I wouldn't say I'm worried really, to be honest I don't care. I didn't even watch the match so can't actually comment on what they did wrong and if it can be attributed to inexperience but using the excuse that they are young and need to learn isn't a valid point.
If they do something wrong, it shouldn't be sugar coated because they're young, it should be shown up so that they can see where they went wrong and they can learn that way.

What you're talking about is something different, you're talking about constructive analysis. Players should absolutely be analysed, but young players should never be given a hard time just because of the occasional bad game.

What you seem to understand by "making excuses" is someone saying that a player did nothing wrong because they are young, rather than saying they're young, they'll learn. Nobody's trying to sugar-coat them; when we say bad games are to be expected, we still subject them to the same analysis as we do any other player, we simply don't act like they've let the team down because of one bad performance. In other words, it's all meant to be constructive.

I completely understand what you're saying and you are absolutely right but all I said was in response to the 2nd comment saying it was you're 3rd, 4th and 5th choice CB's as though that is a good reason for a poor performance. Surely these players who have cost quite a bit should be expected to put in good displays when need be.

If the comment had been, it was an off day, everyone has one or, they're young and still did well but were up against good opposition, that would have been acceptable. However, that excuse is not a viable option.

i prefer us this way. its like the late 90's all over again. 4-4-2 and swashbuckling manchester united football. i never really liked that run of 1-0's we had in 2008 when everyone was knocking one out over van der sar. and in any case,we've got three members of our first choice back four still to come back. so we'll be winning 8-0 in future.

couldnt care less we won 8-2