Greenlizard0 Premier League Football Thread ** spoilers ** [12th - 22nd January 2024]

adam cool dude said:
ETH had Overmars and VDS as well. He had had the whole structure around him. Man Utd is just a basket case at the moment and it is obvious moral and confidence is at an all time low. Hopefully now things might change with this new ownership structure.

ETH is the fastest manager in Ajax history to 100 wins and fastest manager to 50 wins in United's history. He isn't a bad manager and his Ajax team were a revelation. Even after he lost all his players he topped the Group stage of the champions league with 18 points. 20 goals for and 5 against in his final season.

He is clearly a good manager as shown by his first season and he hasn't had it easy with Ronaldo, Sancho, Maguire etc issues which he has dealt with well in my eyes.

They need to get rid of the players that are not towing the line or playing how he wants. If you sack him and replace him you will end up getting exactly the same result.
Click to expand...
What does he have to do for him to go. This season has been an absolute disaster.

Who are the players you think need to go?
 
omnomnom said:
Who are the players you think need to go?
Click to expand...
Easier to say who stays.
Mainoo, Garnacho, Mount (only because he hasn't had a chance yet), AWB, Martinez, Shaw, Malacia, Dalot, Amad, Hojlund.

Within the next 1.5 seasons I'd be letting go of
Varane, Casemiro, Eriksen, Greenwood, Maguire, Lindelof, Martial, Sancho, Antony, McTominay, van de Beek, Amrabat, Evans.

Unsure on
Rashford, Fernandes, Mehbri, Pellistri, Onana

Clearly that's not tenable but I think it illustrates the size of the problem.
 
Last edited:
I'm still angry about that McTominay miss at the last second, what an idiot. Makes a draw feel like a loss, even though really, a draw against Spurs is probably a good result with our form
 
Last edited:
omnomnom said:
What does he have to do for him to go. This season has been an absolute disaster.
Click to expand...

We're actually a team where our league position doesn't represent our form. We should probably be 12th/13th. Given the money ETH has decided to spend (on the likes of Antony), that is crazy.

Ok yes, the board shouldn't have let him choose the players, but he insisted on that as part of his deal when joining - something people forget.

I'm not sure the Ajax argument holds any weight, that is one isolated case where he did well. That doesn't mean he can cut it in this job - all evidence currently suggests he's miles off it.

Spurs is a bit different, but look how Postecoglou has seemingly changed the culture there - all while losing their star player.
 
Robbo said:
We're actually a team where our league position doesn't represent our form. We should probably be 12th/13th. Given the money ETH has decided to spend (on the likes of Antony), that is crazy.

Ok yes, the board shouldn't have let him choose the players, but he insisted on that as part of his deal when joining - something people forget.

I'm not sure the Ajax argument holds any weight, that is one isolated case where he did well. That doesn't mean he can cut it in this job - all evidence currently suggests he's miles off it.

Spurs is a bit different, but look how Postecoglou has seemingly changed the culture there - all while losing their star player.
Click to expand...
No he didn't, he insisted on final veto which is what most manager's have. Big difference between that and doing the entire transfer business by yourself.
 
Shamikebab said:
No he didn't, he insisted on final veto which is what most manager's have. Big difference between that and doing the entire transfer business by yourself.
Click to expand...

I think there's more to it than that. ETH's own agent was involved in a lot of these deals - again, down to the club, but not good.
 
Shamikebab said:
Our clear penalty denied isn't even mentioned in the BBC write up, the media agenda against us is insane. If it was any other club that would be the headline and they'd be demanding an apology from PGMOL.
Click to expand...

It was never a penalty. Defender had his hand on the Man U player (Garnacho) who threw himself at the ground. Not enough contact, even Neville said that at the time.
 
Stu999 said:
It was never a penalty. Defender had his hand on the Man U player (Garnacho) who threw himself at the ground. Not enough contact, even Neville said that at the time.
Click to expand...
So you think grabbing a player with both hands and stopping them from moving is a legitimate tackle? Don't make me ******** laugh. It's as clear a penalty as you'll see. Eriksen got a foul given against him for a one handed grab later in the game.
 
Shamikebab said:
So you think grabbing a player with both hands and stopping them from moving is a legitimate tackle? Don't make me ******** laugh. It's as clear a penalty as you'll see. Eriksen got a foul given against him for a one handed grab later in the game.
Click to expand...
you're too quick to fuel the special folk. just ignore them even though it's tough as there seems to be quite a few knocking round this neck of the forums.
 
The whole penalty claims just wreaks of desperation, you know how many penalties Spurs have had this season......1...despite having an obscene amount of touches in the box, gotta move on guys - he belly flopped to the floor, far too soft.
 
Dale Johnson's weekly VAR review is out. He says no penalty:
Garnacho threw himself to the ground far too easily for the VAR to get involved. While Udogie did have his arm around the Argentine's waist, that alone isn't enough for a foul. The act of holding has to "impede the opponent's movement" and it would have been a huge surprise if this crossed the threshold for a VAR review.
Click to expand...
www.espn.com

The VAR Review: Should Garnacho have been given a penalty against Spurs?

Should Manchester United's Alejandro Garnacho have been awarded a penalty against Tottenham Hotspur? Why did it take so long to disallow Aston Villa's goal against Everton?
www.espn.com www.espn.com
 
Doesn't surprise me ESPN don't know the rules of football either. I'd love to know how Eriksen was given a foul against him for impeding with one arm but two is not impeding? Not to mention the City penalty they got against us which was far softer.

We had two games against Spurs this season, both with atrocious decisions that PGMOL have attempted to sweep under the rug while rushing to apologise to other teams.
 
Last edited:
Shamikebab said:
Doesn't surprise me ESPN don't know the rules of football either. I'd love to know how Eriksen was given a foul against him for impeding with one arm but two is not impeding?
Click to expand...
Dale's a qualified referee who spends 99% of his time analysing decisions and VAR - he's not one of the old boys so actually criticises officials when they're wrong. And if you read the article you'll see that he covers the Eriksen foul in there and the penalty City were given vs Utd.
 
His first sentence says "Udogie had his arm around his waist" He didn't he had both arms round his waist. First mistake.

He then claims that it has to impede motion but doesn't explain how Garnacho was meant to move forward to the ball while Udogie was holding him. "Garnacho was stationary" No **** Sherlock, he was stationary because a bigger guy was holding him. Does this idiot think he was trotting on the spot for some reason? Second mistake.

"As a penalty is a stronger punishment than a free kick, the threshold for fouls inside the area is much higher. It may not say this in the Laws of the Game, but it's an unwritten rule of how the game is played and officiated." So he admits that there is nowhere this is in the rules. Third mistake.

He then goes on to defend the Romero decision, completely ignoring that Arsenal got a penalty for the same thing and Gallagher couldn't even explain how they were different.

A qualified ref talking **** is still someone talking ****.

The funny thing is if Garnacho had just stayed up the ***** still wouldn't give it, they would have just said he should be stronger or some crap.
 
Last edited:
I think you're clutching at straws at bit there. He acknowledges that Udogie is holding him, whether one or two arms is nothing more than semantics. Your second 'mistake' is answered by the fact that Dale has clearly determined that Udogie isn't holding him with any force and therefore is not impeding his movement.

I'm not really sure what the third 'mistake' is - he's explaining the realities of the game. I think we all know that soft fouls are far more likely to be given outside the box that inside the box - in fact we always here "if that's out the box it's given".

And he doesn't defend the Romero decision, he responds to ETH comment about Utd having supposed poor decisions going against them by pointing out that according to the independent panel that mark the official's homework, Utd have not had a single key decision go against them but have had several wrong decisions in their favour.
 
Funny I don't remember this 'soft fouls aren't penalties' coming up when Jota was diving for penalties a few weeks back, weird.

Also noticed you didn't come up with a reason why Garnacho was just trotting on the spot then and not running to the ball if Udogie wasn't impeding him.

Doesn't this just prove the panel is incompetent then? Hell look at how many players have got away with what Dalot has been given a red for in the last week. That not a mistake either? Convenient.

I think this forum can't get worse and then I see people claiming holding onto someone with two hands isn't impeding their movement.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom