aaron bond wrote: I didn't say we played badly, I said we didn't play too well. Just because we had the same number of chances on target, does not necessarily mean they were good chances, so they don't need to show them all. For example, Fernandinho's volley in the first half or Edin's header at the end of the match were both 'off target' but warranted inclusion in the highlights because they were good chances. The only effort of ours not included which could have been was Silva's in the first half when he kept the ball from going out of play for a goal kick with a nice bit of skill, and then shot across the goal (but actually it wasn't very close). For all our possession today, we didn't create many good chances. Palace, on the other hand, created some good chances with the limited amount of time they had on the ball. That's what they showed on MOTD. You moaned about the MOTD highlights and analysis of the Liverpool game when that was very fair, so you clearly just like to moan about MOTD. I think that's a bit sad, but each to their own I suppose.
I agree, they showed Palaces very good chances and their counter attacking play was excellent and should be shown. What I am asking for is a fair representation of the game in which many of those chances came from a break down of Several of the 23 or so efforts, from a poorly playing team, that they were magnificent in defending against. Show how Palace defended and countered from a few seconds prior to their attacks, how they worked bloody hard to get the possession and represent the game correctly, to not do so does Palace a discredit as much as it does their opposition, in my opinion it wasn't done and a cursory mention after the edit is a poor cop out.
You further do me a discredit as I also 'moaned' about the Arse game (the one were Arsenal played really badly against us) so would that promote me from bitter, through to sad and onto delusional? I have aspirations for my motd voodoo doll collection.
