Victor Lindelof image 2

Victor Lindelof Sweden flag

2020-21 Performances


View full 2020-21 profile

5.9 Season Average Rating
Appearances
29
Clean sheets
10
Goals
1
Assists
1
Yellow cards
4

ivaldo

Mediocre Horse Whisperer, s'up wid chew?
Joined
Nov 15, 2012
Messages
26,105
To be fair I need to watch the incident again but Lindelof was all over him and should have conceded a yellow/free kick. Bailly comes out favourbly if just a little as he was rusty and against a faster player.

We all come into this loaded with preconceptions and opinions as we're watching 1000's of minutes to form an opinion on a player's game.

Lindelof being 'average' would be my definition of you giving him benefit of the doubt (and thus loaded). My opinion along with others is that he was thoroughly uninvolved and therefore a net negative. It's not average, it's below that.

If Vidic had played like Lindelof today, I would say 'average off game' because this would be below par. For Lindelof, it's par for the course.
Again, if Lindelof was all over him and he ended up goal side, it flies in the face of the pretence he was left for dead; while Bailly, who neither got within touching distance or goal side, somehow got the better of it.

You're saying it's fine to be unreasonable because you don't rate him. That's entirely different to seeing confirmation bias. Course he was involved. Ridiculous to suggest otherwise.

Good call @A-man. Weird not to count that.
 

A-man

Full Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2017
Messages
3,499
Thank you @GifLord

Just for me to understand the whoscored stats better. What would you call the situation with Lindelof in the clip provided from GifLord?
It is apparently not registered as duel or aerial, and I checked the logger, it is not regged as clearance. For me this is a duel. What do you think?
 

criticalanalysis

Full Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Messages
2,756
Again, if Lindelof was all over him and he ended up goal side, it flies in the face of the pretence he was left for dead; while Bailly, who neither got within touching distance or goal side, somehow got the better of it.

You're saying it's fine to be unreasonable because you don't rate him. That's entirely different to seeing confirmation bias. Course he was involved. Ridiculous to suggest otherwise.


Good call @A-man. Weird not to count that.
@GifLord can you link the Lindelof 1-vs-1 Almiron?

Let's see it again but I first thought he was left for dead and managed to get goal side because he was fouling him and got away with it. Almiron not going down, then checking his run and immediatedly getting dispossesd by Fred didn't go in his favour. Bailly did indeed get within touching distance, he was literally shoulder to shoulder just before Isak took a loose/wider touch (due to Bailly's pressure?) and when Maguire cleared:


If by being on the pitch, a few passes and clearances etc then of course he was involved just like how Martial was involved i.e that's not an endorsement.

It's a figure of speech to say he was largely annonymous not just compared to his defensive partner but in general. Someone can verify the stats someone posted up earlier but I'm sure even with the inconsistencies shown in the clip posted by Giflord above, it's going to be proportionately fair for or against likewise.

Some others have pointed out (anecdotally) that it's remarkable how Lindelof is not involved in our set pieces. I mean what was he doing pushing out for that short corner?
 

ivaldo

Mediocre Horse Whisperer, s'up wid chew?
Joined
Nov 15, 2012
Messages
26,105
@GifLord can you link the Lindelof 1-vs-1 Almiron?

Let's see it again but I first thought he was left for dead and managed to get goal side because he was fouling him and got away with it. Almiron not going down, then checking his run and immediatedly getting dispossesd by Fred didn't go in his favour. Bailly did indeed get within touching distance, he was literally shoulder to shoulder just before Isak took a loose/wider touch (due to Bailly's pressure?) and Maguire cleared:


if by being on the pitch, a few passes and clearances etc then of course he was involved just like how Martial was involved i.e that's not an endorsement.

It's a figure of speech to say he was largely annonymous compared to his defensive partner.

