The Swamp

Sure do with mister d had used the first name of one of those players and the opposite of “on”…

The Sybian wrote: ↑Sat Jan 14, 2023 8:54 amIt must be rough rooting for a team that spends $100 million for a guy, but they have so much talent they struggle to get him playing time .

10th in 5 year net spend but in a very egregious and sure seems spendy kind of way. No argument.

That long diagonal pass in the build up for the second Man U goal?

Woof.

VAR stepping in there and overturning sets me back in terms of how well I thought I’d learned certain rules.

Dumb game and Casemiro is an asshole on Ted Lasso.

Sabo wrote: ↑Sat Jan 14, 2023 9:14 am That long diagonal pass in the build up for the second Man U goal?

Woof.

Bruno is capable of some shit passes, but he can also do the sublime.

mister d wrote: ↑Sat Jan 14, 2023 9:08 am

The Sybian wrote: ↑Sat Jan 14, 2023 8:54 amIt must be rough rooting for a team that spends $100 million for a guy, but they have so much talent they struggle to get him playing time .

10th in 5 year net spend but in a very egregious and sure seems spendy kind of way. No argument.

Net spending is a dumb way to look at it, sorry. It completely discounts amortization for wages, plus teams that buy and buy and buy expensive players also tend to sell and sell and sell those same expensive players because they can’t keep them all happy.

I’ll admit, by my interpretation of the old offsides rule, i thought Rashford was interfering with play. Didn’t realize rule had been changed.

From what they explained and what I read I understand wording now that since he didn’t impede goalies vision of play, nor block a city player from touching it, since he didn’t touch ball he’s not off. Fwiw, Kyle Walker never slowed up and played Bruno the whole time as if he was on. He was the only city player in a position to be able to make a play on Bruno. Complaints about Ederson adjusting his position because he thought Rashford was going to shoot are dumb as beu o shot from the same place.

Either way, city created next to nothing the whole match. So much improvement from this United side.

That's as excited as I've been watching soccer on TV since Landon v. Algeria.

I was in desperate need of sleep and didn’t set an alarm but great news to wake up to.

Square Rob wrote: ↑Sat Jan 14, 2023 9:58 amFwiw, Kyle Walker never slowed up and played Bruno the whole time as if he was on.

Walker never slowed up but Rashford did affect Akanji’s ability to play the onside shooter, no?

(And the ball is where the ball is, but ederson’s positioning isn’t affected by the direction the shooter is coming from and the fact that Rashford likely would have had to shoot with his left?)

Square Rob wrote: ↑Sat Jan 14, 2023 9:53 amNet spending is a dumb way to look at it, sorry. It completely discounts amortization for wages, plus teams that buy and buy and buy expensive players also tend to sell and sell and sell those same expensive players because they can’t keep them all happy.

Ignoring United is still $100MM above City in the same 5 year expenditures, being able to sell to cover future expenses seems a lot smarter and more responsible than (hypothetically) paying $90MM for a CB that has to sit for big matches and wouldn't return half that if sold? City spends alot, but not uniquely and certainly not irresponsibly, relative terms.

"Hey Mister D, bad morning?"

Yes. Woke up for this match and then a concrete divider hit our main car while my wife was backing out in a parking garage this AM. On the bright side, I got a surprise day off Monday because I didn't know that turned from a float to a company holiday. Yay!

mister d wrote: ↑Sat Jan 14, 2023 10:50 am

Square Rob wrote: ↑Sat Jan 14, 2023 9:53 amNet spending is a dumb way to look at it, sorry. It completely discounts amortization for wages, plus teams that buy and buy and buy expensive players also tend to sell and sell and sell those same expensive players because they can’t keep them all happy.

Ignoring United is still $100MM above City in the same 5 year expenditures, being able to sell to cover future expenses seems a lot smarter and more responsible than (hypothetically) paying $90MM for a CB that has to sit for big matches and wouldn't return half that if sold? City spends alot, but not uniquely and certainly not irresponsibly, relative terms.

Straw man. I wasn’t the one who gave you shit for supporting a wealthy club. For sure city have bought well. But doesn’t change the fact they’ve bought a lot. Of course United have too, as they have been chasing the pack and trying to rebuild.

I don't think its a strawman to point out that players you can sell for a profit are better than overspending for players you can't sell for half the initial cost.

