We were a ticking time bomb

[cyberman]

Wh

Boom Sheff, Sheff Sheff U... Tick Tick Tick Tick Boom

It's pretty mad that we are/were top of the league and yet we've only really won one Premier League game this season totally comfortably case in point, only once in the Prem this season have we entered the last 15 minutes of a game more then a goal up (That comfortable game vs. Leeds).

What is comfortable though? If we arent doing it then who is?
The early goals really colours our performances. We routinely dictate games for the vast majority of 90 mins but stupid early goals conceded has us on edge.
We need credit for that. We routinely bend games to our will.

 

[youngrell]

But this is exactly the point of the thread. When every game is a slog and we always have to either hang on for dear life or throw the kitchen sink at the opponent in the final minutes, there will be shaky moments and there will be points dropped even in games where we can otherwise say that we've been the better team.

I disagree. The thread stated we are constantly in battles, being bailed out by brilliance, which simply isn't true. Sure we could be more comfortable in some games, but it's not like we've been consistently under the cosh and won by smash and grab. We have proven that it is sustainable because we've sustained it for a year.

Last night's performance was not reminiscent of any recent performance. We were awful last night.

 

[Annihilate Now!]

Wh

What is comfortable though? If we arent doing it then who is?
The early goals really colours our performances. We routinely dictate games for the vast majority of 90 mins but stupid early goals conceded has us on edge.
We need credit for that. We routinely bend games to our will.

Comfortable to me would not be going into the last 10/15 minutes of the game not worrying about getting the win.

 

[Sandikan]

In fairness, their first goal could easily have been disallowed, Maguire's challenge was definitely one of those "over protected keeper" jobs, and their winner was a flukey deflection.
But we simply didn't put enough shots in.

But then we've somehow got to the top without our strikers catching fire.

 

[bsCallout]

I don't think City will slow down, I can easily see them winning 15 out of their last 19 games. They're on the way to reach 84 points but it's unlikely they'll repeat their shaky start. So it wouldn't surprise me at all that they reach 90 points.

But for the sake of it let's say 85 points is enough, do you think with our current performances we will reach 85 points?

But again you're making assumptions on current form. It's easy to say City will continue after a 5-0 win and that we won't improve after a loss to Sheffield UTD.

I think we'll improve and I think City will have another drop.

We'll see which team swings the wrong way for the longest.

 

[bsCallout]

Yeah, they might slow down with other commitments kicking in, no doubt. It's not a guarantee though.

But as I said it doesn't really matter because we'll be below 80 anyway. We don't have to worry about City, it's the likes of Leicester and Spurs that we should look at.

I think we can hit 80. All it takes is some form from our front 3 similar to the end of last season.

 

[cyberman]

Comfortable to me would not be going into the last 10/15 minutes of the game not worrying about getting the win.

Who says it has to be that way? When do we ever give away leads?
If you were warching a rival would you be so uncertain of winning after dominating a game and getting the lead?

 

[Wednesday at Stoke]

I really hate the idea that a 38-year-old Phil Jagielka was able to shut down Man Utd at Old Trafford. Sheffield Utd had 8 or 9 players missing, they couldn't even make a full bench! There are certain patterns going on that means we shouldn't just right off last night as a freak result. We conceded first yet again, we conceded from a corner yet again, we looked impotent and disinterested going forward yet again, we weren't able to control the game for any significant period of time yet again, we were relying on a moment of individual brilliance to win us the game yet again. These are seriously concerning issues that have been bubbling under the surface and finally bit us on the arse last night.

Jagielka wasn’t the sole reason for their defense, in fact he fecked up and lost Maguire for the corner that lead to the equalizer. The rest of their midfield and defense played so tight that not one of our players could turn in the opposition half after receiving the ball let alone their box. They played 9 men behind the ball with McGoldrick the only player providing a release. They were extremely lucky to score twice and not concede from another set play. It’s a perfect storm of all kinds of shit going wrong.

The team has some issues, especially at defending set plays and the depth in midfield and left back not being good enough to rest Shaw or Fred and Ole probably took them lightly at his peril but this isn’t some season long pattern of riding luck.

 

[Siorac]

I disagree. The thread stated we are constantly in battles, being bailed out by brilliance, which simply isn't true. Sure we could be more comfortable in some games, but it's not like we've been consistently under the cosh and won by smash and grab. We have proven that it is sustainable because we've sustained it for a year.

Last night's performance was not reminiscent of any recent performance. We were awful last night.

Funny you should say that because over the last calendar year and this January, we played exactly 38 league games - a whole season's worth of games. And we got... 75 points. Which is a nice robust top 4 total but in the vast majority of seasons it's nowhere near a league title. And that's what we mean when we say it's not sustainable: that it's not sufficient for a title challenge. City, who haven't had a good 2020 at all, are already at 81 from 37 over the same period.

We are a top 4 challenger. That's what the numbers suggest, that's what the performances suggest, everything points to that. We were never going to sustain a title challenge with the way we've been playing.

 

[Dve]

Every team is set to lose a game once in a while, so in that sense you could say every team is a ticking bomb. So let´s not overdramatise now; after all, this is our first loss in the league in 14 games. Would you not have taken that 15 games ago?

We´ll bunch back against Arsenal, and this will soon be forgotten. Shit happens.

 

[Hugh Jass]

I still back Ole but i agree. We have been getting out of jail. Goals in the last minute against Southhampton and Wolves. Winning by one nil against other teams.

It is so frustrating looking at City destroy these teams. We have good players.

Someone said it yesterday that if Guardiola was in charge of us last night we would have won five nil, which i agree with.

 

[Annihilate Now!]

Who says it has to be that way? When do we ever give away leads?
If you were warching a rival would you be so uncertain of winning after dominating a game and getting the lead?

Well generally if you're not winning the game or only one goal up going into the last 10 minutes then things aren't really comfortable.

What premier league games this season have we been comfortable winners? The only games we've won by more then a goal have been Leeds (comfortable) West Ham (dire for 45 minutes, wrapped up on 78 minutes, but with how bad we were you wouldn't call that a comfortable game) Everton (scored a third in the 95th minute), and Newcastle, (took the lead on 86 minutes)... so yeah, not sure how any of those bar Leeds could be called a comfortable win.

 

[JuriM]

Last night was coming. You can’t challenge for a title by edging 50-50 games time & time again. We haven’t played well for ages yet were just about doing enough with individual brilliance from Rashford & Pogba getting winning goals. It’s not sustainable. On another day Bailly doesn’t make that block & Villa equalise, same for Burnley who missed chances, same for Fulham, on another day that deflection off Bailly goes in. We were never going to be able to keep it up, if you want to win a title you need to be convincing. We were edging wins but we were failing the eye test badly.

Out of some occasional cases, all the "big" teams win titles with grinding out results not blowing someone away 4-0 or 5-1 consistently. Take last seasons end Liverpool or 100 point season City with their annoying streak of 1-0s or last min winners.

Last night wasn't "coming", it was a freak result with really awful defensive errors specially invidually.

 

[cyberman]

Funny you should say that because over the last calendar year and this January, we played exactly 38 league games - a whole season's worth of games. And we got... 75 points. Which is a nice robust top 4 total but in the vast majority of seasons it's nowhere near a league title. And that's what we mean when we say it's not sustainable: that it's not sufficient for a title challenge. City, who haven't had a good 2020 at all, are already at 81 from 37 over the same period.

We are a top 4 challenger. That's what the numbers suggest, that's what the performances suggest, everything points to that. We were never going to sustain a title challenge with the way we've been playing.

You cant add 2 half seasons together to get any sort of accurate picture. If we have Cavani from Jan onwards we would have more points surely?
We are second and we are in a title race, theres no flip flopping around that.

 

[SAFMUTD]

But again you're making assumptions on current form. It's easy to say City will continue after a 5-0 win and that we won't improve after a loss to Sheffield UTD.

I think we'll improve and I think City will have another drop.

We'll see which team swings the wrong way for the longest.

Sure I'm making assumptions, no one knows the future. But I'm making assumptions under evidence and statistics.

Like I can assume Sheffield will still be shit and get relegated. Sure they could turn out and magically start performing but that's not very likely is it?

 

[red woppit]

Last night was coming. You can’t challenge for a title by edging 50-50 games time & time again. We haven’t played well for ages yet were just about doing enough with individual brilliance from Rashford & Pogba getting winning goals. It’s not sustainable. On another day Bailly doesn’t make that block & Villa equalise, same for Burnley who missed chances, same for Fulham, on another day that deflection off Bailly goes in. We were never going to be able to keep it up, if you want to win a title you need to be convincing. We were edging wins but we were failing the eye test badly.

True, we haven't played really well for 90 minutes in any game this season, possibly PSG away, but even against Leeds, they created 4 or 5 decent chances, although we could have had 10 goals that day.
Last night's game was unfortunate for us in that we never got the rub of the green. First goal was a push, even if De Gea made a pig's ear of it, our disallowed goal may well have stood as their keeper actually hit Maguire when coming for the ball.
Yes a couple of times we have relied on good blocks (which for me is excellent defending) and lucky ricochets, but against Leicester, Vardy's shot was going wide until it hit Tuanzebe, that was unlucky, against Palace we had a penalty given against Lindelof, when the ball just caught his arm, which didn't really affect the flight of the ball, and not one Palace player appealed, but VAR gave it, so that was unlucky. So realistically, the fortune tends to even itself out during the season, who knows, against Arsenal we may get good fortune go our way again.

 

[youngrell]

Funny you should say that because over the last calendar year and this January, we played exactly 38 league games - a whole season's worth of games. And we got... 75 points. Which is a nice robust top 4 total but in the vast majority of seasons it's nowhere near a league title. And that's what we mean when we say it's not sustainable: that it's not sufficient for a title challenge. City, who haven't had a good 2020 at all, are already at 81 from 37 over the same period.

We are a top 4 challenger. That's what the numbers suggest, that's what the performances suggest, everything points to that. We were never going to sustain a title challenge with the way we've been playing.

Did you expect a title challenge? I don't think I mentioned one. I said our form/performances were sustainable because we've sustained that over a year.

I don't care too much for point totals, I care about league position.

 

[bsCallout]

Sure I'm making assumptions, no one knows the future. But I'm making assumptions under evidence and statistics.

Like I can assume Sheffield will still be shit and get relegated. Sure they could turn out and magically start performing but that's not very likely is it?

Liverpool wouldn't have been outside the top 4 by now either based on evidence.

In any snapshot a team can look like they'll go on a run, it can take one injury or one bad result to derail that.

 

[bsCallout]

Funny you should say that because over the last calendar year and this January, we played exactly 38 league games - a whole season's worth of games. And we got... 75 points. Which is a nice robust top 4 total but in the vast majority of seasons it's nowhere near a league title. And that's what we mean when we say it's not sustainable: that it's not sufficient for a title challenge. City, who haven't had a good 2020 at all, are already at 81 from 37 over the same period.

We are a top 4 challenger. That's what the numbers suggest, that's what the performances suggest, everything points to that. We were never going to sustain a title challenge with the way we've been playing.

The argument that in any season that would be top 4 is a bad argument because no season is the same.

 

[ShinjiNinja26]

Aye it’s been coming for a while now. I just hope we can bounce back against Arsenal at the weekend and that result last night doesn’t send us off the rails. We all know how mentally fragile this team can be.

 

[cyberman]

Well generally if you're not winning the game or only one goal up going into the last 10 minutes then things aren't really comfortable.

What premier league games this season have we been comfortable winners? The only games we've won by more then a goal have been Leeds (comfortable) West Ham (dire for 45 minutes, wrapped up on 78 minutes, but with how bad we were you wouldn't call that a comfortable game) Everton (scored a third in the 95th minute), and Newcastle, (took the lead on 86 minutes)... so yeah, not sure how any of those bar Leeds could be called a comfortable win.

Burnely couldn't get the ball off us, Newcastle werent even playing the same sport. feck knows how Southampton went 2 up and we dominated West Ham in the second half like no other has done this season. Hell Sheff Utd away was the best game of our season imo, the overreaction to them getting a late goal still looks riduclous to me.
You can look at results on its own and say oh look, we only 1 by a goal so its all nervous but its not at all. You dont have to win by 3 to control games.
Teams piling forward against us for a chance in the 85th minute after being outplayed for the 80 minutes previous shouldnt mean we were a ticking time bomb.
Its ok being a fan and being on edge but we cant put our insecurities on the team itself.

 

[Siorac]

Out of some occasional cases, all the "big" teams win titles with grinding out results not blowing someone away 4-0 or 5-1 consistently. Take last seasons end Liverpool or 100 point season City with their annoying streak of 1-0s or last min winners.

Last night wasn't "coming", it was a freak result with really awful defensive errors specially invidually.

City that season had a goal difference of +79. SEVENTY-NINE. They had twelve wins by three or more goals. They were consistently blowing teams away. Like, I understand that it's not realistic to expect that from the current United team or, well, any team because it was freakish but that really was the worst possible example you could have chosen.