Some others have pointed out (anecdotally) that it's remarkable how Lindelof is not involved in our set pieces. I mean what was he doing pushing out for that short corner?
He can't be left for dead while simultaneously fouling him. Those two statements are incompatible. Unless he's a Jedi of course. :p

Yes his defensive partner had more defending to do. Lindelof didn't do anything particularly good, he didn't do anything particularly bad either. By definition, that makes him average. If DDG went 45 minutes without touching the ball, it would be a bit ridiculous to say he was below average, no? When called upon, Lindelof did what he had to do. Nothing more, nothing less. It's not his fault Newcastle are shite. When did you think he shirked his responsibility? When did he not press the matter enough for you?
 

criticalanalysis

Full Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Messages
2,756
He can't be left for dead while simultaneously fouling him. Those two statements are incompatible. Unless he's a Jedi of course. :p

Yes his defensive partner had more defending to do. Lindelof didn't do anything particularly good, he didn't do anything particularly bad either. By definition, that makes him average. If DDG went 45 minutes without touching the ball, it would be a bit ridiculous to say he was below average, no? When called upon, Lindelof did what he had to do. Nothing more, nothing less. It's not his fault Newcastle are shite. When did you think he shirked his responsibility? When did he not press the matter enough for you?
Ah I realise what you mean. 'Left for dead' meaning in this case, I think he would have had a clear run had it not been for the fouling, which Almiron was a bit unfortunate not to get (coupled with Fred's immediate cover). Let's see the clip again.

Speaking of dramitising, I'm glad you acknowledged Bailly's pace to recover from his own situation where he was clearly within touching distance.

As for the bolded, yes. Too much posturing outside his own penalty box. Not enough pressing, ball carrying or progressive passing. A lot of it was 5-10 yard square passes or it going back to where it came from. Took little responsibility.

We're not playing against peak Barca/City/Liverpool so yes he has to impose himself on the game just like how Martial didn't. By that I don't mean flying tackles and madman harrying, just more quality and nuance. You shouldn't reduce your level to what's in front of you, it's not enough as we need everyone raising their game.

The stats tell one story.
 

GifLord

The gif that keeps on giffing
Joined
Jun 7, 2013
Messages
17,540
Location
LALALAND
@GifLord can you link the Lindelof 1-vs-1 Almiron?

Let's see it again but I first thought he was left for dead and managed to get goal side because he was fouling him and got away with it. Almiron not going down, then checking his run and immediatedly getting dispossesd by Fred didn't go in his favour. Bailly did indeed get within touching distance, he was literally shoulder to shoulder just before Isak took a loose/wider touch (due to Bailly's pressure?) and when Maguire cleared:


If by being on the pitch, a few passes and clearances etc then of course he was involved just like how Martial was involved i.e that's not an endorsement.

It's a figure of speech to say he was largely annonymous not just compared to his defensive partner but in general. Someone can verify the stats someone posted up earlier but I'm sure even with the inconsistencies shown in the clip posted by Giflord above, it's going to be proportionately fair for or against likewise.

Some others have pointed out (anecdotally) that it's remarkable how Lindelof is not involved in our set pieces. I mean what was he doing pushing out for that short corner?
got a time stamp?
 

Doracle

Full Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2017
Messages
396
Is Almiron even quick? I don’t recall him looking fast previously. I know Lindelof is relatively slow but he got horribly exposed in that incident.
 

ivaldo

Mediocre Horse Whisperer, s'up wid chew?
Joined
Nov 15, 2012
Messages
26,105
Ah I realise what you mean. 'Left for dead' meaning in this case, I think he would have had a clear run had it not been for the fouling, which Almiron was a bit unfortunate not to get (coupled with Fred's immediate cover). Let's see the clip again.

Speaking of dramitising, I'm glad you acknowledged Bailly's pace to recover from his own situation where he was clearly within touching distance.

As for the bolded, yes. Too much posturing outside his own penalty box. Not enough pressing, ball carrying or progressive passing. A lot of it was 5-10 yard square passes or it going back to where it came from. Took little responsibility.

We're not playing against peak Barca/City/Liverpool so yes he has to impose himself on the game just like how Martial didn't. By that I don't mean flying tackles and madman harrying, just more quality and nuance. You shouldn't reduce your level to what's in front of you, it's not enough as we need everyone raising their game.

