JRC

This content is not viewable to guests.,This content is not viewable to guests.

Henderson getting 'punished' for taking that pen off Calvert-Lewin and missing it? Genuinely can't believe that Henderson wasn't considered one of 10 potential pen takers given that Sterling and Grealish were overlooked or unwilling for the first 5 anyway. No doubt also that Henderson would have been one of the first to volunteer if that was how they decided. * Agree with the point earlier - Donnarumma absolutely did for Rashford (whose miss then probably did for Sancho and almost certainly did for Sako) - feinted a move on Rashford's first stutter then just stared him out. I thought Kane carried on his big final performance standard from Madrid, without an injury as an excuse - especially second half and Extra Time. How very...Spursy.

This content is not viewable to guests.,This content is not viewable to guests.

In our first 5 Home games we play 4 of the 5 teams still in the PL who won at Anfield last season. Payback time. (The other game of the 5 is against Palace, who were the last team to beat us in the League before that, sometime in the Victorian era). Quite like that we are saving final payback, the Everton Home game, for when we win the trophy, rubbing in the hollowness of their fan-excluded generational success.

Yeah, he had a spell at the end of this season where his finishing was quite ruthless, and every time I saw him score I had to yell at the screen about that City miss. b*****d.

No nominated taker on the pitch. Captain takes responsibility. Greater confidence downside of missing than upside of scoring. Not an unusual call for the player fouled NOT to be expected to take the kick. DCL not a usual penalty taker. Nothing to see here. Not sure why Southgate wants a word with him about it.

Falcao was thought to be the best midfielder in the world at the time - then ran into Souness that night who disabused him of such nonsense. (He was a magnificent footballer TBF. We just throttled him)

Five 'experts' discussing their England teams on 5Live on Tuesday. Apart from the whole thing being like a Partridge amateur hour of broadcasting incompetence, not one of them had TAA in their preferred first team. One of them then had second thoughts, because she decided she needed a dead ball specialist in - so swapped Kyle "kick ball hard, run fast" Walker out......to make a place for Ben Chilwell

Can had those odd games when he absolutely bossed it and looked a worldbeater. Pretty rare, but gave you a glimmer of hope he could be something. He wasn't.

Was glad to see the love he got off the crowd on Sunday - not just when he went off, but for his contribution and specific things he did. I've always felt he is a player you need to see in the flesh to appreciate fully - not trying to be a 'Top Red' or anything, but because I was that way myself; I wasn't overly impressed we had signed him, nor in his first few games, but in the first five minutes I saw him Live, I just knew he was the real deal, a footballer of top quality. Some players just look better seen live, which opportunity I know I am fortunate to be able to have. Have loved watching him ever since, even if he has had some longueurs (esp away from home for a time), and his poor goal return is almost inexplicable vs his Holland/Newcastle stats. Not sure if the divergence of opinion on here - hardly a chasm, no-one disputes he has been pretty good for us - is along the same lines?

Some great fewmin on Merseyside tonight. Presenter asked one particularly irate fan to name the players they should get rid of to make things better. Stopped to fill up with petrol and he was still listing names when I got back in the car.

Said that to my lad. With the ball it's like watching Alonso or Molby. Snapping at opponent's heels it's like watching Lee Cattermole. Often talk about players who receive the ball on the half turn; he seems to receive the ball with the capability to make that half turn either way, or whilst doing a trick. Proper bamboozled the attempted presser more than once today. A pleasure to watch

Ironic that he was also still bitter about our game; the game after which Klopp was very complimentary about the way they played, their professionalism etc. without in any way labouring it so as to imply they were actually a bunch of yard-dogs. Yet Sam's comments?..... Yes, we played long ball against Liverpool because they didn't like it up 'em ...... so thin-skinned.

Don't think they showed the Fouls stats on MOTD2, but gut feel was that Dean gave them at least twice as many as us - despite us having 75% possession

Only sadness is that it wasn't that goal that sent Allardyce down

Some Football Finance fella on Merseyside this morning cited Leicester as the cause - if little old Leicester could break the domination by winning the League etc., they needed to make sure it can't happen again. Two things - City and Chelsea have already done that, and it has more been the failure of UEFA to enforce FFP that has spooked the others (and why City and Chelsea were involved both as much for their current status as for the 'inside the tent pissing out' principle; and have not necessarily been as comfortable bedfellows as others); and in many ways Leicester are another re-incarnation of that threat - massively wealthy foreign owner using PL connection to enhance their global brand, and getting at least half-way there by virtue of a financial regulation busting promotion from the Championship, where their bought success has never been as widely lauded. The fairy-tale league win, and the subsequent tragedy, have obviously cemented a bond with the fans, but trying to pretend they aren't in the same business - albeit with better PR - is deluded.

