In the Trenches

[Carwin261]

After the last 3 performances who you like to be with you in the trenches?

[Hapag Lloyd]

After the last 3 performances who you like to be with you in the trenches?

Definitely not you.

[Hibsclaret]

Tarkowski and McNeil

[RickyBobby]

Ashley Barnes, Ashley Barnes and Ashley Barnes.
We miss his presence not only on the pitch but in the dressing room. When the going gets tough you need players like that.

[CoolClaret]

Roberts:

Not because he’d dig deep and fight - more at least his jokerish ways could at least help alleviate the sense of impending doom.

[agreenwood]

What’s football got to do with a war that finished 105 years ago?

[Enola Gay]

The same as the number of soldiers I’d want in our midfield, i.e. none.

[spt_claret]

Muric if only because someone simultaneously that calm but also that mental would make the rest of you feel better about things.
Gudmundsson because he doesn't give up working improving or adapting.
Taylor because he's too dim to be afraid so you know he's got your back.

[Burnley1989]

I did say this to my mate in the car on the way home last night, there's not one playing that will get in the other teams face and wind them up or put that solid tackle in to change the atmosphere which is another reason we are easy to play against.

I'd probably take Foster, Jack Cork, Beyer, Charlie Taylor if I had to chose any

[mdd2]

What’s football got to do with a war that finished 105 years ago?

quite abit during Xmas 2014

[Vegas Claret]

the worst person to be in the trenches with is someone who complains about everything

[Sproggy]

Tarkowski and McNeil

Oh. If we can pick players that aren't ours I'd take Ederson, Haaland and De Bruyne.

[Dark Cloud]

Ben Mee.

[Pickles]

How big's this trench? Berge and Muric would take up a lot of room.

[StayingDown4Ever]

They were pretty much all missing in action at Brentford, Bournemouth and Everton.

[dandeclaret]

I think that was the joke.... or point in the original post

[box_of_frogs]

Any belt fed weapon would do the job.

[TheFamilyCat]

What’s football got to do with a war that finished 105 years ago?

Interesting that you should ask that question as we are about to enter the annual poppy extravaganza.

[Rileybobs]

I reckon Brownhill would be a nightmare as a vegan, droning on and on about the potted beef rations.

Roberts would be too giddy and annoying, and I’d have to sleep with one eye open around Beyer.

I’d probably go for Muric who would keep spirits high and likely share the odd cigarette and nudey of his sweetheart.

[ClaretInLeeds]

What’s football got to do with a war that finished 105 years ago?

Must be his age….

[jedi_master]

The same as the number of soldiers I’d want in our midfield, i.e. none.

I dunno, Tom FInney fought in the bottle of Argenta Gap.

[alboclaret]

Muric if only because someone simultaneously that calm but also that mental would make the rest of you feel better about things.
Gudmundsson because he doesn't give up working improving or adapting.
Taylor because he's too dim to be afraid so you know he's got your back.

Jbg has definitely given up improving

[spt_claret]

Jbg has definitely given up improving

Absolute rubbish. He's adapted to 3 different positions under Kompany already. Number 10/central attacking midfielder on a couple of occasions. Centre midfield with licence to roam and create who also dropped back to cover leftback when Maatsen pushed forward. Deeper sitting centre midfield as part of a double pivot. This in addition to having been on both flanks, he's played 5 different positions in the last year. If he'd given up improving he would never have fought his way back into the side.

[Clive 1960]

I personally would have given Barnes another year contract but unfortunately we had Jay here so there was only room for one and no one was going to take Jay off us unless he went to USA as was mentioned before.

[Rowls]

What’s football got to do with a war that finished 105 years ago?

Allow me to explain...

It's a metaphor by which the user hopes to invoke the imagery of one of object concept or event and transpose it onto another. In this case, taking the idea and concept of trench warfare and applying certain aspects of that to football.

The imagery of trenches and trench warfare is one that is well understood by wider society. That's why he's using it.

What does football have in common with warfare? Well, plenty actually. It requires teamwork, camaraderie, tactics, organisation, discipline, strength, valour, commitment... Etc. There's also an "enemy" or opposition and there is a winner and a loser. Warfare imagery is common in sport because of these numerous similarities.

Many psychologists / sociologists even believe that sport provides a substitute for warfare in our (relatively) peaceful society.

