Preseason - January 31 - LAFC

Why do you say that?

They set out an actual starting XI while we did not.

And yes... Cause they're winning.

Also, once again we're doing a line change at half time.. shouldn't we be seeing at least some of our starting guys going a full 90 by now? Or at least close to it.
 
They set out an actual starting XI while we did not.

And yes... Cause they're winning.

Also, once again we're doing a line change at half time.. shouldn't we be seeing at least some of our starting guys going a full 90 by now? Or at least close to it.

not really? i mean there are still two games, those may be more when they go full 90 because they are closer to the competitive game. i dont think starting XI went 90 till the nashville game last year IIRC.

EDIT: also we still have missing johnson, mata, tinnerholm ( for some reason) maxi ( injury) and possibly taty ( depending on the shape). so there are missing pieces.
 
They set out an actual starting XI while we did not.

And yes... Cause they're winning.

Also, once again we're doing a line change at half time.. shouldn't we be seeing at least some of our starting guys going a full 90 by now? Or at least close to it.
I don't see why our lineup was not closer to a starting XI?

Stuver, Scally, Chanot, Sands, Callens; Ring, Zelalem, Parks; Mitriță, Héber, Mackay-Steven

This is two or three shy of starting XI. Two of those cannot even play, and we don't know about tinnerholm... Besides, this is still preseason and yes we have a month until CCL but to say this isn't close to our starting XI is absurd imo
 
I don't see why our lineup was not closer to a starting XI?

Stuver, Scally, Chanot, Sands, Callens; Ring, Zelalem, Parks; Mitriță, Héber, Mackay-Steven

This is two or three shy of starting XI. Two of those cannot even play, and we don't know about tinnerholm... Besides, this is still preseason and yes we have a month until CCL but to say this isn't close to our starting XI is absurd imo

i disagree, johnson, maxi, mata, tinnerholm, and even possibly taty ( i dont see GMS as a starter not yet at least) should be starters.

so we missing pieces
 
not really? i mean there are still two games, those may be more when they go full 90 because they are closer to the competitive game. i dont think starting XI went 90 till the nashville game last year IIRC.

EDIT: also we still have missing johnson, mata, tinnerholm ( for some reason) maxi ( injury) and possibly taty ( depending on the shape). so there are missing pieces.

Guess I'm just wondering why Anton and isi aren't in the lineup. I know Johnson and Mata aren't available but that's fine. I'm more concerned about lack of Anton and our defensive line. Are we experimenting or what? Wish we could know somehow.

We'll see what happens the next two games. But I would have liked to see more players getting more than 45 mins under their belt. A solid 70 would have made me feel better about fitness.

Ronny also said no injuries.. so it is curious that maxi was nowhere to be found.
 
They set out an actual starting XI while we did not.

And yes... Cause they're winning.

Also, once again we're doing a line change at half time.. shouldn't we be seeing at least some of our starting guys going a full 90 by now? Or at least close to it.
I mean, our lineup was pretty close with who was available. I see several probable starters missing for LAFC.

LAFC won a lot of games last year. I don't think its out of the question that they could have been up on us 2-0 at LAFC last regular season.

We haven't been able to watch one minute of game action. I just think suggesting that we aren't "taking it seriously" is a bit baseless.