No because Mangala is poor. Always has been always will be. Liverpool would have been all over him like a rash.
If it works, why change it? Seems like a sensible move to me. If I was sat there I really couldn't be arsed booing every time someone touched a ball but the scousers seem to like that sort of stuff
Exactly how i saw it!
Anybody think Mangala would have been a better option instead of Stones yesterday? Was clumsy against Bristol but so was Stones. Mangala may have made a difference with his pace & Strength? Can't see Firmino troubling Manga for strength & pace on the second goal.
Agreed and yet at the other end, Mariner would have whistled the place down, given a free kick and maybe a yellow!Exactly how i saw it!
A foul is a foul. There's no such thing as a soft foul just a foul - an infringement of the rules which is penalised by the referee giving a free kick. As I said in a post yesterday we have reached the stage where we accept the incompetence of referees as normal and try to explain it away with expressions such as 'soft foul' or 'out muscled'.
He misjudged the run of the ball, could have been better placed, kind of created a situation for Firmino to pressure in the first place but you can't tell me that wasn't a push because video evidence says otherwise there was a push in the back, without it he would not have stumbled and Firmino doesn't have such an easy task of taking the ball. Why would he stumble and not hit the deck if he was playing for it? He still had a lot to do to get it to safety but that's neither here nor there he was favourite for that ball. Not the worst decision we've had go against by a long shot considering though, sometimes you get them sometimes you don't.If you notice, Stones actually misreads the whole situation and gets attracted to the ball then realises he has over committed by about half a yard, which gives Firmino the opportunity.
Not a push for me, not strong enough from Stones.
He got in a bad position because he was fouled.To all intensive purposes, a foul isn’t a foul, that’s why we have the laws of the game that we do that allow for interpretation - they have to. A lot of the time, people aren’t arguing about a refereeing mistake, they are arguing the interpretation, which is also why VAR doesn’t have a particularly wide scope.
It certainly wasn’t a mistake from the ref. He allowed a fair bit of leniency for Firmino, but we have benefitted a few times this year from Otamendi getting a foul when the opposition have been in dangerous positions that I have thought have been very innocuous challenges.
The root issue really wasn’t the foul, it was Stones getting himself in a bad position that created an opportunity that should never have presented itself.
Whether a foul or not, he was in a position to deal with the threat, and he didn,t .How anyone can say Stones wasn't fouled for the second goal is beyond me. It's a clear push in the back which was more than enough to give Firmino the chance to nip in. Without that push stones deals with the situation. It wasn't not a shoulder to shoulder challenge which would have been enough.
Firmino even finished it like he was expecting a foul to be given.
Anyone questioning it go have a look at the penalty given against Sterling versus Stoke last season.
It frustrated the hell out of me, as that goal changed the whole complexion of the game.
Shame we didn't keep our heads as we could have got something.
Anybody think Mangala would have been a better option instead of Stones yesterday? Was clumsy against Bristol but so was Stones. Mangala may have made a difference with his pace & Strength? Can't see Firmino troubling Manga for strength & pace on the second goal.
John's still finding his form after the injury. Firmino would not have got past Vinnie - Vinnie would have bullied Firmino and either won the ball or forced him to go the long way round. Vinnie, when fit, is probably physically stronger than any other Prem player.Football's a contact sport. Stones was weak and got bullied, it's that simple. Kompany wouldn't have got eased off the ball that easily had that happened to him.
I agree - Mangala doesn't get physically bullied.I understand that but I think certain games suit certain players. Don't get me wrong I don't think yesterday was a game for Mangala but having watched Stones especially on the second goal i just feel it wouldn't have happened if it was Mangala? If we avoid that second goal we don't collapse.
He did when we played Wolves in the cup.I agree - Mangala doesn't get physically bullied.
Get your point, but Mangala's pure physical strength is one of his strengths when allied to his good (if not super rapid) pace from a standing start. If he could eliminate the odd lapse - you have a pretty good centre back. The basic tools are all there - it's just a case of bringing them together game after game after game. Every slip up is magnified - courtesy of that world legend of football and punditry, Phil Neville.He did when we played Wolves in the cup.