# Ted Lasso Season 2 Thread (Spoilers)



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

With season two only a week away, it's probably time to get the new season thread going. Untagged spoilers allowed as per the thread title, but if you are the first to post about the newest weekly episode, please preface your post with a bold spoiler warning, e.g.

*** SPOILERS FOR S02E0X "_Episode Title_" FROM THIS POINT ***

This will allow viewers who are watching later (you monsters) to participate in the thread as they watch without being spoiled for episodes they've not yet seen. Thanks for your consideration.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

For the brave, here is Alan Sepinwall's review of season two.

I'm tagging the link since the page title contains a hint as to his opinion.



Spoiler



'Ted Lasso' Season 2: Where Nice Guys Still Finish First


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

And if you really like living dangerously, here's EW's review (spoiler-tagged for the same reason):



Spoiler



'Ted Lasso' season 2 is sweeter, weirder, and almost as funny


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Not looking at your spoilers. Want to be surprised. Very excited for S2 to begin.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

I couldn't help it, and read them. For anyone on the fence, I'll say:


Apple didn't give out the whole season for review, so there isn't any discussion in ether review about where things head.
If you've seen either of the season trailers, you know some plot points that are generally discussed in these reviews.
There are a few additional storylines mentioned. Not what happens in them, but what they are.

Overall I didn't feel especially spoiled by either review, so they are safe to read if you want a general overview and opinions on the new season, with some insights into what the characters are up to. But if you don't want to know anything at all, stay away.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

I am shocked to discover that the team's owner is the same actress who played the "Shame" Nun in Game of Thrones. Wow!


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

Nice story on Hannah Waddingham, Juno Temple, and their characters. No spoilers within for season two; it's a safe read.

Ted Lasso's Hannah Waddingham and Juno Temple Talk Apple Show - Variety


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

Sudeikis is on Colbert tonight, promoting season two, for anyone interested.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

Almost game time. Just two more sleeps (or is it one?)


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

It depends on when you sleep.


----------



## Peter000 (Apr 15, 2002)

S2E1 has landed.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

Happy Ted Lasso Day!

I won't watch until this evening, but for those who get going sooner, might as well set the stage&#8230;

**** SPOILERS FOR S02E01 "Goodbye Earl" BEGIN HERE ****


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

Free AFC Richmond wallpapers from an actual design studio:

https://www.patreon.com/posts/42243134


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

I was wondering, who the hell is Earl. Now I know.

I forgot they slow roll the episodes one per week (I watched S1 late so I binged). How many languages does the doc -- sorry, doctor -- speak? Wonder is she'll talk to Ted in whatever accent he's trying to pull off.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

Wouldn't they just do over the PK? I wish the ball had hit the post and then hit the dog, cause then there wouldn't be any question about what would happen.

For the record, I didn't bother to check the FIFA rulebook


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

Anubys said:


> Wouldn't they just do over the PK? I wish the ball had hit the post and then hit the dog, cause then there wouldn't be any question about what would happen.
> 
> For the record, I didn't bother to check the FIFA rulebook


I haven't checked either, but I recently saw a video of a goal that deflected off a huge ball that had entered the playing field...and it counted.


----------



## pkscout (Jan 11, 2003)

Anubys said:


> Wouldn't they just do over the PK? I wish the ball had hit the post and then hit the dog, cause then there wouldn't be any question about what would happen.
> 
> For the record, I didn't bother to check the FIFA rulebook


The rulebook isn't well written, but it would appear the official would stop play and restart with a drop ball. And if they were out of extra time, then the drop of the ball would have ended the game.

"stop play (and restart with a dropped ball) only if it interferes with play unless the ball is going into the goal and the interference does not prevent a defending player playing the ball, the goal is awarded if the ball enters the goal (even if contact was made with the ball) unless the interference was by the attacking team."

Law 5 - The Referee

Now we can spend the next 50 posts arguing about this. '-)


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

OK...let's start the 50-post argument!

um...I agree


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

pkscout said:


> The rulebook isn't well written, but it would appear the official would stop play and restart with a drop ball. And if they were out of extra time, then the drop of the ball would have ended the game.
> 
> "stop play (and restart with a dropped ball) only if it interferes with play unless the ball is going into the goal and the interference does not prevent a defending player playing the ball, the goal is awarded if the ball enters the goal (even if contact was made with the ball) unless the interference was by the attacking team."
> 
> ...


And, from that rule book --

_*an extra ball, other object or animal enters the field of play during the match, the referee must:*_

_*stop play (and restart with a dropped ball) only if it interferes with play unless the ball is going into the goal and the interference does not prevent a defending player playing the ball, the goal is awarded if the ball enters the goal (even if contact was made with the ball) unless unless the interference was by the attacking team*_


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Bierboy said:


> And, from that rule book --
> 
> _*an extra ball, other object or animal enters the field of play during the match, the referee must:*_
> 
> _*stop play (and restart with a dropped ball) only if it interferes with play unless the ball is going into the goal and the interference does not prevent a defending player playing the ball, the goal is awarded if the ball enters the goal (even if contact was made with the ball) unless unless the interference was by the attacking team*_


Ummmmm, you responded to his post by quoting the exact rule that he included in his post. What's your point?