In the last decade, the worst title winner in terms of goal difference was, unsurprisingly, Leicester City, with +32. Ours is +10 right now after 20 games. No one wins a title without quite a few comfortable wins. This is as close to a truism as it gets. Unless you're 1993/94 AC Milan but that was mental.

 

[SAFMUTD]

Liverpool wouldn't have been outside the top 4 by now either based on evidence.

In any snapshot a team can look like they'll go on a run, it can take one injury or one bad result to derail that.

I agree it didn't look likely for Liverpool, but do you think they'll finish outside top 4? Because them being outside at this particular point of the season doesn't mean they will end up there.

Accidents happen and nothing is given, but having our hopes on that accident happening to City will most likely end up in deception for us.

 

[Siorac]

The argument that in any season that would be top 4 is a bad argument because no season is the same.

There are trends though. No two season is the same but you won't ever get relegated with 50 points and the last time that fewer than 80 points were enough to win a title was in 1999. So can a team with 75 points win a title? Sure, it's not impossible - but it's very very very unlikely in the modern day.

 

[bsCallout]

I agree it didn't look likely for Liverpool, but do you think they'll finish outside top 4? Because them being outside at this particular point of the season doesn't mean they will end up there.

Accidents happen and nothing is given, but having our hopes on that accident happening to City will most likely end up in deception for us.

Your first paragraph is exactly the point. In any snapshot you can make assumptions, I actually do think Liverpool will fall outside the top 4.

You don't hope on anything, you play to win games and what will be will be. The point is it's unfair to assume City now run away with it and we fall off just because of current form. We still have everything to play for, and we should aim to get better and our forwards to pick up form to give us that chance.

 

[Problem-free Philosophy]

I think we've ridden our luck towards the end of other (recent) games because we haven't been clinical enough. Yesterday the major difference imo was that we just didn't have that many good chances ourselves. But either way it was definitely unsustainable.

I think people are being harsh on Sheffield United to be honest. They've not exactly been blitzed by everybody to end up where they are, it's just not been going for them. Obviously we should be beating them, but it's not quite the huge shock I think people are making it out to be. "Shock of the season" - yeah because the sort of United performance that has been happening for years, against a well-organised defence riding their luck on the day is more shocking than e.g. the greatest side to ever grace us with their football being hammered 7-2 by a team that narrowly avoided relegation the previous season. Hyperbole much?

We've been doing a good job of grinding out wins, but I always think genuine title challengers need games in between where you just cruise to a 2 or 3 nil and we've not done that.

 

[Siorac]

Did you expect a title challenge? I don't think I mentioned one. I said our form/performances were sustainable because we've sustained that over a year.

I don't care too much for point totals, I care about league position.

I didn't expect a title challenge but that's what we're talking about in this thread. That even though we were first, it wasn't underlined by the sort of performances you normally associate with frontrunners. Hence ticking time bomb: we were always unlikely to keep up the pace at the top of the table.

 

[Ali Dia]

It’s like we go a goal down and go right now we are going to pen you back and see if you can hit us on the counter for the next 60 minutes. It just doesn’t work with static players like Matic and Martial who should both be out of the team for the next few weeks.

 

[Annihilate Now!]

Burnely couldn't get the ball off us, Newcastle werent even playing the same sport. feck knows how Southampton went 2 up and we dominated West Ham in the second half like no other has done this season. Hell Sheff Utd away was the best game of our season imo, the overreaction to them getting a late goal still looks riduclous to me.
You can look at results on its own and say oh look, we only 1 by a goal so its all nervous but its not at all. You dont have to win by 3 to control games.
Teams piling forward against us for a chance in the 85th minute after being outplayed for the 80 minutes previous shouldnt mean we were a ticking time bomb.
Its ok being a fan and being on edge but we cant put our insecurities on the team itself.

It doesn't mean we're a ticking time bomb, it just means we haven't exactly been comfortably winning games - and when you're not comfortable, then it only takes a second to score a goal - even if you're barely in the game. I mean look at the Fulham game, we were 2-1 up and looked decent but they still came within a whisker of scoring at the end.

 

[dev1l]

A ticking bomb? Some of our fans actually are.

 

[Sarni]

Fulham was a tough win but they've been much better and harder to beat recently. I thought we controlled Burnley game all the way, we had some close ones recently (West Ham, Villa, Southampton, Wolves) but you don't normally expect to win those games easily in PL anyway. I don't think winning tight games on a regular basis is luck.

