Victor Lindelof image 2

Victor Lindelof Sweden flag

2019-20 Performances


View full 2019-20 profile

5.7 Season Average Rating
Appearances
46
Clean sheets
19
Goals
1
Assists
1
Yellow cards
6

andersj

Nick Powell Expert
Joined
Aug 7, 2004
Messages
2,368
Location
Copenhagen
Combine the tackles, interceptions, clearances, headers, even the "recoveries" even though it just means getting a ball nobody is in control of so its not actually defending anything.
«As low»? Why is that important? Looking at some of the best CBs in the world, they are relatively low on a stat like tackles, interceptions, clearences and headers. Rio was too. Several poor and very average defenders comes out high compared to players like Varane and VvD.

That should tell you something about the relevance of such a stat. It means zero, zit, nada about the quality of the defender. It is just something that you can measure. It can tell you alot about style, but very little about quality.
 

Ekeke

Full Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2006
Messages
46,432
Location
Hope, We Lose
«As low»? Why is that important? Looking at some of the best CBs in the world, they are relatively low on a stat like tackles, interceptions, clearences and headers. Rio was too. Several poor and very average defenders comes out high compared to players like Varane and VvD.

That should tell you something about the relevance of such a stat. It means zero, zit, nada about the quality of the defender. It is just something that you can measure. It can tell you alot about style, but very little about quality.
Ferdinand wasnt as low as Lindelof. Thats the point

And you can couple it up with what we see in matches with Lindelof backing off letting players run at goal. So its not like he didnt have possible balls to win, he's just not comfortable doing it. You can also see him dropping behind the defense prefering to try and get to a ball in behind the defense before the attacker can get there. He prefers to do that rather than confront someone who has the ball.

Edit - Ferdinand was high on interceptions and clearances. Reading the play and winning the ball in front of a player and being in a good position to mark and clear the ball out of danger. He was very low with headers and he wasnt that high on tackles. But still averaged twice as many as Lindelof.



 
Last edited:

andersj

Nick Powell Expert
Joined
Aug 7, 2004
Messages
2,368
Location
Copenhagen
Ferdinand wasnt as low as Lindelof. Thats the point
But very low compared to a lot of average defenders. And he was probably the best in the world at the time. So why is it important? Why is it an important figure when the best defender in the world comes out poorly compared to average defenders? When the stat probably would tell you that Lovren is the best defender at Liverpool this season?

It is also funny that you try making a meal out of it «not being as low», as if there was some sort of magic cut off? It is probably even weirder than using the number in the first place. I mean, I’m sure you agree that van Dijk is a lot better than several players that wins more tackles, interceptions, aeriel duels and makes more clearences. But how do you end up thinking that there is some kind of minimum here? What is the logic behind it?

It is also interesting that you use clearences (passing without intention of finding a team mate), a number that has been falling among top CBs this decade as an contribution thay should be measured and compared, but not recoveries.

In my opinion, it show that you have a strong agenda and that you dont really understand the stat you throw around.
 

Ekeke

Full Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2006
Messages
46,432
Location
Hope, We Lose
But very low compared to a lot of average defenders. And he was probably the best in the world at the time. So why is it important? Why is it an important figure when the best defender in the world comes out poorly compared to average defenders? When the stat probably would tell you that Lovren is the best defender at Liverpool this season?

It is also funny that you try making a meal out of it «not being as low», as if there was some sort of magic cut off? It is probably even weirder than using the number in the first place. I mean, I’m sure you agree that van Dijk is a lot better than several players that wins more tackles, interceptions, aeriel duels and makes more clearences. But how do you end up thinking that there is some kind of minimum here? What is the logic behind it?

It is also interesting that you use clearences (passing without intention of finding a team mate), a number that has been falling among top CBs this decade as an contribution thay should be measured and compared, but not recoveries.

