0:00

As the Stanley Cup playoffs continue on ESPN,

0:04

anything is possible.

0:06

So, the decorations could get a little

0:08

out of hand. And

0:11

a city could get a new landmark. Could

0:14

a crack end a rise? Could

0:16

the storm surge? Could it happen

0:18

for the first time? Could it happen

0:20

again? Yeah, that could

0:22

happen. That is playoff hockey.

0:25

The Stanley Cup playoffs continue on

0:27

ESPN. The

0:32

Athletic I'm

0:35

sorry, you can sit there and look and play with

0:37

all your silly machines as much as you like. Is

0:40

Gascon going to have a crack? He is, you know.

0:43

Oh, he fell! Brilliant!

0:49

But, gee, he's ran the goalkeeper,

0:51

he's done it! Absolutely

0:53

incredible! He launched himself

0:55

six feet into the

0:58

crowd and Kung Fu

1:00

kicked a supporter who was

1:02

eyewit without a shadow of a doubt

1:04

giving him lip. Oh, I say! It's amazing! He

1:08

does it tame and tame and tame again.

1:11

Crank up the music! Charge

1:14

your glass! This nation

1:16

is going to dance all night!

1:19

Are PhDs the unfinished business of education?

1:22

Stress testing the nose-the-club coefficient model? The

1:26

threshold for a club going down with a whimper? Back

1:28

post? Far post? Near post?

1:31

But what about front post? An exhaustive

1:33

list of football's promised lands? Why

1:35

Arsenal vs Brighton was the Premier League's day-out

1:37

derby? And whether Michael

1:39

Alisse's latest assist was the epitome

1:42

of a ping? Brought to your ears

1:44

by The Athletic, this is

1:46

Football Clichés.

1:50

Hello

1:52

everyone and welcome to episode 258

1:53

of Football Clichés. I'm Adam Hurray and adjudication panelling

1:55

with me today is the news. I'm

1:58

Adam Hurray

1:58

and adjudication panelling with me today is the news.

1:59

today. First of all, Charlie Eccleshare. How's it

2:02

going? Very well, how are you? Yeah, not too bad.

2:04

Thanks. Alongside you, David Walker. How are things? Yeah,

2:06

very good. You?

2:07

Yeah, lovely stuff. Charlie, something to raise,

2:10

I hear. Yeah, well, this came

2:12

from Eli Cronenberg in last week's

2:14

listener, MHD, and it was one of his

2:16

irritations. It's been living rent free in

2:18

my head ever since. It really resonated. This

2:20

sort of there being a goal difference reason

2:23

so that we can't actually say something

2:25

is over. Yeah. So,

2:28

so we talked about that. And firstly, like

2:30

the day after I had to write something

2:32

in which I did almost have to use those words, all

2:34

but secure, which already

2:36

I died a little bit inside. But I noticed

2:39

there is a world,

2:41

and it's not that unlikely, which we are going to have the mother

2:43

of

2:44

all one of these type of situations. If

2:46

Arsenal draw with Nottingham Forest

2:48

next week, they will be three points

2:51

behind Manchester City with a goal difference

2:53

difference of 20 with Manchester City still

2:55

having three games to play themselves. But

2:58

there being a world in which if City

3:00

lost all three and Arsenal won their

3:02

last game, and there was that swing, Arsenal

3:05

could still win the league. So if they were to draw,

3:08

we wouldn't be able to say City of Champions,

3:10

we'd have to say City are all but

3:12

and I think we just made campaign if Arsenal draw

3:15

on

3:15

Saturday, can the world just say City of Champions?

3:18

It's not gonna it would honestly be the

3:21

you know, people say strange things happen in football. No,

3:23

nothing strange would happen than a 20 goal swing

3:25

City losing their last three games and Arsenal winning

3:27

theirs and there being that swing. It would be what's the what's

3:30

the least ludicrous set of results

3:32

that would need to happen goal difference wise? So

3:34

for that yeah, let's give Arsenal a six nil

3:37

win. Okay, so they would say they beat

3:39

Wolves six nil the last day.

3:41

Doable.

3:42

Doable. City would have to lose basically

3:45

on average five nil at

3:46

home Chelsea. Imagine

3:49

if it happened twice. Right. What's

3:53

going on here? They have lost five nil one more five

3:55

nil and and that's it.

3:57

It would be it would be a genuine

4:00

like what's going on here sort

4:02

of situation wouldn't it? Like there would need to be inquiry.

4:07

It would have to be presumably the three biggest defeats

4:09

of... When Edison turns round and

4:11

punks one into his own net from a goal kick.

4:15

So look just let us sit you have it

4:17

on Saturday if they draw. We don't need to wait. Great

4:19

look forward to it and still some twists and turns

4:21

left then in that case. You want the trophy

4:24

to be handed too then Eddy? Ribbons on,

4:27

get it there. Yeah I think even

4:29

though they're not yeah before the game do it before the

4:31

game because before the city play on Sunday

4:33

because even if it's because there's just

4:35

not going to be that collapse let them enjoy it let them have

4:37

a bit more to enjoy it. Guardiola wouldn't be up

4:39

for that at all. Oh this isn't

4:42

over yet this is not over yet. He

4:44

would resist

4:46

all of that right time for the adjudication panel.

4:48

Right let's kick off with this message from

4:50

Will Gain. Charlie says just heard in the pub

4:53

before Palace. Mate your left

4:55

foot was looking womdy. Oh

4:57

I don't like it I don't like it at

4:59

all. Womdy

5:02

mate yeah that's a that's

5:05

a but you know fair play

5:07

if people want to be creative

5:09

in that way I think good luck to them. Could be

5:12

it could be used as an alternative on

5:14

worldy. Oh he scored a real womdy there.

5:16

Scored a womdy yeah. I associate

5:18

wands more with creation than

5:21

finishing. Yeah yeah. Every

5:23

assess this yeah it's more kind of magic-ing

5:25

up something out of nowhere but

5:27

could be a goal scoring thing anyway. Next

5:30

up Dan Rubin writes in Dave's I

5:32

sent my dad a video of the chief rabbi

5:34

singing a prayer to which he replied still

5:37

got it. One can someone's

5:39

singing still have it and two

5:41

surely that phrase is only allowed for people who are retired

5:44

rather than someone at the peak of their religious powers.

5:47

Can't quibble with the point two there can

5:49

we? I don't think they need to be retired.

5:51

No I think I think it's because I think it's

5:53

very specifically related to the act of singing

5:55

right so for point one can

5:57

someone singing still have it yes.

5:59

It's one of the foremost

6:03

examples where you'd use it. An

6:05

aging person singing,

6:08

if you, Elton John. Elton John at the

6:10

Vic. I see what I'm saying. You know, he's still

6:12

got it. He can still belt it out. Yeah. Has

6:14

Paul McCartney still got it?

6:16

Not sure, but.

6:18

He's a bit older, to be fair. Yeah. Fine,

6:20

I don't know how old the Chief Rabbi is, or how

6:23

long into his career, are we in the autumn of his career,

6:25

who knows? But I don't think as well, I

6:27

know what you mean, Adam, often it will be used with a manager

6:30

kicking the ball back onto the pitch, being like, ha ha,

6:32

Ancelotti's still got it, or whoever. But I think

6:34

it can also be when they are still

6:37

playing.

6:38

Okay. Because it. That's

6:40

more rolling back than he is for me. Yeah, exactly, yeah.

6:42

But

6:43

if, I can imagine, Baskets,

6:46

he's come to the end of his Barcelona career, he might, I can

6:48

imagine there being a clip of him doing a drag back

6:51

and losing and playing, being like, still got it, Sergio,

6:53

or something. He's not yet gone. Yeah,

6:55

okay, fair enough. Really

6:57

enjoyed this one. This came from Mr. Sam, he

6:59

says, had an interview for a PhD position

7:02

last Wednesday, and the phrase, I feel like

7:04

I have unfinished business in education, was

7:06

uttered by myself without thinking. I may have

7:08

got the position, but I'm not having that from

7:10

myself. Ha ha ha.

7:13

That's amazing. Well,

7:15

maybe kind of PhDs are the ultimate

7:18

unfinished business in education. I

7:20

mean, you just want to keep going, you can't let it get, you're

7:22

missing the day-to-day buzz of learning.

7:26

Charlie, I like it, I like this. The funny thing

7:28

with that is a lot of PhDs are unfinished,

7:30

so the ultimate of that would be going back to

7:33

finish off a PhD that you were partway

7:36

through. Cooler to leave a PhD

7:38

unfinished if anything, Dave. Maybe that's

7:40

what swung the interview. They thought, oh,

7:42

he's hungry, he's gone to finish business. Got

7:44

a point to prove. Yeah, still

7:47

wants it.

7:48

Good. I love the idea of this person in the interview, this

7:50

occurring to this person in a big, slightly put off

7:52

his stride thinking, oh fuck, I shouldn't have said

7:54

that. Ha ha ha. I mean, it is

7:56

a slightly off thing to say, but I

7:59

think, I think.

7:59

the purposes of an interview where you're trying to show willing

8:02

and an endeavour and

8:04

your ambition, then I guess it kind of works. But yeah,

8:07

I'm glad he had a second thought about it.

8:09

Steve Morrison writes in Next Dave, he says, after

8:12

Dave talking about how he will look out for 1860 Munich's

8:15

results, having been there on a stag do, what

8:17

contexts, reasons or situations

8:20

are there for keeping an eye out for other teams beyond

8:22

your own? I guess Dave, sort

8:24

of managing a team on football manager might

8:26

give you that level of affinity. Yeah, I

8:28

think that is definitely one

8:31

possible option, just randomly choosing a team

8:33

and then because you get to know the, if you're

8:35

particularly into it, you get to know the

8:38

players and you might

8:40

buy a shirt. Some

8:43

people would buy a shirt, perhaps. I think about

8:45

it. I mean, I

8:45

mean, I get, I know it, realise, Charlie, it's an artificial

8:48

thing,

8:49

playing a team of football manager. But as

8:51

you say, as you sort of flippantly

8:54

put it, you do know the club. I mean, if anything, that's

8:56

quite wholesome reason to start following a team properly.

8:59

It's that you've got to be giving yourself a running start.

9:02

I think it's quite good. I actually quite like it. Yeah,

9:04

that is a good one. I'm trying to think if I ever had that.

9:06

I probably did for a brief period that

9:08

you'd manage a lower league team.

9:10

And you just be curious to know as well

9:13

if you've done a better job than what they were

9:15

doing in reality. I think other reasons,

9:17

like if you had a family member who you went to

9:19

visit, say, and maybe

9:22

went to a game with them, or they

9:24

had posters up of the

9:26

team they supported, and you're like, Oh, yeah, I

9:29

can see why. Yeah, Dave,

9:31

you could go to a game once, maybe

9:34

with a mate or something.

9:35

And that's it. Once you've been to a team's game once, I

9:38

think that's enough to maybe start

9:40

keeping an eye out for their results. And

9:42

you know, similar to me being on a stag do, but you could be

9:44

on a holiday. Yeah, holidays, not a big one. You

9:47

know, it's similar, you know, this is sort

9:49

of branching out. But if you if you went to, say,

9:52

America, or I don't even south,

9:54

maybe sort of Mexico or somewhere or Japan, you know,

9:56

you saw another sport, baseball, NFL,

9:58

like, yeah, you end up at a game. You think, oh,

10:00

I'll follow them or whatever. Yeah, this is good.

10:03

I think another football one, though, could be

10:05

a city you went to university in. Like

10:09

that. Went to a few games. I went

10:11

to Nottingham Trent University

10:13

and we went to a few forest games. We used to give students

10:16

really cheap tickets. So I sort

10:18

of do kind of have a little bit of love

10:20

for

10:21

forest. So you got brainwashed. It's more like you got brainwashed,

10:23

isn't it? Sucked in by the commercial machine

10:25

rather than anything. Not really your own will. Beyond

10:28

all this, though, Dave, how did 1860 Munich

10:30

get on at the weekend? That's a great question. I think it was their

10:32

last game, though. I think I went to the last game of the season. So

10:35

really, yeah, yeah. You were checking

10:37

transfer news. Refreshing

10:40

your phone. A 2-2 draw away

10:42

at Essen.

10:43

I can tell you. Right. Must

10:46

have been their last home game, then, I saw. I

10:48

mean, that is another funny. Just keep

10:50

an eye out for their home results, don't you? Yeah, yeah, yeah. Just

10:53

really fascinated with their home form. It

10:55

is a funny thing. I remember going to watch Cambridge

10:57

United at the Abbey, where

10:59

my cousin was at. Down the Abbey, was it? Down the Abbey. And

11:01

they would do really well at the time. And they won the game 1-0. I

11:04

think it was Max Rushton, I'm sure, will remember.

11:06

It would have been October 96. And

11:10

they were

11:11

going for promotion. And I did follow their

11:13

results briefly, but then they absolutely tailed off,

11:15

had a horrific rest of the season. And

11:17

so I kind of thought, oh, let's just leave it.

11:19

Leave it as it was. It was a beautiful holiday

11:22

romance. Fair enough. That was the traditional

11:24

low-key preamble to

11:27

a cliche's perennial. It's time

11:29

for For My Sins Corner.

11:31

This came from St. Raymond and many, many

11:33

others. This was from ITV's The Chase

11:36

the other day. Two heavyweights in this

11:38

discipline. All you need to do, guys, is

11:41

utter the phrase, For My Sins, when

11:43

you think it will be said from

11:46

this example of popular culture. I've

11:48

not won for a long time, I don't think. I could really

11:50

deal with it. I can, I can confirm. Right,

11:53

we're up and running. And next to Face the Chaser,

11:55

it's Lindsay.

11:59

Welcome to the show, Lindsay. Thank you.

12:02

From Nottingley. Yes,

12:04

indeed, yeah. Where's that? Middle

12:06

of nowhere, really. It's about 20 minutes from

12:08

Leeds. OK, all right. And what are you doing Nottingley?

12:11

So I work from home, but I'm a program lead

12:13

for a sports education charity. Right. And

12:16

I get to work with predominantly girls aged 14

12:18

to 16. Right. I get them active in

12:20

sport.

12:20

OK, good. Were you sporty yourself

12:22

at any point? Yes, I've always been

12:24

involved in sport. So I played football when I was

12:26

younger for Don Castabels. Right. I travel

12:28

all over the world watching the lionesses. I absolutely

12:31

love following the England women team. Right. So

12:33

that's really my passion, and it also leads into travelling.

12:36

Yeah, of course. OK, what do you

12:38

do to relax? How do you switch off, though? What do you sort

12:40

of do, you know? Well, I've got a dog for missing.

