I actually don't see how you can see things any other way but i understand that results will cloud some peoples judgment.
1) Against United we created 3 clear cut chances whilst they had zero. In fact, did they create anything bar the goal that came from a mistake? we bossed most of that game.
2) Against stoke we peppered their goal and should have been 3 or 4 up. yes they got into the game midway through the second half but they didn't look like scoring until we gave them a bullshit pen.
3) Against leicester i think it was an even game but as the away team we again limited them to nothing. We then take the lead and due to stupid defending we fuck up.
4) Yesterday we created 3 clear cut chances and Everton created diddly squat.
We could easily have picked up 9 to 12 points had we had luck on our side (and a striker option on the bench). Compare this to the utter dross avb served up where we couldn't create a clear cut chance in about 10 games. it's like night and day (except AVB had luck and bad refereeing decisions going our way).
i wouldnt bring luck in to it. diouf missed 2 easy chances so u could say we could have lost.
leicester hit the post & morgan headed straight at lloris at the end. so we could have lost that too.
oh & they should have had a pen as well.
& kone should gave really scored that header.
some of u seem to be giving too much weight to the part luck plays.
& u seem to be just including bad luck. u are blocking out all the good luck.
in fact, a lot of the bad luck is actually just bad finishing.
which also comes from not having enough good finishers in the team. which actually boils down to not buying them & being left with 1 striker.
if u have only 1 striker & miss a lot of chances then this is what ud expect.
ease up on the sooo unlucky spurs spursy speel.
luck does play a factor but we have some good & some bad.
& most of the luck we have claimed as bad, is actually just poor finishing.
comparing it to avb is silly.
id expect most managers to give us more entertaining football. if u are going to do that then i can just compare it to harry. which was obviously way more entertaining.