It reminded me of another CM we used to have...
It reminded me of another CM we used to have...So good from torp as well
It reminded me of another CM we used to have...
Good shot and stop for Thomas’s shot, we have champions luck at the moment the way it fell to Kitch’Love Thomas and Kitching
It was on the volley according to cwr.Nor me , just spunked the clearance
That’s a bold statement from a team with 2 shots on target…Quote from the Boro forum:
'I think teams get beat by their reputation now, including us'
BTA on hand to bury the Simms chance if it was parried or hitting the bar love it!
the aforementioned "whey's" can he hearded even better here, also what a goal
It's the same when Kitching slips before getting the ball to Jay.
the aforementioned "whey's" can he hearded even better here, also what a goal
Except it didn’t, they had 1 shot on target all second half which was a 0.01 xG chance from Whittaker. They had threat, but we nullified them barring one chance that they missed.
Their first shot of the half was in the 71st minute, the Conway chance on 75 minutes and a shot in 89th.
By contrast, we had 10 shots, 50% of those on target and 2 big chances.
Edit: even the 1st half at 2-0, Whittaker’s goal
Was their only shot on target and only half decent chance they made. Other than that, they had shots outside the box or just inside it in traffic.
Give credit where it’s due, we defended well. Made tackles, got interceptions, blocked shots and won ground duals.
It's okay now all is forgiven. however I agree.Eeek yep crass that bloody hell
It’s not random at all. Your points are made to show that Boro exposed us, mine is the opposite and that we defended well as part of a game plan. The stats conveniently back up my argument because we limited them to 1.05 xG and 2 shots on target.You're just randomly inserting stats which don't actually refer to the point I've made. Which I've noticed you're regularly guilty of.
Depends. Both those teams create a lot of xG but both of them are tracking below this.
Equally, if those teams leave themselves exposed, we’ll score goals. These teams have good underlying data metrics but our way form is better than both their home records.
I take games as they are, we’ve conceded 4 goals from 2.66 xG in the last 2 which is ‘concerning’ despite is a slight underperformance. Compared to Blackburn and Watford at home where we conceded 1 goal from 3.75 xG and the narrative was more positive.
To find common ground, I agree that Lampard needs to look at the last 2 and tweak the tactics to tighten up the defence.
It’s not random at all. Your points are made to show that Boro exposed us, mine is the opposite and that we defended well as part of a game plan. The stats conveniently back up my argument because we limited them to 1.05 xG and 2 shots on target.
The difference here is that your views are mostly subjective whereas I use objective data to support my viewpoints.
I’ve understood you clearly, it’s your premise that I disagree with.What in the ChatGPT are you on about. You've clearly not understood what I've said at all.
Do you actually come up with anything original or just use AI to attempt at responding to posts?
I’ve understood you clearly, it’s your premise that I disagree with.
I’ll take the compliment though, safe travels home if you’re making your way home from
Middlesborough.
He will only have a year left on his contract at the end of the season.Unfortunately I can't see him being let go unless a massive fee is offered. There would be numerous clubs interested, including prem. I don't think we had a buy agreement.
If he stays with us until the end of the season and we go up then who knows
More than slightly. I can’t see more than 4.Exactly, this is why I think if we’re going to crumble and fuck this up, it’ll be in December.
We lost away to Ipswich, Southampton, PNE and Birmingham in 23/24 a repeat of that would be damaging.
I think we’ll get 8 points from those games a that’s being slightly optimistic.
What does that even mean?Quote from the Boro forum:
'I think teams get beat by their reputation now, including us'
Kitching's fitness level is immense. He had to put in a long shift at the back. But was in the box for his second and then played in JDS to set up the 4th. He may not be the fastest and this level as high as he can go but his stamina is astonishingI think I 🩵 Liam Kitching
By the law of averages 60% of a game is dominated by the home team and 40% by the away. That LoA also would have the home side having a superior shot and passing count, that's why we look impressive. You can play badly for 80 minutes and well for 10 and score once of one shot, because the game is about scoring goals and we do for fun at the moment. If people are looking for perfection you'll never find it on the football pitch.There's no argument to make really. We were dreadful for large spells either half.
The commentators also said the same.
But we've got the win that's all that matters.
We went to 3 at the back and Kkh and Dasilva the wing backsI am not quite sure how the formation changed when KKH came on. Can someone explain?
Aura)What does that even mean?
Only 6 points between 4th and 17th, the league is so ridiculously competitiveScored the same amount of goals as 2nd and 3rd in the league combined. Madness.View attachment 47379
ThanksWe went to 3 at the back and
We pushed KKH and DaSilva out wide and had Kitching and MvE doubling up inside them . It nullified a lot of Boros play .I am not quite sure how the formation changed when KKH came on. Can someone explain?
And City old boys doing well - Robins and EustaceOnly 6 points between 4th and 17th, the league is so ridiculously competitive
I’m still struggling to believe my own eyes with that league table. Yes, Ipswich can go second with a good win at Blackburn, but for now nobody would have guessed that being the top 3 at this stage.And City old boys doing well - Robins and Eustace
Great Ball from Torp for Ellis to just take the shotOh and one other thing. It's going to have to be a bloody good goal to beat Simms' first for goal of the season
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?