12:42

Oh, I'll take it. A dog's a dog. A

12:44

dog. I feel like a dog, to be honest.

12:47

The bloody dog. It was all but one

12:49

for Dan Walker. To the lakes. Oh. Oh.

12:52

Oh, whatever. OK. A dog. Oh,

12:54

dear.

12:56

Also, no gap. She

12:58

just went straight into that. Charlie

13:00

bottled it. The route was clear for Dave

13:02

Walker, and he was just poised. I was just poised.

13:04

A dog for my sins. Oh,

13:08

God. There were so many good red herrings in

13:10

there. Not only her job, then the football

13:12

team, then

13:13

spare time. It was all there. It's one of the strongest

13:15

ones I've seen. One of the strongest ones we've had for a long time.

13:17

Really, that was like they knew, and it was just dangling there.

13:20

Tremendous. There were so many points after I'd gone, I

13:22

thought, oh, that'll be it. Bradley Walsh is like Paxman

13:25

and Frost rolled him together in one

13:27

in terms of eliciting a for my sins. So

13:29

good, but too good for us, it would seem.

13:32

Right. Great stuff. Next up, Callum

13:34

writes in, Charlie, says, I had experience

13:37

at the barbers recently that you might enjoy. I've

13:39

been going to the same barber for a few years. We're quite friendly.

13:41

And while chatting, he told me that I was in

13:43

his Premier League of Customers. I chuckled

13:46

at that prospect,

13:47

of him ranking his customers in such a way.

13:49

And I jokingly asked if I was in his relegation zone

13:51

or chasing Europe, not really expecting an answer.

13:54

To my surprise, he gave it a moment's thought and responded,

13:56

you're my Aston Villa. I asked what he meant,

13:58

and he didn't offer any further ex- explanation, and the conversation

14:01

drifted on. I'm not really sure what to make of his clearly

14:03

considered and thought out answer. Should I be

14:05

offended to be a middling side chasing Europe?

14:08

Happy to be a team experiencing strong form with an exciting

14:10

future? He could have easily said I was in Manchester

14:13

City for an easy win and been done with it, but he gave

14:15

a serious response. Does this imply I could

14:17

make his Champions League and play against the customers of other

14:19

barbers next season? At a loss. Any

14:22

thoughts appreciated? What a very precise answer,

14:24

Charlie. Yeah, I'm really impressed

14:26

with

14:27

clearly the amount of thought the hairdresser's given it.

14:30

I guess as well with Villa it's how much of a kind of micro or macro

14:33

position you take on this.

14:35

I would suggest he's not going kind of recent form

14:37

here. I don't think he's suggesting this customer's on the

14:39

up. On the up, yeah. I think he's... Ever

14:42

since you had that hair transplant you just... I

14:44

really joy to cut the hair. The new hair

14:47

bounce. Yeah. No, I

14:49

think he's using Villa as a proxy for mid table

14:51

here, surely.

14:53

It must be. Yeah, you would think

14:55

so. In which case... Otherwise you'd have

14:57

to explain it, wouldn't you? Why wouldn't he explain

14:59

it? Why didn't he explain it? What

15:01

are you doing? I'll leave you to

15:03

work it out. Yeah, in which case that's

15:06

pretty steady.

15:08

You're not going to be one of my

15:09

favourite customers but

15:11

you don't give me any issues and the

15:14

sort of... The relegation's

15:16

not a thing anymore really for them, is it? You don't think

15:18

of them. So, you're here, you'll

15:20

be in the Premier League for a while but I

15:22

don't put you in that elite bracket.

15:24

I mean, a strange conversation to have with your barber

15:27

Dave puts him in all sorts of awkward positions but do

15:29

you think the criteria here are the quality of the chat in

15:31

the chair or is it the quality of the hair? How

15:33

easy the hair is to work with. You've got

15:35

good hair, tell me. Could all be a

15:38

combination.

15:40

Got a lot of things rolled into one, yeah. Tipping.

15:43

You would... I would think that quality...

15:47

It depends on whether the barber's chatty or not.

15:49

If he likes a chat and this guy's not giving

15:51

him much, the hair... Your

15:53

hair... There's nothing you can do about the hair. Your hair

15:55

is your hair.

15:57

Transplant is not withstanding. Yes. But

15:59

the chat...

15:59

improve upon and that can be rated more

16:02

qualitatively I suppose. But there might be

16:04

some people, you're right, of

16:06

course it's not anyone's fault but there might be

16:08

some hair that barbers do just find a bit of

16:10

a pain to do. Yeah, sort of

16:13

wavy curly hair that doesn't really do anything. Yeah,

16:16

that sort of stands on end with the best one in the world, like

16:18

their conversation might be quite good but the hair drags

16:21

them down to a kind of middling level.

16:23

Fair enough. The whole package it must be. Yeah,

16:25

I don't think we're any closer to the truth here Callum but

16:28

take what you get as far as I'm concerned.

16:30

Maybe it was a reference, you know, Villa bringing a new hot

16:32

director of football, maybe it was that micro

16:35

and it was saying like I really think you've brought some new

16:37

levels to your game over the last year or so

16:40

and I'm rewarding you with Villa. I take Everton

16:42

or Leicester these days personally and

16:44

snap your hand off. Right this

16:46

is great, this is great. Listen to Andrew Howeley

16:49

on the back of Robbie Keene being appointed

16:51

to Sam Allardyce's lead staff on

16:53

the basis of knowing the club has

16:56

come up with a knows the club coefficient, a

16:58

formula for us to test

16:59

to measure

17:00

how much an individual knows a certain

17:03

club. The formula is thus.

17:05

Total years at club divided by the age

17:08

that they first joined the club in the first place plus

17:10

the years since they were last at the club.

17:13

Let's put it into practice to exemplify this. Frank

17:16

Lampard when he was drafted in as caretaker.

17:19

Charlie. That gives him a coefficient

17:21

and knowing the club coefficient of 0.73, a 73% knowing the clubness.

17:27

He sounds about right because there's an element of West

17:29

Ham to him as much as he's

17:31

gradually sort of disowned it over the years. He's still

17:33

very West Ham family and all that sort of stuff so

17:35

I said 73% is probably about right. Yeah

17:37

that seems I'm curious to get like a

17:40

comparison with

17:42

someone who doesn't particularly know the club. In

17:44

fact I should point out Dave that

17:46

Lampard's actually since because he's

17:48

now at the club again the formula has dictated

17:51

these now up to 80% so

17:53

he's actually knows the club more since he

17:55

came back as a caretaker. Yeah makes sense. And all as

17:57

far as Chelsea are concerned. What you're all desperate to

17:59

know is

17:59

what Robbie Keynes leads knows the

18:02

club coefficient is. Well,

18:04

on the basis that you only spent two years there and

18:07

hadn't been back for 21 years, his

18:09

coefficient is 0.04. How,

18:13

I mean, he must know a lot of clubs, not

18:16

that well,

18:17

given how his career played out. Spread

18:20

himself too thinly. Yeah. And you can't

18:22

know your country, so Republic of Ireland doesn't count.

18:25

At the other end of this scale, just a really sort of stress

18:27

test this day, Ryan Giggs, 29

18:29

years at Manchester United, first

18:31

joined at 14 and hasn't been there for seven,

18:34

but his coefficient remains 1.38. Right.

18:38

Yeah. 138% knows the club, which

18:41

is huge. A little mischievous one here though,

18:43

Charlie. Knows it too well, if anything. Yeah. On

18:45

the more mischievous side, Charlie, Mark

18:47

Robbins, Richard Keyes' tip for

18:50

Manchester United's future, a mere 17%, 0.17 on

18:52

his coefficient. Further

18:57

to this, Andrew Howeley has given me the

19:00

keys to the spreadsheet. So all you need to

19:02

do, just give me a name and we'll work it out.

19:04

Give me a name of someone you think might know

19:06

a club well or not very well, and we'll work

19:08

it out for them. Can we do Reedy? Reedy

19:10

for Everton. Right. So Reedy

19:13

was at the club for seven years, joined

19:15

the club at the age of 26, and

19:18

hasn't been back either as a manager, coach

19:20

or player, it would seem, for 34 years.

19:25

Are we not counting him popping along just

19:27

to show his face? Yeah. Just for vibes. You

19:29

can't factor that in. I mean,

19:31

spiritually, you can, but who's tracking this

19:33

stuff? Has to be employed, has to

19:35

be on the payroll. Yeah, exactly. So

19:38

that gives him

19:40

a

19:40

mere 0.12 knowing

19:43

the club coefficient for Everton. That has blown

19:45

the model apart, as far as I'm concerned.

19:48

Keyes' gonna be fuming. I

19:50

was saying that when Keyes was sort

19:52

of trumpeting his knows the club credentials,

19:55

that was the point I was making. It's been a long time.

19:57

And I mean, yes, obviously there have been...

19:59

probably a formal dalliances but I

20:03

think that shows something. Is there an element

20:05

missing from the equation? Could

20:08

you, I don't know how you'd put it in there, but what about

20:10

like being from the

20:12

area? Like a boyhood fan? Miles

20:14

from the stadium. Miles Bourne from the stadium,

20:17

yeah. Andrew Howeilly, go back into your spreadsheet and

20:19

update it because I think this is a very solid way of doing

20:21

it. Yeah, being from the area and knowing

20:23

the club in that... Because you know the supporters

20:26

then. ...wider sense, yeah, knowing the fan base. You know the

20:28

mindset. Yeah,

20:29

yeah, exactly. I'd love to know how that affects

20:32

things. Get on it, Andrew Howeilly. Otherwise,

20:34

great work nonetheless.

20:35

Google Pixel is teaming up with The Athletic

20:37

for an exciting editorial series called My

20:40

Game In My Words. Leading up to this summer's

20:42

big tournament, athletic writers will sit down

20:44

with some of the world's top women's soccer players

20:46

and break down critical moments from recent matches.

20:49

It's an in-depth look at what goes on inside these

20:51

players' heads, brought to you by the only

20:53

phone engineered by Google. Read

20:55

My Game In My Words in partnership with

20:57

Google Pixel at theathletic.com

21:00

slash mygameinmywords. Google

21:03

Pixel is teaming up with The Athletic for an exciting

21:06

editorial series called My Game In

21:08

My Words. Leading up to this summer's big tournament,

21:10

athletic writers will sit down with some of the world's

21:12

top women's soccer players and break down critical

21:15

moments from recent matches. It's an in-depth

21:17

look at what goes on inside these players' heads,

21:20

brought to you by the only phone engineered by

21:22

Google. Read My Game In My

21:24

Words in partnership with Google Pixel at

21:26

theathletic.com slash mygameinmywords.

21:33

This episode of Football Clichés is brought to you

21:36

by BetterHelp. Life is busy,

21:38

and with work, family and other day-to-day pressures,

21:41

it's so easy to get caught up in what everyone else

21:43

needs from you, whilst never taking a moment

21:45

about what you need for yourself. That

21:48

can leave you feeling burned out, and therapy

21:50

can give you the tools to find more balance in your

21:52

life, meaning you can keep supporting others

21:55

without leaving yourself behind.

21:57

Therapy through BetterHelp is entirely online.

22:00

and it's designed to be convenient, flexible

22:02

and suited to your schedule. All

22:05

you need to do is fill out a brief questionnaire to

22:07

match with a licensed therapist. If things

22:09

don't click, you can switch to someone new at

22:11

any time. So find more balance

22:14

with BetterHelp by heading to betterhelp.com slash

22:17

FC today to get 10% off

22:19

your first month. That's B-E-T-T-E-R-H-E-L-P

22:24

dot com slash FC.

22:31

MassMutual knows that your finances can

22:33

be an uncomfortable conversation.

22:35

Mark, we should really talk about our

22:37

money. Yep, we really should. Like

22:39

we never talk about our savings. No,

22:41

we never talk about that. Or our assets.

22:44

Or our debt. Yeah, we really should

22:46

talk about our debt. We

22:47

need one of those financial plans.

22:50

One of those will make a difference. We

22:53

should talk about it. We really should. Talk

22:55

to us about financial wellness today. Feel

22:58

comfortable about tomorrow. MassMutual

23:00

live mutual.

23:01

Oh, look at that! That

23:04

is wonderful! Brought

23:06

to your ears by the Atlantic. This

23:08

is football cliches. JS

23:11

Livesley writes in Charlie

23:13

and says, which stadium is the most playoff

23:15

semifinal? I have one in my

23:17

mind. I really hope you said the same one. I mean,

23:19

it's hard to sort of fight against

23:21

recency bias here, but I do... I

23:24

don't know. Well, I'm thinking Stadium of Light,

23:26

but I think that's probably just because I saw them. I

23:29

literally had the same thought. Our

23:32

brains have been shredded to that extent.

23:35

Just Stadium of Light

23:36

probably. My instinct says Hillsborough.

23:38

Really? Yeah. I mean, they put Wednesday playing

23:40

out a tense first leg of a semifinal

23:43

playoff on some random midweek

23:45

night and you tune in thinking,

23:47

well, I mean, it's bound to have some drama. Then

23:49

you think, I can't be asked its first leg. I'm not going to bother.

23:51

And that's what it is. Another one that came to mind was John

23:54

Smith Stadium.

23:55

There have been quite a few. Huddersfield have been knocking

23:57

around in playoffs quite a lot. And again... And

24:00

it wouldn't be a brilliant game necessarily,

24:02

probably

24:02

a draw, the first leg, but there's

24:05

enough to leave their

24:06

intrigue for the second. I didn't really want to take to

24:08

an empirical approach to this, David. I

24:10

didn't actually want to look up who's been in the playoff semi-finals the

24:12

most because that would ruin it. It would ruin the vibe

24:15

of this. But I think we're close.

24:17

I think we're close. They sort of blue and white striped

24:19

team

24:21

playing in the semi-finals of the playoffs in some

24:23

division rather. In the North. In the North-ish,

24:26

yeah. Take that. Okay, great. I

24:29

can't believe this happened. In La Liga,

24:32

referee Antonio Mateo-LaHoz

24:35

officiated in his last ever game,

24:38

Charlie. And as he walked off, he

24:40

handed his cards to a young Osasuna

24:43

fan. There's

24:46

no suggestion that the fan was holding up a sign saying,

24:49

Antonio

24:49

Mateo-LaHoz, please can I have your

24:51

cards? They're

24:54

so knowledgeable, those Osasuna fans. It really

24:56

wouldn't surprise me. He

24:59

didn't book the fan, did he? No. Did

25:01

he do like a performative booking? One last flourish. Well,

25:03

I mean, he had to, the fan was sort of sitting

25:05

on the bit that overhangs the tunnels.

25:08

We had to sort of reach up and give him the cards.

25:10

So it was, there was an element of brandishing going

25:12

on, but certainly no semi-ironic

25:14

brandishing going on. If you look at the pictures, actually,

25:18

the cards are pointing downwards from his hand

25:19

and not up, which is, that's crucial. Didn't

25:22

want to be seen to be a player, Charles. Yeah, yeah, yeah,

25:24

exactly, yeah. The smile

25:27

on his face, Charlie. Exactly the same sort

25:29

of smile as if a player had given him the shirt. So

25:31

delighted with his haul. What's he going

25:33

to do with them?

25:34

What would you do with them? eBay?

25:37

I don't know. Or would you keep them just as a bit

25:39

of fun on a night out or something, you know?

25:42

Book your mates, that sort of thing. Oh

25:44

God. I mean, I presume it's not even signed,

25:46

Dave. I don't know. Can they write, do they write

25:49

on cards, referees? Or do they write in a book? Yeah,

25:51

these days there isn't a notebook. They actually write the

25:53

name straight on the cards. Yeah, so maybe he's

25:55

got that. One for classic football cards.

26:00

That's gonna be worth a bomb in

26:01

a few years, isn't it? Match worn,

26:04

match brandished. Mad

26:07

scenes, honestly. Didn't even, I mean, take

26:09

your shirt off as a referee, you could do that. Or is that

26:11

too much, is that? It's twos too much, isn't it? Yeah,

26:14

yeah, you gotta stay. What about the whistle?

26:16

Yeah, yeah, that's true. You don't want the whistle

26:18

though, do you? It's been in his mouth.

26:21

Yeah, true, okay. Next

26:24

up, former cliches guest Robin Cowan

26:26

and presumably enduring cliches listener

26:28

Robin Cowan, commentating on Sam

26:30

Kerr's 68th minute winner for Chelsea in

26:33

the Women's Epic Up final on Sunday.

26:36

It's harder and calm. And calm. And

26:39

calm. And calm. And calm. And

26:41

calm. And calm. And calm. And

26:44

calm. And calm. And calm. And

26:46

calm. And calm. And calm. And

26:49

calm. And calm. And calm. And

26:51

calm. You know, Charlie, part of me hates

26:54

to exhume this debate every three

26:56

weeks or so, but if we have to roll back

26:58

the years to the original debate, this would have been a great

27:00

case study to use because

27:03

68th minute suggests that it's in

27:05

the realms of being in the thinking.

27:08

Do you know what I mean? Let's not dig out that old grave.

27:10

On the other hand, it is essentially a decisive

27:13

goal in a cup final which might override it.

27:16

I mean, I was curious there because I was thinking, is it going

27:18

to be a comfy outcome with the woman? I thought when you

27:20

led into it saying clearly, you

27:23

know, that Robin's clearly still listening, I

27:25

thought she was going to somehow sort

27:28

of start to say it and then pull it

27:30

back from it. Say on it, I don't want to open up

27:32

this can of worms again or go with something else.

27:35

No, we're not- Some would say come

27:37

of the hour. No. Debating

27:39

with the eight minutes is too long whilst

27:43

fans celebrate behind it. Yeah, no,

27:45

kept it professional. And that's

27:46

what I like to see. This is good. This came from

27:48

Ross F.J. Dave said, the BBC said

27:50

Southampton went down with a whimper. What's

27:53

the threshold in terms of time left in the league to

27:55

have this label?

27:56

Is it just about time though, Dave? I think it's

27:58

about a manner of going down.

27:59

Yeah, I think so. Can you go

28:02

down with a whimper on the final day? Maybe, because

28:05

what about when, you know, the Great

28:07

Escape Day, when West Brom stayed up?

28:09

Yeah. Norwich lost 6-0. That's

28:11

exactly what I was just looking up.

28:13

That is going down with a whimper on the final day, isn't

28:16

it, Charlie? So it can happen. Yeah, and even Southampton,

28:18

they went down with a bit of a whimper that day. They lost at

28:20

home to United, I seem to remember. I think

28:22

they'd been ahead and then just sort of folded.

28:26

Can you go down with a whimper on the final day

28:28

if you were leading at some point?

28:29

No, maybe not. And you'd lose to United as

28:32

well. Yeah, maybe that's a bit harsh. Come on, mate. That

28:34

is harsh. Yeah. But

28:36

I think a whimper can be all sorts of different things,

28:38

because you can go down with a

28:40

game left, but you've just been on this weirdly

28:43

passive run of defeats or something.

28:45

I don't think it has to necessarily be that there was

28:47

lots of time left or you got a really low

28:49

points total. Yeah, because Derby's record-load

28:52

points table, a whimper doesn't even do it

28:54

justice. No, exactly. That wasn't a whimper.

28:56

Yeah, that's actively bad. I think

28:59

going down with a whimper

28:59

means that at no stage, I mean,

29:02

mathematics aside, Charlie, I think at no

29:04

stage did you have a kind of statement win that made it

29:06

look like you might be turning it around. You know,

29:08

a rabble-rousing Everton versus Crystal Palace kind

29:11

of situation. I think you need to have a win

29:13

that gives the fans hope. And if you don't provide that,

29:16

even if you sort of gently slide

29:18

sleepwalk into relegation, that's going

29:20

down with a whimper. Yeah,

29:21

I'm trying to think of like the most whimper. You know, like

29:24

when Blackburn went down in 1999 and

29:26

they drew Neil Neil with Manchester United and that relegated

29:29

them. And Fergie didn't even know that they'd

29:31

been relegated by that result. Right.

29:33

That was the extent it was a win. It was just kind of like,

29:35

oh, didn't go down loudly enough. Yeah,

29:37

it was a little enough. There's no noise

29:39

because he didn't even console

29:42

whoever it was who'd been his assistant. Oh,

29:44

I see. And it was then asked, oh, it

29:46

was Brian Kidd. Yeah, exactly. Oh, did

29:48

you not? It seemed really cold. And I think

29:50

after his eyes, like, oh, what?

29:51

They've been relegated out there. It's like they

29:54

won the league four years earlier. Like talk about a whimper.

29:56

That is good. That is good whimpering. Yeah, OK,

29:58

I'll take that. Right.

29:59

Now, next one, I'm not sure about this one at all,

30:02

Dave. Ben Coleman writes in, he says, when should

30:04

front post

30:05

be used over near post

30:07

and vice versa? I'd

30:09

say near post is the dominant form, clearly,

30:11

but I would say

30:13

maybe one scenario where you would say front post

30:15

is when you're deploying someone defensively

30:18

at a corner, maybe, you

30:20

take front post. I take back post,

30:22

back post, far post. So maybe the template

30:25

here, Dave, is that when you're talking specifically about

30:27

the post itself, it's front post, but

30:29

when you're talking about an area, a

30:32

place to be to capitalize

30:34

in either sense, it's near post or a near

30:36

post cross. I don't think you'd ever

30:40

hear someone say a goalkeeper shouldn't

30:42

be beaten at his front post. They say

30:44

near post, don't they? I think for that example. That,

30:47

yes, agreed. So Charlie, that's interesting.

30:50

That narrows it down a bit because when

30:52

you're talking

30:52

about any sort of form of angle,

30:55

then it's clearly always going to be near post. If you're talking

30:58

literally dead on from a corner, that's

31:00

when front post comes into the equation, right? When

31:02

it's zero degrees, there's

31:04

nothing to quibble with. Yeah, I think that

31:07

is about the only time you dare it. Near post is

31:09

definitely the default for most things, I would

31:11

say. It's far more commonly used,

31:13

near post and front post. Yeah, yeah.

31:15

What about he just makes that near post run? He makes that

31:17

front post run. No. It

31:19

sounds weird, doesn't it? I don't think they're interchangeable,

31:22

and one just happens to dominate over the other. I'm sure

31:24

there's specific reasoning. Is it the

31:26

same for back and far? I'd

31:29

say it's 50-50 for back and far, far

31:31

post. That's just a brilliant back post header.

31:33

Yeah, I think back

31:34

post, this is interesting. Back post

31:37

is way more dominant

31:39

than front post is over its traditional

31:41

bedfellow. Why would that be? Just

31:44

makes a run around the back post. What's

31:46

wrong with front post? And that's where we're so dangerous at a back post.

31:49

Maybe near post just rolls off the tongue

31:51

so well, and front post just doesn't.

31:53

Yeah. What's wrong with front

31:55

post? An unexpected can of worms open there. Thanks,

31:57

Ben Coleman. I heard this next one at the time,

31:59

Charlie.

31:59

and I was umming and aring about whether to include

32:02

it on today's episode. Nicholas Saki has

32:04

tipped it over the edge. He says, the interviewer in the Notts

32:06

County Chesterfield game called the EFL

32:08

the Promised Land when interviewing a Notts County player

32:11

after the game. How many Promised Lands can there

32:13

be in one football pyramid? I think it

32:15

has to be relative, right? So yeah,

32:18

but how many Promised Lands can there be? Yeah,

32:21

I don't know. I mean, certainly the EFL,

32:24

if we're accepting that. I think I think that's fair enough. Yeah,

32:26

going from non-league to league is clear. You're crossing a Rubicon,

32:28

aren't you? Yeah, that's hugely

32:29

significant. The Premier League, undoubtedly,

32:32

is a Promised Land for a lot of teams. I think the Champions

32:34

League, I know that's not in the same pyramid, but for a lot of

32:36

teams who were trying to get there for years,

32:38

when Spurs in 2010 got there, I'm sure it

32:40

would have been said they've reached the Promised Land. Oh,

32:42

getting into the competition is the Promised Land. Oh,

32:45

is it? Yeah. Yeah. Well,

32:47

I mean, that's the same. It's the same as getting in. We're

32:49

still getting... Well, they're all getting into competitions,

32:51

aren't they? You're getting into the EFL, getting into the Premier

32:53

League. I know what you mean, Charlie. It's probably

32:56

less frequently used, but it could...

32:58

Because it's rare, because most of the clubs these

32:59

days are used to being in it, even after getting back

33:02

into it is not the same. But Spurs

33:04

getting in for the first time was a big deal. So

33:06

you can only use it for the first time. You wouldn't use

33:08

it if a club had been away for 20 years. Can you

33:11

get back to the Promised Land? Can you come out of the

33:13

Promised Land and be back again? I think you can. Well, the House

33:15

County have been in... And Chesterfield have both been in the Football

33:17

League plenty of times. Also true. Are there any

33:19

Promised Lands, though, within it? I mean, is the Championship

33:22

or League one?

33:23

No.

33:24

No. The Promised Land

33:26

of the Championship. So the League itself,

33:29

Premier League, getting into the Champions League and then

33:31

presumably winning the Champions League, as Clive Tilley

33:33

most famously said, they're the

33:35

four Promised Lands of football. There can't be any others

33:38

in an English football sense. Right, so you think, well,

33:41

so winning, actually winning the competition

33:43

is the Promised Land. Was he talking about the triple? Oh,

33:45

God, we're doing this again, aren't we? Oh, no. Was

33:48

he talking about buying or uniting there? Whose

33:51

name was on the triple? What promise was that?

33:53

It was the triple, wasn't it? Yeah, I think

33:55

it was. Yeah, rather than simply

33:58

the European Cup. Yeah, because they'd won the...

33:59

won the European Cup before.

34:02

So I think it was more about the uniqueness. Yeah,

34:04

it has to be. It overrode it. Yeah, fine.

34:06

Okay.

34:08

Okay, interesting. Fine. Next up, this

34:10

is from the Higgsmeister, who's watching

34:12

the match of the two highlights of Brighton's win over

34:14

Arsenal.

34:15

And he heard this quick fire double.

34:18

We played with

34:20

Coraz

34:23

to win the game, not

34:25

to spend one day in

34:27

London. You know, to go to the Emirates today, to go

34:29

London wasn't for a day out. These guys are full of courage,

34:31

full of energy. The

34:35

Higgsmeister asks Charlie, is this a new cliche

34:37

we're seeing burst? Is it an exclusively London

34:39

phenomenon? Does it have its origins in the chant,

34:41

you've had your day out, now fuck off home? I

34:43

would go further than this, Charlie. I would say Arsenal versus

34:45

Brighton is essentially the day out Derby, because

34:48

Arsenal are a good

34:50

example of a day out in London club

34:52

to visit because they've got a big gleaming stadium.

34:55

It's

34:56

near to a relatively trendy part of town,

34:59

that sort of thing. And then Brighton, of course,

35:01

are a day out on the South Coast

35:03

kind of club. Yeah,

35:05

and a good day out, better than Bournemouth.

35:08

More to do in Brighton than Bournemouth. Or

35:11

Boscombe, that's where they're actually based. Yeah,

35:13

that's what I was going to say. I thought,

35:15

if anything, yeah, you'd have a better day out in Brighton,

35:18

I think, than the Holloway

35:20

Road. There's different connotations

35:22

to the two, Charlie. The day out in

35:24

London, for some fans, is quite condescending, isn't

35:26

it? It's essentially your cup final. That kind

35:28

of vibe, isn't it? Nice trip to the capital. Yeah,

35:31

and let's just talk about the day. Yeah, there are those two.

35:33

There's the day out on the seaside, because

35:36

that's why you're talking about a day out in Brighton.

35:38

It's the idea you're on the South Coast

35:40

and there's that day out. Or yes, there's the day

35:42

out, because you wouldn't talk, even

35:45

though, obviously, if you're going up to Newcastle,

35:47

great city.

35:48

But I don't think you'd be saying like these fans, they're not

35:50

just here for a day out. There's no other days. There are

35:52

no other days out, are there, Dave? Yeah, I think

35:54

there are,

35:55

because I think you could have a day

35:58

out if you're a small team. in the FA

36:00

Cup and you've gone to any

36:02

Premier League ground really, but especially a big one if

36:04

you're a small team and you get drawn on Trafford, Anfield,

36:08

St James's. Or if you're a newly

36:10

promoted club, that's where it might be more

36:12

relevant. If this was Brighton

36:15

six years ago,

36:17

first season in the Premier League, you might be saying

36:19

enjoy the day out. And I think you could

36:21

lower that threshold if it was a new club and

36:23

they were playing United, it was their first

36:25

away game in the top five for 20, 30 years. Crucial.

36:28

Yeah, we're not here. We're not just here for a day out.

36:30

Yeah, I think I think you might hear it in that context.

36:33

Does the fact that it was a lovely sunny day yesterday

36:36

make it more likely that this gets said if it was pissing

36:38

down yesterday? I don't know. I agree with

36:40

that. Almost certainly. It's towards the end of the season

36:43

as well. Yeah, that's all factored

36:45

in. What further complicates this Charlie is

36:47

what if it had been the final day of the season and they

36:49

come sort of dressed in their sort of fancy

36:51

dress and they bought sort of inflatable bananas and

36:53

things. That's a day out. Doesn't

36:55

matter what happens on the pitch then that is literally the

36:57

day out overrides the footballing spectacles.

37:00

That is literally a day out. Stoke fans had

37:02

a beach ball at Vicarage Road last

37:04

Monday on a bank holiday last game

37:06

of the season. That's a day out.

37:08

That's a day out. It was as a cast. It was a day out.

37:11

And he's right on the edge of the tube Matt, but it is a day out.

37:14

Yeah, it's fine. Good. Excellent stuff.

37:16

Really enjoyed that. Now the next one came in an email

37:18

from John Hare. He says he was reading the programme

37:20

notes of Roy Hodgson at the weekend

37:22

and Hodgson was talking about the Tottenham result the week before

37:25

where Palace lost 1-0 and he felt that despite

37:27

this the boys had acquitted themselves well.

37:29

The question though is this, can you ever acquit

37:31

yourself well and win? Our answer

37:34

amongst our friends was unanimously no. But here

37:37

was the controversial point. Can you acquit yourself

37:39

well and draw? We were split on this.

37:41

Further context was introduced. Maybe you can draw and

37:43

acquit yourself well if you get a draw against a team

37:45

you expected to lose to. So This

37:48

is a great debate. Yeah. You

37:51

can't acquit yourself well and

37:52

win Charlie. Let's deal with the obvious point first.

37:54

No, unless it was we

37:56

needed to win by 4 goals and we

37:59

only won 1-0.

38:00

So it's still a negative, you know, we acquitted

38:02

ourselves, well, we did all we could, but ultimately

38:05

we just couldn't score the volume of

38:07

goals we needed or something. But broadly,

38:09

yeah, you can't get the result you wanted and agree yourself well.

38:12

Yeah, it's vaguely connected to falling short, isn't

38:14

it, Dave? Yeah, I think so. Now, the caveat

38:16

to this, as John Hare also suggests,

38:19

Charlie, is that an individual player can equip

38:21

themselves well.

38:22

I think a classic case

38:24

of a player quitting themselves will be a young player

38:26

being drafted in for their debut, maybe at full

38:29

back, a position where they could have struggled. Shall

38:31

I tell you, an almost unanimous acquitted

38:33

themselves well was early

38:35

this season Spurs had to play Milan at San

38:38

Siro without all their sentiment fielders basically,

38:40

and Skip and Sa were drafted in and

38:43

they were good, they were fine, and

38:46

it was everyone, almost unanimously

38:49

described them as they acquitted themselves well in

38:51

difficult circumstances. Yeah, in a cauldron

38:53

in San Siro, definitely. It annoys

38:55

me, Dave, that a lot of people think it's equipped themselves

38:58

well. Loads of people think it's

39:00

equipped themselves. What good boots? Equipped. Yeah.

39:03

Their shin pads are outstanding. It's annoying. Important

39:06

to get this stuff right. This is really useful

39:08

for us, this next one, and it really nails

39:10

a very, very precise word of the football language

39:13

down perfectly. Jack Pierce, he says,

39:15

I've seen a few references to Michael Alise's

39:17

assist, Perebi Eze's second goal

39:20

against Bournemouth. Eze scored

39:22

an unbelievable goal. It's a brilliant finish once

39:24

he gets into it. Let me tell you, the pass from Alise

39:26

is diagonal. He hits a crossfield

39:30

pass and it just

39:32

zings it. Eze comes inside, beats

39:34

one, beats two, and smashes it into the top

39:36

corner. Fantastic goal. 2-0,

39:38

Crystal Palace. Eberichie Eze,

39:40

wow, he is just scoring

39:42

goals for fun right now under Roy Hodgson. It's

39:44

his second goal that I've picked out, Cass,

39:47

because first of all, you've got to give

39:49

credit to Michael Alise from the Palace

39:52

own half. Ping's a beautiful

39:54

diagonal ball.

39:55

It was an absolute textbook ping. Charlie,

39:57

I've never seen a pingery ping than that.

40:00

What makes it a ping, Dave? So

40:02

I hadn't seen this goal before you introduced this clip. Good.

40:06

So I was expecting to see a ping, and what

40:08

I saw was, I don't know if it was quite

40:10

exactly what I thought, the distance

40:12

and the angle were pingy, but

40:15

the technique, I expected the foot to

40:17

sort of stab at the ball and kind of not follow through in the

40:19

way that it did each time. You think he

40:21

drove it too much? He kind of

40:23

did drive it a bit, yeah. I sympathise

40:26

with that, but I don't know, maybe... The trajectory

40:28

is so pingy, I think. That's what

40:29

won me over, Charlie, it's the flat trajectory.

40:32

Yeah. That's what makes it pingy. The

40:34

suggestion that the connection might have made a

40:36

ping sound, but maybe Dave's right, maybe there

40:38

was just too much purchase. Maybe it wasn't

40:40

clipped enough. It was too much of a drive than

40:42

a clip, and didn't make it pingy.

40:45

The cross-fieldness helps as well. Has to

40:47

be cross-field, right? You can't ping a ball

40:49

upfield. Could you ping an upfield ball?

40:52

You can't ping it up to the centre forward, can you? You

40:54

just can't do it. There are slight golf connotations

40:56

to ping, aren't there? Yeah. And that's obviously

40:59

straight up the middle. Could you ping a ball over the top,

41:01

Dave, for a striker to run onto? Just pings one over

41:03

the top. No, because he's got to be directly

41:06

to the guy's feet, isn't it? Mm.

41:07

You ping it, because then it implies

41:10

sort of effortless accuracy, which I quite

41:12

like. But yeah, I think this trajectory is the main thing

41:14

here. What about that viral,

41:17

hack-em-zee-etch cross-field pass for Ajax,

41:19

Charlie? That was a pick, right? Yeah, yeah. That

41:22

was huge pingy.

41:24

But yeah, it was good to see two independent

41:27

sources verify its pingness. Mm. Clinton

41:30

Morrison and Natalie Sawyer, well judged. Next

41:32

came from the not-the-top-20 pod, who

41:35

were listening to the post-match interview after

41:37

Bradford overcame Carlisle in

41:39

the first leg of their playoff semifinal.

41:42

Very dubious stuff from Sky Sports' David

41:44

Craig. Jamie Scott, well done.

41:47

Honours to you in the first leg. Jamie,

41:49

first of all, how's the head? Dave, I won't

41:52

accept any use of honours other than honours even.

41:55

Definitely never heard that before, honours

41:57

to you. And also it's a first leg.

41:59

So sort of not even... Does

42:02

it qualify as honours? You can have honours even after

42:04

the first leg though, can't you? You could, although

42:07

in the away... I know obviously that no longer

42:09

is the thing, but with away goals, I think that would slightly,

42:11

back in the day, would slightly confuse things

42:13

to say honours even. Yeah.

42:15

Not like the spoils, because you can take

42:17

the spoils, but you can also share the spoils.