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

DevdogAZ said:


> Ummmmm, you responded to his post by quoting the exact rule that he included in his post. What's your point?


LOL...I kept reading to see what's different...

I did find this other rule to add to the discussion:

_*an extra ball, other object or animal enters the field of play during the match, the referee must:*_

_*stop play (and restart with a dropped ball) only if it interferes with play unless the ball is going into the goal and the interference does not prevent a defending player playing the ball, the goal is awarded if the ball enters the goal (even if contact was made with the ball) unless unless the interference was by the attacking team*_
**


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

DevdogAZ said:


> Ummmmm, you responded to his post by quoting the exact rule that he included in his post. What's your point?


The first line in my quote...as Anubys pointed out.


----------



## pkscout (Jan 11, 2003)

We did not see when the dog entered the field of play. If it ran along the goal line and entered only near the end and the ball had already been kicked, it was too late to stop play. That would result in a drop ball. And any team with bad enough luck to have seven straight ties would have that much bad luck here too.

And I'm only saying this because there have been only 8 posts worth of argument.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

The dog was on the sidelines - I mean "in touch" - standing with its handler near the coaches. Or at least that's how I remember it.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

With episode two on the way, I just realized I never wrote anything about episode one.

I read a few reviews before the premiere and most of them noted the same reaction I had in watching the first 10-15 minutes of episode one. Fun, pleasant, familiar… but low-risk. Is this going to be a season of resting on laurels? I already knew from those reviews the answer was no, but it was interesting to have that experience even having been reassured I needn’t. Also, I’ve seen season one so many times that even something as minor Roy being shaggier was hard to get used to at first. So I was really excited to get going with the season even as I felt myself resisting to it a little bit.

Got out of my head by about halfway through and really enjoyed the premiere overall. I was interested to see Doc(tor) Sharon is a main character in the main cast and not a guest, so she’ll be a major presence the rest of the way and obviously the foil for Ted. That will be fun.


----------



## Test (Dec 8, 2004)

I had paid for this month of atv+ when I forgot to cancel the free subscription apple extended to July 2nd. I liked the show last season and figured I would catch the first two episodes of the 2nd season to see if it was still any good, have to say I really enjoy this show. 

Looks like the last episode is on October 1st, I guess I'll resub for the month to binge the episodes.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

I agree, the first ep seemed kinda blah. But the second ep significantly raised the bar; it was excellent!!


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

Brendan Hunt (Coach Beard, and co-creator) said that they had assumed Apple was going to release the first three episodes of season two at once, like they did with season one, and so the team wrote the first three assuming they’d be binged.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

*SPOILERS FOR EPISODE 2*

I definitely liked Episode 2 better than Episode 1.

Given the conversation Ted had with Sam about not bringing Jamie back to the team, it seems very much out of character for Ted to then invite Jaimie back without at least first telling Sam. Even if it's more of a "I changed my mind and I'm the coach so this is my call" that would be fine. But during that final scene, it looked like everyone on the pitch was surprised to see Jamie there, including Coach Beard and Nate.


----------



## mlsnyc (Dec 3, 2009)

That it’s out of character is I think the whole point. Ted Lasso is all about making everyone better by believing in themselves and each other and trusting each other. But after 8 straight ties, it’s time to shake things up. Which includes making an unpopular decision if it means helping the team. That he did it without his players’ and coaches’ approval seems to also be part of shaking things up.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

I loved how "doc" kept moving down. She's a very interesting character.

I found it very hard to follow E2 because of the very quick dialog with accents (mostly Roy/Keely). The CCs were very hard to read. I usually watch it upstairs on my Roku but was watching on the main TV (smart TV) so it's possible the AppleTV apps were a bit different, or had different settings.


----------



## jr461 (Jul 9, 2004)

wprager said:


> I loved how "doc" kept moving down. She's a very interesting character.
> 
> I found it very hard to follow E2 because of the very quick dialog with accents (mostly Roy/Keely). The CCs were very hard to read. I usually watch it upstairs on my Roku but was watching on the main TV (smart TV) so it's possible the AppleTV apps were a bit different, or had different settings.


We watch this with subtitles in case we miss something with Keeley and Roy but now that Jamie is back it's really needed!

Will be interesting to see/hear how Jamie's return came to be.

Love the doc!


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

jr461 said:


> We watch this with subtitles in case we miss something with Keeley and Roy but now that Jamie is back it's really needed!
> 
> Will be interesting to see/hear how Jamie's return came to be.
> 
> *Love the doc*!


That's Doctor, to you.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

DevdogAZ said:


> *SPOILERS FOR EPISODE 2*
> 
> I definitely liked Episode 2 better than Episode 1.
> 
> Given the conversation Ted had with Sam about not bringing Jamie back to the team, _*it seems very much out of character for Ted to then invite Jaimie back without at least first telling Sam*_. Even if it's more of a "I changed my mind and I'm the coach so this is my call" that would be fine. But during that final scene, it looked like everyone on the pitch was surprised to see Jamie there, including Coach Beard and Nate.


Yeah, that was the first thing that crossed my mind, too.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

wprager said:


> I loved how "doc" kept moving down. She's a very interesting character.
> 
> I found it very hard to follow E2 because of the very quick dialog with accents (mostly Roy/Keely). The CCs were very hard to read. I usually watch it upstairs on my Roku but was watching on the main TV (smart TV) so _*it's possible the AppleTV apps were a bit different*_, or had different settings.