The stats tell one story.
That wouldn't be left for dead, then. I'm perfectly happy with fouling in situations like these. I wish we did more of it. Everyone else seems to.

Yes, correct. Bailly caught him at the last. That's not dramatising but I applaud the effort to equalize the two.

Ah, so no actual instances, just vague, empty notions. It's what I expected.

You want 15/20 yard passes into the space to take advantage of the clever movement of Martial and James? That's what everyone else was doing of course.

I'm bored of this merry-go-round. As far as I'm concerned, your desperation to find fault is precisely what I mean. I'm sure you'll think otherwise. Have a nice evening.
 

criticalanalysis

Full Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Messages
2,756
got a time stamp?
Not sure 24min? If you can't find it no biggie, thanks.

That wouldn't be left for dead, then. I'm perfectly happy with fouling in situations like these. I wish we did more of it. Everyone else seems to.

Yes, correct. Bailly caught him at the last. That's not dramatising but I applaud the effort to equalize the two.

Ah, so no actual instances, just vague, empty notions. It's what I expected.

You want 15/20 yard passes into the space to take advantage of the clever movement of Martial and James? That's what everyone else was doing of course.

I'm bored of this merry-go-round. As far as I'm concerned, your desperation to find fault is precisely what I mean. I'm sure you'll think otherwise. Have a nice evening.
'Vague'? What the actual feck. You want me to list all the instances where Lindelof could have made more incisive passes, pressed faster or took initiative with the ball?

Rewatch the game because there's no stats for that but how about the below:

Lindelof against Newcastle

0 Duels attempted
0 Aerials duels attempted
0 tackles attempted
0 interceptions
3 clearances
3 recoveries
0 blocks

For Maguire

12 duels attempted
6/6 aerial duels won
2 tackles attempted
1 interception
3 clearances
11 recoveries
1 block

One man defence.
Then secondly, how many times did Maguire find Shaw or play passes inbetween the lines? How many times did Lindelof do anything remarkably similar or to the same frequency?

Thirdly, I am far from the only person saying this.

But sure we're all 5 year olds with agendas.
 

city-puma

Full Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2020
Messages
667
Location
NYC
It’s very obvious now that Maguire and Lindelof are just too similar so that the partnership doesn’t work well, because they have the similar flaws and not able to complement each other.
Bailly needs to take care of his body to partner Maguire consistently. Can he do yoga?
 

mav_9me

Full Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2009
Messages
6,137
Thank you @GifLord

Just for me to understand the whoscored stats better. What would you call the situation with Lindelof in the clip provided from GifLord?
It is apparently not registered as duel or aerial, and I checked the logger, it is not regged as clearance. For me this is a duel. What do you think?
That is weird. Its absolutely an aerial duel and one in which he did good.

I think Lindelof is a huge weak link but he didn't do anything really wrong today.
 
Joined
Jan 8, 2017
Messages
2,554
Is Almiron even quick? I don’t recall him looking fast previously. I know Lindelof is relatively slow but he got horribly exposed in that incident.
Yes, he is. One of the fastest players in the league actually, very atypical sort of #10. Lindelof was still poor in that situation imo
 

Mcking

Full Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2017
Messages
5,234
Location
Nigeria
It’s very obvious now that Maguire and Lindelof are just too similar so that the partnership doesn’t work well, because they have the similar flaws and not able to complement each other.
This does my head in. They are not remotely similar. There's no partnership as well. It is just Maguire doing the majority of the defending and having to make do with Lindelof beside him.
 

BenitoSTARR

Full Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2015
Messages
3,630
You can’t make it up. Lindelof does well to defend against a pacey player. He shouldn’t have touched him etc

The same people praising Bailly’s recovery pace and physicality are now criticising Lindelof for showing recovery pace and physicality. :lol:
 
Joined
Jul 31, 2015
Messages
13,979
Location
Somewhere out there
You can’t make it up. Lindelof does well to defend against a pacey player. He shouldn’t have touched him etc

The same people praising Bailly’s recovery pace and physicality are now criticising Lindelof for showing recovery pace and physicality. :lol:
To be fair, I think those people are playing a bit tongue in cheek with ivaldo due to his incredibly ott criticism of a pretty nothing situation in the week.
 

