seems like a good, honest sort.

I think United are claiming that Sanchez is 'only' being paid the same wages as Pogba, whether that's true or not.