That's what I have, and the CCs are very easy to read and also keep up with the video.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

Episode two thoughts:

Still feeling a bit disoriented with the new sets and locations and general glossier appearance of some of the characters. (I don’t know why Mae’s silver hair is throwing me so!) At least Roy got a trim for his TV appearance and looks more like himself.

Ted bringing Jamie back on is definitely a response to Doctor Sharon pointing out that his methods have created a great workplace that is failing in its core purpose of getting wins. At the same time, it’s also completely in character for him; as he points out, not giving up on people is part of what he is about. And he also observes that Sam’s comment about his father, and Jamie’s comment about his terrible father, make him want to help Jamie.

Doesn’t seem like bringing Jamie back is the gaffer’s call. I guess Higgins did vote thumbs-up on it, and he’s director of football operations, so we can let it slide.

There’s bit of revisionist history employed with Jamie. Ted tells him it’s not a good idea to bring him back because he burned a lot of bridges. That’s true, but the very last thing we saw of Jamie on Richmond last season, before Rebecca sent him back to Man City, was with the rest of the team at the curse fire. Rebecca’s rueful observation then: “That is a team united.”

Hannah Waddingham is brilliant. Loved the sly smile she gave right at the end, as the four of them were in her office watching Jamie appear on the pitch.

Got a big chuckle out of Rebecca sending a gift basket of bottled water to Sharon because Sharon doesn’t eat sugar. A dumbfounded Keeley: “There are other things that don’t have sugar!”


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

cmontyburns said:


> Episode two thoughts:
> 
> Ted bringing Jamie back on is definitely a response to Doctor Sharon pointing out that his methods have created a great workplace that is failing in its core purpose of getting wins. At the same time, it's also completely in character for him; as he points out, not giving up on people is part of what he is about. And he also observes that Sam's comment about his father, and Jamie's comment about his terrible father, make him want to help Jamie.


Just to be clear, I wasn't saying that Ted bringing back Jamie was out of character for him. I agree that he would want to help Jamie. All I was saying is that after he had that conversation with Sam and told Same that he wasn't bringing Jamie back, and Sam felt stupid for assuming, then it's out of character for Ted to not give Sam a head's up and tell him that he'd changed his mind. The way it played out, it makes it seem (from Sam's perspective) that Ted lied to him, which is definitely out of character for Ted.


cmontyburns said:


> Got a big chuckle out of Rebecca sending a gift basket of bottled water to Sharon because Sharon doesn't eat sugar. A dumbfounded Keeley: "There are other things that don't have sugar!"


Yes, this exchange was brilliant.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

...and Rebecca's dumfounded look in response to Keeley's comment!


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

*SPOILERS FOR EPISODE 3 BEYOND THIS POINT!!*

_______________________________________

LED TASSO!!!!!

Doctor Sharon: And has that ever worked?

I love Nora. Hope we see more of her (and her mom!).

I was bugged at the taping over the DubaiAir logo on the jerseys. Not that they did it, but that it was obvious the tape was in a different spot in every shot. Either tape up the jersey once and use it that way through all the necessary days of filming, or get a wider roll of tape where the logo won't be peeking through one one side or the other.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

Sassy Smurf returns! Loved her last season, and she was kind of an instrumental character in that one appearance. I'm glad they brought her back. Funny how her daughter Nora took on the instrumental role for Rebecca this time out. She was good with Hannah Waddingham. Nora: "Dear Dick Hole..." Rebecca, typing: "Dear Richard Cole..." 

That said, it's smart of the series not to just run back the old characters as the old characters. Sam, for example, has grown a lot since last season. He's clearly a team leader and a better player (witness his tackle of Jamie and subsequent taunt). He's a good character around whom to center the sponsorship crisis. (I've seen the episode twice and I can't say I noticed the varying tape jobs either time, and that's with having resolved to keep an eye out for it before the second watch.)

Phil Dunster was the only regular not to get an Emmy nod, but he played Jamie perfectly this episode. Jamie is still Jamie, genuinely believing he's special, but he also genuinely (maybe excepting the moment before Sam tackled him) isn't trying to make anyone else believe it. He just can't help being Jamie in the process -- witness his willingness to let Ted put him on second team, even as he's showing off his ridiculous warmup routine. Of course, not being the brightest bulb, his ideas about fitting in are very Jamie at first -- buying everyone PS5's -- but taping up his jersey in support of Sam was sincere and powerful. Opportunistic too, of course, but Dunster makes us believe that Jamie truly did that out of solidarity. "We're a team; we wear the same kit." Nice.

