[justsomebloke]

We are going to concede down that left flank so often this season. Twice y’day and against Milan Martinez shaw looked so vulnerable

The big question for me is if Shaw has the quickness, recovery speed or stamina to deal with that considering that he is also being asked to push high when we have the ball. We so need another LB.

 

[Xeque_279]

Key things remain the same: What would we do without Bruno Fernandes? That is potentially a, I mean the problem. He is our best player by some distance and I cannot understand why we haven't cover, and I mean an attacking midfielder (rather than just put Tielemans there for example). We are v exposed being this dependant on him and he cannot just keep playing, It's unrealistic, unfair and unsustainable.

I feel like Cunha is the backup for him. He doesn't really operate like a 10, more like a SS which Cunha does well too. Obv passing range is not as expansive but he provides more drive with the ball.

Idk who with could even get as a backup to Bruno, such a unicorn profile in football right now.

 

[TwoSheds]

I feel like Cunha is the backup for him. He doesn't really operate like a 10, more like a SS which Cunha does well too. Obv passing range is not as expansive but he provides more drive with the ball.

Idk who with could even get as a backup to Bruno, such a unicorn profile in football right now.

It's... Mason Mount!

 

[Xeque_279]

It's... Mason Mount!

Maybe on the playstation.

 

[Galactic]

Which “excellent” players would want to come in as backup to Bruno anyway. Cole Palmer?

 

[SoCross]

Great 2nd half performance. Is it dumb to say Mainoo stood out more than Bruno? What a feckin performance in midfield. Props to Lammens too, glad the NT error doesn’t seem to be weighing on his mind. Kept us in the game in the first half. They save from Enciso was super, how he kept his bearings and didn’t commit.

Short comings:

1. LB will be a major issue. I love Shaw but he is a weak link at the moment. Played his heart out though.
2. There were times when the midfield was non-existent, we will have trouble against more physical midfields. Second half was better, seemed like Cunha dropped deeper, letting Bruno be the furthest man up at times. The 4-4-2 off the ball will be fun to watch but expect some heavy losses too. Looking forward to Balainoo!

 

[RoyH1]

Great second half

 

[AndySmith1990]

Poor first half but comfortable win in the end. The defence is a worry though

 

[manichester]

A cracked violin may play occasionally but the flaw is always there.

 

[SirScholes]

The big question for me is if Shaw has the quickness, recovery speed or stamina to deal with that considering that he is also being asked to push high when we have the ball. We so need another LB.

He certainly doesn’t, shame because I like him defensively but every full back gets beat just most can catch up or apply pressure to the attacker, with shaw and Martinez once they’re beat they’re done

 

[Grande]

The rule is mindboggling. The ref got it absolutely right and there's nothing controversial about the decision.

To me its obviously not intentional. If you see it diffeeently, fair enough.

The man was protecting himself from a potential kick with his hands, they were not extended from his body, and gave him no advantage as if he didn't raise them, the ball would have still hit his chest, with the same result.

It was clearly unintentional, and thus, valid according to the rules.

If that was in our box you would never want a penalty given for it. His hands are literally within and against his body.

The rule is neither mindboggling, nor dictates intention. There are three conditions that will lead to a handball verdict if EITHER ONE are met:

• deliberately touches the ball with their hand/arm
• touches the ball with their hand/arm when it is in a position that makes their body unnaturally bigger and that position is not the result of their body moving fairly as part of play
• scores a goal against the other team with their hand/arm or scores immediately after the ball has touched their hand/arm (even if the touch was accidental)

For the first condition: If you use your arm to protect another part of your body from the ball, the touch is definitively deliberate - otherwise the protection wouldn’t work, would it? Someone seems to have the impression that the rules allow for using arms to protect from the ball. This is allowed for nowhere in the rules, which has been pointed out by IFAB and others several time in directive statements.

For the second: His arms are clearly in an unatural position for anything else than blocking something. They are not glued to the body, you clearly see them sticking out in front of the body, towards the ball, making his body bigger in that direction. It might have hit his chest if his arms were in a natural position, but obviously the bounce would have been different. Now, they fall down into his feet, giving him a goal scoring opportunity even.

