tonyh

I felt bad for him too because the reason he had the ball so deep in our half, before passing it and then getting kicked (which is what he reacted to), was that he had just run over half the length of the pitch tracking back. (Admittedly this was after losing the ball himself, but still …).

I completely agree with this. Yes, it's a bit unprofessional, but nowhere near the level of not turning up to training as others have done. But yes, if the staff were actually involving him in things it would be impossible for him not to know who we're playing. He would just hear about it, unless he went round with his fingers in his ears saying 'la la can't hear you'.

Well, it is true. You can see it in the video. Obviously some players would still follow the fixtures in his situation and know the next opponents, but I doubt he's the only one that wouldn't. Someone like Harry Kane didn't even bother to turn up for training for his boyhood club because he wants out. Think of Rooney's antics when he wanted to leave. I've seen far worse than this. I haven't heard him bitching on social media, he was just being honest and speaking quite calmly. Seems to me that James is not particularly bothered, and the club aren't that bothered about him. He came a year ago, signing for a manager who has since left. The new manager seems to have no interest in him and has not backed him publicly. He has no sentimental connection to the club (unlike Rooney, Kane etc.). I really don't see the fuss to be honest.

He said it, you can watch it here: https://colombia.as.com/colombia/2021/08/20/futbol/1629426691_372926.html (after about 45 seconds) It's hardly a surprise that he didn't know if he's being excluded from training with the first team. He's not being involved in the preparation for the match, presumably because the club wants it that way, so why should he know?

I wasn't happy about this last night. This morning, well, I feel a little bit differently. It obviously shouldn't have happened. Baines is the penalty taker, for good reason. But Mirallas showed that he's someone who wants to win, who wants to take responsibility, who wants to do things. I repeat he shouldn't have taken the penalty. But I think he was just a bit stupid and naive rather than some egotistical maniac. I remember years ago a draw away to West Ham. They were 2-0 up. West Ham striker (can't remember his name – goatie beard, late nineties early naughties era) had got both. They got a pen and he was given the ball to get his hat trick, even though he wasn't the designated penalty taker. Southall saved and we came back to draw 2-2. I remember Redknapp was furious. Now if Mirallas had insisted on taking the penalty to get his hat trick in a similar situation I'd think much worse of him. But this time, I don't know – I just think more than anything he wanted to get the team ahead, to take responsibility etc. It was wrong but I can't make the same negative judgements of him that everyone else is.

Not much of what he says makes much sense. 'There are too many foreign players so English players don't get opportunities' – maybe, but Jagielka has managed to get loads of games in the Premier League. So doesn't that mean he must be good enough? And Chris Sutton managed a single cap, by the way. In a period where there were a lot less foreign players in the league. What does that say about him?

I'm glad he's coming back and I always thought he was a good man. But as a manager I don't think he was up to much. The season he left we were terrible at times (after an excellent start). Big Nev was scathing of him in his book on that season, although he had an axe to grind. I remember once Royle said something along the lines of, 'Tactics aren't that important. The Brazil team in the 1970s didn't worry about tactics – they just used to give the ball to Pele!' Which I think isn't true to start with, but in any case overlooked the fact that closest player we had to Pele was probably Graham Stuart!

It doesn't make any sense. If you bring players on loan instead of buying them then you're not overextending yourself. So you're behaving sensibly, from a financial point of view, which is what the FFP criteria are all about. I don't see why that's unfair. The whole point of FFP is presumably to stop teams bankrupting themselves like Leeds did, or to have a few checks on teams like Man City and Chelsea so football isn't dominated by a tiny number of teams with rich owners, which UEFA worry would get boring. If you loan players then you don't enter in to any of that.

Some interesting quotes in the Guardian today http://www.theguardian.com/football/2013/oct/04/roberto-martinez-everton-manchester-city I love this: "Sometimes you get too carried away thinking about the threat of the opposition and you nullify yourself. We have to realise we have to be as good as we can and then maybe we can compete against them." Maybe the reason we were successful against City under Moyes is that because we'd beaten them, Moyes actually had a belief we could go there and do it again and again. With the other top teams he never really believed.

Moyes is shifting out a lot of experienced people with an international perspective … I'd be a bit worried if I was a Man U fan.

The new manager would probably have wanted to bring plenty of his own people in anyway, so many/all of these people might have left anyway. And now I see loads of Man U fans complaining that Moyes is getting rid of back room staff there to bring his own staff from Everton!

I remember that was a weird season. I think we played really well towards the beginning. Wasn't there a home game against Chelsea and we battered them but ended up losing. But towards the end of the season things just drifted and the players didn't seem to be bothered. Then the next season loads of the season previews said we'd finish bottom of the table but I wasn't at all worried as I know there was some decent players. The idea of them finishing bottom was a joke.

So, about the substitution. Yes the justification is that an extra centre back was needed to defend against the height of Smith. But it didn't work. So there's also a very good argument for leaving the striker on instead of having the whole team defending and inviting what then happened (i.e. Smith goal).

Are there any OPTA stats for Neville from games where he's been in a holding role? My impression is that he does his job there reasonably well. If we asking him to get up the pitch and be creative then we're lost, but that's not what he's having to do at the moment. He would never get in ahead of Gibson but I don't see a better option while Gibson is out. Fellaini is too effective up front at the moment for us.

This is the most significant bit for me, in terms of our failings: One alarming facet of Everton’s game was their lack of penetrating through-balls. Steven Pienaar’s return drastically improved this, for before his arrival, there had been times when only Stoke City had achieved fewer through-balls than Everton. With Pienaar on board orchestrating things, the Toffees’ rose to eighth worst, yet a sobering fact is that Alex Song (with 24) still made more successful through-balls than the entire Everton squad put together (21). This is certainly an area that must be addressed this off-season.