I dont mind criticism of it, it's justified on occasions but theres never any context. Watford was just pure laziness because the game was over, not really anything to do with a shit defence! Annoying to concede but human nature to switch off, after they scored we went back to battering them again. West Brom's goal shouldn't even have stood!! 1 or 2-0s are "the sign of champions" etc but 6-1 and conceding a goal at 5-0 up or winning 4-2 brings all sort of questions! Baffles me. And the hilarious "what happens if their attack doesn't function?" errr we'll drop some points maybe? Like Arsenal did v Boro, like City did v Boro and Everton etc etc.
And if our defence is that hopeless it doesn't really say much for our rivals attack, Tottenham had 2 chances v us in their own stadium, Chelsea 1 and didnt even threaten after they got a goal back etc etc. Let's see who finishes higher out of us and Spurs with their "amazing defence", it won't be them I guarantee you that! I'm happy with how we are defending, we can do better but the luxury of having the best attack in the country means it isn't a big deal if we dont.