I didn't say you'd criticized him. You're very careful in your posts about Bruno
Careful or measured? Or moderate?
(of which there are many, which is odd for someone that professes not to have a strong opinion on him)
Well we all have our weaknesses I guess. I get triggered when I read certain stuff. Not proud of it but it is what it is. Still don't think that I have a particular strong opinion on the player. I just see dumb arguments and feeling the need to chip in. Applies to many posters on here - Bruno thread is full of them, not sure how many would admit like I just did.
not to criticise him overtly.
Honestly, why would I be "careful"? Is there some danger connected with the "wrong" opinion?
I said you downplay his performances.
Downplaying means that I know the performance had a certain quality and I intentionally depict the performance worse than I think it really was to make the player look worse than he actually was to gain something I guess. When you say "You downplay this and that" that is an accusation. And obviously that will lead to me getting defensive.
I don't "downplay". I just see performances different than you. If you think, Bruno played great today, so be it. I'll encourage you to have the same level of acceptance towards me. Be ensured I read the thread here and the other Bruno threads as well. I am happy to overthink my stance when I notice that I have missed things.
FYI
1. Quotation: No downplaying at all. I responded to somebody who listed a few stats of Brunos performance - I added another stat. Sorry if that bothered you. Not sure why though - I guess because I added a rather negative one. But I guess when you are already looking for hidden motivations in posts, things are stressful.
2. Quotation: I have no clue, what the downplaying part is supposed to be... I liked his assist and mentioned his good decision making. I can only assume it bothered you because you felt different but, as we established already, you can hardly criticize me for not having the same perception than you.
For the record and without any hidden agendas or motivations or anything: I didn't think it we have seen a great game today. We had a simple plan that was suprisingly effective ending in us not having the ball all too much. City was reduced by whatever reasons (our tactics, their bad or missing preparation) to slowly passing it around without much intensity. We went in front from an obvious miscommunication by two City players. Scored another with a good counter where City really showed lack of commitment. Other than that, the game was hardly stunning. Nobody stood out positively or negatively - in my eyes at least.
If you feel differently because you expected us to be worse or you expected City to be better, that is fine. If you think we were great because the result was great or that it won us a title, thats fine. I don't take that into consideration when I look back on the individual performances. I haven't seen anybody perform better or worse than I expect them to be. Which is a 5 rating for me btw. A few players suprised me positively today, not too much but slightly. They ended up with with a 6 rating, namely Onana, Varane, Mainoo and Garnacho. FYI, I would have rated most City players also with 5s today, probably apart from Doku who would get a 6 and apart from Ortega and Haaland who would end up with 3 or 4.
This is how I see it. That is not downplaying stuff that is me trying to be as objective as I can be in my eyes. Knowing that all my biases and subjectiveness is in full effect. If you don't agree, I'll live with that. But don't accuse me of stuff. This is the whole agenda contra top red conflict all over again.