Everton vs Tottenham: Match Thread

[Gambler]

Coming from North Wales I know a lot of bluenoses. One of them is on holiday in Greece. He sent me a text at 9.30am yesterday.

"Unlucky mate. Better luck next time. I'm sending this text now just in case I forget later."

I didn't forget to respond after the game

 

[davidmatzdorf]

What's, as in what has...

I did debate internally long and hard whether it would be what's but having now researched further following your post and indeed found it is that, it doesn't really make sense in sense of English language as means what is in context of other words.

So in short the English written language is facking weird.

Coz we're the famous Tottenham Hotspur's

The thing is, it isn't even difficult.

Plural = no apostrophe. Never never never: no bean's or tree's or Hotspur's.

Contraction = apostrophe. "What is" = what's. "What has" = what's.

Possessive = apostrophe. David's bike. Sissoko's power. Kane's movement in the box.

Not difficult.

 

[Jenko]

Yep, completely ignoring any positive contributions and just picking up on the negative...he was decent, you've said it yourself, the final result should not affect that opinion.
Pretty funny reading the 'experts' opinions in here before kickoff....get the impression some were actually pissed off that he played well, quite sad really.

Haha, I do have to admit that I'm a little put out that I might have to re examine him all over again after spending loads of time examining him last year only to come to the conclusion that he had the touch of a rapist.

Now he's had a 75% performance he's shown he might actually have the ability to be a competitive squad player this season.

I'm really not sure how I'd feel about that if I think there's a better player on the bench. Trust the Poch you'd say, and you'd be right of course.

But that touch, it needs improving. I just can't get around it mentally

 

[Jenko]

Lighten up, it's a bit of fun, don't get upset cause you can't take a bit of ribbing

You asked a question why Sissoko was picked, the question was answered during the match, despite him messing up a load of chances he opened up spaces on the pitch for Eriksen which IMO we would have not seen if Dembele or Winks was on the pitch.

I'd prefer if Simon Davies was doing that. At least he might score the odd time and he didn't cost 30mil.

Just saying.. .

 

[Spurger King]

The thing is, it isn't even difficult.

Plural = no apostrophe. Never never never: no bean's or tree's or Hotspur's.

Contraction = apostrophe. "What is" = what's. "What has" = what's.

Possessive = apostrophe. David's bike. Sissoko's power. Kane's movement in the box.

Not difficult.

Thank's.

 

[sly1]

The thing is, it isn't even difficult.

Plural = no apostrophe. Never never never: no bean's or tree's or Hotspur's.

Contraction = apostrophe. "What is" = what's. "What has" = what's.

Possessive = apostrophe. David's bike. Sissoko's power. Kane's movement in the box.

Not difficult.

You can write DVD's or 1960's or "crossing t's and dotting i's".

 

[Gb160]

You can write DVD's or 1960's or "crossing t's Andrew dotting i's".

No you can't, unless they're possessive apostrophes (i.e. that DVD's surface is scratched etc)

 

[tony0379]

The thing is, it isn't even difficult.

Plural = no apostrophe. Never never never: no bean's or tree's or Hotspur's.

Contraction = apostrophe. "What is" = what's. "What has" = what's.

Possessive = apostrophe. David's bike. Sissoko's power. Kane's movement in the box.

Not difficult.

Well done David, here's a treat.

 

[$hoguN]

Surprised Sissoko is getting so much praise. Okay, he put himself about but when he came to the basics - controlling the ball, passing, shooting, staying on side - he struggled more often than not. I literally found myself shaking my head and laughing at how poor he was on numerous occasions.

He is always going to be a very limited footballer. He has never had control or pretty much anything that qualifies as real footballing talent, but the question is how do we use what he does have effectively? The guy is a good athlete and in games like yesterday his willingness to run beyond massively disrupted their game plan of marking Dele and Eriksen out of the game with their DMs. Sisokko clearly gave Eriksen more space and that was very important to the overall team performance.

 

[davidmatzdorf]

You can write DVD's or 1960's or "crossing t's and dotting i's".

People do. That doesn't mean that people should. I write DVDs and 1960s; I cross my Ts and dot my Is - the last one can cause font problems , but the others are just as clear as the ones with the otiose apostrophes.*

This one already made the point:

No you can't, unless they're possessive apostrophes (i.e. that DVD's surface is scratched etc)

* It isn't so that I have been waiting all my life for a chance to write "otiose apostrophes". It just seems that way.

 

[Bobbins]

Thank's.

