Search results

He only really has one peer; EMC. You can only compare fairly with players who play in the same position. And that's been the issue, hasn't it. Not enough options out wide.

That's something we'll have to disagree on then. They're not co-dependent, no. And of course if you get a better player, and they fit the system, then you improve the team. They're a great partnership, but that doesn't mean you can't improve on it. And Sakamoto's not a weak link, but that's...

You said that he and MvE is an over-rated partnership, which I disagreed with. That was the only thing I engaged with. When they are both in form, it's an excellent partnership between two players whose qualities compliment each others' extremely well.

You don't need charisma to terrorise a fullback, fortunately! He loves football; that's what you want.

The Temu CR7?

Earlier in the season. Not that long ago. No, I do not think Saka starts over Esse, based on that latter's form in the division for Millwall. I'd imagine Saka will be used primarily as an impact sub when games are stretched, which is when he's particularly dangerous. Saka's under-rated by...

I don't think that's true, I think it's more neither are in form On song they compliment each extremely well.

Looked good in a couple of games very early on, but then got a prolonged run in the side and appeared out of his depth. Some of that may have been down to trying too hard to impress when form had left him. The current management clearly doesn't fancy him, though. As others have said, he's...

I think you've missed the point. I'm not offering an opinion on how good or bad a signing it would be, just saying that this wouldn't be possible, or even mooted, if we weren't his hometown club. A similar status player with no connection would not be being discussed. That's all. I'd be...

If he wasn't an ex-player (and a Coventry kid) then there would be no talk, or possibility of signing him, at all.

If teams up their game against us it's because we are top of the league, and they know they have have to.

Very marginal, and if you quibble that kind of decision, where it's fractions of centimetres and no advantage is gained, then you want VAR and all the chaos and soul-sapping joylessness that it brings. Fine, if you do, but I don't; I would like to see us get one of these stonewall penalties...

You know you don't have to be in the same room as someone nowadays to speak to them, right?

This is getting annoying. If you don't defend, you haven't played well enough to win. And as shit as the decisions that have gone against us have been, referees are not against us. That's just mad.

No, because those decisions were correct. Marginal, maybe, but correct. So for balance, we need some stinkers to go in our favour, not just get the correct decision in some heart-in-mouth moments. Offside goal v. Sheffield Wednesday is the only one that's coming to mind. There may be others.

If that's true, we should have had two today. Both of the handball shouts were correct. I have no complaints about today's.

That's true. What is also true is that game-changing decisions are consistently going against us. We can be both poor and have a poor referee performance costing us at the same time. It's impossible to argue that we shouldn't have had a penalty today; if we do, then we probably take something...

It's just boring, isn't it.

He doesn't hide, and he isn't lazy. He's bang out of form and his decision making is particularly poor, but those kind of criticisms of him are just plain lazy.

Don't put it anywhere. It adds nothing, and is just childishly petty. "Oooo, you did it wrong!!" I mean, how old are you? 40s, 50s, going on the references of games you make. Grow up, for fuck's sake.