LionNYC said in the match chat that there were one too many passes, but at any rate, he passes left to Ring. Ring kind of runs at goal/kind of runs at the end line to make an impossible angle. It's saved by Bono.
I'm not going to try to comprehensively discuss this game. But one sequence is emblematic for me of the problem with the line-up choices.
58', right after Taty is subbed out. Free kick at the halfway line, Sands finds Tinnerholm, Tinny goes inside and then cuts it back out to GMS, GMS crosses inside and Heber gets it down and lays it off with his foot, and it ends up back with Tinnerholm who has run back inside. He doesn't shoot, and
My guess is that Deila deflects at the press conference, or gets a pass, because of the Heber injury and he'll say we played well for 85 minutes and the penalty was a fluke. But I don't agree with that
I think you are being obtuse and intentionally misreading what I wrote? We had several creative sequences that could have been goals. I will even be generous and say they were chances, subjectively to both Ronny and me, even if the one I mentioned does not actually count as a shot on goal. But if you field a line-up with players out of position, even if they perform well, I think it's foolish, for eample, to expect that Ring on the left wing will result in goals from anything more than high probability chances. The penalty is a non-issue if we actually score goals but it allows a dodge on actually discussing that there was a more fundamental problem the entire time before Heber's injury and the penalty.
I don't know who you're directing this to, but it's the opposite of what I said. This isn't an issue of bad luck in one game and the chances not going our way, it's been an issue every game. Our top scorer is Alex Ring. With 3 goals. Why on earth would you ask a defensive mid to finish your chances? Our xG through the New England game was 10.8, putting us at almost the same rate of chances as Montreal, New England, RB and Cincinnati.
