Thin skinned? I made an observation that he's a gloom merchant. Based on my years of listening to him and his athletic articles including one dropped today.
He made a joke, a quite funny one about City having 115% possession. Don't take it as being a literal summary of the game. Someone who cant take that as a joke is being thin skinned!Thin skinned? I made an observation that he's a gloom merchant. Based on my years of listening to him and his athletic articles including one dropped today.
I know you met him once but there's no need to get overly sensitive about a fair opinion on the guy. I respect him, I also think he's becoming a fear monger. Don't be thin skinned about that
Serious question, why are you so sensitive if someone has a small negative about him?
. You're reacting all defensive like I burned his house down feck me. It doesn't matter who it is.Serious question, why are you so sensitive if someone has a small negative about him?
I said I respect him, he's a great supporter, he has sources, but I found him a gloom merchant of late. And you're hell bent on thinking it's because of just one throwaway joke
The irony of the whole thing is you said I was thin skinned. Look in a mirror mate.
Butt hurt? What an imbecilic comment. I say someone's a great fan but become a bit of a gloom merchant recently and that equates to being butt hurt.
Not at all, I don't get upset about a journalist being a "gloom merchant".Butt hurt? What an imbecilic comment. I say someone's a great fan but become a bit of a gloom merchant recently and that equates to being butt hurt.
You are a bit sensitive aren't you
I have on various occasions. They aren't selling great at the moment. but whether I did or didn't has absolutely feck all to do with whether one can have an opinion on a journalists pieces. Especially if they are commonly on podcasts and Athletic. That magazine is not the sole barometer of his journalistic pedigree. What an absolute nonsense logic that would be.
I think it's very evident you are triggered.
Stop being such a "Carl Anka".
Onana
Evans, Reguilon, Amrabat loans or emergency signings. Wouldnt argue Evans or Reguilon are particularly bad though, and I dont think he would have wanted to play Evans as a first choice CB in the games he did.
Only Casemiro payed off. He at least gave us one great season where he was our main player. And Eriksen is a good signing too. Others were/are a waste so far. Including fans favorite Lisandro who is more injured than fit.
Isn't this a problem in itself, as sacking Ten Hag because of that means we have to replace him with a Fergie-style manager that's performed at a big club? That option just doesn't exist.
Yeah, a top calibre coach is exactly what we need, rather than whatever fudge and failures in communication are stymieing ETH, but alongside vision and competency in coaching the technical side and tactical side, he needs to have both the conviction and authority to exclude players from the side or even 1st team see-up for not executing instructions and for attitude/misdemeanours generally. Sancho seems to be the only case where there were genuine consequences (Ronaldo was an attack on the club and ownership in public, so that's a different matter still).
He signs mid-players and it's because he's a mid-manager. When he signed Wegroast it said it all.
Did he sign Weghorst, or was he the only free option?
Why would Weghorst be the only free option? He wasn't even free, he was at a club. If we could prize a player from a club we could have gotten a player that could score at least 5 goals. Weghorst was chosen because ETH knows him and he likes how mediocre he is.
He was a loan because Ronaldo fecked the club over completely and tried to derail the season/force a move because he wasn't happy. Weghorst was probably the best option out there. ETH's eye for players is definitely worth scrutinizing but Weghorst was such a unique situation, he's not one of the sticks to beat the manager with.
Whatever about “personality” I’m not sure what that even means in a manager but he certainly is a strong manager. We seen that when he got rid of Cristiano Ronaldo in the first few months he was here. Whether or not that was the correct decision is up for debate but it’s an absolute fact that it would take a strong manager to make such a call. He’s also shown De Gea the door and taken the captains armband away from Harry Maguire. Again, the correctness of these decisions can be debated, but what’s not up for debate is it would and did take a strong manager to make these calls.
I think I counted 9 players that have been here for five years or more, that's a fair amount. Even players like Maguire, Bruno and AwB who are on their fifth season are now about to see a fourth different manager when the inevitable happens (and it will happen).
Because that makes sense.
That’s an absolutely ridiculous way of doing things. Luke Shaw’s probably our only world class player (respective of his position), and our down turn has been whilst he’s been out injured, but we have to get rid because he’s been here a while? That’s not analytical it’s just very stupid.
he wanted Gakpo and Felix ffs
There are some voices of reason here amongst people. Thankfully.
Alright then.
I'm no expert but I believe you have to field 11 players or they start with the whole forfeiting games craic.
If he's taking an analytical approach, Rashford would definitely not be sold, also Bruno would definitely not be gone.
His fluctuating form has been symptomatic of the problems that have ailed us for years.
Yeah I mean there is always the whole buying new players thing...
Right, because keeping a player who has scored 36 goals over 2.5 seasons (30 coming in one season) and paying him 350k/week makes all kinds of sense...
