Ronald Koeman discussion

[bicycleheader]

Pipe down you sanctimonious bore

Can do, if you can pipe down the incessant moaning about your least favourite poster

 

[Tel001]

Were we up against it though? They had 10 men, not us.

I can't get on board with the 'if' in this situation. That works when you are in control, the game is going how you want it to go and then something inexplicable happens which costs you. I'd say something like when we were 2-0 up at Chelsea a couple of years ago and controlling the game, and suddenly Howard and Jagielka make a complete hash of mopping up a booted clearance and the game changes, or Spurs away last year when we never looked like scoring until their defender slipped and let Lukaku in to get us back in to the game. Those sort of things can go down as 'if that hadn't happened it would have been fine'. Last night though, they were causing problems. You could say 'if' Silva had scored instead of hitting the post, or Jagielka hadn't somehow slid 50 yards to tackle Aguero, or Baines hadn't made a great tackle on Walker or Jagielka hadn't been on the line to clear then we'd have been comprehensively hammered. Equally nonsensical.

Ten men doesn't mean that your going to lose.. in fact a lot of the time is galvanises the team and the fans and actually takes the pressure off you and onto the other team as they are expected to be the better side now..

Remember when turner got sent off in the first minute against blackburn ? The whole stadium changed and our players absolutely battered them ...

 

[Lanolin]

Ten men doesn't mean that your going to lose.. in fact a lot of the time is galvanises the team and the fans and actually takes the pressure off you and onto the other team as they are expected to be the better side now..

Remember when turner got sent off in the first minute against blackburn ? The whole stadium changed and our players absolutely battered them ...

Of course, and I never said we should win or they should lose.

I just don't think there's any need to suggest we were 'up against it' as if we're a conference team playing Real Madrid. We're an expensively assembled side with ambitions to win things and finish high up the league table, I don't expect the Alamo when we're 11 v 10 and 1-0 up against a side that finished 4 places higher than us in last seasons table.

 

[Tel001]

I would have taken a point before the game too.

The point I've been making is that I don't think the old Everton would have lost 3-1. I don't think there's any evidence to suggest that at all. In the 9 away games at City since they became monied, we've won 3, drawn 3 and lost 3. None of the losses came against 10 men.

And when we're those victories mate? As they have been getting further along and spending more our victories are becoming less and less.. and that draw last season was 1-1 going on 1-5

 

[Tel001]

Of course, and I never said we should win or they should lose.

I just don't think there's any need to suggest we were 'up against it' as if we're a conference team playing Real Madrid. We're an expensively assembled side with ambitions to win things and finish high up the league table, I don't expect the Alamo when we're 11 v 10 and 1-0 up against a side that finished 4 places higher than us in last seasons table.

4 places higher but how many points ahead? If you can't see the slick passing and pace they have compared to our players then I don't really know what to say... how many of our attacking players would get in their team? None is the answer ... attacking wise they are one of the two best in the league

 

[zzr45]

Here's the thing with 'playing against 10 men' kind of thinking for me.

Professionals will train with a defensive overlap, so having less in attack isn't exactly an issue. Realistically we saw why their players are seen as some of the best in the world - the speed and ability was unmatched. We couldn't take advantage of having that overlap as we still as a team don't look entirely at ease with a ball at our feet. Our midfield doesn't have the ability to control a game, defend like demons, yes, but control in attack, not so much.

 

[Khalekan]

I'm not missing your point though - it's that the gap between our squad and city's squad has got bigger in the past 6/7 years. I understand you loud and clear, I simply disagree.

Do I think we should expect to beat city away? No. Do I think we should expect to beat city away when 1-0 up and against 10 men for the 2nd half? Still no. Do I think we should expect to have more control of the game and cause them more problems than we did last night? Yes, absolutely.

My point was simply that last night was classic kitap1. It's fine, we know you get the odd draw with those tactics, we've been doing it for years. I thought we'd got past it that's all.

I like that post even if I don't know what "kitap 1" means.

 

[orly]

I would have taken a point before the game too.

The point I've been making is that I don't think the old Everton would have lost 3-1. I don't think there's any evidence to suggest that at all. In the 9 away games at City since they became monied, we've won 3, drawn 3 and lost 3. None of the losses came against 10 men.

Apparently Everton only began in the summer of 2013.

'old' Everton old Everton won League titles

 

[Groucho]

Pipe down you sanctimonious bore

We'll do the piping down thanks.

Pipe down.