BenitoSTARR

Full Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2015
Messages
3,630
To be fair, I think those people are playing a bit tongue in cheek with ivaldo due to his incredibly ott criticism of a pretty nothing situation in the week.
I hope so.

They are pretty similar circumstances though you could argue Bailly being in the centre of the pitch and making his mistake was a bit more of a worry both defenders dealt with the situation.
 

Kostov

Full Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2017
Messages
6,384
Location
Skopje, Macedonia
And Lindelof still ended up goal side while Bailly didn't. So, as I said, it's utter nonsense to deem Bailly had recovered from his mistake while Lindelof was left for dead. :houllier:
Your are quick to point out how he ended up goal side and Bailly didn't but ignore the fact that if Almiron had a bit of sense he would have gained a free kick and a yellow for Lindelof, while Bailly caught up to Isak without fouling him.

IMO they both did fairly well considering their limitations (lindelof's pace compared to Almiron) but you criticized Bailly to an extent for a nothing situation just like the one from yesterday.
 

Ekeke

Full Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2006
Messages
48,235
Location
Hope, We Lose
Thank you @GifLord

Just for me to understand the whoscored stats better. What would you call the situation with Lindelof in the clip provided from GifLord?
It is apparently not registered as duel or aerial, and I checked the logger, it is not regged as clearance. For me this is a duel. What do you think?
I'd say its a header/aerial and if its not considered a duel maybe its because his opponent doesnt jump and compete properly for it, he stays on the floor allowing a clear headed clearance. Maybe its even a foul with Lindelof going down clutching his chest
 

Ekeke

Full Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2006
Messages
48,235
Location
Hope, We Lose
22:29 is the end of the Lindelof and Almiron chase. He got turned but I'd actually say he did well to get back with him and get him to turn back towards Fred and eventually lose the ball.
 

ivaldo

Mediocre Horse Whisperer, s'up wid chew?
Joined
Nov 15, 2012
Messages
26,105
Your are quick to point out how he ended up goal side and Bailly didn't but ignore the fact that if Almiron had a bit of sense he would have gained a free kick and a yellow for Lindelof, while Bailly caught up to Isak without fouling him.

IMO they both did fairly well considering their limitations (lindelof's pace compared to Almiron) but you criticized Bailly to an extent for a nothing situation just like the one from yesterday.
Eh? Ive mentioned it at least twice in this thread.
 

ivaldo

Mediocre Horse Whisperer, s'up wid chew?
Joined
Nov 15, 2012
Messages
26,105
I hope so.

They are pretty similar circumstances though you could argue Bailly being in the centre of the pitch and making his mistake was a bit more of a worry both defenders dealt with the situation.
It's quite incredible isn't it?

I imagine RAB has realized the blatant double standards in play here and is desperate for a way to justify it. We both know if it wasn't highlighted when Bailly did it the Lindelof incident would have been a damning indictment. But as they've already praised Bailly for worse, it becomes a bit awkward.
 
Last edited:

BenitoSTARR

Full Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2015
Messages
3,630
It's quite incredible isn't it?

I imagine RAB has realized the blatant double standards in play here and is desperate for a way to justify it. We both know if it wasn't highlighted when Bailly did it the Lindelof incident would have been a damning indictment. But as they've already praised Bailly for worse, it becomes a bit awkward.
Agendas gonna agenda though.

Do agree had we not seen Bailly do it with Maguire mid week it would be spun as “Lindelof was too reactive and slow to deal with it so Fred had to save him.”

People are clutching by suggesting he shouldn’t hold onto the player. What happened to wanting a physical CB?
 

ivaldo

Mediocre Horse Whisperer, s'up wid chew?
Joined
Nov 15, 2012
Messages
26,105
Agendas gonna agenda though.

Do agree had we not seen Bailly do it with Maguire mid week it would be spun as “Lindelof was too reactive and slow to deal with it so Fred had to save him.”

