What on earth are you going on about?I ignored your argument because it was an irrelevant point. Smart sounding, but irrelevant none the less.
It's irrelevant because Stress was not the issue in contention. The claim was about what was the Cause in Fact of the goals. Not whether you could make a colorable argument about some tenous proximate cause. Which by the way if we took the argument to its outer to its limits, it could easily be shown that you couldnt prove a direct causal relationship BTW the goals and a high line. If nothing else we had already conceded the initial set piece goal before we ever moved our back line up.
But it was such a pointless exercise that I chose not bite and derail the thread.
So don't mistake my sidestepping the irrelevant for acquiescing.
And yes, I hope Pep brings all his sport psychology know-how to the table for us. But this has no relationship to whether a supposed high line caused the goals we conceded in a particular match.
Yes, got that. But that's not the issue.What on earth are you going on about?
You clearly didn't read my reply. I stated It loads the dice in favour of a failure. i.e. it makes the probability of a defensive error elsewhere higher.
Your other arguments have been totally destroyed by Prestwich Blue and others.
I'll leave it there. I've got work to do.
I ignored your argument because it was an irrelevant point. Smart sounding, but irrelevant none the less.
It's irrelevant because Stress was not the issue in contention. The claim was about what was the Cause in Fact of the goals. Not whether you could make a colorable argument about some tenous proximate cause. Which by the way if we took the argument to its outer to its limits, it could easily be shown that you couldnt prove a direct causal relationship BTW the goals and a high line. If nothing else we had already conceded the initial set piece goal before we ever moved our back line up.
But it was such a pointless exercise that I chose not bite and derail the thread.
So don't mistake my sidestepping the irrelevant for acquiescing.
And yes, I hope Pep brings all his sport psychology know-how to the table for us. But this has no relationship to whether a supposed high line caused the goals we conceded in a particular match.
I am probably one of Pellegrinis critics...hence the original post, however credit where it is due, I thought we started the game yesterday (Spurs) a lot more organised.... Basically always trying to have two banks of four behind the ball......we surrendered the bulk of possession, but never really looked like conceding until that awful penalty decision....although to be fair the team nearly picked itself.
However, I fail to understand why he still wouldn't play 3 in midfield..playing Yaya as an out and out second forward, and then replacing Kolarov with Clichy, who had been excellent..... and then as we went gung ho we started to look vulnerable once again.
Yaya has once again come in for some stick, however he was involved in most of our dangerous moments, although was culpable for their second goal, which probably wouldn't have happened with the initial set up!
+1I thought Pellegrini got it spot on with his initial set up, Yaya playing off Sergio would have works nicely if Yaya didn't waste a lot of counterattacks with the last ball - but those passes are the kind of thing you expect him to be able to to.
And bear in mind we had no one choice for the lineup really because of injuries. I reckon he'd have gone with silva 10 and Navas on the right if Navas was fit.
The Kolarov substitution was a good call when he decided to send Kolarov off to warm up, because we were getting a lot of joy down the right, and Clichy was unlikely to come up with anything. 9 times out of 10 Kolarov is the more likely LB to produce something in attack.
But, then when Clichy did come up with a decent cross and we equalised, he should have cancelled the substitution
his decision to carry on with the substitution arguably showed confidence to get all 3 points, but ultimately cost us the game as Kolarov did what he always does, got lazy and let Eriksen get away from him for the goal.