There's also the fact that using warfare metaphors heightens the stakes - people's lives aren't generally at real risk during sport but by using warfare metaphors is used to demonstrate how much meaning we attach to events.

Whatever distaste you might feel for the use of warfare imagery in sports, it's not going to stop because of these numerous similarities. I'm afraid it's something we're going to have to live with.

Is the OP really calling for trench warfare? Is he wanting a British Expeditionary Force to cross the channel, dig trenches and fight dastardly Germans? No. Of course he isn't.

So to answer the question of what a war that happened over a century has to do with football, he's invoking the imagery of being up against the odds and suffering defeats - something extremely relevant to our current plight.

The rhetorical question of "would you want this guy's next to you in the trenches?" is a well worn device. What he's doing is calling for our team to display the kind of characteristics that would have been required in the trenches - a never-say-die attitude, a resolve beyond the ordinary, an unflinching desire to turn things around and transform the defeats we're suffering into victories.

Sorry to be so literal and didactic in this response but I couldn't help feeling the "what's this to do with war?" line of questioning was extremely po-faced and misplaced. The OP isn't doing anything wrong. He isn't calling for literal warfare. He's using metaphor in his language which is perfectly normal.

I completely understand finding jingoism distasteful but this isn't that. The OP's intent was clear. He's referring to resolve and character and nothing more complicated than that.

[daveisaclaret]

A certain type of Englishman aged anywhere from 30-70 imagines himself in the trenches (and in the RAF in the second World War) with no consideration for the morality of the wars or the grave effect it had on the men who were actually there as some kind of proxy for being personally brave. It is sad and pathetic and probably disrespectful to those who had to live through the horror of war.

[Rowls]

I don't know a single bloke who doesn't wonder how they'd have coped in difficult situations. It isn't "Englishmen" who do this - it is all people of all nationalities.

It's completely normal and human nature. It's universal.

What is particularly po-faced is implying some kind of moral deficiency in normal human nature or normal use of metaphorical language.

[Carwin261]

Thanks for that Rowls some people tend to take thinks too literally.

[claretonthecoast1882]

Allow me to explain...

It's a metaphor by which the user hopes to invoke the imagery of one of object concept or event and transpose it onto another. In this case, taking the idea and concept of trench warfare and applying certain aspects of that to football.

The imagery of trenches and trench warfare is one that is well understood by wider society. That's why he's using it.

What does football have in common with warfare? Well, plenty actually. It requires teamwork, camaraderie, tactics, organisation, discipline, strength, valour, commitment... Etc. There's also an "enemy" or opposition and there is a winner and a loser. Warfare imagery is common in sport because of these numerous similarities.

Many psychologists / sociologists even believe that sport provides a substitute for warfare in our (relatively) peaceful society.

There's also the fact that using warfare metaphors heightens the stakes - people's lives aren't generally at real risk during sport but by using warfare metaphors is used to demonstrate how much meaning we attach to events.

Whatever distaste you might feel for the use of warfare imagery in sports, it's not going to stop because of these numerous similarities. I'm afraid it's something we're going to have to live with.

Is the OP really calling for trench warfare? Is he wanting a British Expeditionary Force to cross the channel, dig trenches and fight dastardly Germans? No. Of course he isn't.

So to answer the question of what a war that happened over a century has to do with football, he's invoking the imagery of being up against the odds and suffering defeats - something extremely relevant to our current plight.

The rhetorical question of "would you want this guy's next to you in the trenches?" is a well worn device. What he's doing is calling for our team to display the kind of characteristics that would have been required in the trenches - a never-say-die attitude, a resolve beyond the ordinary, an unflinching desire to turn things around and transform the defeats we're suffering into victories.

Sorry to be so literal and didactic in this response but I couldn't help feeling the "what's this to do with war?" line of questioning was extremely po-faced and misplaced. The OP isn't doing anything wrong. He isn't calling for literal warfare. He's using metaphor in his language which is perfectly normal.

I completely understand finding jingoism distasteful but this isn't that. The OP's intent was clear. He's referring to resolve and character and nothing more complicated than that.

