Manchester United Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread 2017

TheDoc

RobertKK wrote: »

Sport Witness say United have been scouting Benfica more than once recently and the talk is United are leading the race to sign Swedish defender Victor Lindelof in January, who has a release clause of €30 million.
Claims of talks have already started.

I don't know how to look at our squad in terms of building. Like there is my opinions and thoughts, but then I'm trying to gauge Mourinho.

We all know he likes to buy in, and that's fine. He typically has a really good track record in the transfer market buying quality improvements.

Think I mentioned before I've needed to re-evaluate the players I see on paper and their potential, and what their actual ability or potential is.

Looking at our squad, I can see Mourinho looking for potentially :
CB
DM
CM
LB

In no particular order. It's tough to gauge what to make from his public roastings and selections.

From just experiencing Mourinho like we all have, I'd say it's probably touch and go for Martial, Shaw and Smalling. I'd say Schneiderlan and Memphis are just gone, likely in January on loan.

People like Jones, Rojo and Darmian were maybe looking iffy but I'd say have done themselves massive favours in recent weeks.

Personally I'm still unsure if you say handed me that team where I'd want to invest. There are players I rate and trust that clearly Mourinho doesn't, or that I rate and trust and people here wouldn't. Any position I look at I see a player who in my head can go in there and be good at it.

I'm finding it weird to have a squad performing so poorly and yet I don't want to be shouting who to clear out. To trim numbers I'd probably offload Young and Fellaini.

That might well funnel into the general conversation here of the team just being unlucky and not clinical enough and not being far away from something. In the previous failing teams there was clear points I'd have taken a sledgehammer too. I'm not so sure with this team.

TheDoc

Lord TSC wrote: »

He's the only player I still seriously regret losing. I'd KILL to have him back. I 100% understand why LVG let him go, and why Chico wanted to go, but I wish he hadn't I feel he'd be thriving right now with us.

I'm not watching him in Germany at all, I'm hearing he is doing great. But if he's playing as part of a two man attack then that is totally fine, and it's credible for Van Gaal for moving him on.

He never looked like someone who could play as a single striker, and even his loan spell at MAdrid he was pretty rubbish playing as the sole striker.

If he's playing in Germany as a lone striker and doing well, then fair play to him for working on his game and adapting. But the Chico we had was never going to work in a 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1, just never.

TheDoc

sky88 wrote: »

i think people myself included were just dissapointed that it was lingard starting after rooney and miki had good games.

Lingard has never done it consistently he seems to pop up with great goals every now and again but has done little to deserve a starting place. Hes not even very good defensively were i could see why jose would put him in.

I don't know what my take is on Lingard. I don't think I'm in a rush to judge. Sometimes I think he looks an incredibly intelligent player that could be a brilliant addition to our attack.

Other times I think he is the second coming of Kieran Richardson and just a horribly limited player.

But maybe like Cleverly when he came onto the scene, I'm not in any major rush to put a judgement on him and just see how he goes for a bit.

Pro. F

jambofc wrote: »

so is this good or bad

It is meh. Just means we can't directly compare Fergie's team's shot accuracy to the managers that followed him. But Jose can still be compared directly to LVG and Moyes, which was more the point of that table anyway.

0gac3yjefb5sv7

Anyone have any stats to say how likely top 4 may be? Like would we have to go on a outrageously improbable good run...

The_Kew_Tour

Just try get as many points as we can. We won a league once from 12 points behind.

Yes they choked and all that but i still think things can change so quick. We do need get our act together quick all same

StringerBell

Pheonix10 wrote: »

Anyone have any stats to say how likely top 4 may be? Like would we have to go on a outrageously improbable good run...

You want to head over to the Liverpool thread for that kind of stuff, they love that.

Potential Underachiever

Pro. F wrote: »

Are you seriously trying to say that we are not creating more and better chances than last season? Come on for fùck sake. Think before you type.

Nope, I didn't say that, it's obvious yous are playing better and creating more than under LVG, you would need to be blind to miss that, however don't forget that creating more than that isn't exactly going to be hard to do considering ye were so PASSive under LVG.

The thing is yous are talking as if it's something amazing having all these shots and chances, it's not, I'm sure all the big teams create lots of chances, it's standard, dominating the likes of Stoke, Burnley, West Ham at home is again standard, the fact you can't beat them should be your concern, not how many shots you had. Far too simplistic look at your problems thinking yous are unlucky or you just need someone to finish these chances, or their GK is saving them etc etc.... Utd in their pomp would be smashing up these weaker teams at home routinely, it's not happening anymore, you certainly weren't worried about counting shots then.....