The breach of the third condition is equally ovious, but a good lawyer or a bad referee might ttwist it. ‘Even if accidental’ it specifies, when he scores immediately after. He scores two or three touches after. If anyone wants to argue that ‘Maguire didn’t score, it was deemed an own goal’, it is both evidently against the spirit of the law, and also extremely doubtful interpretation of the rules, as wether a deflected shot is accounted as a players goal or as an own goal is not part of the regular football rules nor in the referee’s remit. It’s for a committee and has nothing to do with the outcome of games.

I would say it is a blatant handball according to ALL THREE of these conditions, and in fact, only ONE of them needs to be met for the rule to have been broken.

Appologies for the capslocking.

 

[stu_1992]

Usually in pissed when I have to miss some or all of a game through travel. But I missed the first half yesterday except for the last couple of minutes, so it's safe to say I saw the better of the two halves yesterday!

 

[Overhaul FC]

On being fortunate with our goals: you really can't look at it like that. What we call "luck" is just one end of probability. The other is all those shots that get blocked, deflected outside or miss the target. Put in the shots, you'ln get lucky with some and not with others. The ones that bounce the right way, which some of them will, is the payoff on all the attempts.

I get that, but the player slipping like Gerrard, or the huge deflection on Maguire's goal isn't because we worked on those things, or planned for Maguire to be taking edge of the box shots etc.

We'll not have that much luck every game, to not get too carried away from that 90 mins was my point that's all.

 

[sparx99]

The rule is neither mindboggling, nor dictates intention. There are three conditions that will lead to a handball verdict if EITHER ONE are met:

• deliberately touches the ball with their hand/arm
• touches the ball with their hand/arm when it is in a position that makes their body unnaturally bigger and that position is not the result of their body moving fairly as part of play
• scores a goal against the other team with their hand/arm or scores immediately after the ball has touched their hand/arm (even if the touch was accidental)

For the first condition: If you use your arm to protect another part of your body from the ball, the touch is definitively deliberate - otherwise the protection wouldn’t work, would it? Someone seems to have the impression that the rules allow for using arms to protect from the ball. This is allowed for nowhere in the rules, which has been pointed out by IFAB and others several time in directive statements.

For the second: His arms are clearly in an unatural position for anything else than blocking something. They are not glued to the body, you clearly see them sticking out in front of the body, towards the ball, making his body bigger in that direction. It might have hit his chest if his arms were in a natural position, but obviously the bounce would have been different. Now, they fall down into his feet, giving him a goal scoring opportunity even.

The breach of the third condition is equally ovious, but a good lawyer or a bad referee might ttwist it. ‘Even if accidental’ it specifies, when he scores immediately after. He scores two or three touches after. If anyone wants to argue that ‘Maguire didn’t score, it was deemed an own goal’, it is both evidently against the spirit of the law, and also extremely doubtful interpretation of the rules, as wether a deflected shot is accounted as a players goal or as an own goal is not part of the regular football rules nor in the referee’s remit. It’s for a committee and has nothing to do with the outcome of games.

I would say it is a blatant handball according to ALL THREE of these conditions, and in fact, only ONE of them needs to be met for the rule to have been broken.

Appologies for the capslocking.

Using your arm to protect yourself and flinching is clearly unintentional. It’s instinctive not premeditated.

 

[Grande]

Using your arm to protect yourself and flinching is clearly unintentional. It’s instinctive not premeditated.

The word ‘intentional’ is not to be found in the rules, so there is little use in trying to go into a debate on the differences between insticts, intentions and premeditations, though I suspect both a psychologist and a lawyer would challenge your attempt at it.

If you read the whole post you answered, you would see that it says ‘deliberate’, and that it is a moot point even, because it is a handball by two other counts as well. If you want to say that placing your arms in the way of something is not deliberate if the aim is protection, you have created a strange logical implosion in my view.

 

[Red in STL]

The spirit of the rule is to prevent players from using their hands when scoring a goal, accidental or not. That should have led to Maguire's goal being ruled out, but because his shot was off target and deflected in VAR wasn't allowed to intervene. So he gained the very advantage that the rule is intended to prevent, just because his shot was off target rather than on target.

