PoP:
First off, and off topic probably, can we get that analysis of our fullback play vs Chelsea that you sorta promised us and which, for whatever reason, never materialized (unless it has and I missed it, in which case, help a brother out and point me to it).
Secondly, maybe I'm over-sensitive to scapegoating. Still, when one part of the team goes at 70% and another at 30% of their respective maximum, I do have a problem with not highlighting the extra 'slacking' by the one who only gave 30%. Yes, indeed, perhaps 85% by the first fellow may have been just enough, even given the same 30% by the second fellow, but the emphasis should be on why the second fellow was at 30% first and foremost, and THEN, perhaps, a mention that 70%, whilst much better than 30%, is still not "good enough".
Anyway, thanks for the explanations and guidance!