25-02-2019, 01:15
(This post was last modified: 25-02-2019, 01:17 by Slick_Footwork.)
Just my 2 pennies worth, but I think you're buying into the massive overreaction created by the Sky commentators.
IMO, they were trying to hype up this incident to cover up the fact it was another dull 0-0 game.
The manager was going only going to take the goalkeeper off because he thought he was injured. He readied the sub super fast, because it was the 2nd time the goalkeeper had gone down and it was almost the end of extra time and they just wanted to see it out.
The goalkeeper felt fine after receiving treatment so signalled that he was okay to play on. Given he was only going to be replaced because of injury and not for tactical reasons, it's understandable that he wanted to get his message across.
He's a young player, on the verge of winning a major trophy who is going to get hauled off at a vital moment when he feels fit to continue. I don't think he refused to come off at all, he simply wanted to make sure the manager understood he could continue.
It was just very naive because the sub was already at the side of the pitch ready to come on. This is why it looked so bad.
Some of the hyped commentary like 'the players are running the club' is laughable. It was 1 player who didn't want to be replaced because of injury because he didn't feel he was injured. Much about nothing...
Definitely he could've conducted himself better, but I don't think it should have any implications on the manager's future. If it does, I think it will just be the straw that breaks the camels back after previous results.
IMO, they were trying to hype up this incident to cover up the fact it was another dull 0-0 game.
The manager was going only going to take the goalkeeper off because he thought he was injured. He readied the sub super fast, because it was the 2nd time the goalkeeper had gone down and it was almost the end of extra time and they just wanted to see it out.
The goalkeeper felt fine after receiving treatment so signalled that he was okay to play on. Given he was only going to be replaced because of injury and not for tactical reasons, it's understandable that he wanted to get his message across.
He's a young player, on the verge of winning a major trophy who is going to get hauled off at a vital moment when he feels fit to continue. I don't think he refused to come off at all, he simply wanted to make sure the manager understood he could continue.
It was just very naive because the sub was already at the side of the pitch ready to come on. This is why it looked so bad.
Some of the hyped commentary like 'the players are running the club' is laughable. It was 1 player who didn't want to be replaced because of injury because he didn't feel he was injured. Much about nothing...
Definitely he could've conducted himself better, but I don't think it should have any implications on the manager's future. If it does, I think it will just be the straw that breaks the camels back after previous results.