I liked Alan Sepinwall's opinion of Led Tasso:

_Let's start with Led Tasso, which is both the dumbest and funniest thing this show has done to date... It is completely, utterly stupid. But it works a little as a motivational approach, since Jamie is the one to call Ted out for behaving that way, which wins the team villain a few brownie points from the guys. And it works very well as comedy, because Ted is just so inept at being a jerk. Led Tasso is like a little kid's caricature of how a mean coach would behave, flipping over tables, demanding absurd exercises (the players have to bend down and touch each other's toes), making the players run lap after lap, etc. Jason Sudeikis has really toned down the character's sketch-comedy leanings from the original NBC Sports promos, and it's been to the Apple series' benefit. But Led Tasso was Sudeikis going back into full SNL mode, and it's an idiotic joy to behold for a few minutes._

We certainly don't need to see Led Tasso again, but as Sepinwall says, the bit was so dumb it was kind of brilliant just this once.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

One thing I didn't really think about at the time, but now it seems like a big plot hole, is that DubaiAir has been on the team's jerseys for a while, right? So why is Sam's father only just now scolding him for promoting the company? Wouldn't the father have said something earlier? Or is he totally fine with his son wearing DubaiAir on his jersey for years, but suddenly has a problem with it if he's appearing in a separate ad for the company?


----------



## jr461 (Jul 9, 2004)

DevdogAZ said:


> One thing I didn't really think about at the time, but now it seems like a big plot hole, is that DubaiAir has been on the team's jerseys for a while, right? So why is Sam's father only just now scolding him for promoting the company? Wouldn't the father have said something earlier? Or is he totally fine with his son wearing DubaiAir on his jersey for years, but suddenly has a problem with it if he's appearing in a separate ad for the company?


I think the latter is the best way to make sense of it. As part of a team it's one thing, like an entity, but him alone in the ad makes it personal - that Sam is personally endorsing them and perhaps even seen as representing his country in doing so. At that point the father had to say something.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

I can see that this might be the first time his father expressed disappointment with his son’s choice to do the ad, but it seems implausible that this is the first time the father told the son that DubaiAir is owned by the company doing so much ecological damage to Nigeria. Sam seemed genuinely surprised that there was anything wrong with DubaiAir and it’s parent company, yet that seems like something that should be very well known to a Nigerian if what the father says is true.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

But the other Nigerian players had no idea, either.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

It could be that they just thought of this plot point in season two.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

cmontyburns said:


> It could be that they just thought of this plot point in season two.


Bazinga!!


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

cmontyburns said:


> It could be that they just thought of this plot point in season two.


Yes, that's the obvious behind the scenes answer. But in the world of the show, they should have had it play out differently. For example, Sam's dad could have said that the company that has been ruining Nigeria for decades just purchased DubaiAir. Or Sam's dad could have pointed to some kind of recent expose that uncovered previously unknown info that DubaiAir has a parent company and it's . . . the company destroying Nigeria.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

Is it Friday yet?


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

wprager said:


> Is it Friday yet?


In another hour, it will be in Japan


----------



## Generic (Dec 27, 2005)

I thought today’s episode was the best of the season so far.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

**** SPOILERS FOR S02E04 "Carol of the Bells" FROM HERE ***
*
I always watch episodes of this show a couple of times before wanting to post any thoughts, but following my first viewing of this one, I have to say -

That was absolutely as featherweight as gossamer, and I might need an insulin shot after watching it. And I loved every second of it.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

I usually hate holiday shows but this was superb. Imagine my surprise when the first review Google showed me was someone who loves the show but thought this was the worst episode of all episodes ever made. I was stunned to read his idiotic review.


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

I liked it, but weird in August. I wonder if they had thought it was going to be a December release.


----------



## Saturn_V (Jun 2, 2007)

Made me wish for a Roy-Keeley-Phoebe spin-off show. Best part of the episode.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

Wow. I’m going to have to add this episode to my Christmas viewing list I do every year.


----------



## ThePennyDropped (Jul 5, 2006)

Turtleboy said:


> I liked it, but weird in August. I wonder if they had thought it was going to be a December release.


My husband and I were talking about this last night. We both agreed that we enjoyed this Christmas episode so much more seeing it now than if it had been released in December, when we've had it up to here with Christmas stuff.

Or do we need to worry that this episode will make August the new beginning of the "Christmas Season"?


----------



## kaszeta (Jun 11, 2004)

This bordered on “meh” for me.

Which is actually pretty good for a holiday episode


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

The backstory here is that Apple requested two extra episodes this season (twelve instead of ten). The main season storylines had already been broken so Sudeikis & Co decided to make one of the extras a Christmas episode. As such, it is fairly standalone and probably could have gone almost anywhere after episode three (since the Dubai Air protest was mentioned here). My guess is they decided to move it up in the order from the original plan to help pace the season. Last episode the team had eight draws and a loss, and this one they had three more losses and also three wins. Also, last episode Coach Beard and Jane had just decided to share an iCloud account, and this one they have broken up.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

cmontyburns said:


> ...Last episode the team had eight draws and a loss, and this one they had three more losses_* and also three wins.*_..


Actually, the board shows them now with a total of _*four*_ losses and four wins.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

One loss previously plus three more equals four. My mistake on the win total.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

TonyD79 said:


> Wow. I'm going to have to add this episode to my Christmas viewing list I do every year.


That was my thought as well. This episode was excellent, and will probably warrant an annual watch just because of how great it made me feel.


----------



## mr.unnatural (Feb 2, 2006)

ThePennyDropped said:


> Or do we need to worry that this episode will make August the new beginning of the "Christmas Season"?


I think we're already way past that. Just go check out your local retail stores and chances are at least one of them is already displaying Christmas merchandise.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

This episode reminded me that I missed watching It's a Wonderful Life last Christmas. First time in probably a decade. That made me sad


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

cmontyburns said:


> I always watch episodes of this show a couple of times before wanting to post any thoughts, but following my first viewing of this one, I have to say -
> 
> That was absolutely as featherweight as gossamer, and I might need an insulin shot after watching it. And I loved every second of it.


