how's that?Chelsea's lead is effectively 3 points, would love it if Spurs pipped them to the title
how's that?Chelsea's lead is effectively 3 points, would love it if Spurs pipped them to the title
how's that?
Spurs +8 goals on goal difference compared to Chelsea.
Still it's 4 point lead. If they make 3 points on Chelsea they will still be 1 point behind.
It is true. A 3.5 point lead, is that fair enough? Or from Chelsea's perspective, if they lose the 4 point gap, they'll (most likely) finish 2nd.
Conte is still the better manager in this season, he has way more points then us with a squad that isn't better then oursIf he can win back to back titles I will admit that he is a world class manager in the same bracket as Mourinho. Till then, Mourinho has shown the way to beat him.
Yep. How people don't see the class of Lingard is beyond me, shows a severe lack of understanding the game. While he is surely not the best in technical aspects, he is a pressing machine in a class of his own. Only attacking player who comes close to his pressing is Sanchez. In addition superb off the ball movement, creating loads of space for other attacking players..he is at least as good as Pedro in overall play, the Pedro that was a starter in Barcelona's "century eleven". And yet still people moan about him. Rashford doesn't need any more introduction i guess, alongside Mbappe the best attacking talent on the planet. I doubt that Mbappe would have been able to terrorize the Chelsea defence in that way on his own though.In that game, Rashford and Lingard showed exactly what is wrong with Martial and Shaw.
Watching the highlights back I think Courtois if playing probably saves both of our goals yesterday. The keeper was poor for both goals. Such thin lines in football. If Courtois had of played we could all be sitting here after a 0-0 draw or even a narrow loss and things would feel completely different. Thankfully it went our way this time.
Taking nothing away from our performance as we were brilliant and deserved winners but that doesn't always mean you win the game.
Chelsea didn't create so how could they take 3 points?Watching the highlights back I think Courtois if playing probably saves both of our goals yesterday. The keeper was poor for both goals. Such thin lines in football. If Courtois had of played we could all be sitting here after a 0-0 draw or even a narrow loss and things would feel completely different. Thankfully it went our way this time.
Taking nothing away from our performance as we were brilliant and deserved winners but that doesn't always mean you win the game.
Watching the highlights back I think Courtois if playing probably saves both of our goals yesterday. The keeper was poor for both goals. Such thin lines in football. If Courtois had of played we could all be sitting here after a 0-0 draw or even a narrow loss and things would feel completely different. Thankfully it went our way this time.
Taking nothing away from our performance as we were brilliant and deserved winners but that doesn't always mean you win the game.
If we had played Micky, Martial and Ibra along with Rashford we win 5-0 with or without Courtois. #logicWatching the highlights back I think Courtois if playing probably saves both of our goals yesterday. The keeper was poor for both goals. Such thin lines in football. If Courtois had of played we could all be sitting here after a 0-0 draw or even a narrow loss and things would feel completely different. Thankfully it went our way this time.
Taking nothing away from our performance as we were brilliant and deserved winners but that doesn't always mean you win the game.
Watching the highlights back I think Courtois if playing probably saves both of our goals yesterday. The keeper was poor for both goals. Such thin lines in football. If Courtois had of played we could all be sitting here after a 0-0 draw or even a narrow loss and things would feel completely different. Thankfully it went our way this time.
Taking nothing away from our performance as we were brilliant and deserved winners but that doesn't always mean you win the game.
Effectively 3? Why?I have to admit, I didn't expect much when I saw the line up. Was a tactical masterclass by Jose. Herrera and Rashford were awesome.
Loved the badge pumping as Jose walked off at the end.
Chelsea's lead is effectively 3 points, would love it if Spurs pipped them to the title
How would Courtois save a shot from Rashford that went on the other side of the net? And how does he stop a deflection?Watching the highlights back I think Courtois if playing probably saves both of our goals yesterday. The keeper was poor for both goals. Such thin lines in football. If Courtois had of played we could all be sitting here after a 0-0 draw or even a narrow loss and things would feel completely different. Thankfully it went our way this time.
Taking nothing away from our performance as we were brilliant and deserved winners but that doesn't always mean you win the game.
Lingard is as good as Pedro now? He's looking good the past couple of games but come on.Yep. How people don't see the class of Lingard is beyond me, shows a severe lack of understanding the game. While he is surely not the best in technical aspects, he is a pressing machine in a class of his own. Only attacking player who comes close to his pressing is Sanchez. In addition superb off the ball movement, creating loads of space for other attacking players..he is at least as good as Pedro in overall play, the Pedro that was a starter in Barcelona's "century eleven". And yet still people moan about him. Rashford doesn't need any more introduction i guess, alongside Mbappe the best attacking talent on the planet. I doubt that Mbappe would have been able to terrorize the Chelsea defence in that way on his own though.
Not now, but for a good one and a half seasons. He also had a lot of good games before, if you "just watch football with a pint of beer" you won't be able to recognize it though, because his skills are not as apparent as the one's from one Hazard or Pogba to name one of our own players.Lingard is as good as Pedro now? He's looking good the past couple of games but come on.
The Rashford one - he possibly didn't need to advance as quickly as he did, and he also narrowed the angles really badly. If you look at where the ball finished up, it was more towards the middle of the goal as it crossed the line than the side. He left a lot to hit at. The deflection he could do nothing about, correct.How would Courtois save a shot from Rashford that went on the other side of the net? And how does he stop a deflection?
There are rules and then you have the refs interpretation of said rules. For handball, the real question is actually about intent (and the notion of your hand in an unnatural position).For those still trying to tell you that it was a clear handball..
Here are the rules
Handball
The following must be considered:
So there you have it like the commentators on NBC said live that it wasn't handball you can clearly say that its not clearly a handball.
- the movement of the hand towards the ball (not the ball towards the hand)
- the distance between the opponent and the ball (unexpected ball)
- the position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an infringement
Then again you have the distance from the ball to the player.. The ball is kicked a short distance up to his hand and he tries to pull it back.. The ref clearly saw it and ruled it as ball to hand.. Like I said its not a clear handball by the rules so its up to interpretation from the ref.There are rules and then you have the refs interpretation of said rules. For handball, the real question is actually about intent (and the notion of your hand in an unnatural position).
If you stand with your hands spread wide, and the ball hits your hand, it would be deemed a deliberate handballl because your hand would have been judged to be placed in an unnatural position to make your body bigger (even if your hands were stationary and your were standing very close when the ball was kicked).
Herrera's hand was away from his body and it is up to the ref to judge if it was intentional or not.
Agree. Liked him as a player, like him as a pundit too.I really like Lampard as a pundit. He remains relatively unbiased and he has a good understanding of the game.
how's that?
Effectively 3? Why?
Which means their lead is 4 points. Not "effectively 3".Because if Spurs make up 4 points, Spurs will be top due to their goal difference
So the difference is still 4. If Spurs gain 3 points, they will still be 1 point behind, thus they need to gain 4 points. It's simple math.Because if Spurs make up 4 points, Spurs will be top due to their goal difference
Yeah. The "effectively 3 points" is one of the stranger claims I've seen on the cafSo the difference is still 4. If Spurs gain 3 points, they will still be 1 point behind, thus they need to gain 4 points. It's simple math.
Because if Spurs make up 4 points, Spurs will be top due to their goal difference
Chelsea didn't create so how could they take 3 points?
What a game. What a performance. Every player was 10/10. This game gives me great hopes for the rest of the season.
Are you for real?
What logic are you even using considering Chelsea didn't have a shot on target over 90mins yet had they had a different goalkeeper you fear we might have suffered a narrow loss.
Just like at Madrid, Mourinho has struggled with playing an attacking minded sort of football because he knows people expect it at United.
However, this time he threw caution to the wind and reverted to his Inter and Chealsea Form. Hard working players preffered ahead of talented players and with winning as the only objective and it was surprisingly exciting. I love Martial, Shaw and Mikhi but I don't mind them sitting out if Jesse, Young and Fellaini continue to play like that.
Agree. Liked him as a player, like him as a pundit too.
It would break his teeth!Like I was saying, Kanté can eat Herrera's dick.
Robert Madley