Do you actually believe this guff or do you think he was simply stating we don't have anyone with a bit of bravery. Just to give you a bit of assistance his thought provoking thread the day before was "weak in body and weak in mind"

[Carwin261]

Do you actually believe this guff or do you think he was simply stating we don't have anyone with a bit of bravery. Just to give you a bit of assistance his thought provoking thread the day before was "weak in body and weak in mind"

No point posting unless it’s thought provoking is it?

[Steve1956]

After the last 3 performances who you like to be with you in the trenches?

Kompany .....and his team.

[Superjohnnyfrancis]

I reckon Brownhill would be a nightmare as a vegan, droning on and on about the potted beef rations.

I can imagine him being bloody good at running through the trenches with ordnance though and he wouldn’t have anyone to tackle him from the other side unless he was really unlucky.

[claret2018]

The sooner this country gets over it’s weird obsession with the war the better

[Rowls]

Do you actually believe this guff or do you think he was simply stating we don't have anyone with a bit of bravery. Just to give you a bit of assistance his thought provoking thread the day before was "weak in body and weak in mind"

At no point does the OP call for actual, literal trench warfare.

You might find the OP distasteful but if he bothers you it would be better to take issue with the words he's written rather than something you're inferring above and beyond the actual words.

There is no literal call for trench warfare. There is not even any direct mention of WWI.

He's using metaphorical language here, which is perfectly normal.

[alboclaret]

Absolute rubbish. He's adapted to 3 different positions under Kompany already. Number 10/central attacking midfielder on a couple of occasions. Centre midfield with licence to roam and create who also dropped back to cover leftback when Maatsen pushed forward. Deeper sitting centre midfield as part of a double pivot. This in addition to having been on both flanks, he's played 5 different positions in the last year. If he'd given up improving he would never have fought his way back into the side.

Oh, alright then chief 🫡.

Because he's played a few position makes him a better football than end of last season.
I didnt know that's how it worked.
I might have a o in pegs

[spt_claret]

Oh, alright then chief 🫡.

Because he's played a few position makes him a better football than end of last season.
I didnt know that's how it worked.
I might have a o in pegs

He won us multiple points last season and has never let us down this or last no matter the role he's been assigned. Your argument was he's given up improving, if that was the case he wouldn't be doing a good job across different positions. Hardly been the weakest link when he's played this year.

This is a stupid axe to grind here

[CoolClaret]

Christ almighty lads

The OP was just making a point of

'Who would you want with you when the going gets tough', wondering who you think in our squad has the minerals to keep fighting when the chips are down (like they are right now) - it's a bloody metaphor

[Ziggy Stardust]

None of the wet wipes on here that's for sure.

[yTib]

just when i thought rowls couldn't be any more pretentious...

[alboclaret]

He won us multiple points last season and has never let us down this or last no matter the role he's been assigned. Your argument was he's given up improving, if that was the case he wouldn't be doing a good job across different positions. Hardly been the weakest link when he's played this year.

This is a stupid axe to grind here

My axe is sharp enough,
I disagree with what you are saying about different positions, he may/probably has alway been capable of this.
I disagree without rubbishing your comment

[Rowls]

just when i thought rowls couldn't be any more pretentious...

[yTib]

Allow me to explain...

[Rowls]

Of course, we could just allow people to wilfully misrepresent others and all pile in on them.

Actually, that'd be kinda fun wouldn't it? A nice bit of online bullying.

[Carwin261]

Pity I can’t delete a post like on Facebook ,it seems that most posts on this board that start as a discussion finish up as a sniping contest.

[Lip]

Of course, we could just allow people to wilfully misrepresent others and all pile in on them.

Actually, that'd be kinda fun wouldn't it? A nice bit of online bullying.

Plenty of that on here!

[spt_claret]

My axe is sharp enough,
I disagree with what you are saying about different positions, he may/probably has alway been capable of this.
I disagree without rubbishing your comment

Possible he has but he's never demonstrated it before and has in the past year so can only go off what we've seen- which is that he shifted positions and took to them very well. I'd say he's also shown increased two-footedness compared to a few years ago, and adapted to losing his pace by an improved positional & tactical sense.

[Superjohnnyfrancis]

Would absolutely love a load of mindless zombies in the trenches. Send em over the top

[yTib]

Of course, we could just allow people to wilfully misrepresent others and all pile in on them.

Actually, that'd be kinda fun wouldn't it? A nice bit of online bullying.

of course, one could allow folk to draw their own conclusions.