I've watched it a few times already.  Some other thoughts:

A couple of fun callbacks to season one here, in Keeley's disgust with the pimentos in green olives and the "can I get an ussie?" guy popping up as the dentist's son. (Apparently that guy is her son is real life, too.)

I hope they keep finding excuses for Hannah Waddingham to sing each season. She's a professional singer but doesn't want to come across that way on the show, so we are getting her amateur renditions of things. 

Loved the tracking shot down the dinner table/surfboard/snooker table at the Higgins house. That looked like a fun party. I want to go to the Higginses for Christmas.

Dani: "Tell my extremely beautiful wife I love her!" Ha ha.

Funny running (well, now it's running) about Jan (the Dutch player) having no sense of humor.
Jan: "I brought fried chicken."
Higgins: "Oh, is that a tradition back home?"
Jan: "No."
Or...
Richard: "The French believe having a beautiful woman around is a good thing."
Jan: "Didn't work out in the Helter Skelter murders."

Back in season one, I thought Sudeikis occasionally had trouble modulating Ted. Like, he was 100% Ted when maybe a scene could have used a 50%-level Ted, that sort of thing. Just occasionally. He's got command now. All his patter as he was walking out with Rebecca was dialed-down and a bit muted. Hands in pockets, smaller steps. The very picture of a guy feeling blue. Nicely performed.

Roy's reaction to Phoebe's breath was amazing. "I think you may be dying." Awesome. And of course his immediate alpha reaction, "Who the f is Bernard?" when Phoebe tells her story. Great character.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

cmontyburns said:


> The backstory here is that Apple requested two extra episodes this season (twelve instead of ten). The main season storylines had already been broken so Sudeikis & Co decided to make one of the extras a Christmas episode. As such, it is fairly standalone and probably could have gone almost anywhere after episode three (since the Dubai Air protest was mentioned here). My guess is they decided to move it up in the order from the original plan to help pace the season. Last episode the team had eight draws and a loss, and this one they had three more losses and also three wins. Also, last episode Coach Beard and Jane had just decided to share an iCloud account, and this one they have broken up.


I think you can forget about any continuity with the Jane relationship. It's going to be a running joke about them being together/broken up


----------



## logic88 (Jun 7, 2001)

Anubys said:


> I usually hate holiday shows but this was superb. Imagine my surprise when the first review Google showed me was someone who loves the show but thought this was the worst episode of all episodes ever made. I was stunned to read his idiotic review.


I was surprised as well about the comments that the Xmas episode was "dividing the Ted Lasso community". Sure, it was a bit saccharine but what's wrong with a pure feel good episode every now and then?


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

logic88 said:


> I was surprised as well about the comments that the Xmas episode was "dividing the Ted Lasso community". Sure, it was a bit saccharine but what's wrong with a pure feel good episode every now and then?


Feel good that stayed consistent to the characters. The hidden charity work done by the boss. The direct approach to getting the girl's stink fixed. The team coming together (again).


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

Love the latest episode, with all the homages to rom-coms when Ted was trying to persuade Roy to join them. Except when he walked off I think I would have gone with "You're lovin' me now, aren't you!" from Jerry Maguire. But I guess I have to be satisfied with "You had me at 'Coach'".

LOVED IT!


----------



## robojerk (Jun 13, 2006)

On the Rom-Com episode at the end when Rebecca was on her phone messaging the guy on Bantr, the next scene showed Ted reading something on his phone smiling then put it away. Visual clue they're messaging each other without realizing it???


----------



## cbrrider (Feb 2, 2005)

robojerk said:


> On the Rom-Com episode at the end when Rebecca was on her phone messaging the guy on Bantr, the next scene showed Ted reading something on his phone smiling then put it away. Visual clue they're messaging each other without realizing it???


Prolly.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

robojerk said:


> On the Rom-Com episode at the end when Rebecca was on her phone messaging the guy on Bantr, the next scene showed Ted reading something on his phone smiling then put it away. Visual clue they're messaging each other without realizing it???


That's the impression I got when I watched it. So hopefully it's misdirection.

(I expect them to get together eventually, but don't want it to happen already.)


----------



## logic88 (Jun 7, 2001)

robojerk said:


> On the Rom-Com episode at the end when Rebecca was on her phone messaging the guy on Bantr, the next scene showed Ted reading something on his phone smiling then put it away. Visual clue they're messaging each other without realizing it???


Quoting German modernist poets doesn't seem like the Lasso Way but I suppose he could be code switching.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

**** SPOILERS FOR S02E05 "Rainbow" START(ED A FEW POSTS AGO) ***
*
I need to re-watch this one. I had mixed feelings on first viewing.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

I want to marry Rebecca. Tall and full-figured is totally my sweet spot.

Oh, and filthy rich. That's a sweeter spot. 

Shame. Shame. Shame.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

also, can sing


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

Tall, beautiful, can sing ... but can also look downright terrifying!


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

wprager said:


> Tall, beautiful, can sing ... but can also look downright terrifying!