 

[Lanolin]

And when we're those victories mate? As they have been getting further along and spending more our victories are becoming less and less.. and that draw last season was 1-1 going on 1-5

4 places higher but how many points ahead? If you can't see the slick passing and pace they have compared to our players then I don't really know what to say... how many of our attacking players would get in their team? None is the answer ... attacking wise they are one of the two best in the league

No offence but this is becoming really hard work. You're imagining things that I'm not saying because you think I'm a froth mouthed bedwetter when in reality I'm just trying to say that last night's result was a pretty good one, but one which we have achieved fairly regularly and in a similar way in recent years.

1. The victories were in the past yes. By the 'old Everton' the same 'old Everton' that the poster I was replying to had said would lose. I was saying they wouldn't, because they didn't.

2. City are really good, yes. They have better players than us, yes. I have not suggested otherwise. You don't know what to say about me not being able to see it because I can see it. All I'm saying is that some people appear to be making out like it was a tactical masterpiece and an outstanding result. I don't believe it was either. It was a disciplined, hard working, defensive performance, the like of which I have witnessed many many times. I had hoped we now had enough quality to expect a little better than we got in the 2nd half but it wasn't to be. Nevermind, we'll have another go next week at Chelsea and maybe do better.

 

[Prevenger17]

I think people pointing out the significant gap between us and City are missing our point a little bit. Fair enough, would have taken a point going in. But as circumstances would have it, we scored a goal and went a man up relatively early. When viewed in isolation, it's one of the best possible scenarios we could have envisioned if we were to beat City away and it's disappointing that we never looked like doing it, even when we were ahead. It's not an indictment of our overall season or Koeman or anything, just a brief kick in the nads.

 

[Woolly Blue]

Stuck in the middle of being a pessimist and an optimist.

End of the day, I expected more from us in that 2nd half against 10 men. But instead we played worse and didn't threaten once.

I also expected it to be a good opportunity for the manager to change what was progressively becoming inevitable as that half went on. Show something different than what we've generally come to expect.

Agree with some of that.

But we didn't create much in the first half either if we're honest and he changed things by introducing Klaassen and Siggy. Admittedly that didn't work, but it was a positive change so at least he tried something.

From his post match interviews he was obviously disappointed to not come away with three points. His tactics at City were very Moyes like, but the mentality of the two of them are quite different. They're both, like all managers, bloody stubborn, but one's very self confident and the other's full of self doubt.

Hand on heart I can't say I'm 100% sure Koeman will be successful here, but I do think there's a good chance he will be. If he isn't, he's likely to be shown the door.

 

[bizzaro]

After 498 seasons of Moyes and 3 seasons of Martinez I am very wary about us going through the same cycle again with the same excuses. I can already imagine being half way through his third season without looking like topping 7th or winning anything and people are still talking about new players and bedding in and takes time.

A big plus so far this season is I really like all his signings and the regular young starters. It's a bunch of players I can really get behind. I want to see Klassen start chipping in with goals and Sandro scoring free kicks. Sigurdsson reminding us what a decent corner/fk looks like. and most of all Pickford and Keane being confident, technically good AND tough.

You're talking absolute ROT.

What on earth has Moyes got to do with this?

This is Koeman's new team. Emphasis on NEW.

As in NEW players. Getting used to playing with each other.

4 points out of 6.

OMFG. All I can say.

 

[JLW]

2 games 4 points what's all the fuss about?? We got a point away from home against the favourites for the title..

 

[Tel001]

No offence but this is becoming really hard work. You're imagining things that I'm not saying because you think I'm a froth mouthed bedwetter when in reality I'm just trying to say that last night's result was a pretty good one, but one which we have achieved fairly regularly and in a similar way in recent years.

1. The victories were in the past yes. By the 'old Everton' the same 'old Everton' that the poster I was replying to had said would lose. I was saying they wouldn't, because they didn't.

2. City are really good, yes. They have better players than us, yes. I have not suggested otherwise. You don't know what to say about me not being able to see it because I can see it. All I'm saying is that some people appear to be making out like it was a tactical masterpiece and an outstanding result. I don't believe it was either. It was a disciplined, hard working, defensive performance, the like of which I have witnessed many many times. I had hoped we now had enough quality to expect a little better than we got in the 2nd half but it wasn't to be. Nevermind, we'll have another go next week at Chelsea and maybe do better.

Not meaning to make it hard work and I'm not frothing either ..

I am saying the Everton of old as In RM team.. and I think even Moyes old teams would have lost as the man city team these days is vastly superior to anything he faced..

I don't think it was a tactical masterpiece either... but I think it was our best chance to get something from the game and we nearly took it all...