(The fact they've spent as much as they do and are barely top 10 in net, between 90(pound sign) and 300 million less than the other big 5 clubs, counts for something.)

mister d wrote: ↑Sat Jan 14, 2023 11:00 am I don't think its a strawman to point out that players you can sell for a profit are better than overspending for players you can't sell for half the initial cost.

(The fact they've spent as much as they do and are barely top 10 in net, between 90(pound sign) and 300 million less than the other big 5 clubs, counts for something.)

That ends when the success stops. And yes, it was a straw man to my point. Net spend is a stupid way to look at it. I didn’t say city haven’t done well with their spending, but like every butt hurt city/Chelsea/psg fan when anyone points out their owners are loaded the first thing they say is net spend.

And the success stops when the smart spending ends?


(If a club is going to constantly eat shit for rampant spending, they should at a minimum be outspending other clubs in their league.)

What a free kick that was by Ward-Prowse

mister d wrote: ↑Sat Jan 14, 2023 11:33 am And the success stops when the smart spending ends?


(If a club is going to constantly eat shit for rampant spending, they should at a minimum be outspending other clubs in their league.)

No, smart spending gets far more difficult after the success drops off.

At least our owners are just your run of the mill terrible American billionaires.

A_B wrote: ↑Sat Jan 14, 2023 11:47 pm At least our owners are just your run of the mill terrible American billionaires.

So is the Swamp FC owner AB a coal baron, hedge fund guy or what?

Llollris.

mister d wrote: ↑Sun Jan 15, 2023 12:05 pmLlollris.

Haha. Lloser.

Such a frustrating result today. Ted Lasso's house seems to be a hard place for United to pick up wins. Would've loved to jump into second place but a gorgeous free kick by Olise tied it at 1 late on. Was only able to half pay attention and the match seemed very end to end. Halfway through the season, and things are looking up.

Did Bruno get an offside screen for his goal today or was it legit?

govmentchedda wrote: ↑Wed Jan 18, 2023 5:02 pm Such a frustrating result today. Ted Lasso's house seems to be a hard place for United to pick up wins. Would've loved to jump into second place but a gorgeous free kick by Olise tied it at 1 late on. Was only able to half pay attention and the match seemed very end to end. Halfway through the season, and things are looking up.

The free kick was spectacular...



And Casemiro got a yellow...meaning he's out for the Arsenal game on Sunday.

Spurs may have beaten City many times recently, but I am anticipating a gruesome afternoon.

I think it’s either that or an absolute City defensive disaster where you can later point back at when they dropped out of the race.

Triple captained Haaland. Gonna need a real bounceback after last weekend's game.

mister d wrote: ↑Thu Jan 19, 2023 8:25 am I think it’s either that or an absolute City defensive disaster where you can later point back at when they dropped out of the race.

Spurs don't play to take advantage of weak defending. They sit back for 45 minutes and then come out in the second half and either have Son try to run through holding midfielders or have a back who can't cross try to cross to Kane.

#Conteball

A first-half goal???!!!


It has gotta be someone cosplaying as Conte.

I think it would be cool if one goal against didn't now mean two goals against.

Rush2112 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 19, 2023 3:47 pm A first-half goal???!!!


It has gotta be someone cosplaying as Conte.

Two!!! I turned the game on just in time. COYS!

The Sybian wrote: ↑Thu Jan 19, 2023 3:49 pm

Rush2112 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 19, 2023 3:47 pm A first-half goal???!!!


It has gotta be someone cosplaying as Conte.

Two!!! I turned the game on just in time. COYS!

Confirmed. Levy borrowed a bunch of Meerkats from the London Zoo and dressed them up for this match.

Rush2112 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 19, 2023 3:51 pm

The Sybian wrote: ↑Thu Jan 19, 2023 3:49 pm

Rush2112 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 19, 2023 3:47 pm A first-half goal???!!!


It has gotta be someone cosplaying as Conte.

Two!!! I turned the game on just in time. COYS!

Confirmed. Levy borrowed a bunch of Meerkats from the London Zoo and dressed them up for this match.

It looks like Ederson's been studying from the Lloris book of howlers.

Ederson was due for a boner.

mister d wrote: ↑Thu Jan 19, 2023 3:56 pm Ederson was due for a boner.

He could have saved the first one too.

Not starting Perisic every game is something that makes me wonder about Conte's alleged genius.

Too busy getting ready to inexplicably blame Rodri to get down, I imagine.

Man - Spurs are going to need a keeper VERY soon

Still not sure how they can keep Alvarez happy post-WC but its kinda fun to have them both out at once.