You say that last part as if it's a bad thing


----------



## jakerock (Dec 9, 2002)

I'm not reading anything here but did want to stop in and say that I read an article on this show this weekend AND had an out of town friend visiting. He mentioned the show, I said, I hadn't even heard of it until a day or so ago. We watched 7 episodes in the three nights he was here. I would describe it as extremely pleasing to watch. It isn't hilarious (to me) but it keeps me smiling the entire time.

Oh I also discovered that I have Apple TV. That was something else I learned this weekend.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

jakerock said:


> Oh I also discovered that I have Apple TV. That was something else I learned this weekend.


I'll bet you find you are not paying for it either.


----------



## jakerock (Dec 9, 2002)

TonyD79 said:


> I'll bet you find you are not paying for it either.


It is equally possible that I am paying for it. I have a teen age daughter who is the primary Apple user. So it's possible that I signed up for (or was signed up for) it, perhaps using an introductory offer or something.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1430973747452735488
Roy Kent wrote the episode that comes out tonight! I can't imagine how many F-bombs there will be in the episode.


----------



## jakerock (Dec 9, 2002)

Update I just saw a google calendar appt coming up to "Cancel Apple TV". Doh. I guess the trial run is about over. Which is bad. I love this show.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

jakerock said:


> Update I just saw a google calendar appt coming up to "Cancel Apple TV". Doh. I guess the trial run is about over. Which is bad. I love this show.


My "trial run" ran out four times. Still working.


----------



## trainman (Jan 29, 2001)

*Spoilers for S2E6 "The Signal" below*

"Steve Wiede vs. Billy Mitchell" -- that's kind of a deep cut for Ted Lasso to toss out! (It's a reference to the battle over the high score for the arcade version of Donkey Kong, as seen in the documentary "The King of Kong.")


----------



## Regina (Mar 30, 2003)

Roy Kent: I'm calling HR!
Ted Lasso: Tell Mr. Pufnstuff I said Hello! 
...and I was born in the late 1960s!


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

I loved how long it took for Jamie to realize he’d just been given “the signal” and the way you can see the gears in his head turning as he processes it.


----------



## Regina (Mar 30, 2003)

And Rebecca's mystery man is...Sam!  Can't wait to see what happens!

...and I don't think that the doc is going to make it for that one drink with the team...pure speculation, so I won't spoilerize...I think that Ted is having panic attacks because he's so far away from his son, and the doc will help him leave the team and move back to the US. Since this is the last season, and all.

Nice to see Nate the "Wonder Kid" help win the game. 

***EDIT EDIT EDIT*** Apple TV has picked up Ted Lasso for a 3rd season-this is not the last season-please do not have a heart attack. Thank you!***


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

I didn't love this episode (I still liked it, I just didn't love it) but it was saved by Rebecca wearing a hat. I don't know what it is with hats but woman are 100 times prettier to me when they're wearing a hat.

Is this the first time we see Jane? I was kind of hoping she would be like Norm's wife...


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Regina said:


> And Rebecca's mystery man is...Sam!  Can't wait to see what happens!
> 
> ...and I don't think that the doc is going to make it for that one drink with the team...pure speculation, so I won't spoilerize...I think that Ted is having panic attacks because he's so far away from his son, and the doc will help him leave the team and move back to the US. Since this is the last season, and all.


I thought they had confirmed it was a three season show, so there should be one more season after this, right? RIGHT?


Anubys said:


> I didn't love this episode (I still liked it, I just didn't love it) but it was saved by Rebecca wearing a hat. I don't know what it is with hats but woman are 100 times prettier to me when they're wearing a hat.


I'm not sure I'd say that women always look better in hats, but Rebecca looked amazing in that hat.


----------



## Generic (Dec 27, 2005)

Regina said:


> Since this is the last season, and all.


I thought I read that TL had a 3 season arc so I looked it up. Apple has renewed it for season 3.
'Ted Lasso' Renewed For Season 3 By Apple - Deadline Bill Lawerence (Coach Beard) stated it is up to Jason Sudeikis if it will go past 3 seasons.

I think I can see Rebecca and Sam as a good couple. Although the show seemed to point to Ted and Rebecca, it just seemed too obvious to me and this show doesn't do the too obvious. I am not surprised by Nate stepping up to the plate. At the beginning of the episode, I thought Roy was brought back to team to eventually be the head coach long term and then 10 seconds later Nate popped into my head. It is a better story of an underdog coming out ahead.


----------



## trainman (Jan 29, 2001)

Generic said:


> Bill Lawerence (Coach Beard) stated it is up to Jason Sudeikis if it will go past 3 seasons.


Coach Beard is played by Brendan Hunt (who is also a co-creator/producer/writer). Bill Lawrence doesn't act on the show.


----------



## Generic (Dec 27, 2005)

trainman said:


> Coach Beard is played by Brendan Hunt (who is also a co-creator/producer/writer). Bill Lawrence doesn't act on the show.


Bah, you are right.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

DevdogAZ said:


> I'm not sure I'd say that women always look better in hats, but Rebecca looked amazing in that hat.


Oh, it's just something weird (one more thing) about me...

Funny story is that one time I told my best friend's wife that (about how I love women in hats) and she was relieved..."you too? I thought xxx (her husband) was just a weirdo"...pause..."oh, I guess it makes sense that you're friends" 

Just find any woman with and without a hat...you'll be shocked at how much prettier she is with than without!