Thanks's's

 

[JUSTINSIGNAL]

He is always going to be a very limited footballer. He has never had control or pretty much anything that qualifies as real footballing talent, but the question is how do we use what he does have effectively? The guy is a good athlete and in games like yesterday his willingness to run beyond massively disrupted their game plan of marking Dele and Eriksen out of the game with their DMs. Sisokko clearly gave Eriksen more space and that was very important to the overall team performance.

I recognise his contribution but he was nothing more than functional. As you point out more praise should probably go to Poch for a good tactical setup rather than the player himself

 

[sly1]

People do. That doesn't mean that people should. I write DVDs and 1960s; I cross my Ts and dot my Is - the last one can cause font problems , but the others are just as clear as the ones with the otiose apostrophes.*

This one already made the point:




* It isn't so that I have been waiting all my life for a chance to write "otiose apostrophes". It just seems that way.

Well that is simply a matter of your personal preference.

The New York Times recommends using an apostrophe in the crossing t's and dotting i's case, but not for DVDs. (https://afterdeadline.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/04/13/faqs-on-style/)

Where you should or shouldn't use such an apostrophe generally varies in different publications. None of the examples I have are strictly incorrect.


———

To avoid going too far off topic:

Regarding the game, it was good to see how confident, calm, strong and technically adept Sanchez looked. I don't think it's possible to make a serious assessment on his all round defensive abilities based on a game like the one yesterday, so I will withhold judgement on that front.

Most of all, it was good to see us get into our groove. Under Pochettino we seem to be a team that takes a few games to get into our groove at the beginning of the season, but are almost unstoppable after that.

Last season we started off very slowly and didn't seem to really get going until late November/December. (The fact that we picked up quite a few points in our opening fixtures belies the fact that we weren't playing especially convincingly; "Spurs still haven't moved out of second gear" was generally the phrase commentators would use at the time"). Though we also started off pretty slowly yesterday, there were moments of decisive attacking whixh, last season, we didn't see from us for another couple more months. Hopefully we'll be up to speed in time to mount a proper champions league campaign this year.

 

[DJS]

Wots, its the new English

Are you marking my exam?

The thing is, it isn't even difficult.

Plural = no apostrophe. Never never never: no bean's or tree's or Hotspur's.

Contraction = apostrophe. "What is" = what's. "What has" = what's.

Possessive = apostrophe. David's bike. Sissoko's power. Kane's movement in the box.

Not difficult.

Urgh... :dead:

 

[davidmatzdorf]

The New York Times recommends using an apostrophe in the crossing t's and dotting I'd case, but not for DVDs.

As much be plain from my previous post, that makes intuitive good sense: you add the apostrophe only when its omission would reduce comprehension.

I generally add it when "dotting i's" for that reason, but usually with a grunt of self-disapproval at not being able to find a better option!

 

[doctor stefan Freud]

Is it still 3-0?

 

[Vincent30]

I honestly can't wait to add Aurier to this team, with Sanchez at the back and this beast on the right. We will look a lot better against pacey attackers like Mane and will have so much more danger on the right side. I really feel Tripps hasn't taken his chance at all, which is unfortunate, but Aurier is an absolute steal of the summer, this guy is going to be so good for us.

Even though i feel Davies has done an excellent job on the left. To have Rose and Aurier is mouth watering right now. Off to the Dortmund game mid week. Let's finally put on a performance at Wembley.

 

[nightgoat]

Yep, completely ignoring any positive contributions and just picking up on the negative...he was decent, you've said it yourself, the final result should not affect that opinion.
Pretty funny reading the 'experts' opinions in here before kickoff....get the impression some were actually pissed off that he played well, quite sad really.

He wasn't great, he wasn't terrible. Statistically he was our worst player, but unfortunately that's still one of his better performances for us. I'd love it if he regularly performed to the level he sporadically did at Newcastle, although that seems unlikely. I get the impression some people want to think he played better than he did so they can get on their pedestal and have a go at those who were surprised by his inclusion in the starting line up (not suggesting that's you, by the way.)

 

[nightgoat]

Surprised Sissoko is getting so much praise. Okay, he put himself about but when he came to the basics - controlling the ball, passing, shooting, staying on side - he struggled more often than not. I literally found myself shaking my head and laughing at how poor he was on numerous occasions.

I think you'll find he categorically stuck it to the naysayers, apparently.

 

[mckenz]

Is it still 3-0?

No, we lost 4-3 on apostrophes....