In my opinion, it show that you have a strong agenda and that you dont really understand the stat you throw around.
Again, because its so low. If he had the exact same numbers as Ferdinand then fair enough. He doesnt. He has significantly less

You are the one who compared them, in the comparison Lindelof gets crushed. It shows you didnt have an argument to begin with
 

andersj

Nick Powell Expert
Joined
Aug 7, 2004
Messages
2,368
Location
Copenhagen
Again, because its so low. If he had the exact same numbers as Ferdinand then fair enough. He doesnt. He has significantly less

You are the one who compared them, in the comparison Lindelof gets crushed. It shows you didnt have an argument to begin with
But if this figure is important, why is Gomez prefered over Lovren? In fact, Gomez appears to be the central defender Klopp prefers to partner VvD. If this stat is important, why? Maybe Klopp dont understand football very well and you should show him your stat...
 

Ekeke

Full Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2006
Messages
46,432
Location
Hope, We Lose
But if this figure is important, why is Gomez prefered over Lovren? In fact, Gomez appears to be the central defender Klopp prefers to partner VvD. If this stat is important, why? Maybe Klopp dont understand football very well and you should show him your stat...
Amazing. There's a lot of average strikers who scored more goals than Martial this season, I guess that shows that goals from a striker arent important.

What is it with you and digging this hole deeper and deeper with more and more useless arguments?

One more thing, the season before last in the 2nd half of the season Lindelof started making significantly more headers for a 5 or 6 game period. When he did that and his overall numbers went up, I wasn't critisizing him because he was improving what I feel he needs to improve. I gave him credit. But I did say it needs to be more than a handful of games to show that its fixed. A year on and its not. If I hated him his performances wouldnt change how I talk about him. It did. He just didnt keep it up and it remains his issue
 
Last edited:

andersj

Nick Powell Expert
Joined
Aug 7, 2004
Messages
2,368
Location
Copenhagen
There's a lot of average strikers who scored more goals than Martial this season, I guess that shows that goals from a striker arent important.
No, using your logic it obviously shows that these average strikers are better than Martial...

The same way, applying your logic and use of stat, Schar, Bednarek and Tarkowski are better than Varane and VvD (sorry did not check their figures). And of course your favourite player Pezzella (who I am sure you have seen a lot of btw, not just found using a filter on whoscored).
 

Santoryo

ripping the reward
Joined
Apr 10, 2014
Messages
4,814
But very low compared to a lot of average defenders. And he was probably the best in the world at the time. So why is it important? Why is it an important figure when the best defender in the world comes out poorly compared to average defenders? When the stat probably would tell you that Lovren is the best defender at Liverpool this season?

It is also funny that you try making a meal out of it «not being as low», as if there was some sort of magic cut off? It is probably even weirder than using the number in the first place. I mean, I’m sure you agree that van Dijk is a lot better than several players that wins more tackles, interceptions, aeriel duels and makes more clearences. But how do you end up thinking that there is some kind of minimum here? What is the logic behind it?

It is also interesting that you use clearences (passing without intention of finding a team mate), a number that has been falling among top CBs this decade as an contribution thay should be measured and compared, but not recoveries.

In my opinion, it show that you have a strong agenda and that you dont really understand the stat you throw around.
@Ekeke is the same guy who told posters to go support and watch another team because he felt they shouldn't have been criticizing one of our player in AWB yet here he is camped in this thread with an obvious agenda criticizing Lindelof with a bunch of straw grasping arguments. He hasn't even realized the irony yet :lol:
 

Ekeke

Full Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2006
Messages
46,432
Location
Hope, We Lose
No, using your logic it obviously shows that these average strikers are better than Martial...
Seems you have a bad memory too. You were suggesting that Lindelof is very good because of 2 stats, blocks and "recoveries". My point is you dont look at one single thing, you look at the entire combination of things you want from a certain position. Therefore with your logic goals would be all important. With mine you would take into account everything else you'd want in a striker including general play, setting up chances for others, etc.

How far can you dig?
 

Ekeke

Full Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2006
Messages
46,432
Location
Hope, We Lose
@Ekeke is the same guy who told posters to go support and watch another team because he felt they shouldn't have been criticizing one of our player in AWB yet here he is camped in this thread with an obvious agenda criticizing Lindelof with a bunch of straw grasping arguments. He hasn't even realized the irony yet :lol:
Nope, told someone that if they find it painful watching AWB like they stated, they should watch another team.

Its not painful watching Lindelof. In fact a lot of the time its easy to forget he's on the pitch. Extremely painless, like playing as a striker against him
 

andersj

Nick Powell Expert
Joined
Aug 7, 2004
Messages
2,368
Location
Copenhagen
One more thing, the season before last in the 2nd half of the season Lindelof started making significantly more headers for a 5 or 6 game period. When he did that and his overall numbers went up, I wasn't critisizing him because he was improving what I feel he needs to improve. I gave him credit. But I did say it needs to be more than a handful of games to show that its fixed. A year on and its not. If I hated him his performances wouldnt change how I talk about him. It did. He just didnt keep it up and it remains his issue
I never said you hate Lindelof. I say that your use of statistic is based on a fallacy.
 

Ekeke

Full Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2006
Messages
46,432
Location
Hope, We Lose
I never said you hate Lindelof. I say that your use or statistic is based on a fallacy.
In my opinion, it show that you have a strong agenda
My agenda is Manchester United doing better and improving the team and results. To that end, yes I view Lindelof with an agenda. I don't rate him as a good enough central defender for us to be challenging for the title and as the weakest link in our back 4. Thanks
 

andersj

Nick Powell Expert
Joined
Aug 7, 2004
Messages
2,368
Location
Copenhagen
With mine you would take into account everything else you'd want in a striker including general play, setting up chances for others, etc.
Actually you dont. You take into account those that suit you and that you find on whoscored.
 

Ekeke

Full Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2006
Messages
46,432
Location
Hope, We Lose
I did not.
Actually you dont. You take into account those that suit you and that you find on whoscored.
Yes the stats that suit me are all the ones you would want from a striker :houllier: Of course I'd pick the selection of stats that "suit me". Those are the ones that would be used to match up to the criteria. Why would someone "take into account" stats that wouldnt be useful for a striker?
 

andersj

Nick Powell Expert
Joined
Aug 7, 2004
Messages
2,368
Location
Copenhagen
My agenda is Manchester United doing better and improving the team and results. To that end, yes I view Lindelof with an agenda. I don't rate him as a good enough central defender for us to be challenging for the title and as the weakest link in our back 4.
Fair enough. But your way of trying to prove it comes of as rather silly, and indicate that you dont quite understand the figures you use!

Your welcome!
 

BenitoSTARR

Full Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2015
Messages
2,154
I've posted it several times already in this thread. It'll just have more people saying I hate someone I've never met. Its not my fault you're a new frog or cant be bothered to look back.

Yes, my answer is to replace the weak link so that we do have the best defense instead of spending the most and still being behind. Thats everyone's answer. Nobody has ever refused to improve their team.
Had a look back at your posts and what little stats you do provide they don’t support your criticism.

You are currently displaying a worrying lack of awareness of both context and what a defenders job is. Also calling me a new frog? Ironic as your arguments hop from one meaningless interpretation to another.

Who do you suggest we buy to improve this “weak link”? How much would this new player cost?
Simply not true. Made more recoveries per 90 min than Maguire according to statsbomb. Also made more blocks.

Yes he makes few tackles, interceptions and clearences. A lot of great CBs do, and it is a poor measure of how good a CB is used by people who dont understand the numbers or the game.
Clear agenda poster. Would rather completely ignore the role of a defender and the stats that really matter. Are we conceding lots of goals? Nope. So should we be constantly laying into these players? Nope.

Completely agree with you it’s used by people who don’t actually know what they are talking about.
But very low compared to a lot of average defenders. And he was probably the best in the world at the time. So why is it important? Why is it an important figure when the best defender in the world comes out poorly compared to average defenders? When the stat probably would tell you that Lovren is the best defender at Liverpool this season?

It is also funny that you try making a meal out of it «not being as low», as if there was some sort of magic cut off? It is probably even weirder than using the number in the first place. I mean, I’m sure you agree that van Dijk is a lot better than several players that wins more tackles, interceptions, aeriel duels and makes more clearences. But how do you end up thinking that there is some kind of minimum here? What is the logic behind it?

It is also interesting that you use clearences (passing without intention of finding a team mate), a number that has been falling among top CBs this decade as an contribution thay should be measured and compared, but not recoveries.

In my opinion, it show that you have a strong agenda and that you dont really understand the stat you throw around.
This. Well said!
 