That's a clear failing on the rules to me, I'd be furious if it went against us.

VAR was involved, it determined that the current law was applied, so it did intervene, and the "spirit of rules" left football a long time ago

 

[McTerminator]

The rule is neither mindboggling, nor dictates intention. There are three conditions that will lead to a handball verdict if EITHER ONE are met:

• deliberately touches the ball with their hand/arm
• touches the ball with their hand/arm when it is in a position that makes their body unnaturally bigger and that position is not the result of their body moving fairly as part of play
• scores a goal against the other team with their hand/arm or scores immediately after the ball has touched their hand/arm (even if the touch was accidental)

For the first condition: If you use your arm to protect another part of your body from the ball, the touch is definitively deliberate - otherwise the protection wouldn’t work, would it? Someone seems to have the impression that the rules allow for using arms to protect from the ball. This is allowed for nowhere in the rules, which has been pointed out by IFAB and others several time in directive statements.

For the second: His arms are clearly in an unatural position for anything else than blocking something. They are not glued to the body, you clearly see them sticking out in front of the body, towards the ball, making his body bigger in that direction. It might have hit his chest if his arms were in a natural position, but obviously the bounce would have been different. Now, they fall down into his feet, giving him a goal scoring opportunity even.

The breach of the third condition is equally ovious, but a good lawyer or a bad referee might ttwist it. ‘Even if accidental’ it specifies, when he scores immediately after. He scores two or three touches after. If anyone wants to argue that ‘Maguire didn’t score, it was deemed an own goal’, it is both evidently against the spirit of the law, and also extremely doubtful interpretation of the rules, as wether a deflected shot is accounted as a players goal or as an own goal is not part of the regular football rules nor in the referee’s remit. It’s for a committee and has nothing to do with the outcome of games.

I would say it is a blatant handball according to ALL THREE of these conditions, and in fact, only ONE of them needs to be met for the rule to have been broken.

Appologies for the capslocking.

Nonsense.

His intention is to protect his face/body from a potential impact. The byproduct is the ball hitting his arms not the purpose.

His body is not unnaturally larger. If his arms aren’t there it hits him in the head/chest instead. Because the clearance was so scuffed this likely gives Maguire possession anyway.

He didn’t score. It was going out for a goal kick and someone else turns it in.

You can debate the rule, but debating it’s application here is just daft.

 

[Drz]

VAR was involved, it determined that the current law was applied, so it did intervene, and the "spirit of rules" left football a long time ago

VAR is so yesteryear now, clearly officials should hold a seance to address the Spirit of rules. Don't even think it would take that long...

 

[Red in STL]

2nd half was a joy but it doesn't change my feeling that Martinez is a poor players. I wished that all the players bought by the bald fraud can be sold ASAP. Which idiot loses the ball and concede a goal like that. If this is 3-1, how much pressure will be invited? Stupid player shouldn't be near XI.

He made one big mistake, a brainfart when we were winning 5-1, other that he had an excellent game, his passing was outstanding, all players make mistakes, it doesn't make them stupid or bad

 

[A-man]

The spirit of the rule is to prevent players from using their hands when scoring a goal, accidental or not. That should have led to Maguire's goal being ruled out, but because his shot was off target and deflected in VAR wasn't allowed to intervene. So he gained the very advantage that the rule is intended to prevent, just because his shot was off target rather than on target.

That's a clear failing on the rules to me, I'd be furious if it went against us.

Glad about the goal, obviously, but this is one of those situations where common sense should be used rather than following the rulebook to the letter.

 

[Maticmaker]

Great 2nd half performance. Is it dumb to say Mainoo stood out more than Bruno? What a feckin performance in midfield.

No its not dumb, I think Kobbie gave one of his best midfield displays ever. Working in tight spaces he always does well, but yesterday he kept finding the spaces himself, he made a difference.
The trouble is Bruno made a bigger difference, his all around performance, his attitude, his role as 'skipper', his energy all made him MOTM, but Kobbie was definitely runner-up.

 

[Oranges038]

VAR is so yesteryear now, clearly officials should hold a seance to address the Spirit of rules. Don't even think it would take that long...

