He's played pretty much every game since he's been here, hasn't he? It's probably a difficult one to accurately cover, unless you use the same kind of model as the one which pointed to Da Costa being our best player.
In fairness, as others have said, it's not particularly telling as he almost never missed a game until now.
In fact, before this injury the only other game he missed completely was the defeat by Swansea back in March.
In fairness, as others have said, it's not particularly telling as he almost never missed a game until now.
In fact, before this injury the only other game he missed completely was the defeat by Swansea back in March.
Yeah totally, I said as much in the Rose Hyam thread. What I do think it means is we’ve basically never had to do without him and are probably still working out what that looks like.
@shmmeee I can see where you were going with the question but starting to think like that starts a paradox
"We don't win without CoH" becomes "We can't win without CoH" becomes "We will lose because CoH isn't playing". It's mind games but as some have shown, it's not far down the negative path when we should be saying "We can win with or without CoH".
@shmmeee I can see where you were going with the question but starting to think like that starts a paradox
"We don't win without CoH" becomes "We can't win without CoH" becomes "We will lose because CoH isn't playing". It's mind games but as some have shown, it's not far down the negative path when we should be saying "We can win with or without CoH".
Honestly when I started the thread I wasn’t going anywhere. Just a Q that popped into my head and I couldn’t work out how to answer it.
I think I’ve ended up with a renewed appreciation for the job the club have got on their hands after three years of being reliant on a particular focal point of attack.