Never said he’s basically awesome. Said he’s one of the best 3rd options and today’s performance doesn’t change that for me at all.
I’ve mentioned twice already that he should’ve done better. That doesn’t automatically negate the fact that it’s not always easy to direct your headers where you want when you’re challenged. Or the fact that those kind of situations happen with even better defenders nor the fact our midfield was nowhere to be seen when they should be fighting for that second ball.
I hope you’re giving your critical analysis on the players in front of the back four tonight. I’d say our defense did well and the problem was the gap in quality elsewhere on the pitch.
But I agree, I can’t handle the truth and post in an embarrassing and pathetic way. No disagreements there.
Herein lies the problem. The issue is not that he didn't direct the header; no, in that instance he did as well as he could have just like anyone else. It's the fact that he shouldn't be contesting a 50/50 header in the first place. He should have been on his toes to challenge/pressure/jostle and make it hard for KDB to influence the very first (bouncing) ball. By letting it bounce, he can only go for a 50/50 aerial or jostle from a standing position. By pressing against KDB or the ball, he can make it an awkward header/control; it's something Martinez does to a high standard. It's a small error in isolation but not when it comes to Lindelof. It's extremely consistent of his passive nature (just look the examples I have given) despite what the last 10-15 games have told us and the incredibly roundabout ways some posters have been using to absolve this tendency:
"He wasn't told by coaches previously to be proactive and aggressive"
"Varane and Martinez conceded 6 goals against City (despite Lindelof coming on and conceding three with him on the pitch but you know, let's ignore facts) so therefore this means Lindelof is just as good as anybody else"
"It's the midfield's fault"
You can look up my post about Casemiro, where I've basically said it was a one-man midfield. Besides, I'm not blaming the loss on Lindelof. I'm blaming Lindelof for consistently underwhelming me and always flattering to deceive after a run of form. I'm basing this on 6 years of rinse, repeat and not 10-15 games cycles.
As for the last line, it's funny how you turn the moral cheek after I call you out on it. That's good, at least you can show some growth, unlike our melting Iceman.