TheDoc

Pheonix10 wrote: »

Anyone have any stats to say how likely top 4 may be? Like would we have to go on a outrageously improbable good run...

Hard to speculate I'd imagine.

But we probably need our team to go on a proper 4-6 win streak and then hope those above us drop points either to each other or ideally, against teams they should be beating.

I'd say where historically I'd have always maintained you need to win your games against the bottom 10 with no exceptions, this year we probably also need to scalp a few from those above us to really swing the pendulum.

J. Marston

We've got 2 wins in our last 10 league games. This "Just need to go on a run" thing is not going to happen.

And even if did manage to go on a run, the teams ahead of us are too good. Chelsea are on a 7 game winning streak. Liverpool and Arsenal haven't lost a game since August and any frailty that City were showing is also gone.

Top 4 is not happening, it's already locked in.

v3ttel

Our next two league games are Everton away and Spurs at home. If we don't win both of those games, I think there is no chance we will make the top 4.

Our results will definitely improve given that our performances are the most encouraging since Fergie retired, but it's difficult to see us picking up 9 to 11 points more than those above us, nevermind 12 to 14.

sky88

I think our chances for top 4 are very slim at the minute. The teams ahead are too strong at the minute but i think 5th is on as spurs are not great. our best hope is through the europa league which tbh i think we can we if we find our finishing boots.

I wouldn't be against playing our strongest team in all EL games.

TheDoc

I think teams above us will hit some snags and rough patches. Will be as always, if we can capitalise on the glimmers of hope we get, which this team hasn't been able to do.

I don't see Liverpool for example sustaining their current level for the entire season. I think they are most likely to drop out. I don't see Spurs getting into the top 4 and I'd say 5th or 6th is them. But it will be all down to our team and if they can capitalise. The opportunities will come.

It's been a terrible start, but plenty to go. So many points can be picked up around Christmas also and with the general quality of our squad you imagine we should be in with a decent shout.

crkball6

Great to see some positivity around here this morning for a change :pac:

TheDoc

crkball6 wrote: »

Great to see some positivity around here this morning for a change :pac:

A report in today's Daily Mail is certainly trying to crash the mood.

I find Chris Wheeler a bit hit and miss.

Link to the entire mail piece
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-3980126/Inside-troubled-world-Jose-Mourinho-behaviour-upsets-people-Manchester-United-not-used-it.html

And F365 link which summaries the "good bit"
http://www.football365.com/news/mourinho-conduct-upsetting-united-players-report

I'm finding the various training ground behaviour to be at odds to how I believed Mourinho worked, but it's becoming too much of a pattern in reporting now for me to ignore totally.

Pro. F

Potential Underachiever wrote: »

Nope, I didn't say that, it's obvious yous are playing better and creating more than under LVG, you would need to be blind to miss that, however don't forget that creating more than that isn't exactly going to be hard to do considering ye were so PASSive under LVG.

You argued against a post where Bucketybuck pointed out that we are creating more than previous seasons. You didn't argue that creating more than LVG's team is not impressive, you doubted the idea that we are creating more at all.

Now you are trying to change your argument because you realise the first one you used was idiotic. As I said, you should think before you post.

Potential Underachiever wrote: »

The thing is yous are talking as if it's something amazing having all these shots and chances...

No, we are not. You are talking bollocks.

Potential Underachiever wrote: »

...it's not, I'm sure all the big teams create lots of chances, it's standard, dominating the likes of Stoke, Burnley, West Ham at home is again standard, the fact you can't beat them should be your concern, not how many shots you had. Far too simplistic look at your problems thinking yous are unlucky or you just need someone to finish these chances, or their GK is saving them etc etc.... Utd in their pomp would be smashing up these weaker teams at home routinely, it's not happening anymore, you certainly weren't worried about counting shots then.....

It's amazing that you haven't noticed this, but here you go: Ferguson retired a few seasons ago and we've had a few terrible seasons since. United aren't in their pomp anymore.

We are in a rebuilding process, under a new manager. The results aren't good enough yet, but there are some encouraging signs - like the fact that this season we are creating more than we did under the previous manager. That shows that at least we are moving in the right direction.