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

Regina said:


> And Rebecca's mystery man is...Sam!  Can't wait to see what happens!
> 
> ...and I don't think that the doc is going to make it for that one drink with the team...pure speculation, so I won't spoilerize...I think that Ted is having panic attacks because he's so far away from his son, and the doc will help him leave the team and move back to the US. Since this is the last season, and all.
> 
> Nice to see Nate the "Wonder Kid" help win the game.


I was having trouble following the narrative this week. Did the hunk Rebecca have come out of nowhere? And the sequence with Ted getting "sick" up to being found in the Doc's office just seemed disjointed to me. Did she find him *after* the drink with the players or before.

A bit of a messy episode.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

Anubys said:


> Is this the first time we see Jane? I was kind of hoping she would be like Norm's wife...


We saw Jane at least twice in season one. She was Beard's date at the gala, and then in a later episode he left the bar with her after he exploded at Ted that winning matters, and she (who was there with someone else) told him that was hot.


----------



## Howie (May 3, 2004)

Anubys said:


> Oh, it's just something weird (one more thing) about me...
> 
> Funny story is that one time I told my best friend's wife that (about how I love women in hats) and she was relieved..."you too? I thought xxx (her husband) was just a weirdo"...pause..."oh, I guess it makes sense that you're friends"
> 
> Just find any woman with and without a hat...you'll be shocked at how much prettier she is with than without!


You must go nuts at the Kentucky Derby.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

Howie said:


> You must go nuts at the Kentucky Derby.


There are a ton of dirty joke possibilities here but I will refrain 

I don't know how I convinced myself that we never saw Jane...oh well...that's the trouble with shows that you watch once a week instead of binging all at once!


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

Yeah, Bill Lawrence is the guy married to Christa Miller (and the father of Charlotte Lawrence -- she's the one who says "Bye-bye" at the end).


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

In another example of the show getting the most out of its writing staff (along with Brendan Hunt, Brett Goldstein [who wrote this episode], and Nate Mohammed -- and of course Jason Sudeikis), Jane is played by Phoebe Walsh, who is a producer/writer on the show.

In another bit of staff trivia, NBA coach Steve Kerr's son works on the show. Pretty sure that's where Ted's "Yes sir, Steve Kerr" line last episode came from.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

I liked this episode (not as much as last week's but still). Hilarious scene in the kitchen "I'll start in the living room" (or something to that effect).


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

Regina...please edit your post. You're giving too many people here (including me) heart attacks.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

Best episode of the season in my book.

I guess there is a bit of backlash going against this season (because of course there is) that, as near as I can tell, goes something like, "You are not moving along fast enough as it is, so how dare you waste my time with your precious Christmas episode and your rom-com nonsense." I reject that entirely; how quickly we act entitled to something we didn't even know we wanted until recently. There is, though, an underlying observation validity here. The plotlines for season one were immediately obvious, and no matter what else the episodes got up to, they always had that common spine to them (even if we didn't know where those plots were going, necessarily). Season two has played its plot cards much closer to the vest, with things that seem like they might be major ongoing stories, like the Dubai Air protest, not being so (at least, not yet); things that seem to be going somewhere, like Nate's increasing anger/arrogance, not apparently being major enough to support the whole season; and things that seem inevitable, like Ted needing Dr. Sharon, not really seeming to build. And though the show has only been tangentially about football and the team's fortunes, those things do matter in the world of the show, and it's not been clear exactly where the team is in its pursuit of anything.

This episode really started to play all the cards the show has been dealing this season, though. We now see the point of pushing the dating app so hard, we see (I think) bad things definitively in the offing for Nate, we see, in a really poignant ending, Ted needing Dr. Sharon following his panic attack (and the things that brought the attack on in the first place); we see the team making some noise; and we see what may be in the offing for Rebecca. (I wonder if the Dubai Air protest will return as a plot point once Sam and Rebecca realize who each other is. Rebecca would never date a member of the team, but the Dubai Air guy told her to move him on from the team early in the season. I wonder if something could recur there that would make him leave and allow the two of them to date. Probably not... and I don't know if the show is that interested in them as a couple, vs. the storytelling around the potential.) 

Anyway, I was left feeling that the train is on the tracks now and picking up steam, even if it's unclear where it's headed. Even amidst a bit of the meandering, I was confident that the crew had a solid plan for the season even if they were going to unveil it only gradually. This is the halfway point and things are coming more into focus. 

Anyway, enough macro blah-blah. On the micro level, two of my favorite moments from this episode:

Ted: "... and that's the last time I'll give a best man speech." Great joke button that story.

For attentive viewers, the guy with the weird laugh at the very beginning is the "laugher" Higgins didn't want to have to office next to at the start of the season when Dr. Sharon took his office. Great callback!


----------



## Regina (Mar 30, 2003)

Bierboy said:


> Regina...please edit your post. You're giving too many people here (including me) heart attacks.


Done


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

I was going to say that the Age difference is also a factor, but then I remembered that Rebecca didn't mind that with hunky guy...

Still, a booty call and a relationship are two very different things, so I don't see Sam and Rebecca getting together.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

And while Sam is in his 20s (seems to be portraying early 20s), Rebecca’s “true” age is 47. The hunk is portrayed by a 32 year old. 