 

[youngrell]

I didn't expect a title challenge but that's what we're talking about in this thread. That even though we were first, it wasn't underlined by the sort of performances you normally associate with frontrunners. Hence ticking time bomb: we were always unlikely to keep up the pace at the top of the table.

And most fans recognised this, in most cases due to our actual squad rather than the performances. There is still a chance we stay in the fight, but as expected, we will probably fall short in the end.

My overall point in response to the thread is that last night was a really, really bad game from us. All the other close games mentioned here were nothing like this. I don't see the comparison.

 

[Chairman Steve]

On reflection, the amount of close, tight one goal win games we’ve had recently is ridiculous. I understand that tight wins are part and parcel for even the best teams, but usually there’s some comprehensive wins in there too. I don’t think I’ve seen one since we played Leeds at OT and that was assisted by the way Bielsa sets up.

Are we really just going to win by one and just hang in there for the second half of the season? That surely isn’t sustainable. I will say I’m more confident we can score goals from behind though.

 

[Sarni]

It doesn't mean we're a ticking time bomb, it just means we haven't exactly been comfortably winning games - and when you're not comfortable, then it only takes a second to score a goal - even if you're barely in the game. I mean look at the Fulham game, we were 2-1 up and looked decent but they still came within a whisker of scoring at the end.

Nobody is winning games comfortably in this league though. Even Caf darlings City and Liverpool have been winning tight games a lot. Looking at City's run recently, there was tight 1-0 with Brighton where they could have easily equalized, late goals against Villa, 1-0 at Southampton. Main difference between us and them is that they win those games by having good defence and edging out a goal in the end, we are winning them by outscoring opposition which is obviously less sustainable.

 

[Godfather]

A quick look at our goal difference shows where we are in all honesty. And don't come at me with the Spurs game. Even without it our goal difference is shit. I agree with the OP.

 

[SAFMUTD]

Your first paragraph is exactly the point. In any snapshot you can make assumptions, I actually do think Liverpool will fall outside the top 4.

You don't hope on anything, you play to win games and what will be will be. The point is it's unfair to assume City now run away with it and we fall off just because of current form. We still have everything to play for, and we should aim to get better and our forwards to pick up form to give us that chance.

I agree, I'm not saying hey let's give up this is already given to City. Of course we have everything to play for, but the odds are clearly against us.

Anyway time will tell. Hopefully we can enter a great run and City implodes or something.

 

[bsCallout]

There are trends though. No two season is the same but you won't ever get relegated with 50 points and the last time that fewer than 80 points were enough to win a title was in 1999. So can a team with 75 points win a title? Sure, it's not impossible - but it's very very very unlikely in the modern day.

Fair to say this is a mad season and it wouldn't be too surprising.

 

[Hugh Jass]

I really hate the idea that a 38-year-old Phil Jagielka was able to shut down Man Utd at Old Trafford. Sheffield Utd had 8 or 9 players missing, they couldn't even make a full bench! There are certain patterns going on that means we shouldn't just right off last night as a freak result. We conceded first yet again, we conceded from a corner yet again, we looked impotent and disinterested going forward yet again, we weren't able to control the game for any significant period of time yet again, we were relying on a moment of individual brilliance to win us the game yet again. These are seriously concerning issues that have been bubbling under the surface and finally bit us on the arse last night.

That is the one thing that annoys me about Ole. We rely on individual brilliance and not collective brilliance to win games.

For example, Pogba got us out of jail against Burnley and Fulham.

If you look at Guadiola or Nagglesman or Flick, their teams are trained to work as a unit to break down teams. We dont have that at all.

 

[Siorac]

Nobody is winning games comfortably in this league though. Even Caf darlings City and Liverpool have been winning tight games a lot. Looking at City's run recently, there was tight 1-0 with Brighton where they could have easily equalized, late goals against Villa, 1-0 at Southampton. Main difference between us and them is that they win those games by having good defence and edging out a goal in the end, we are winning them by outscoring opposition which is obviously less sustainable.

City are winning more games comfortably than we are though. I mean, the goal difference alone shows it quite clearly. They have eight wins by more than one goal, we have four. And they had their best striker out pretty much all season.

 

[bsCallout]

I agree, I'm not saying hey let's give up this is already given to City. Of course we have everything to play for, but the odds are clearly against us.

Anyway time will tell. Hopefully we can enter a great run and City implodes or something.

We'll have to win the game against them so none of this passive stuff in big games.