Should have Derek Acorah in the VAR room.

 

[Grande]

Nonsense.

His intention is to protect his face/body from a potential impact. The byproduct is the ball hitting his arms not the purpose.

His body is not unnaturally larger. If his arms aren’t there it hits him in the head/chest instead. Because the clearance was so scuffed this likely gives Maguire possession anyway.

He didn’t score. It was going out for a goal kick and someone else turns it in.

You can debate the rule, but debating it’s application here is just daft.

no, this is nonsense.

His arms stick out from the body, I’m sure you can see it, his left arm moving foward, a half metre out from his forward moving body. They are in a place unnatural for running and shooting, so the rule applies. In philosophy you could claim that they’re in a place where it’s natural to have them if you want them to interfere with the ball, and this is true. But it’s not allowed.

If you think the ball gets the same trajectory if it hits the chest or head as it would if it hits the arms, I would certainly love to play snooker with you! Either way it’s a moot point, it hits the arms, sticking out from his body, in an unnatural position for anything but stopping the ball.

Anyone could see we got the goal as a direct result from the handball. If you want to split legal hairs, you have to be consistent and also apply them to his positioning of his arms moving forward there.

 

[foggybottom]

Most of what I'd say has been said but the game proved one absolute fact: if we don't buy at least one fullback in the next 36 hours, there is zero chance of a top-four finish or progressing far in Europe. Shaw repeatedly looked too slow and has to be replaced now

 

[gerdm07]

I've only seen the highlights and have two questions.

1. On the first goal shouldn't Cunha have kept dribbling to get the defender to commit? One reason is Bruno isn't pacy and he may not have gotten a shot off. Yes, we scored, but it could have gone wrong and in a 2v1 the dribbler should keep it till the defender commits (if he commits).

2. Why wasn't the penalty a red card offense? Last defender and goal scoring opportunity.

Based on the highlights we started very brightly.

 

[Red in STL]

I've only seen the highlights and have two questions.

1. On the first goal shouldn't Cunha have kept dribbling to get the defender to commit? One reason is Bruno isn't pacy and he may not have gotten a shot off. Yes, we scored, but it could have gone wrong and in a 2v1 the dribbler should keep it till the defender commits (if he commits).

2. Why wasn't the penalty a red card offense? Last defender and goal scoring opportunity.

Based on the highlights we started very brightly.

1. No, if he'd held on to the ball any longer Bruno would have been offside

2. It wasn't a red card because he made a genuine attempt at getting the ball, in those circumstances a yellow card and a penalty are the punishement, and that isn't new, it's been that rule for a while now

 

[George The Best]

Bruno obviously gets the plaudits, bit I thought Mainoo was outstanding. Intrigued as to how Carrick fits Baleba in - maybe go to 4-3-3

 

[Scotty Doesn't Know]

I think we can put to bed most of our concerns from the Hull game. No set piece goals conceded and we eventually hit our stride and dusted off the cobwebs from preseason.

Sure, our defence is far from perfect at the moment, but neither is Chelsea's and I doubt their fans are too worried about that, as they have the quality to outscore most opponents.

First half was end-to-end. I wasn't as despondent about that performance as others were, as it felt like we were just as likely to score as Ipswich and that our quality would eventually shine through. That's exactly what happened in the second half. Total domination from minute 55 to minute 85. Ipswich got forked by the Devils (we can all do cringey puns, Hull).

 

[lex talionis]

The positives are self-evident, and we're still missing who I believe are three nailed on starters when they're cleared by the docs for a full 90 -- Sesko, De Ligt and Baleba. We have a known world class player in Bruno, a soon-to-be-acknowledged world class player in Mainoo and a left winger who, when "happy" (as I like to put it, perhaps awkwardly) in Rashford, we're a pretty potent offensive juggernaut. I'd like to see more out of Mbeumo and I think he's got it, and Cunha has an X-factor that's hard for opposing defenders to work out.

The weakest link in the chain are the two fullbacks, although I thought Dalot was decent yesterday; and after getting rinsed Shaw recovered to put in a solid performance...but he was rinsed for the opening goal.