Ekeke

Full Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2006
Messages
46,432
Location
Hope, We Lose
Fair enough. But your way of trying to prove it comes of as rather silly, and indicate that you dont quite understand the figures you use!

Your welcome!
I don't care if you think its silly. You've shown me nothing but confusion over what you have said yourself in the past hour, let alone what happened in a full season on a football pitch. You've shown a lack of awareness and understanding of how to analyse stats. You've flip flopped both ways on arguments, suggested players to compare against and then whined when those stats are brought up in that comparison. Thanks
 

BenitoSTARR

Full Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2015
Messages
2,154
Nope, never argued that this prove that he is good or bad. Never.
I believed you were just responding by pointing out two metrics where he was performing better than others as the other guy had claimed every stat of Lindelofs was concerning.

Would like to back you on this one.
 

UNITED ACADEMY

Full Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2018
Messages
4,533
Lindelof is just a decent centre back who relies on his positioning. When you want to talk about Lindelof think of a Blind, and Blind is a good centre back. 2 centre backs with lack of pace & physical strength relies on positioning but Blind has much more intelligent in defending than Lindelof & much more superior than Lindelof on the ball playing ability.

Lindelof just doesn't have outstanding assets, he was just decent on what he does. Blind on the other hand has the outstanding assets to be centre back in top club. I always believe if Blind has pace, he will be a top class centre back while if Lindelof has pace he will be a good one only.
 

andersj

Nick Powell Expert
Joined
Aug 7, 2004
Messages
2,368
Location
Copenhagen
I don't care if you think its silly. You've shown me nothing but confusion over what you have said yourself in the past hour, let alone what happened in a full season on a football pitch. You've shown a lack of awareness and understanding of how to analyse stats. You've flip flopped both ways on arguments, suggested players to compare against and then whined when those stats are brought up in that comparison. Thanks
Based on your use, we would probably be better of with Schar, Bednarek or Tarkowski than VvD or Varane. Or do these makes just enough of these involvemens to meet the threshold to be considered ok?
 

andersj

Nick Powell Expert
Joined
Aug 7, 2004
Messages
2,368
Location
Copenhagen
I believed you were just responding by pointing out two metrics where he was performing better than others as the other guy had claimed every stat of Lindelofs was concerning.

Would like to back you on this one.
Correct. Thanks.

(I would never use stat that way.)
 

BenitoSTARR

Full Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2015
Messages
2,154
Lindelof is just a decent centre back who relies on his positioning. When you want to talk about Lindelof think of a Blind, and Blind is a good centre back. 2 centre backs with lack of pace & physical strength relies on positioning but Blind has much more intelligent in defending than Lindelof & much more superior than Lindelof on the ball playing ability.

Lindelof just doesn't have outstanding assets, he was just decent on what he does. Blind on the other hand has the outstanding assets to be centre back in top club. I always believe if Blind has pace, he will be a top class centre back while if Lindelof has pace he will be a good one only.
Lindelöf isn’t slow.

I’d argue his positioning and containing are outstanding.

Heading is his weakness and the rest he’s good at.

So overall I’d say he’s a very good but not excellent CB at the moment as an individual.
 

UNITED ACADEMY

Full Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2018
Messages
4,533
Lindelöf isn’t slow.

I’d argue his positioning and containing are outstanding.

Heading is his weakness and the rest he’s good at.

So overall I’d say he’s a very good but not excellent CB at the moment as an individual.
Calm down, don't go beyond there mate.
 

UNITED ACADEMY

Full Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2018
Messages
4,533
Calm down? Eh?

He has two outstanding traits and overall is very good?

For context:

David Luis
Very bad
Bad
Below Average
Average
Above average
Good
Very Good
Excellent
Luiz is decent as a CB overall. Shite positioning & concentration but has very good physical attribute & great ball playing ability. That's my standard. What's your standard?
 

He'sRaldo

Full Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2019
Messages
1,638
It's like when Firmino isn't scoring, the things he does do are hyped up a lot.

Lindelof's attributes are just good enough to get the job done. His positioning is the only above average attribute, and it's not good enough to offset the other attributes at a club like ours; especially when paired with a huge weakness for a CB which is a lack of aggression. But since it's his standout attribute, it's being made more than it actually is.

I'd say he has 2 main contributions right now, which are not being injured a lot, and gelling decently enough with Maguire who is currently our main CB.
 

Ekeke

Full Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2006
Messages
46,432
Location
Hope, We Lose
Lindelof is just a decent centre back who relies on his positioning. When you want to talk about Lindelof think of a Blind, and Blind is a good centre back. 2 centre backs with lack of pace & physical strength relies on positioning but Blind has much more intelligent in defending than Lindelof & much more superior than Lindelof on the ball playing ability.

Lindelof just doesn't have outstanding assets, he was just decent on what he does. Blind on the other hand has the outstanding assets to be centre back in top club. I always believe if Blind has pace, he will be a top class centre back while if Lindelof has pace he will be a good one only.
Since this is another comparison brought up, look here



So once again we have another player who is far more aggressive with ball winning than Lindelof, just like Ferdinand was. I do understand why you tried to compare them afterall Lindelof coming in did seem to take the spot Blind had under LVG at CB - and neither Blind, nor the previously compared Ferdinand were known for being aggressive and ball winning defenders.

But once again, Lindelof is on a complete other level of passive defending and staying away from trying to win the ball. He's not like Ferdinand and he's not like Blind. He's our least aggressive CB way beyond them and thats why I don't rate him.
 

sp_107

Full Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2012
Messages
1,394
Location
Yorkshire
Why this much discussion ? Sell him to Barca/Inter for 40M and buy either Upamecano or Kabak with that money so we can close this thread ?
 

Ekeke

Full Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2006
Messages
46,432
Location
Hope, We Lose
Why this much discussion ? Sell him to Barca/Inter for 40M and buy either Upamecano or Kabak with that money so we can close this thread ?
You'd think they'd have to be in for him this summer if he's as great as is made out here. So we'll see what they bid.

Once again I think he's perfectly fine as a 3rd choice. But I cannot lie, I would be so interested to see if a club overrates him half as much as the posters in this thread and would offer a load of money for him.
 

yan man utd

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Sep 27, 2016
Messages
120
Pogba losing possession is not because of Lindelof. It's his own problem. He doesn't need to get outnumbered. He dilly dallies too long and he loses even on one to one. Lindelof is a sensible player that needs to improve his heading a lot more. Normally keepers shouldn't get beaten by long range shots. I said normally.
DeGea has let in so many goals he should have saved. I do agree the longer the range the easier it's to save. So outfield players shouldn't let attacking players enter the area. But going in for a tackle and getting beaten is much worse than to slow down the attacker and get the numbers back to defend.
I don’t disagree with anything you’ve said here; what I’m talking about it having at least one tenacious, proactive CB who has the balls to step in front of the striker and intercept the crucial passes which take the opposition into the transition of attack. Maguire and Lindelöf as a pair back off too soon, in fact Lindelof especially is neither ambitious enough or confident enough to win possession further up the pitch (and nip attacks in the bud)

all too often he is knocking it straight out of play to be on the same side and I’m not absolving Pogba of responsibility but these situations where he has been ganged up on would be avoided... we lose momentum because we then take ages to re-impose ourselves and control the game in the oppositions half....
 

UNITED ACADEMY

Full Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2018
Messages
4,533
Since this is another comparison brought up, look here



So once again we have another player who is far more aggressive with ball winning than Lindelof, just like Ferdinand was. I do understand why you tried to compare them afterall Lindelof coming in did seem to take the spot Blind had under LVG at CB - and neither Blind, nor the previously compared Ferdinand were known for being aggressive and ball winning defenders.

But once again, Lindelof is on a complete other level of passive defending and staying away from trying to win the ball. He's not like Ferdinand and he's not like Blind. He's our least aggressive CB way beyond them and thats why I don't rate him.
Ferdinand not aggressive? You must be only watch his late seasons of him not when he used to still have his prime leg. Ferdinand is a complete one that he was more aggressive in his prime career but much more (your definition) "passive defending" during his late season.


So Blind isn't aggressive according to you. If he's not aggressive then there is only one definition, he's ''passive defending" then?
 

