Indy_Bones

Definitely better than the awful 2nd kit we've got this season!

No, you're not the only one. I've always argued that you need 1 defensive player and 1 creative/attacking player, as 2 defensive limits attacking play far too much, and 2 creative doesn't give the defensive bite and stability in the centre. Probably why I've been pushing for Vrancic so much lately, as he's the ideal counter-balance to a Skipp or Tettey style player.

It's not just the match engine for me, it's a lot of little things that may simply need an adjustment period, but there's half a dozen things I now find much harder to actually find and access with the different layout, and I don't like the changes to the training system in the slightest. Doesn't help that the Epic version currently has a number of bugs either. Maybe I just need to persevere, but at the minute it simply feels like a chore rather than enjoying it like I do in FM18.

I'd disagree with that in the case of Reece James, I'd rather have Max tbh. Wan-Bissaka has the extra strength and physicality Max doesn't have but I do feel Max is a smarter player and better with his close control and movement, and TAA is a different kettle of fish altogether. I'd absolutely consider him in the top 5 of English RB's right now, and our asking price should reflect this as well as his genuine potential.

I also got FM20 free with Epic this past week, have to say that I WAY prefer FM18 overall, especially the match engine. There are absolutely some bits from FM20 I'd like to have in FM18, but in general I simply prefer the older version. Will be uninstalling FM20 shortly and sticking with FM18, shame really.

It's because I've got an updated database which was downloaded from FM Scout. Byram and Drmic come in on pre-arranged transfers just before the season starts, with Franke moving away. Fahrmann, Rhodes and Passlack are all there on loan as well. Still got Naismith, Jarvis, Oliveira etc all away on season long loans. Sadly it still needed updating further as they had players like Aarons, Lewis and Idah all with really weak potential ratings, and Maddison virtually at his peak with little room for improvement (even at Leicester I can't see him misrepresented!). I also sacked 90% of the existing staff on day 1 including Riemer and Webber (I don't like working with a DoF in-game)!

Why should I? It's an opinion board, and my opinion is that our team is weaker when McLean plays and that he doesn't bring enough to justify his selection, never mind his seeming undroppability. Cantwell has been getting stick on here for months despite him playing well, yet I don't see you chasing other posters down demanding they stop making said posts, so how about YOU give it a rest in trying to dictate what opinions I can or can't post ref McLean!

It's more than McLean did...

Probably because he wasn't poor in either game. He does have moments where he drifts a bit and isn't involved as much as he should be, but when he is involved he looks to make things happen and plays some clever balls and forces teams to defend because they can't afford to just let him do what he wants.

Amazing that nobody thought it prudent to ask the author about this before casting Cruise, they just pick who they want regardless.

The complete mangling of "The Sword of Truth" series of books by Terry Goodkind is another example of how they ruined books I really liked, and instead made multiple changes for no reason AND got the casting all wrong in the process. Goodkind himself stated before the show was released that fans of the books shouldn't expect the series to be truly faithful to the source material, but then later released a further statement saying that the writers/directors hadn't bothered to consult him on any of it, were doing their own thing, and not to complain to him if viewers didn't like the show because he wasn't going to be responsible for it, and he hoped that the writers/directors would do it justice (they didn't). It's quite rare you find a genuinely good adaptation of a book or book series, and often the ones that do try to be very faithful don't catch the attention of the masses and simply get written off. PS, apols for going slightly off-topic here.

McLean has had 2 years to find rhythm and has consistently failed, how much longer do we continue this charade and instead play someone who actually does something in the midfield?

Clearly a talented player, but let's not forget what league he's playing in, and much like Sinani, there is a vast gap in quality between his league and the Champs, never mind the PL. We've seen players from stronger leagues fail when they move to the UK, so whilst I agree he'd had been a potentially very good acquisition, there are still plenty of question marks there, and the price they wanted was insane for his limited experience in a pretty weak league.

Because unless something is put in place VERY quickly, we could well be back in lockdown by that point.

We could debate all day about whether or not assist stats have true relevance, but the fact is that in terms of provable data, Vrancic directly contributed more to our promotion than McLean did in terms of attacking threat and supply for our forwards. As I've repeatedly said, I'll take a player with the vision, creativity, passing range and technical ability to get the best out of our forwards than I will a hard worker who covers a lot of ground but doesn't actually do much of real note in the process. This is somewhat fine if you're a defensive mid who's only job is to regain possession, break up play and then provide a short pass to a technically better teammate, it's not ok if we already have someone doing that and the other guy isn't handling the creative and passing side in exchange, nor is he providing the defensive duties the other player is. Jack of all trades players are highly useful to a squad as a whole for their flexibility to cover positions on a short-term basis, but you don't play them for 46 games a season, you use them only when needed if your primary choices can't be selected for whatever reason.

I'm certainly not going to claim our government has done a good job with this pandemic in the slightest, but it IS the fault of people if they REFUSE to act sensibly and risk theirs and other peoples lives by their choices. I'm sick of seeing people wandering round shops (especially supermarkets) without facemasks, and almost getting in your face ignoring distancing guidelines, but will then blame the government if they get sick despite them being directly responsible for not taking appropriate precautions. If EVERYONE was following the rules and being as safe as possible, we wouldn't have anywhere near the infection rates we're currently seeing, but no, people would rather argue the toss, claim it's a hoax, say they can't wear a mask despite having no genuine reason physically not to, and then go out for 20 pints whilst doing all the above AND ignoring distancing... Track and trace has been a disaster from the start, but it's also hard to keep up with demand for tests when people are going for them willy nilly, as if they're somehow missing out if they don't get one while they can (toilet roll syndrome). A friend of mine's son developed symptoms last week, it took them 2 days to get a test arranged, as despite living near Sheffield, the only places that had availability when they tried to book one were Liverpool or Aberdeen...

The books are a bit hit and miss tbh, some are excellent, others don't really seem to hang together properly. Casino Royale will always be my favourite, along with Moonraker, whereas The Spy Who Loved Me and You Only Live Twice left me as cold as Bond himself. One thing to remember though is that Casino Royale was the first book, and although Bond was already quite cold and ruthless from the start, he was willing to give it all up for Vesper who he then found out had betrayed him and this drove him even darker which is somewhat reflected past this point. I'd say that if you fancy reading any of them, obviously start with Casino Royale, but then do Moonraker and From Russia With Love. The reason I wouldn't go in chronological order is that you get this weird sort of alternation between good and weak entries for the most part which is a strange coincidence and always made me wonder about Fleming's approach to writing, and if you'd only read the likes of Live and Let Die and Diamonds are Forever, you'd be forgiven for thinking all the books were a bit rubbish.

Unless drastic steps are taken, and members of the public actually start being sensible and following guidelines like distancing and face masks, then a 2nd lockdown seems inevitable. We're almost back to the pre-lockdown numbers already, and those numbers are increasing rapidly. But instead of being responsible, hundreds of people descended on Blackpool this weekend, most of whom weren't distancing or wearing masks, yet will quite happily blame the government for their own actions...

That's actually my favourite Bond movie, followed by the more recent Casino Royale. I really wish Dalton had been given a few more movies to work with rather than replacing him with Brosnan, but I guess too many fans were used to Connery/Moore and a commercial decision rather than accuracy to the source material will almost always win out in those situations.

That still creates the same problem we have now Paddy, in that there's nobody in the middle to provide them with any sort of creativity or supply to work with. You can't just rely on a full back to constantly bomb forwards, nor for attacking players to keep dropping back to make something happen, you need a degree of that coming from the middle of the park and two defensive mids doesn't give us that. If all we want to do is park the bus and try not to concede (a'la Hughton ball), then Tettey and Skipp makes sense, if we actually want to win and give the opposition something to worry about we need someone in there to make things happen. We had this under Lambert with the likes of Fox, we had this previously with Crook as well, and more recently with Maddison (although more of a number 10 than central mid) and Vrancic/Leitner for the champs promotion season. This side is crying out for someone in the middle who can pick out a through ball or a 40 yard pass across the field, what we don't need is more defenders or headless chickens in there.

Theoretically that's right, as if you can simply outscore a team even if you concede a number of goals yourself you still get the 3 points. This is why we finished 3rd in the Premier League with a negative goal difference, we weren't the strongest defensively (not like a classic Mourinho side who were happy to grind out 1-0 wins) but were good in passing and attacking which lead to a lot of wins, but a number of absolute thrashings in exchange. The point here is simple, if you play nothing but defensive players you are unlikely to ever get more than a point for a draw unless you can squeak a goal from a set play or similar, if you play all attacking players you will likely concede a lot and whether or not you get the points depends on if you outscore them. Most sides quite understandably look for a balance, but in the process you don't tend to find TWO defensive midfielders in the centre of the park unless you have absolutely top class players around them who can make things work with the limited supply they give offensively, or it's a team purely looking to park the bus and hope to scrape a goal from somewhere whilst not getting battered in return. ONE defensive midfielder in a side like ours is enough, two leaves us giving the forwards very little to work with and why players like Pukki will start dropping deeper just to try to make something happen. TWO attacking and creative mids can be an issue as well, which is why the preferred balance is one of each - a defensive minded mid and a creative attacking mid. At the minute we're playing a defensive mid and a jack of all trades mid (who is neither creative enough nor defensively strong enough to claim either role), when we should be playing a defensive mid and a creative mid.

Assists are a direct reflection of contribution to goals, the more assists you have, the more goals you've helped create. Whilst in some roles this is far less relevant such as keepers, central defenders, defensive mids etc, for attacking midfielders and forwards it plays a much greater and frequently expected part of their game. Liverpool scored numerous goals last season due to crosses, passes and set pieces from their full backs and is a direct reflection of their contribution to Liverpool scoring, so to claim it's meaningless is misleading at best, and downright wrong at worst. Out of the 93 goals we scored in the champs promotion season, over 70 of them came from assists by teammates, 12 from Buendia alone, and nobody doubts his value in providing this, but somehow it's different with Vrancic and meaningless in his case?

Out of the 13 games he played 75+ minutes, he scored 7 and assisted 4, (which if extrapolated over a full 46 game season equals 25 goals and 14 assists, but that's by the by), so what more do you actually want from a creative central midfielder??? I don't care that he's not great defensively, I don't care that he's not that quick or particularly good in the air, I don't care that other players are better tacklers or better dribblers, because what he can do that NONE of our other central mids can, is to have the vision and technical ability to bring our forwards into the game whilst offering a genuine goalscoring threat himself. Not to mention his genuine quality from free kicks and other dead ball situations. Having McLean alongside Tettey, Trybull or Skipp hasn't made us better defensively or helped up maintain possession better, but what it has done is remove that creative spark which players like Pukki, Stiepermann, Buendia and others all benefitted massively from. Let players like Tettey, Skipp and Trybull deal with the defensive part of the midfield, but they NEED a player like Vrancic alongside them to actually do something useful with the ball once they've won it back. Leitner was another who helped with this area, as he could also pass a ball and really set a tempo for the rest of the team (but without Vrancic's attacking threat or set pieces) - McLean just can't. I really don't get why a number of posters seem to want to drag Vrancic down and make out he's not good enough. It's like complaining that De Bruyne should be dropped because he's not good enough defensively, whilst completely ignoring his passing ability, goalscoring threat and actual difference a player like that makes because you can't simply ignore them. Opposition sides aren't scared of McLean, whereas the thought of giving Vrancic the time to make a perfect pass to Pukki, let him hit one from 20 yards, or giving him a free kick from a decent position WILL and DOES concern them. When did we start celebrating mediocrity and mindless running over technical ability and actual threat? How many fans would rather have had a Mike Milligan over an Ian Crook? I know I bloody well wouldn't...

Is that because he missed my tenure as England manager?