People are clutching by suggesting he shouldn’t hold onto the player. What happened to wanting a physical CB?
So true. 'Too passive' springs to mind.
 

Kostov

Full Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2017
Messages
6,384
Location
Skopje, Macedonia
I hope so.

They are pretty similar circumstances though you could argue Bailly being in the centre of the pitch and making his mistake was a bit more of a worry both defenders dealt with the situation.
Contrary Bailly turning and chasing him down the middle between himself and Maguire was probably the deciding factor and good on that occasion, allowing Maguire to catch up.. Not sure about Lindelof, since haven't seen the incident again, but I feel he did good slowing Almiron for Fred to catch up abd lucky Almiron didn't fall down.
 

A-man

Full Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2017
Messages
3,499
Good call @A-man. Weird not to count that.
That is weird. Its absolutely an aerial duel and one in which he did good.

I think Lindelof is a huge weak link but he didn't do anything really wrong today.
I'd say its a header/aerial and if its not considered a duel maybe its because his opponent doesnt jump and compete properly for it, he stays on the floor allowing a clear headed clearance. Maybe its even a foul with Lindelof going down clutching his chest
I find it strange to not register that as a aerial, clearance or duel but I’ve seen this before. Like @Ekeke wrote it could be because the opponent didn’t challenge enough, didn’t jump etc. People tend to forget that these stats have a large portion of subjectivity in them. I suspect that if ten trained people would analyse this situation they would end up with different results.

I’ve also seen that if a clearance ends up with a team mate, it is often registered as a pass and not a clearance.
 
Joined
Jul 31, 2015
Messages
13,979
Location
Somewhere out there
It's quite incredible isn't it?

I imagine RAB has realized the blatant double standards in play here and is desperate for a way to justify it. We both know if it wasn't highlighted when Bailly did it the Lindelof incident would have been a damning indictment. But as they've already praised Bailly for worse, it becomes a bit awkward.
It was a nothing incident, Lindelöf showed decent pace, there was never any danger.

It’s only brought up because you spent 2 days slagging Bailly for a similar nothing incident and some posters were desperate to see if YOU had double standards or not.
 

ivaldo

Mediocre Horse Whisperer, s'up wid chew?
Joined
Nov 15, 2012
Messages
26,105
It was a nothing incident, Lindelöf showed decent pace, there was never any danger.

It’s only brought up because you spent 2 days slagging Bailly for a similar nothing incident and some posters were desperate to see if YOU had double standards or not.
I said he make 3 mistakes in a game that several members incredibly decided was a good example of why he should be starting instead of Lindelof. Then you and others took great offense to this, and tried your damned hardest to turn it into a positive. He got done on the half way line but, no, apparently, that was GOOD defending. There was NOTHING wrong with it. Indeed, at first you couldn't even see a fault in it:

What are you seeing here? That’s good teamwork from the pair, never any danger and easily dealt with.
He was turned on the half way line and had to chase him to the edge of our box man. 'Never any danger' though. It's blatantly clear with your self confessed bias that you're downplaying the incident as much as you possibly can. You can accuse me of making it out for more than it is, sure, but the only reason it's highlighted in the first place is because this is the sort of thing he routinely gets blasted for.

This after examining every single aspect of Lindelofs game under a microscope for the last 2 months. The hypocrisy would be harder to spot if it was licking your face. And no, it's very sweet of you to say that this was all because of me. The endless pages of petty criticisms of Lindelof shows this is standard practice. Nice try though!
 

Polar

Full Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2020
Messages
419
Watched Brighton - Palace and have to say I’m impressed of Cahill’s warrior mentality and his leadership on the pitch. He is into his 36y and still a motivated professional, although he has achieved a lot in his career.

Why I’m speaking of Cahill? Because he is everything Lindelof isn’t; what I miss. I actually think Lindelof would’ve struggled to be a regular on many teams in PL. Off course we need to buy a new CB!
 
Last edited:

Poborsky's hair

Full Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2020
Messages
375
Supports
Bohemians 1905
Is Almiron even quick? I don’t recall him looking fast previously. I know Lindelof is relatively slow but he got horribly exposed in that incident.
Another myth that he's faster than Maguire, Lindelof is painfully slow too but on top of that his weak physique means he can hardly ever win any race shoulder to shoulder. Lindelof really has got nothing any top CB should have for a top team. Just because this time we didn't concede after his mistake, means he had a fine game and should stay. History will repeat itself until we buy injury free CB or two who are not shite because quite simply anyone can replace him who has two legs and a head on shoulders. Reading this thread I'd even take 36 year old Cahill over him any day, in fact any EPL player from this year. Such a shame that teams like City or Leicester are able to replace their players quickly and we have to wait for many years to prove that a player one is not good enough. Can you ever imagine Darmian or Lindelof playing for teams like Bayern, Barcelona or Madrid, How many games such average players managed to play for us it's painful.

Perhaps then we can realise why we are fighting for top4 for the last 8 years instead of challenging like true heavyweight club for every trophy possible when these players can clock as many as 200 games for us altogether..
 
Joined
Jul 31, 2015
Messages
13,979
Location
Somewhere out there
I said he make 3 mistakes in a game that several members incredibly decided was a good example of why he should be starting instead of Lindelof. Then you and others took great offense to this, and tried your damned hardest to turn it into a positive. He got done on the half way line but, no, apparently, that was GOOD defending. There was NOTHING wrong with it. Indeed, at first you couldn't even see a fault in it:



He was turned on the half way line and had to chase him to the edge of our box man. 'Never any danger' though. It's blatantly clear with your self confessed bias that you're downplaying the incident as much as you possibly can. You can accuse me of making it out for more than it is, sure, but the only reason it's highlighted in the first place is because this is the sort of thing he routinely gets blasted for.

This after examining every single aspect of Lindelofs game under a microscope for the last 2 months. The hypocrisy would be harder to spot if it was licking your face. And no, it's very sweet of you to say that this was all because of me. The endless pages of petty criticisms of Lindelof shows this is standard practice. Nice try though!
It is because of you though, in this instance. I’m not trying anything.
You went to great lengths to point out what a big mistake a nothing incident was, posting gifs and everything, and you’re still doing it now.

Neither was any danger, so it’s a strange bias from me to say I thought Lindelöf showed good pace and defended the situation fine. You’ve just made up your own bias that ”had you not pointed out Bailly’s mistake in the week, people would have been all over this”.
I call that bollocks, it’s was another nothing incident, not worthy of any debate and was only brought up because of your putting that Bailly incident under the microscope.

But sure, pretend you aren’t completely responsible for this debate about two nothing incidents.
 
Last edited:

ivaldo

Mediocre Horse Whisperer, s'up wid chew?
Joined
Nov 15, 2012
Messages
26,105
It is because of you though, in this instance. I’m not trying anything.
You went to great lengths to point out what a big mistake a nothing incident was, posting gifs and everything, and you’re still doing it now.

Neither was any danger, so it’s a strange bias from me to say I thought Lindelöf showed good pace and defended the situation fine. You’ve just made up your own bias that ”had you not pointed out Bailly’s mistake in the week, people would have been all over this”.
I call that bollocks, it’s was another nothing incident, not worthy of any debate and was only brought up because of your putting that Bailly incident under the microscope.

But sure, pretend you aren’t completely responsible for this debate about two nothing incidents.
You see, you don't even know how this situation arose, you're just making convenient assumptions because that's what you do.

I hadn't mentioned the specific incident at first. Another poster brought it up as an example of good defending, and what we've been missing. They mentioned the time stamp, they compared it to Lindelof, and they said it would be a goal if Lindelof was playing. Despite that you state I'm the one who is exaggerating the danger there, when the person who I originally replied to requesting the gif had said it would be a goal if Lindelof was playing in his place. Sounds like a pretty dangerous situation he's portraying, right?

So no, it's not some strange bias I has brought up. Someone had, quite literally, already made that comparison. I would give you the benefit of doubt because the conversation crossed multiple threads, but I see you make no attempt to actually ascertain where it started. RABs gonna RAB.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jul 31, 2015
Messages
13,979
Location
Somewhere out there
You see, you don't even know how this situation arose, you're just making convenient assumptions because that's what you do.