Ekeke

Full Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2006
Messages
46,432
Location
Hope, We Lose
Ferdinand not aggressive? You must be only watch his late seasons of him not when he used to still have his prime leg. Ferdinand is a complete one that he was more aggressive in his prime career but much more composed during his late season.


So Blind isn't aggressive according to you. If he's not aggressive then there is only one definition, he's ''passive defending" then?
No, neither one were considered aggressive ball winners - particularly in the air. That part is like Lindelof.

On the deck they did as we can see by the stats. But they never had the reputations of being aggressive CBs. The stats show they both won the ball plenty. Another one is Carrick, he too had seasons where he won the ball a lot. When he won the ball less people would talk about "intangibles"
 

fps

Full Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2018
Messages
3,860
I agree. He really gets about rapidly and clears up a lot of danger in all sorts of alarming areas. He’s not brilliant but he is becoming very good. I would keep him around but I think we need a real beast of an athlete to play next to Maguire who I would definitely build the defence around (even if he moves like a damaged tank at times).
:lol: Love that analogy. Maguire brings out gold.
 

UNITED ACADEMY

Full Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2018
Messages
4,533
No, neither one were considered aggressive ball winners - particularly in the air. That part is like Lindelof.
I gave you 15 min video to watch not to ignore. Ferdinand is a complete one that he was more aggressive in his prime career but much more composed during his late season.

On the deck they did as we can see by the stats. But they never had the reputations of being aggressive CBs. The stats show they both won the ball plenty. Another one is Carrick, he too had seasons where he won the ball a lot. When he won the ball less people would talk about "intangibles"
What stats? You're not reading. I just told you Rio is a complete one and he used to be more aggressive in his prime career, all I saw is stats of Rio post his prime years.

If Blind is not aggressive then he's the opposite "passive" right? And Blind's number pretty much tells both of us & also people who defend Lindelof that Blind is much better than Lindelof. This is why I said Blind is a good CB while Lindelof is just decent.
 
Last edited:

Ekeke

Full Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2006
Messages
46,432
Location
Hope, We Lose
I gave you 15 min video to watch not to ignore. Ferdinand is a complete one that he was more aggressive in his prime career but much more composed during his late season.



What stats? You're not reading. I just told you Rio is a complete one and he used to be more aggressive in his prime career, all I saw is stats of Rio post his prime years.

So what is Blind? If he's not aggressive then he's the opposite "passive" right? And Blind's number pretty much tells you why he's much better than Lindelof.
I watched his entire United career and years before that, I dont need your video thankyou

No if you arent of repute as a particularly aggressive CB and you arent a passive CB, then you are of course in the middle which would be a balance like most CBs. Trust you to think that something has to be at one side of two extremes though :lol:

Blind had low numbers in the air and not much strength. Other than that he was a pretty standard CB. Because he didnt win too much in the air and wasnt strong, he certainly wasnt considered an aggressive CB at United. Most posters would suggest he isnt tough enough so quite the opposite
 

andersj

Nick Powell Expert
Joined
Aug 7, 2004
Messages
2,368
Location
Copenhagen
Just to clarify, I dont think Lindelof is a great player comparable to Rio. I am sure we could improve upon him. But I do think he is alot better footballer than Smalling, Jones and Rojo. I also prefer him over Bailly. And I’m not sure there is a huge gap in quality between him and Maguire.

First and foremost, I do not agree at all with Ekekes use of stat. Compounding the defensive involvements that way gives little useful information.

And btw, clearences? Is making many clearences even a good thing?
 

Andycoleno9

Full Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2017
Messages
11,366
Location
Croatia
Just to clarify, I dont think Lindelof is a great player comparable to Rio. I am sure we could improve upon him. But I do think he is alot better footballer than Smalling, Jones and Rojo. I also prefer him over Bailly. And I’m not sure there is a huge gap in quality between him and Maguire.

First and foremost, I do not agree at all with Ekekes use of stat. Compounding the defensive involvements that way gives little useful information.

And btw, clearences? Is making many clearences even a good thing?
If it is then our best cb pair is Jones-Smalling. They never bothered to pass the ball or shield it or something. They would just kick the ball out of danger despite even being first on the ball.