Rousseau

Yes, 'freaks' for the latter. Is that not just revisionism, though, because he's been retired for over a decade? Did Bergkamp really play exceptionally -- barring a game or two -- in every game he played, even the big games? I'm not so sure. The only players that can win games on their own are strikers/forwards and attacking midfielders; a defender can't win a game on their own, although they can see it out or defend a draw. Bergkamp could win a game on his own because he could score a goal out of nothing. Ozil is not that type of player. He will set up the winning goal, and has done more than any other player, by quite a distance. You can't mark him down for being in a team that tends to choke in the big games. I agree the comparison between Bergkamp and Ozil is silly -- they're too different. I think any definition of "world-class" must take into account the players position; they have to be exceptional in their role/position. Ozil is the best creator in the world, therefore he has to be included in the world-class category.

I think that'll come with better wingers. We only have one proper winger (McKay). I agree a DM is a must.

I agree Bergkamp was world-class but you can't then compare him to Ozil without specifying exactly what makes him world-class. What exactly did Bergkamp "do on his own"? Bobby Moore was world-class but exhibits none of the qualities Bergkamp did. I seen on Sky Sports this morning Ozil actually has more assists than Bergkamp achieved in the first 100 games. Ozil is also only slightly behind on goals per game also. Bergkamp was a special player, but so is Ozil in his own way - I don't think anyone has more assists. I think any definition of "world-class" must take into account position. In his position Ozil is world-class.

I think he is world-class. What is your definition of world-class?

Awful performance. Couldn't keep the ball and couldn't create anything. To be honest, I wasn't really that nervous: we were dealing with their ''tactics'' -- which was basically lump it into the box, which was embarrassing really -- quite well; most of the time a Rangers player was first to the header. Foderingham was superb; most definitely MOTM.

I'm not sure we've had our "standard 60-65 minute" substitution in a while, but I agree he'll come on. I hope Warburton keeps the winning formula, however.

That's your Match Preview now published, Coop. A very nice read -- lovely message at the end.

Anyone seen this advert featuring Luis Suarez? I can just imagine a version with Joe Garner:

I wonder if Windass' availability means Tavernier drops out? Windass may not start the game, but I have been quite pleased with Tavernier's performances in midfield and so I wouldn't like to see him replaced.

What "hate mob"? I doubt we give him a second thought. I don't know why I'm posting: I usually just ignore these silly headlines.

I can't believe Sky Sports covered it!

Err... I don't know any foreign languages, so I'll simply say: Merry Christmas and a happy New Year to you all!

We were piss poor in the Cup game and only narrowly lost, so if we can play near our best we have a chance.

There was a bit of banter with Forrester too: [tweet]809917972970164224[/tweet]

Hodson is more defensively sound, but I also think he's more of a team player -- his instinctive one-twos with Waghorn, Holt were terrific to watch. However, Tavernier is a very good player for us; it'll maybe just take a little time to figure out his exact role.

We weren't as 'dangerous' as we have been but we thoroughly deserved the win, and should have scored a few more. Waghorn and McKay (who seems to have found that telepathic link with Wallace again -- some of the first time balls were sublime) were excellent, and Garner again was a handful (I thought the way he held the ball up in the last minutes of the game was brilliant, taking all the pressure off us). I thought Tavernier was OK: he gives energy and drive in the middle of the park -- I actually thought he was fouled when he lost the ball which conceded Hamilton's only real chance -- and if he can find that final ball he'll be a good option in the middle. As Barebear said, Halliday has not done much wrong: he's looking to pass it out, when he sees he can't he's going to hit it up the line, but inexplicably treads on the ball on a tricky surface. It could have cost us but it didn't -- we should have been well out of sight anyway. I thought it was still the 4-1-4-1 base, but Waghorn and McKay pushed on often to make a front three. Decent performance, brilliant result.

As "good" as he has been, it is nice to see Miller dropped and Waghorn getting a game -- although it is a surprise with the plastic surface. It must be the first time there has been 2 defenders on the bench.

I'd like to see him get another year. I want someone to replace him regularly next season -- and this season, to be honest! -- but there is no reason why he can't be a squad player, coming on in games for 10-20 minutes or so. He's a good influence.

We welcome the chase.

There's no way Leicester are beating Sevilla. Just my opinion, but I just can't see it. Monaco are one of the most solid defensive teams out there and will be no push-over. It always amazes me the way our media write-off European sides before a ball is kicked. Anyone that is not a 'big name' is a pub team.

I thought Kiernan was good today. He's quite frustrating though: at times he can be brilliant, blocking, intercepting passes and can be physical in the air; then at other times he can look distinctly average, almost amateur. Consistency is key for him. If he can add it to his game we have a good player. I think that can be applied to the squad as a whole.

Pep's decision making is always to control the game, so putting Sagna and Kolarov (who's played their before tbf) into a back-three may not seem like the best way to go about it defensively, I think it gives him a better chance of controlling the game. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, merely suggesting a reason for it. Craig beat me to it, but I'm not sure Bravo is the issue. I think you've made a good point about the 100 mph nature of our game compared to the slower 'continental' style (although I don't agree there is a 'continental' style per se, as Italian, Spanish, German and Dutch styles are completely different).

McKay was terrific; he always tries the intricate pass, but it's amazing how better he is with a bit of confidence. Garner was a constant thorn in their side. It doesn't bother me too much that he's not scoring -- although I'd prefer it -- as long as he puts in shifts like today. We could have had a few more if Waghorn was not so greedy -- can't really blame him, though!

Well, that was a pretty commanding performance. It's difficult to pick a MotM.

That Miller miss, though...