42:20

Whereas honours, you can't really take all

42:22

the honours, can you, really? Next, an

42:24

email from juliobinyaku. Charlie,

42:26

what does it mean to be living dangerously? Is

42:29

it a style of play? Is it a certain position

42:31

like a full back being more prone to living dangerously?

42:33

Can you live dangerously anywhere else on the pitch other

42:35

than inside either box? Is it just a player,

42:38

or can a whole team be said to be living

42:40

dangerously? What's living dangerously? I think

42:43

of living dangerously as you've picked up a booking

42:45

and you look like you might get another one. Really?

42:48

I... Dave, I'm more inclined to think

42:50

of it as a team who are allowing

42:53

pressure onto them and they're living dangerously

42:55

at the back. They're sort of taking a few liberties, maybe

42:57

being a bit too casual, trying to play

43:00

out from the back, maybe. That's living

43:02

dangerously, isn't it? Yeah, but inviting pressure

43:04

onto them,

43:06

not in the sense of like a team that's adopting

43:08

a low block, because that's living safely,

43:10

isn't it? Living sensibly.

43:13

Yeah, yeah. It's allowing team inside

43:15

that block, isn't it?

43:17

Being too open, being too cavalier,

43:19

and yeah, leaving gaps at the back, high

43:21

defensive line that keep this, a

43:23

couple of times has nearly been breached. I don't

43:26

think it's about leaving yourself exposed as such,

43:28

especially because it's usually because you've got

43:30

attacking intent at the other end. I don't think that's necessarily

43:32

living dangerously. I think it's being careless at the back,

43:35

Charlie, inside your own penalty area,

43:37

living dangerously. They're living... if they

43:39

keep doing this. Yeah. But

43:41

that has been muddy, doesn't it? Because it's so

43:44

prevalent now. Yeah. It's so

43:46

used to seeing... I mean, goal kicks get taken

43:48

backwards. You know, it's so common

43:50

that, you know, obviously proper football men and

43:53

supporters or whatever still sort of gasp

43:55

at the sight of a goalkeeper passing

43:57

a square ball across the six-yard box.

43:59

It's not unusual enough to be living dangerously.

44:02

Yeah, I don't think it's living dangerously by default. I

44:04

just think it's once you start getting caught out and you don't

44:06

try something else to get out to relieve the

44:09

pressure,

44:10

maybe that's where you're living dangerously. So you've had a warning

44:12

and you're not heeding the warning. A wake

44:14

up call. Yeah, yeah, exactly. Charlie's

44:17

example about a player is definitely, definitely

44:19

works on an individual level as well. So

44:21

you think you think living dangerously is this kind of tightrope

44:24

related situation? I think so. I

44:26

mean, a very dangerous profession, as

44:29

we know.

44:29

Okay, fine. Okay,

44:32

thanks, Julia. Now, finally, Callum

44:34

Ray writes in and says, Premier League years, bingo,

44:37

all we riots. Well,

44:39

we've heard you, Callum Ray. Let's do

44:41

this. Of course, listener, Mr. Venger, has

44:43

got an epic playlist of every

44:46

song ever featured on Premier League years.

44:48

Listeners who heard the episode, what, within

44:51

the last month when we did this, we brought it out of

44:53

hibernation. Last time

44:55

we got Babylon by David Gray, which

44:57

we theorised could have been about

45:00

the end of a long managerial career, possibly

45:02

a relegation, something sad towards the end of

45:04

the season. But we had a look, some people sent us in

45:06

the clips, and it was actually

45:09

over two separate clips, one of Michael

45:11

Owen, sort of prime Liverpool Michael

45:13

Owen

45:13

scoring a couple of goals. And

45:16

also Luke Niles's horror

45:18

injury for Aston Villa against Ipswich.

45:21

There's a certain yearning about David Gray

45:23

generally, so maybe that kind of works,

45:26

but across the two clips it doesn't. But

45:28

let's see what we come up with today. Dave, you can choose.

45:30

I want a number between one and 1,385, please. I'm

45:35

gonna go 1,143. 1,143, we're

45:40

going very- Oh, we're

45:42

going very late. Very

45:43

late. Let's see what happens. 1,143 is...

45:52

Coming Home by the Rifles. OK.

45:57

Is this very literal, do we think? Yeah, it could

45:59

be. Upbeat,

46:04

this is good things happening. So

46:10

what season do you think this was in Charlie? Well

46:12

this came out... when

46:15

did this come out? Oh 2011

46:18

it came out. Okay, so this could

46:20

be... Yeah

46:22

so if it's 20... so this came out in the summer of 2011. So

46:26

this could be, if it's contemporaneously be

46:28

that 11-12 season,

46:30

which obviously

46:32

was when City won the league. I

46:34

mean it's upbeat, it's a sort of like... I

46:36

think this is a team's going on a good

46:39

run. It could even be the sort of that summery

46:41

feel when they're introducing lots of new fit, lots

46:43

of summer signings. You know it's another busy

46:45

summer. Very good.

46:46

And Playwracks arrived on

46:48

Merseyside to much fanfare. Well what's there anyone that

46:50

could be home? There were a host of new faces at

46:53

Villa Park as the new era

46:55

began under Alec MacLeish. Was

46:58

there any player that actually came home?

47:00

Did anyone return to a club in that summer?

47:03

Back to our shores. Ignore

47:06

me I'm just looking up whether Alex MacLeish ever managed

47:08

Aston Villa. He did, yeah he definitely

47:11

did. 2011-12, get in there! He

47:14

very much did. Accident to Eccleshare

47:16

from me. Staying

47:19

in Birmingham as well because he just... He

47:22

just left Birmingham. That was

47:24

the summer of Aguero joining, Charlie

47:27

Adam going to Liverpool.

47:30

I'm looking up Villa's transfers for that season now. I've

47:33

absolutely nailed it already. Let's see what they've

47:35

got. In came Shay

47:37

Givens, Charles and Zogbier and Alan Harton. Does

47:41

that deserve a jingly jangly guitar upbeat?

47:44

No it doesn't. Not specifically there

47:46

but they'd

47:46

have been enough. Ditzy

47:48

made a statement of intent with their busy summer.

47:51

Sergio Aguero the pick of the bunch. Pick

47:54

of the fucks. That could lead into

47:56

him scoring two on his debut against Swansea.

47:58

It's all there.

47:59

I try and I try to out-premisely

48:02

gear Charlie, it just doesn't work! It just doesn't work,

48:04

I can't do it. He's always in his head.

48:06

He's there. Right, no

48:09

keys in grey corner this week for the

48:11

sad reason, because they got sidetracked

48:14

with what feels like the 194th

48:16

exclusive sit-down with Arsene Wenger.

48:18

Fucking hell! Every other

48:21

week, they boast about getting

48:23

Arsene Wenger into the studio to ask him exactly

48:25

the same questions about Arsenal.

48:27

And him just looking a little bit baffled.

48:29

Oh, really baffled! Why

48:32

are you asking me this again? I'd rather he stood

48:34

up next to the big screen actually than

48:37

sat down. Oh God. Just,

48:40

every clip

48:41

is just him going...

48:44

Look! No.

48:49

Oh God, honestly, that's it. There's

48:51

nothing else, absolutely nothing else. Thanks

48:53

to you, Charlie Eccleshire, great adjudication panelling.

48:56

Thank you. Thanks a lot, Dave Walker. Thank you.

48:58

Thanks everyone else, we'll see you on Thursday.