Things may or may not work out under Mourinho, it is early days yet. But dismissing the number and quality of chances created as a useful tool to judge how well or not the team are playing is utter nonsense.

Sirsok

Lord TSC wrote: »

He's the only player I still seriously regret losing. I'd KILL to have him back. I 100% understand why LVG let him go, and why Chico wanted to go, but I wish he hadn't I feel he'd be thriving right now with us.

Always loved him, id also include Diego Forlan and probably Quintine Fortune, in players that I was sad to see leave the club.

Always loved Fellani from his time at Everton so will place him in thay category aswell.

Heinze was someone I had a affinity towards untill all that stuff with wanting to go Liverpool cropped up.

Minderbinder

Lovely Bloke wrote: »

RIP to those players and everyone else who has died on the flight carrying the Chapecoense team to their Copa Sudamerica final game in Columbia.

The news must be bringing horrible memories back to people like Bobby Charlton.

It's really tragic. I hope United reach out to that club or offer support in some way. That just puts all talk of our form or prospects for the season into perspective.

Potential Underachiever

Pro. F wrote: »

You argued against a post where Bucketybuck pointed out that we are creating more than previous seasons. You didn't argue that creating more than LVG's team is not impressive, you doubted the idea that we are creating more at all.

Now you are trying to change your argument because you realise the first one you used was idiotic. As I said, you should think before you post.


Again, taking potshots is not actually creating chances is it? That's what I pointed out to Bucketybuck, I never actually mentioned LVG or whether it was more or less than previous seasons, just that the stats are not as impressive as they look at face value.

So I'm not changing my argument at all, it still remains that looking at shots taken is not a great metric to judge performances off, you guys are seeing high numbers and translating that to mean more than it does, when in fact they're probably normal enough numbers for a team like Utd playing weak teams at home. Albeit higher than the last few years because they were extremely low because of LVGs philosophy.


No, we are not. You are talking bollocks.

In your humble opinion, maybe.



It's amazing that you haven't noticed this, but here you go: Ferguson retired a few seasons ago and we've had a few terrible seasons since. United aren't in their pomp anymore.

We are in a rebuilding process, under a new manager. The results aren't good enough yet, but there are some encouraging signs - like the fact that this season we are creating more than we did under the previous manager. That shows that at least we are moving in the right direction.

Things may or may not work out under Mourinho, it is early days yet. But dismissing the number and quality of chances created as a useful tool to judge how well or not the team are playing is utter nonsense

No point re hashing what I've already said. Just that again I'm not dismissing quality chances I'm dismissing shots from 35 yards into row Z.

.

I don't know how to break a post down in to multiple quotes like Pro.F did, sorry for the eyesore.

TheDoc

Potential Underachiever wrote: »

I don't know how to break a post down in to multiple quotes like Pro.F did, sorry for the eyesore.

Boards uses bbcode. So to do multiquotes, you open and close a command in square brackets. I've put in a dot just to show, but you remove it to actually use

[quote.]
[/quote.]

The second one with a slash denotes a closing statement. So put the quote command in bracket at the start and end of what you want to appear as a "quote"

I typically just click quote on a post so I get the starting quote, so people can see who I'm quoting, then I manually break it down bit by bit by adding my own QUOTE tags.

There is a button beside the Quote one, which is multiquote. That lets you quote multiple people in the one post.

If your going down this route with Pro.f, take it from me you'll need all the help you can get, formatting or otherwise

Best of luck!

Potential Underachiever

TheDoc wrote: »

Boards uses bbcode. So to do multiquotes, you open and close a command in square brackets. I've put in a dot just to show, but you remove it to actually use

[quote.]
[/quote.]

The second one with a slash denotes a closing statement. So put the quote command in bracket at the start and end of what you want to appear as a "quote"

I typically just click quote on a post so I get the starting quote, so people can see who I'm quoting, then I manually break it down bit by bit by adding my own QUOTE tags.

There is a button beside the Quote one, which is multiquote. That lets you quote multiple people in the one post.

If your going down this route with Pro.f, take it from me you'll need all the help you can get, formatting or otherwise

Best of luck!

Thanks!

Nah I'm not going down that route, going to work now! So won't be online until after 10, but I've said all I need to say anyway on that matter.

Pro. F

Potential Underachiever wrote: »

Again, taking potshots is not actually creating chances is it? That's what I pointed out to Bucketybuck, I never actually mentioned LVG or whether it was more or less than previous seasons, just that the stats are not as impressive as they look at face value.

So I'm not changing my argument at all, it still remains that looking at shots taken is not a great metric to judge performances off, you guys are seeing high numbers and translating that to mean more than it does, when in fact they're probably normal enough numbers for a team like Utd playing weak teams at home. Albeit higher than the last few years because they were extremely low because of LVGs philosophy.

You are all over the fùcking place, so I'm not going to respond directly to what you said here, because this would just go around in circles.

So here's my points:

1) United are creating more and better chances than we did under the previous manager.

2) This is a good thing.

3) The number and quality of chances created has been reasonable (only that) for what a team with top four ambitions should expect.

4) The conversion of chances has been low. This is almost certainly down to variance (shot conversion being extremely prone to variance) and is most likely to improve as the season goes on.

5) Pure shot numbers are not a great metric, but they give some reasonable information when looked at in larger samples (as the table Zerks posted did). Our Expected Goals numbers (a qualitative measure of chances) are also decent, so that bears out what we can all see with our eyes.

Potential Underachiever wrote: »

In your humble opinion, maybe.

You said United fans on here were talking about the shot numbers as if they were something "amazing." They were not. That is not my opinion, it is a fact. If you disagree, then post quotes to prove your case.

Potential Underachiever wrote: »

I don't know how to break a post down in to multiple quotes like Pro.F did, sorry for the eyesore.

Copy and paste the things that are in the [] brackets, including the brackets themselves, for each bit you want to quote. One set goes at the start of the quote - that has the quoted poster's name in it and some numbers. And the other is for the end of the quote - that's the one with just /QUOTE in the bracket.

So an example would look like:
[*QUOTE=Potential Underachiever;101814582]I don't know how to break a post down in to multiple quotes like Pro.F did, sorry for the eyesore.[*/QUOTE]

..but just take out the *s I put in.

crkball6

TheDoc wrote: »

A report in today's Daily Mail is certainly trying to crash the mood.

I find Chris Wheeler a bit hit and miss.

Link to the entire mail piece
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-3980126/Inside-troubled-world-Jose-Mourinho-behaviour-upsets-people-Manchester-United-not-used-it.html

And F365 link which summaries the "good bit"
http://www.football365.com/news/mourinho-conduct-upsetting-united-players-report

I'm finding the various training ground behaviour to be at odds to how I believed Mourinho worked, but it's becoming too much of a pattern in reporting now for me to ignore totally.

*IF* we were top, we wouldn't even be talking about it.
As far as I know how he acts at the training ground is pretty much how he's always been. But it didn't matter, he was winning.

As soon as he gets on a winning streak the papers won't give a hoot who he's ignoring at training or that he didn't say "thank you every much" to the lady in the canteen, these are all only stories because at the end of the day a bit of bad luck and it's Jose's bad luck.

We're starting to become like the listeners of Joe Duffy we just want swim around in more misery.

Back to the positive stuff lads!

IITYWYBMAD

TheDoc wrote: »

A report in today's Daily Mail is certainly trying to crash the mood.

I find Chris Wheeler a bit hit and miss.

Link to the entire mail piece
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-3980126/Inside-troubled-world-Jose-Mourinho-behaviour-upsets-people-Manchester-United-not-used-it.html

And F365 link which summaries the "good bit"
http://www.football365.com/news/mourinho-conduct-upsetting-united-players-report

I'm finding the various training ground behaviour to be at odds to how I believed Mourinho worked, but it's becoming too much of a pattern in reporting now for me to ignore totally.

What I find amazing is that anybody finds this amazing?

UTD knew exactly what they were singing up to when they approached Jose, and it's the main reason he wasn't signed earlier.

All this "it was only a bottle" type c**p and the faux feeling of being singled out for unfair treatment is hilarious.

Mourinho was always going to bring a circus with him and that's how it's panning out.

I'd be more concerned about how the managers antics are affecting the players on the pitch.

His reaction to Pogba's dive last weekend is laughable and now he's looking at a 4-6 week ban. Beggars belief tbh.

Lovely Bloke

DDG used to share a locker (room) with one of the victims of the plane crash, who played with him in Madrid

https://twitter.com/D_DeGea/status/803576469536509952?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

Dwarf.Shortage

Pheonix10 wrote: »

Anyone have any stats to say how likely top 4 may be? Like would we have to go on a outrageously improbable good run...

We have a 26.67% chance of making the top 4 based on our current price with Paddy Power, adjusting that for their profit margin they're estimating the probability as around 30%.

They also have us a 16.67% shout to win the Europa which is let's say 20% allowing for profit margin.

A bit of tinkering with those two numbers says we have a 44% chance of being in the champions league next season.

Cantona's Collars

Seems like a lovely place to go see an away game:

0gac3yjefb5sv7

Dwarf.Shortage wrote: »

We have a 26.67% chance of making the top 4 based on our current price with Paddy Power, adjusting that for their profit margin they're estimating the probability as around 30%.

They also have us a 16.67% shout to win the Europa which is let's say 20% allowing for profit margin.

A bit of tinkering with those two numbers says we have a 44% chance of being in the champions league next season.

Curious to see how the probability is worked out based on the odds?

Pyjamarama

Pheonix10 wrote: »

Curious to see how the probability is worked out based on the odds?

Given that odds are calculated with expected and actual outlay included using them as a marker for probability is ludicrous if the op is being serious.

If something is odds on does that mean there's a greater than 100% chance of it happening.

Dwarf.Shortage

Pheonix10 wrote: »

Curious to see how the probability is worked out based on the odds?

One divided by the decimal odds which is the same as one divided by (1 + fraction odds). We are 11/4 to make top four 11/4 = 2.75 and 1 / (1 + 2.75) gives 0.26666.

However if you add up all the odds calculated like that you won't end up with 100% because if you did the bookie would have it priced as break even. On an ultra popular event it might add up to 97/98% because bookies are competing for business. If you went to back third division Turkish volleyball it might only add up to 85% both because it's a less competitive market and because bookies worry more obscure events could fixed/dodgy.

Dwarf.Shortage

Pyjamarama wrote: »

Given that odds are calculated with expected and actual outlay included using them as a marker for probability is ludicrous if the op is being serious.

If something is odds on does that mean there's a greater than 100% chance of it happening.

No it means there's a greater than 50% chance of it happening.

Cantona's Collars

Eric Bailly is back in training,some good news going into the busy Xmas period.

sabat

Dwarf.Shortage wrote: »

We have a 26.67% chance of making the top 4 based on our current price with Paddy Power, adjusting that for their profit margin they're estimating the probability as around 30%.

They also have us a 16.67% shout to win the Europa which is let's say 20% allowing for profit margin.

A bit of tinkering with those two numbers says we have a 44% chance of being in the champions league next season.

You have this wrong-bookies have to "make a book" so the prices will also be determined by the amount of money they're taking on an outcome as well as what they think the true odds are-hence you have unrealistically low odds for things like Liverpool to win the league or England to win the World Cup. I actually think a Europa win is more likely than top 4 tbh- by the time the competition restarts the team will be a lot more settled and they might even be the best side left in it, but the EPL will have pulled too far in front at that stage.

Dwarf.Shortage

sabat wrote: »

You have this wrong-bookies have to "make a book" so the prices will also be determined by the amount of money they're taking on an outcome as well as what they think the true odds are-hence you have unrealistically low odds for things like Liverpool to win the league or England to win the World Cup. I actually think a Europa win is more likely than top 4 tbh- by the time the competition restarts the team will be a lot more settled and they might even be the best side left in it, but the EPL will have pulled too far in front at that stage.

It's not perfect but it's a decent quick estimator. The actual underlying probability cannot be calculated and you could argue it doesn't necessarily exist, all you can do is try make a decent estimate.

ArmaniJeanss

Dwarf.Shortage wrote: »

We have a 26.67% chance of making the top 4 based on our current price with Paddy Power, adjusting that for their profit margin they're estimating the probability as around 30%.

They also have us a 16.67% shout to win the Europa which is let's say 20% allowing for profit margin.

You've got this backwards but an easy mistake to make.
If the bookies think something is a 20% chance (4/1) then for margin purposes the advertised price will be closer to 25% (3/1) than your 16.7% (5/1).
In other words if they are offering 16.67% then it means they believe the true chance is around 14%/15%.

0gac3yjefb5sv7

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

You've got this backwards but an easy mistake to make.
If the bookies think something is a 20% chance (4/1) then for margin purposes the advertised price will be closer to 25% (3/1) than your 16.7% (5/1).
In other words if they are offering 16.67% then it means they believe the true chance is around 14%/15%.

Does this take into account the level of getting on it or is that impossible to gauge?

Dwarf.Shortage

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

You've got this backwards but an easy mistake to make.
If the bookies think something is a 20% chance (4/1) then for margin purposes the advertised price will be closer to 25% (3/1) than your 16.7% (5/1).
In other words if they are offering 16.67% then it means they believe the true chance is around 14%/15%.

Yeah you're right I've went the wrong way when I tried to account for margin.

ArmaniJeanss

Pheonix10 wrote: »

Does this take into account the level of getting on it or is that impossible to gauge?

I think when discussing what bookies price mean that its best to ignore factors like biased money, markets being potentially skewed by a massive bet or bookies setting odds based on expected flow of money rather than opinion. Coz these things are genuinely impossible to quantify.

Bearing in mind that bookies have 1000s of markets priced up at any time then I think its reasonable to say that the vast majority of the time the odds quoted are directly rated to what they believe is the true chance. (Exceptions for markets prone to insider info like Sack Race, SPOTY or XFactor etc )

Dwarf.Shortage

Pheonix10 wrote: »

Does this take into account the level of getting on it or is that impossible to gauge?

It’s impossible to account precisely for the weight of money going on different outcomes. If I was looking to get a decent estimate of the chances of various outcomes I would use the following logic.

Say you’re looking to back the winner of group A in the Europa League; someone has to win the group so the real probabilities need to add up to 100%. Presently you have Man UTD at 8/13 (61.9%) Fenerbache at 5/4 (44.4%) and Feyenoord at 33/1 (2.9%). This adds up to 109.2% and the surplus over 100% is basically a source of edge for the bookie.

However if you divide the original percentage estimates by 109.2% you end up with UTD 56.7%, Fenerbache 40.7% and Feyenoord 2.6%. This adds up to 100% as required and is basically splitting the real world probability space up in the same ratio as the bookies prices. It’s then a question of judgement in terms of the weight of money, like chances are you’re overstating United’s chances because more people will be backing them.

However the offered prices will not differ from their actual estimates by much at all because if they did they would be exploited by professional gamblers many of whom are very well versed in this kind of statistical analysis.

As I said ultimately it is an estimate but it’s a pretty bloody good one.

The_Kew_Tour

Sirsok wrote: »

Always loved him, id also include Diego Forlan and probably Quintine Fortune, in players that I was sad to see leave the club.

Always loved Fellani from his time at Everton so will place him in thay category aswell.

Heinze was someone I had a affinity towards untill all that stuff with wanting to go Liverpool cropped up.

Agree with all that, had same feelings.

IamtheWalrus

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

Agree with all that, had same feelings.

I had a soft spot for Jordi.

Trigger

RobertKK

zerks wrote: »

Seems like a lovely place to go see an away game:

Can't be as bad as playing West Ham away...

jayo26

All these calculations and figures remind me of one person



We were due a bit of Rachel

Dwarf.Shortage

jayo26 wrote: »

All these calculations and figures remind me of one person



We were due a bit of Rachel

I would calculate my chances if it wouldn't be so disheartening.

BenK

TheDoc wrote: »

A report in today's Daily Mail is certainly trying to crash the mood.

I find Chris Wheeler a bit hit and miss.

Link to the entire mail piece
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-3980126/Inside-troubled-world-Jose-Mourinho-behaviour-upsets-people-Manchester-United-not-used-it.html

Hard to take anything the Daily Mail writes seriously. 'Troubled world of Jose Mourinho' in the headline doesn't bode well for the rest of the article. It's not exactly balanced!

The_Kew_Tour

We should get our budget ready for Championship next season at this rate

Rayne Wooney

You'd have to be blind or hold a grudge not to see the amount of progress we've made.

The results are still shít but for the most part Jose has done his job and the players need to start putting teams to the sword.

West Ham, Stoke, Burnley and Watford, 8 points dropped in games we absolutely should have won. All of these games came after a midweek one but I can't have that as an excuse, we didn't look lethargic, 4 of our front 6 against West Ham were fresh.

sky88

I was one of those who did not want Jose whatsoever and still dont really want him but even i have to admit he has improved the team.

brinty

jayo26 wrote:

We were due a bit of Rachel

God bless her