Reference to RL was that the fans didn't stay away, despite it embodying some of the worse examples of this kind of change - and evidence of harm to the game as well as benefit. Of course RL is fighting a different corner in terms of exposure and coverage. Wrt Re-election, there has been lot of appeals to the 'pyramid' system at the heart of the great history of our game - but that has only really been true in practice since the mid-80's. The FL was effectively a closed shop - of 92 clubs of varying size, history and financial stability, yes, but plenty of well-run, ambitious non-league clubs were denied the opportunity to move up that pyramid until fairly recently. That is the history. What I agree with is that promotion/relegation to the FL has been a fair and improving change (note that the last 2 clubs elected to the League went on to play in the top tier and win the FA Cup, which proved that the pyramid was the more legitimate option) so I agree that a closed shop League is NOT a good idea. Just don't invoke a history that wasn't quite like that.

Or was it double bluff - the UEFA proposal was so obviously s***, the ESL would have still looked opportunistic and self-serving. If supporters were gong to rail against the co-efficient/history method being used to protect the place of the bigger clubs, how does a no co-efficient, permanent place at the top[ table seem better? Best get it out there and stand your ground.

RL Super League - a sport whose history is as rooted in working class communities as much as football - was initially closed and has played with relegation/formal applications/play-offs in different formats ever since. Fans love it now, but (relatively recent) former World Club Champions Widnes got f***ed over and have never really recovered (abetted by routinely awful management, tbf). At least the clubs held out against forced merged 'franchises' and fair play to St.Helens, they didn't even adopt a fancy new brand/name. It re-booted the game financially until the next meltdown, which is probably happening now anyway. If we want to refer to Football's historic roots - don't forget, we won most of our titles in a Football League that operated a de facto closed shop/invitational exit and entry system. In fact, over around 100 years we won more League titles than there were teams replaced in the FL by meritocratically superior non-FL teams. (Those looking to transfer their support could switch to Southport - the last team to fail to be re-elected and so demoted from the League; 8 or so years before promotion/relegation was introduced) I'm NOT a supporter this move, btw, just think some of the approaches and arguments against are overly sentimental (and yes, hypocritical) - and that cuts no ice with the 12 sets of owners.

Radio pundit (I know) suggesting he shouldn't go to the Euros this summer on this form. Given Southgate's posturing re Trent, that is not that irrational a shout.

Yeah, gutted that it could virtually be the post Palace mini-slump - draws vs West Brom and Newcastle, loss at Southampton - that cost us; that we could have still very possibly finished Top 4 relatively easily even with an incredible - and unlikely ever to be repeated - clusterf*** of 6 straight defeats at home will bug me more. To some extent I can 'laugh' at that run, because it is just so bonkers and so out of kilter with what we have been for so long. Not over until its over, though, so come on the Mighty Reds. Who knows, maybe something will come up again like last year, and completely change the way the season ends and next season goes.

I'm against it. I was against the PL for much the same reason. Having inherited my Dad's Season Ticket (and passed mine down to my Son), I admit to not being so principled that I will give up that legacy - mine, his, my grandson's - after 50 years. Maybe we won't be able to stomach it, or the game will implode anyway, but I've carried on going through Heysel. Hillsborough, Hicks, Hodgson et al; that the club is just another corporate institution focused on the bottom line is no longer shocking.

This content is not viewable to guests.,This content is not viewable to guests.

Given that last season (or the one before) there was a furious pitch invasion by home fans, and the owners had to be escorted from the Director's box for their own safety, I would say that may well be the case. This theory would also refute the jibes we make about the toxicity, booing etc at Goodison, implying that Everton are inspired by the crowd - because their home form is significantly worse than ours overall, not much better over our terrible recent 7-8 games even.

I genuinely think it extremely unlikely that replacing the current technology with the simple single shot/horizontal line images approach, and an acknowledgement that failure of that to show an attacker clearly offside is to be taken as that they were level, would eventually result in fans, managers etc arguing for the re-introduction of the current model; certainly not at the volume, near-consensus and intensity that there is about VAR now.