The coaching challenge is going to how to handle Tielemans and Santos, both of whom are very good to have in the squad but I'm neither have ever thought they'd become squad men.

 

[Bobski]

Just on the handball,

What if, the shot hits the inside of the post, goes across the line, hits the keeper and goes in. Not technically on target so has to be a goal, but is bloody stupid.

 

[FerociousCorgis]

man that slip was just a huge turning moment in the game. Gotta wonder what happens if that slip doesnt happen as Ipswich were looking pretty good up until then. Much better 2nd half from us though at least compared to the first 30 minutes or so

 

[Ram1fy]

man that slip was just a huge turning moment in the game. Gotta wonder what happens if that slip doesnt happen as Ipswich were looking pretty good up until then. Much better 2nd half from us though at least compared to the first 30 minutes or so

I agree. None of the goals in fact were particularly convincing barring Bruno's third goal. The scorelines is definitely a bit flattering.

 

[Oscar Bonavena]

The attacking play was scintillating in the 2nd half but We'll be lucky to finish top 5 if that's our back 4 for the season.

 

[justsomebloke]

I agree. None of the goals in fact were particularly convincing barring Bruno's third goal. The scorelines is definitely a bit flattering.

We had a 4.56 xg and missed several very good chances. It could easily have been 7 or 8.

 

[Posh Red]

I agree. None of the goals in fact were particularly convincing barring Bruno's third goal. The scorelines is definitely a bit flattering.

Not really sure what this even means

 

[sparx99]

Just on the handball,

What if, the shot hits the inside of the post, goes across the line, hits the keeper and goes in. Not technically on target so has to be a goal, but is bloody stupid.

Oddly this controversy is because they changed the rule to allow more goals. We tried penalising every accidental handball and it annoyed everyone.

So then you change it so only accidental handballs that lead directly to a goal get disallowed but it has created this odd scenario.

 

[Lj82]

Great 2nd half performance. Is it dumb to say Mainoo stood out more than Bruno? What a feckin performance in midfield. Props to Lammens too, glad the NT error doesn’t seem to be weighing on his mind. Kept us in the game in the first half. They save from Enciso was super, how he kept his bearings and didn’t commit.

Short comings:

1. LB will be a major issue. I love Shaw but he is a weak link at the moment. Played his heart out though.
2. There were times when the midfield was non-existent, we will have trouble against more physical midfields. Second half was better, seemed like Cunha dropped deeper, letting Bruno be the furthest man up at times. The 4-4-2 off the ball will be fun to watch but expect some heavy losses too. Looking forward to Balainoo!

It is not dumb, but i guess Bruno suffers from expectations. That is we all expect him to come up with the goods (myself included), and so when he does what he does, we celebrate it but don't go fanatical over it. I remember thinking to myself just before Bruno's hattrick that he "wasn't playing well", in the sense that he wasn't finding players in good areas in the final third like he usually does. But by the end of the game, I really just have to applaud how good he is. 3 goals and an assist. That is his standard.

As for Mainoo, he was immense physically, tactically, technically and mentally. Watching him play for Utd is such a joy.

 

[Chungy]

It is not dumb, but i guess Bruno suffers from expectations. That is we all expect him to come up with the goods (myself included), and so when he does what he does, we celebrate it but don't go fanatical over it. I remember thinking to myself just before Bruno's hattrick that he "wasn't playing well", in the sense that he wasn't finding players in good areas in the final third like he usually does. But by the end of the game, I really just have to applaud how good he is. 3 goals and an assist. That is his standard.

As for Mainoo, he was immense physically, tactically, technically and mentally. Watching him play for Utd is such a joy.

I'd agree with that. Mainoo played really well throughout the match, though it only became more obvious as others settled and started playing better after the goals. But can't deny Bruno for his MOTM, 3 goals and an assist is an incredible output, and ultimately games are decided by goals.

Like most people, thought the 1st half was average, and much better in the 2nd. The fullbacks, Tielesmans and Mbuemo was really quite poor before the goals, but everyone bar Mainoo was average at best in the 1st half. I think sharpness was definitely the main issue against Hull and 1st half Ipswich, but the improvement in the 2nd half was also do the confidence and trust.