I hadn't mentioned the specific incident at first. Another poster brought it up as an example of good defending, and what we've been missing. They mentioned the time stamp, they compared it to Lindelof, and they said it would be a goal if Lindelof was playing. Despite that you state I'm the one who is exaggerating the danger there, when the person who I originally replied to requesting the gif had said it would be a goal if Lindelof was playing in his place. Sounds like a pretty dangerous situation he's portraying, right?

So no, it's not some strange bias I has brought up. Someone had, quite literally, already made that comparison. I would give you the benefit of doubt because the conversation crossed multiple threads, but I see you make no attempt to actually ascertain where it started. RABs gonna RAB.
Feck me @ivaldo mate.....

Was let down (Maguire) by his CB partner tonight and stepped up. Excellent performance.
Yes totally let down. That's why we conceeded 4.
That’s how it started in that thread, you slagging Bailly, another poster questioning why when we had a clean sheet and you posting that as ”proof”.
Now I don’t know if you had something else going on in another thread, but the entire debate in THAT thread started there. How can the rest of us know if you actually took that over from another debate? You used it here as an example of shit defending and how he let Maguire down.

That debate is the reason the shitty nothing Lindelöf/Newcastle incident was brought up.

So yes, two nothing incidents from two defenders that you caused mass debate over.
 
Last edited:

SATA

Full Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2005
Messages
12,344
Location
We all love United
The worst Jose buy ever. He normally has a good eye for centrebacks but this is just an appalling buy. What did he ever seen in Lindelof at Benfica to get the club to sanction this transfer?
 

ivaldo

Mediocre Horse Whisperer, s'up wid chew?
Joined
Nov 15, 2012
Messages
26,105
Feck me @ivaldo mate.....





That’s how it started in that thread, you slagging Bailly, another poster questioning why when we had a clean sheet and you posting that as ”proof”.
Now I don’t know if you had something else going on in another thread, but the entire debate in THAT thread started there. How can the rest of us know if you actually took that over from another debate? You used it here as an example of shit defending and how he let Maguire down.

That debate is the reason the shitty nothing Lindelöf/Newcastle incident was brought up.

So yes, two nothing incidents from two defenders that you caused mass debate over.
And the origin of the gif came in response to the following:

Everything you need to know about our central defence was summed up around 23 rd min. They had a counter, Maguire was on way back after making a run forward with the ball. Their player breaks at pace from half way line, Bailly sticks with him for pace, doesn't make a challenge, stays up, forces him to his right and by that time Maguire has caught up and nips in with the touch. If that was Maguire and Lindelof as a pair, that's a goal or at the very least a shot on target, simple as.
.
As I already said, your assertion that I was the one continuously pressing this is just plain wrong. I also stated in my post that conversations were happening across multiple threads. So to say this is all because of me bringing up that incident is, as we can see, complete bollocks, as is this ridiculous notion that the only reason the Lindelof incident from last game was brought up was as a 'tongue in cheek' response to me. Again, you know that's bollocks, but you decided to write that anyway. I'm sorry a few people are exposing the ridiculous double standards of others that you like to occasionally partake, but it's there, and it's abundantly clear. Why defend it?

So by pointing out a failing in his game I'm 'slagging' him off, but when Lindelof is in the firing line it's justifiable critique?

Probably the same way you knew the criticism was a tongue in cheek response to me? In other words you're as about as clued up as I am on the thought processes of other posters, yet you didn't hesitate on pretending that was the reason why. I'm also curious how you'd know the conversation in the Maguire thread and not the 'Our defence - has it been fixed" thread is the reason why the dogs abuse continues in the Lindelof thread? You seem to take great offense in me making assumptions, but you're perfectly happy to make many as you like.

Oh I see so in responding to someone who makes the point I've caused the debate, and in bringing up the incident I've also caused the debate... I think you've covered your bases there. You'll also find you're guilty of the former. It takes two to tango bud.
 
Last edited: