I am beginning to conclude you know nothing about football.
Conceding that many shots and corners shows a team outplayed. Even their own players admit they were battered and were lucky.
Strange on another thread Bradford were lucky when you were arguing they had little possession and conceded most shots and corners. Now it's different. Until their first goal they were very lucky not to be 2 or 3 down. If their own players know that why don't you?
We did out play them, I never said otherwise, but when you counter against us, you'll have more shots and therefore corners etc. and in theory, goals, but they defended quite well, absorbing some the pressure we put on them, hit us on the counter, we lost 3-0, counter-attacking football?
They set out to do that, they did it, and won.
I do recall you talking of 4-4-2 as it would end all of our home woes (despite us losing more playing 4-4-2) and Tuesday happened. England beat Brazil playing... 4-3-3, that wretched 4-4-2 has been dropped, good riddance, and we won which is a great for England & the formation.
I was saying their run was lucky, beating teams on pens, where it is a lottery. V Villa, they played well, but had the luck, which they made, to win, Villa should've scored 3-4 goals.
In football, and in life actually, you make your own luck! Crewe 'rode their luck', but their game plan, which was to counter, worked a treat, that's what MR said. But I'm the one who knows nothing about football? Coming from the dinosaur here!? :facepalm:
