Hobsons Choice

Vatican City must be pretty high, cos we all know where the Pope shits.....

Sorry, I was being facetious. But you are right.

Maybe they turned it off so they could do some war crimes.

Inevitably, though, if you have massive CB units, they will tend to be lacking in pace, and less quick off the mark, meaning a high defensive line is a no-no. Imo, UE will not be looking at those kind of players. He'll be going for quick technical CBs.

I already discussed this. We made loads and loads of good chances and we finished none. A striker not finishing chances is not a result of systems, it's down to strikers not finishing chances. Are you suggesting that changing the way we create chances in offensive play will improve our defending of set pieces? If not then I think you are trying to have a different argument with me than the one we were originally having, which was me countering someone who suggested that we should have changed things because we'd conceded from set pieces and had been battering them for 30 minutes at the start of the second half, but had only scored once.

Well maybe, but the point was that the system of play was effective on the day, and you don't change it if it's working. If we replace Watkins for Ings etc, etc, that doesn't really have much influence on defending set pieces. That's purely down to organisation. I pointed out in the match thread that Buendia should not be marking Van Dijk on set plays, but to change that you don't need to change the way we play. Also we need a new striker in the window, but again if the way we play creates chances for them, we don't need major upheavals.

People saying that we got lucky playing the high line because Nunez is crap. Do we not think that we persisted with such a high line because Nunez is crap? End of the day, playing like that we created enough to win, and Liverpool scored 2 from set pieces.

Not really. The creation of chances means a system is working. Not taking chances doesn't mean a system is not working.

See both povs, but I side with this one.

Watkins was a weird one. I don't think he'd get a 1/10 for the first half from me, but he looked much better after the break. Still don't think on the whole he did enough to avoid being replaced in January. A better striker up front and we get something from that match imo.

I can't blame Olsen for No. 2, but I do think Emi gets a hand on that to tip it wide.

One player above a 6? Nah, that's rubbish.

I don't understand this view. We were battering them for at least 20 mins but just couldn't score.

Takeaways for me. 1. When we apply ourselves, we look good and can compete with good teams. 2.Defence of set pieces leaves much to be desired. 3. We desperately need a new striker and backup goalie. 4. Liverpool have 0% chance of winning the league.

Ffs. Put Mings in goal for the last 5 minutes

On the strength of this half we don't deserve to lose this.

We've been good this half.

Game on.

Don't agree with how you've phrased this at all. It's not been disastrous. The high line has created issues sure, but we've created chances. I do agree that Ollie has been terrible.

Good shout

Why can't we score? Why? Watkins with two opportunities. Sitter for Bailey, McGinn header far post. Bet our xG for that half is well over 1.

Ref is Bought

Difference so far between these two teams- good finishing, luck, and questionable set piece defending.

Buendia marking van dijk on a corner. Good move.

God I hate everyone creaming over Liverpool. I'd love us to spoil the wankfest.