Ha, yeahAlways seems close to tears
And Scholes was trying to absolve AWB of any blame while Ince and Hargreaves, the two who have actually played RB, disagreed with him. Ince called out AWB correctly, as what he did was pathetic.Totally agree. He is not only clueless, he can barely put words together. It's like he tries to speak quicker than his mouth will allow.
He was trying to firmly blame AWB for the second goal, almost as though he was more responsible than Lindelof for the goal. Scholes was having none of it. But he just keeps barking his illiterate gob.
Can't bare him.
I agree AWB has his share of the blame, our entire back four were bad for that goal. But you cannot blame AWB for what Lindelof and Maguire did, their positioning was fecking awful.And Scholes was trying to absolve AWB of any blame while Ince and Hargreaves, the two who have actually played RB, disagreed with him. Ince called out AWB correctly, as what he did was pathetic.
Disagreeing with Scholes isn’t really a sign of a bad pundit considering Scholes does nothing but talk absolute shite.
That's because he was. Hes a shite pundit but so is Scholes. Both obviously have no idea why they were as good as they were.Totally agree. He is not only clueless, he can barely put words together. It's like he tries to speak quicker than his mouth will allow.
He was trying to firmly blame AWB for the second goal, almost as though he was more responsible than Lindelof for the goal. Scholes was having none of it. But he just keeps barking his illiterate gob.
Can't bare him.
Can't believe posters think AWB was solely to blame for that goal. I'm not even defending him as a player, it's just clear as day Lindelof was five feckin yards out of position.That's because he was. Hes a shite pundit but so is Scholes. Both obviously have no idea why they were as good as they were.
And you can’t blame Lindelöf and Maguire for AWB failing to track the run yet again. Scholes wasn’t blaming them all. He was pulling out every excuse to say it was everyone’s fault more than AWB.I agree AWB has his share of the blame, our entire back four were bad for that goal. But you cannot blame AWB for what Lindelof and Maguire did, their positioning was fecking awful.
For arguments sake, if AWB was doing what most of his detractors want and bombing forward, there is every chance he wouldn't have been in the box at all to help defend that ball in. Would we still be blaming him then?
And what I remember Hargreaves was agreeing more with Scholes than Ince on the topic. He said both CB's cant move up past the near post - which is ridiculous in itself. Lindelof sits in his correct position there and it's a simple header, or he could even feckin chest it down, there was only the one opposition player in the box.
Also Scholes said the entire back four were to blame as well.
When you've got those two plus Jake Humphrey you might as well mute the TV until the game starts.That's because he was. Hes a shite pundit but so is Scholes. Both obviously have no idea why they were as good as they were.
I find this baffling to be honest. How can the fullback take the blame for two central defenders not clearing a single cross into the box when there is only a single attacker in their box!?And you can’t blame Lindelöf and Maguire for AWB failing to track the run yet again. Scholes wasn’t blaming them all. He was pulling out every excuse to say it was everyone’s fault more than AWB.
That isn’t an argument. I don’t want him to bomb forward. I want him to mark his fecking man for both goals.
Hargreaves said everyone made a mistake but made a point to say AWB especially fecked up because Scholes kept trying to absolve him of anything. Hargreaves specifically said he agreed with Scholes and Ince. That Maguire and Lindelöf could have done better but that what AWB did was in fact, absolutely pathetic.
Saying the front CB should be in line with the front post isn’t ridiculous at all, it’s basic positioning. And the cross was deflected, it wasn’t a simple header.
Exactly, one opposition player who AWB was marking and decided to leave so he could do what? Stand there doing nothing.
He was not solely to blame, just mostly. Lindelof could have positioned himself better but on his last look over AWB was about 3mm away from the player and clearly marking him, and Lindelof had every right to expect him to continue doing that.Can't believe posters think AWB was solely to blame for that goal. I'm not even defending him as a player, it's just clear as day Lindelof was five feckin yards out of position.
As I mentioned above, what if AWB had made one of these 'much needed' attacking runs and wasn't back in the box to help defend that cross. Would he still be to blame? Of course he wouldn't and Lindelof would have been rightly hammered to move so far out of position when there was only one attacking player in the box. It was 3 defending against one. Full back didn't even need to be there.
A fair summary. They're absolutely both to blame, AWBs was a bit more obvious because you can't lose your man like that but at the end of the day both of them lost their concentration at crucial moments.He was not solely to blame, just mostly. Lindelof could have positioned himself better but on his last look over AWB was about 3mm away from the player and clearly marking him, and Lindelof had every right to expect him to continue doing that.
In that situation its Lindelof's job to stop the ball getting to the striker, and that was complicated by a deflection, but the main job is to stop them getting to the ball, and that was AWBs.
That's where we differ in opinion I feel, just because I don't think AWB even needs to be in the box at that moment. Lindelof lost the same player (the only player in the box) it's on him as the primary error. Then with the position AWB found himself in he should have done more, but that's only because Lindelof is out of position.He was not solely to blame, just mostly. Lindelof could have positioned himself better but on his last look over AWB was about 3mm away from the player and clearly marking him, and Lindelof had every right to expect him to continue doing that.
In that situation its Lindelof's job to stop the ball getting to the striker, and that was complicated by a deflection, but the main job is to stop them getting to the ball, and that was AWBs.
I feel a lot of them talk emotionally and in the heat of the moment as a fan in the pub would whereas the likes of Jose and Wenger actually think in more detail.He's really bad. I feel like most ex-pros aren't great, annoyingly. I found it much more interesting seeing Mourinho on Sky and Wenger on BEIN (I think?) as examples than ex-pros and failed managers at that. Scholes is also outrageously poor as a pundit.
You've obviously never experienced Craig & Stevie on ESPN...Possibly the worst pundit around at the moment?
He is absolutely awful and I feel even that is being kind. It's almost impressive how frequently wrong he is.
Mate, you are absolutely wrong about Maguire. His positioning was spot on. Their winger was set up one on one against Williams, and where do you suggest Maguire should be in case Williams were beaten?I agree AWB has his share of the blame, our entire back four were bad for that goal. But you cannot blame AWB for what Lindelof and Maguire did, their positioning was fecking awful.
For arguments sake, if AWB was doing what most of his detractors want and bombing forward, there is every chance he wouldn't have been in the box at all to help defend that ball in. Would we still be blaming him then?
And what I remember Hargreaves was agreeing more with Scholes than Ince on the topic. He said both CB's cant move up past the near post - which is ridiculous in itself. Lindelof sits in his correct position there and it's a simple header, or he could even feckin chest it down, there was only the one opposition player in the box.
Also Scholes said the entire back four were to blame as well.
Yeah more so Lindelof sorry. The point raised at the time was that both CB's had pushed up to much to the left side, it's blatantly too far with Lindelof, which is my main point.Mate, you are absolutely wrong about Maguire. His positioning was spot on. Their winger was set up one on one against Williams, and where do you suggest Maguire should be in case Williams were beaten?
I tend to agree with you. It's a shame really but also depends on what you the viewer want from analysis. For me, I'm much more interested in hearing/seeing the likes of Jose/Wenger dissect the tactical nuances of a game/performance than listen to ex-players of the club they're analysing give, as you say, heat-of-the-moment off-hand comments with no real rhyme nor reason behind them.I feel a lot of them talk emotionally and in the heat of the moment as a fan in the pub would whereas the likes of Jose and Wenger actually think in more detail.
I vaguely remember a time when Rooney was declining Phil Neville went on a passionate defense of his saying he should always play no matter what and gave absolutely zero reason or analysis as to why.
