3 hours ago, timetowaste said:

Don't get me started on the Garnacho cameo 😂

If your defence of our 105M man’s 90 minute stinker is that a sub wasn’t good in 15 minutes then this debate is already won

I thought Enzo was decent last night, just didn't have his long-range boots on. Not sure he has that in the locker tbh and surely that's where any Frank comparisons fall flat.

To be honest, I thought the entire starting lineup had a good go.

He always has more chance of hitting the stands than the target from outside the box. I never expect it to cause any trouble for the keeper.

I still don’t fully understand this infatuation with hitting top bins when you have a clear sight of the whole goal.

He didn’t have anyone obstructing the view to goal so he should have really been able to keep those shots under 8 feet high.

Saying that he played ok last night.

Edited February 4Feb 4 by 2211

8 hours ago, GarnachoCheese said:

If your defence of our 105M man’s 90 minute stinker is that a sub wasn’t good in 15 minutes then this debate is already won

I don't really have a defence for Enzo today other than he was fairly limited in what he was able to do by the tactics. But admittedly I nearly threw something at the TV seeing him blast 3 shots over the bar. I wouldn't single anyone out for being bad today though (apart from maybe Garnacho) because barring the defenders and Joao Pedro I don't think anybody really offered anything.

30 minutes ago, timetowaste said:

I don't really have a defence for Enzo today other than he was fairly limited in what he was able to do by the tactics. But admittedly I nearly threw something at the TV seeing him blast 3 shots over the bar. I wouldn't single anyone out for being bad today though (apart from maybe Garnacho) because barring the defenders and Joao Pedro I don't think anybody really offered anything.

Why was Garnacho bad out of interest?

6 minutes ago, GarnachoCheese said:

Why was Garnacho bad out of interest?

Subbed on, as with Palmer and Estevao, to attack. Passed backwards virtually every time he received the ball.

7 minutes ago, dermott said:

Subbed on, as with Palmer and Estevao, to attack. Passed backwards virtually every time he received the ball.

So the same as Estevao. Just funny how he's the only one being singled out again. I have no issue with people saying Garnacho is bad, i have issue with the double standards and hypocrisy.

54 minutes ago, timetowaste said:

I don't really have a defence for Enzo today other than he was fairly limited in what he was able to do by the tactics. But admittedly I nearly threw something at the TV seeing him blast 3 shots over the bar. I wouldn't single anyone out for being bad today though (apart from maybe Garnacho) because barring the defenders and Joao Pedro I don't think anybody really offered anything.

I was quite happy to see him shooting, its what we needed to do to get to Kepa, but they were just dreadful attempts, and just kept getting worse. Just stop, and give it to someone who can shoot.

3 hours ago, GarnachoCheese said:

So the same as Estevao. Just funny how he's the only one being singled out again. I have no issue with people saying Garnacho is bad, i have issue with the double standards and hypocrisy.

Probably gets singled out because he's consistently bad without any credit in the bank. Estevao was equally sh*te yesterday but he has credit in the bank.

This question isn't really based on any conversation we're having now, I'm just curious; if he was available, would you prefer Mudryk or Garnacho to start?

2 hours ago, timetowaste said:

Probably gets singled out because he's consistently bad without any credit in the bank. Estevao was equally sh*te yesterday but he has credit in the bank.

This question isn't really based on any conversation we're having now, I'm just curious; if he was available, would you prefer Mudryk or Garnacho to start?

I must have imagine the 2 goals against Arsenal to even give us a chance in the second leg. Where’s Neto’s credit coming from this season out of interest?

Mudryk.

33 minutes ago, GarnachoCheese said:

I must have imagine the 2 goals against Arsenal to even give us a chance in the second leg. Where’s Neto’s credit coming from this season out of interest?

Mudryk.

You'll hear no defending of Neto from me this season, he's crap, I'd happily sell them all apart from Estevao. The Garnacho goals were probably the only good thing he's done this season, fair play for stepping up but it doesn't change overall he's been a liability, especially when he starts. Since he's arrived I've been a lot less critical of Garnacho than most on here have been but in reality he just isn't very good.

5 hours ago, timetowaste said:

Probably gets singled out because he's consistently bad without any credit in the bank. Estevao was equally sh*te yesterday but he has credit in the bank.

This question isn't really based on any conversation we're having now, I'm just curious; if he was available, would you prefer Mudryk or Garnacho to start?

In all honesty if had to be flogged before being forced to choose between Mudry or Garnacho to start for us I would probably choose to be flogged again.

5 hours ago, timetowaste said:

This question isn't really based on any conversation we're having now, I'm just curious; if he was available, would you prefer Mudryk or Garnacho to start?

Mydryk.

I’ve forgotten how bad he could be, Garnarcho is fresh in my memory.

12 hours ago, dermott said:

Subbed on, as with Palmer and Estevao, to attack. Passed backwards virtually every time he received the ball.

Tbf you really don't want Garnacho to try to take on player

13 hours ago, dkw said:

I was quite happy to see him shooting, its what we needed to do to get to Kepa, but they were just dreadful attempts, and just kept getting worse. Just stop, and give it to someone who can shoot.

I fully agree, and i think there's also credit due to Enzo for putting himself in the right place at the right time to create those shooting chances. He should definitely improve his shooting, it doesn't have to be top bin shots every single time.

Edited February 5Feb 5 by Upb78

Enzo £106m, Gittens £50, Neto £50, Garnacho £40m.

Which one was the biggest waste of money ?

Edited February 5Feb 5 by Bebe1980

2 hours ago, Bebe1980 said:

Enzo £106m, Gittens £50, Neto £50, Garnacho £40m.

Which one was the biggest waste of money ?

The correct answer is Jamie Jermaine Bynoe Gittens. Thank You.

2 hours ago, Bebe1980 said:

Enzo £106m, Gittens £50, Neto £50, Garnacho £40m.

Which one was the biggest waste of money ?

Lukaku

3 years of his mediocrity. More to come... painful viewing that he has his better games against lower placed Premiership sides and lower league clubs.

On 04/02/2026 at 20:42, Shweaves said:

I thought Enzo was decent last night, just didn't have his long-range boots on. Not sure he has that in the locker tbh and surely that's where any Frank comparisons fall flat.

To be honest, I thought the entire starting lineup had a good go.

Which is annoying because with Kepa in goal, any long-range shot on target is a goal. Any analyst worth their salt would have pointed that out.

He's had some shocking games this season but amazingly managed to lower than bar today. Absolutely abysmal.

20 minutes ago, dkw said:

He's had some shocking games this season but amazingly managed to lower than bar today. Absolutely abysmal.

Did you not enjoy his rabona when he was in 1v1?

😐

So many other things he could, and should have done there, the idiot.

Frustrating the life out of me at the moment.

It annoys me when he completely messes up easy shots or passes and then he does that stupid smirk as if it doesn’t even matter.

Edited February 10Feb 10 by 2211