Football 2020/2021

[kaosmark2]

2 hours ago, pink_triangle said:

I actually think many female pundits would not think a situation where male pundits can have their views debated, but females need to be protected as equal terms. 

The views of a pundit should always be open to question. If those questioning do it in an abusive manner then punishment should be anything from warnings by the social media companies, to bans, to criminal action depending on severity.

It's not equal terms, but fighting for equality doesn't necessarily involve moving both things in the same direction. Perfection doesn't have to be the enemy of the good, and equal treatment doesn't come about from identical behaviour patterns. Questioning a female pundit carries the baggage of decades of misogynistic jokes about women and football, routed in centuries of sexism in society. If Leeds as a club is unaware of the impact of complaining about a female pundit, then they need to really consider their understanding of basic sexism.

[squirrelarmy]

If you look at the Leeds twitter feed you know they will always call out any pundit for being wrong. 
 

She was clearly wrong with her comments and was rightfully corrected by the social media team. 
 

Should they have not called her out on her factually incorrect remarks because she’s a woman? 
 

The blame lies with the Twitter twats. There are a lot of dickheads on there who make ridiculous comments on all sports/music/governments etc. Every team has their twats, it’s not just a Leeds thing. 

[eFestivals]

7 hours ago, squirrelarmy said:

She was clearly wrong with her comments and was rightfully corrected by the social media team. 

it's not really that.

She had an opinion. They have a different opinion.

I agree that they have the right to disagree with her opinion, so then it's all about how they go about it. 

[Hugh Jass]

8 hours ago, squirrelarmy said:

If you look at the Leeds twitter feed you know they will always call out any pundit for being wrong. 
 

She was clearly wrong with her comments and was rightfully corrected by the social media team. 
 

Should they have not called her out on her factually incorrect remarks because she’s a woman? 
 

The blame lies with the Twitter twats. There are a lot of dickheads on there who make ridiculous comments on all sports/music/governments etc. Every team has their twats, it’s not just a Leeds thing. 

Was she “clearly wrong” though? Leeds were more or less level with us when the break happened and in the previous season the team had ran out of puff due to Bielsa’s high energy style knackering them out.

Of course COVID wasn’t the only reason they went up, but it’s hardly unreasonable to suggest that a few months off helped the team recharge and put them in a much stronger position for the restart.

[eastynh]

No wonder Ole does not want to stop. It's getting like WWE. United getting out played, that's ok, the ref will give them a penalty for their own player tripping himself up.

Oh no he didn't, oh yes he did. Who needs pantomime season?

[thetime]

26 minutes ago, eastynh said:

No wonder Ole does not want to stop. It's getting like WWE. United getting out played, that's ok, the ref will give them a penalty for their own player tripping himself up.

Oh no he didn't, oh yes he did. Who needs pantomime season?

United pissing of rival fans again, rather than a laughing stock.

Life is good.

[eFestivals]

Just now, thetime said:

United pissing of rival fans again, rather than a laughing stock.

Life is good.

oh I dunno. There's still a lot of laughter to be worked out from the last few years, and Ole is still adding to them. 😄 

[jyoung]

United game at Anfield in a few weeks becomes very interesting. 

[pink_triangle]

19 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

oh I dunno. There's still a lot of laughter to be worked out from the last few years, and Ole is still adding to them. 😄 

The fact is you don't need to be the best team or have the best manager to win the league as Leicester showed. If the points total is relatively low (very possible in current times) then man utd could be contenders. There are in my view only 2 teams significantly stronger (liverpool and City) and both have their own issues, while man u will spend most of the next 22 games not playing them.

[pink_triangle]

10 hours ago, squirrelarmy said:

If you look at the Leeds twitter feed you know they will always call out any pundit for being wrong. 
 

She was clearly wrong with her comments and was rightfully corrected by the social media team. 
 

Should they have not called her out on her factually incorrect remarks because she’s a woman? 
 

The blame lies with the Twitter twats. There are a lot of dickheads on there who make ridiculous comments on all sports/music/governments etc. Every team has their twats, it’s not just a Leeds thing. 

I dont necessarily agree they were factually incorrect, although I think poorly worded and probably most would disagree. I don't really have a problem with having the debate though.

However I maintain my view that the comments of a female pundit should be open to debate. Take a hypothetical situation where is female pundit calls a footballer lazy or accuses them of diving, it would be wrong in my view that society doesn't allow that player a right to reply.

Also it should be noted that the likes of Priti Patel, Katie Hopkins etc also take abuse that they wouldn't if they were male. I would be very wary of creating an environment where they could use this abuse to restrict questioning of some of their views.

As I have said if people are being abusive on social media, these wealthy companies and the law must weed these people out and stop it.

[eFestivals]

17 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

The fact is you don't need to be the best team or have the best manager to win the league as Leicester showed. If the points total is relatively low (very possible in current times) then man utd could be contenders. There are in my view only 2 teams significantly stronger (liverpool and City) and both have their own issues, while man u will spend most of the next 22 games not playing them.

oh, Utd are hugely improved with Bruno, but he's carrying the rest of them so whether they're good enough I don't know.

I always thought Liverpool would have a ropey season. I'm surprised they're top of the pile at the mo. If they win it again it'll say more about the weakness of other teams than it will anything about Liverpool.

[thetime]

24 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

The fact is you don't need to be the best team or have the best manager to win the league as Leicester showed. If the points total is relatively low (very possible in current times) then man utd could be contenders. There are in my view only 2 teams significantly stronger (liverpool and City) and both have their own issues, while man u will spend most of the next 22 games not playing them.

In reality united will finnish between 3rd and 6th. 

Some nice Christmas results though, united played there best against Leicester and only got a point. 

Uniteds have slowly sorted out there home form, which was kicking them in the balls. 

[thetime]

12 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

 

I always thought Liverpool would have a ropey season. I'm surprised they're top of the pile at the mo. If they win it again it'll say more about the weakness of other teams than it will anything about Liverpool.

Surprised how average Liverpool have been away from home, only 1 away win since September. 

I've not been impressed with any team this season. 

[squirrelarmy]

2 hours ago, Hugh Jass said:

Was she “clearly wrong” though? Leeds were more or less level with us when the break happened and in the previous season the team had ran out of puff due to Bielsa’s high energy style knackering them out.

Of course COVID wasn’t the only reason they went up, but it’s hardly unreasonable to suggest that a few months off helped the team recharge and put them in a much stronger position for the restart.

It wasn’t physical strain that was the issue for the previous season but mental strain. That additional year under Bielsa before being promoted certainly made the difference for getting the team together. Instead of just scraping promotion we completely smashed it. 
 

Also every team in the league had the same break, before the shutdown we were on a long unbeaten run and hadn’t conceded a goal for 5 games, the break stopped the rhythm and allowed teams like Brentford to recover and we actually lost the first game after the break so if anything the league stopping actually hindered us slightly. The fact is that we were by far the best team in the championship in the league last season. The season before we were still finding our feet. 

[pink_triangle]

5 minutes ago, thetime said:

In reality united will finnish between 3rd and 6th. 

Some nice Christmas results though, united played there best against Leicester and only got a point. 

Uniteds have slowly sorted out there home form, which was kicking them in the balls. 

More than likely, but the fact football is a low scoring game means a team could come through with a string of tight wins. 

[squirrelarmy]

1 minute ago, pink_triangle said:

More than likely, but the fact football is a low scoring game means a team could come through with a string of tight wins. 

Is it?

Depends on your style of football. 

[thetime]

5 minutes ago, squirrelarmy said:

Is it?

Depends on your style of football. 

Who would of thought ole playing a good style of football. 😎

[squirrelarmy]

5 minutes ago, thetime said:

Who would of thought ole playing a good style of football. 😎

Leeds have an average of 3.75 goals a game this season. Penchester Utd have an average of 3.56 goals a game. 
 

There are a few outliers like Burnley with 1.9 goals a game but you can’t disagree that a combination of the revised VAR rules and the return of Leeds and their high pressing style of football has meant there are a lot more goals in the league this season compared to previous ones. 
 

 

[eastynh]

48 minutes ago, squirrelarmy said:

Leeds have an average of 3.75 goals a game this season. Penchester Utd have an average of 3.56 goals a game. 
 

There are a few outliers like Burnley with 1.9 goals a game but you can’t disagree that a combination of the revised VAR rules and the return of Leeds and their high pressing style of football has meant there are a lot more goals in the league this season compared to previous ones. 
 

 

City have been scoring over 100 league goals a season, Leeds are not going to replicate that.

[eastynh]

2 hours ago, thetime said:

United pissing of rival fans again, rather than a laughing stock.

Life is good.

It's blatant cheating. Pogba fell over himself and United get a penalty for it, in a game where they were being out played by Villa.

[thetime]

22 minutes ago, eastynh said:

It's blatant cheating. Pogba fell over himself and United get a penalty for it, in a game where they were being out played by Villa.

United had more shots and more on target, possession villa shading it with 52% over uniteds 48%.

Hardly outplayed, thought villa played well and are a good team. 

Bit comical city moaning about cheating. 🤣

[eastynh]

4 minutes ago, thetime said:

United had more shots and more on target, possession villa shading it with 52% over uniteds 48%.

Hardly outplayed, thought villa played well and are a good team. 

Bit comical city moaning about cheating. 🤣

Villa looked the better team and United looked clueless. United spent all night either kicking Villa players to the floor or chucking themselves to the floor. As for the penalty, it was outright bent.

 

[thetime]

1 hour ago, squirrelarmy said:

Leeds have an average of 3.75 goals a game this season. Penchester Utd have an average of 3.56 goals a game.
 

 

Premier league games?

[kaosmark2]

2 hours ago, pink_triangle said:

I dont necessarily agree they were factually incorrect, although I think poorly worded and probably most would disagree. I don't really have a problem with having the debate though.

However I maintain my view that the comments of a female pundit should be open to debate. Take a hypothetical situation where is female pundit calls a footballer lazy or accuses them of diving, it would be wrong in my view that society doesn't allow that player a right to reply.

Also it should be noted that the likes of Priti Patel, Katie Hopkins etc also take abuse that they wouldn't if they were male. I would be very wary of creating an environment where they could use this abuse to restrict questioning of some of their views.

As I have said if people are being abusive on social media, these wealthy companies and the law must weed these people out and stop it.

I think you're conflating 2 different issues. Restricting debate is not the same as thinking people should take responsibility for the consequences of what they tweet.

You mentioned Katie Hopkins, and a large criticism of her is that she refuses to stop inciting hate. Ditto Priti Patel. 

The right to say something doesn't mean there's no responsibility not to. 

[thetime]

20 minutes ago, eastynh said:

As for the penalty, it was outright bent.