A big issue in attack I thought was being both too slow and too fast. Inability to progress through the 3rds quickly enough, but also rushing it when we reach the edge of the box and just crossing it all the time. After leading comfortably, we controlled possession a lot better because the defense finally started trusting the CMs to pop passes into them more often, and we sustained more attacking pressure because we had a bit more variation and patience than just spamming crosses.

The fullbacks got better after initially getting skinned too easily, with Dalot improving faster and more than Shaw did as the game went on. Mbeumo was poor but seemed better after his goal, so hopefully it's a confidence thing. Tielesmans was still half a yard too slow by the end of the game, I think sharpness is definitely an issue as opposed to physicality. And I actually think both Santoes (against Hull) and Mainoo in the 1st half suffered from it.

I liked Carrick's subs both on and off, though I felt it could be a tiny bit earlier. Santos for Mainoo instead of Tielesmans so Santos & Tielesmans can hopefully get more fitness/sharpness (Mainoo looked really sharp already). Leaving the attackers on for a bit longer to give them more time (and less pressure) to play themselves into form. And I still really want an LB and think the club's failed this transfer window without a new LB, but I thought Maz and Yoro played much better than expected in their cameos (Yoro carried on his pre-season RB form, and Maz looked secure at the back and helpful attacking wise as LB) 【still need new LB】.

Finally, the "we got lucky and the scoreline flattered us". Yes, the first couple were jammy goals, but it wasn't as though we didn't threaten at all before them. And I though after the goals settled our nerves, everyone played noticably better and was very controlled, dominant and attacking afterwards - good keeping of possession and progressing up the pitch, recycling the ball and shifting of positions while we're waiting for openings. This isn't actually very common after we lead, so I'm hopefully that it's a sign of things to come and we can have a good season.

 

[CG1010]

I agree. None of the goals in fact were particularly convincing barring Bruno's third goal. The scorelines is definitely a bit flattering.

I can understand the first goal coming from a slip, but that required great skill from Bruno to convert to a goal. Second goal was fortunate but we had already started applying pressure in the second half. And none of the other 3 goals were not "convincing", all of them were from our players' skills and relentless attacking pressure we created. Don't know where you are coming from.

 

[Craig Ward]

Such a weird game

We let Ipswich play and they were the better team for most of the first half. Two strokes of luck, the slip and the Maguire deflection and we're in cruise control

It's great to see us scoring 5 and we had other chances, but our flaws are so evident. Mad to think we can score 5 at home and still find criticisms but the PL is relentless - we're gunna get found out this season if we dont dramatically improve.

Full backs - Shaw just cannot get up and down the pitch. He's either got to be super defensive and leave the LW alone with no overlaps or support or he'll be a major target if he carries on the way he is for the opposition. Once he's beaten by his man he's got to recovery pace either.

Dalot is Dalot - he'll keep being average but no chance he's being replaced now. Maz has fallen off a cliff form wise - works hard but he's pretty useless

Midfield - we need to sort a combination here. I think Mainoo has proven that he is an assured starter, I thought he was fantastic. Tielemans in 2 games has thus far underwhelmed - quite sloppy with the ball and got caught in possession multiple times. Hasn't got the legs to cover for me either - we thought Casemiro couldn't run but this guy will cause us trouble if we keep playing him so deep. He'll be great when we're in control - have all the possession and he's further up. But thus far - not filling us with confidence playing deep.

Striker - So Cunha can't play ST, we lacked a presence in the ST area all game. I dont know if it was tactical - but Cunha was all over the shop, didnt really get into the game or lead the line. I guess him and Bruno sort of rotated between being the furthest player forward - but either way we need a ST to back up Sesko. Mbeumo looked good up top in pre season - for me he's a better bet up there than Cunha. I don't really know what Cunha is - not a natural LW, not a natural ST, will never starg ahead of Bruno...

CB - As much as I love the turnaround for Maguire - we aint competing for top 4/going far in the Champions league with Maguire starting every single game. Especially with Shaw on the decline, we just cannot have a back four that has Maguire and Shaw as regular starters