Actors don’t always play their true ages but much bigger difference with Sam. 

Not that there is anything wrong with that.

What’s more interesting is finding the depth in Sam’s character.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

cmontyburns said:


> Season two has played its plot cards much closer to the vest, with things that seem like they might be major ongoing stories, like the Dubai Air protest, not being so (at least, not yet); things that seem to be going somewhere, *like Nate's increasing anger/arrogance*, not apparently being major enough to support the whole season; and things that seem inevitable, like Ted needing Dr. Sharon, not really seeming to build. And though the show has only been tangentially about football and the team's fortunes, those things do matter in the world of the show, and it's not been clear exactly where the team is in its pursuit of anything.
> 
> This episode really started to play all the cards the show has been dealing this season, though. We now see the point of pushing the dating app so hard, *we see (I think) bad things definitively in the offing for Nate *. . .
> 
> <snip>


Interesting that you see the last couple stories focusing on Nate as indicating something bad. I thought they showed positive growth of his character. He's always been timid and shy, then Keely and Rebecca taught him to be more assertive and he used that to get his parents the window table. Then in this episode he used that newfound confidence to make a brilliant (but unorthodox and risky) coaching move that none of the other coaches would have thought of.

I'm curious what it is about the recent Nate storylines that has you thinking he's angry or arrogant and that they're foreshadowing bad things for him?


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

up until he has his "wonder kid" moment, Nate was heading into a darker arc...he was unhappy and being shoved aside by the new assistant; who had the ear and respect of everyone...

I can see a fork in the road here where he starts demanding more (and not getting it) or if he's happy again because they won and he gets more respect...


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

Was there ever any indication that Sam knows who "BossLady" is? As much as she has no idea who he is, he shouldn't have any idea who "BossLady" is, and when he finds out he's probably going to be just as embarrassed/uncomfortable as she would be. Age difference aside she is, well, Boss Lady.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

Anubys said:


> up until he has his "wonder kid" moment, Nate was heading into a darker arc...he was unhappy and being shoved aside by the new assistant; who had the ear and respect of everyone...
> 
> I can see a fork in the road here where he starts demanding more (and not getting it) or if he's happy again because they won and he gets more respect...


That's not necessarily "bad" but just part of growth. Dealing with success and failure. His is the most human story on the show.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

DevdogAZ said:


> Interesting that you see the last couple stories focusing on Nate as indicating something bad. I thought they showed positive growth of his character. He's always been timid and shy, then Keely and Rebecca taught him to be more assertive and he used that to get his parents the window table. Then in this episode he used that newfound confidence to make a brilliant (but unorthodox and risky) coaching move that none of the other coaches would have thought of.
> 
> I'm curious what it is about the recent Nate storylines that has you thinking he's angry or arrogant and that they're foreshadowing bad things for him?


He seems like a boiling cauldron. He clearly has no idea how to wield the power he now has, or the extent of it. We know he's a good strategist, and we know from season one that he is capable of giving good coaching, but is he capable of _being_ a coach? He constantly berates the new kit man, and his coaching of Colin this episode on the pitch consisted of calling him a dolt (at which point Roy stepped in and actually coached Colin, which made Nate upset). He's also acting too big for his britches, not realizing that Isaac, who was in his own head, would not welcome him trying to address it (and then Nate was hurt when the others laughed at the suggestion), and when he said he wasn't a "wunderkid", he was clearly believing he _was_. And we've has several shots of him in those moments looking hurt and/or angry and finding he's not automatically the man just because he's a coach. There's just too much in all that for it not to be heading somewhere.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

cmontyburns said:


> He seems like a boiling cauldron. He clearly has no idea how to wield the power he now has, or the extent of it. We know he's a good strategist, and we know from season one that he is capable of giving good coaching, but is he capable of _being_ a coach? He constantly berates the new kit man, and his coaching of Colin this episode on the pitch consisted of calling him a dolt (at which point Roy stepped in and actually coached Colin, which made Nate upset). He's also acting too big for his britches, not realizing that Isaac, who was in his own head, would not welcome him trying to address it (and then Nate was hurt when the others laughed at the suggestion), and when he said he wasn't a "wunderkid", he was clearly believing he _was_. And we've has several shots of him in those moments looking hurt and/or angry and finding he's not automatically the man just because he's a coach. There's just too much in all that for it not to be heading somewhere.


I appreciate your reply and your analysis. I hope you're wrong, though. It doesn't seem like this show to vilify a young guy simply because he's in over his head. They had Ted do a great thing by promoting him to coach and building him up. Keely and Rebecca have helped build his confidence. It just seems like it would be cruel for everyone to be showing faith in him and helping build him up and then to have him turn out to be arrogant and unappreciative about it. Especially when he's a minority and all the people helping him are white. That would seem particularly unenlightened for the one minority person in a leadership position at AFC Richmond to turn out to be a bad guy.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

Oh, I don’t think they are making him out to be a bad guy, more that he is a product of his influences. That’s definitely a theme of the show. Just like Jamie’s dad has had a profound effect on Jamie’s affect, for instance, Nate has made a lot of comments about (and we’ve seen a bit of) how judgmental his own dad is. I think that’s reflected in his behavior now that he finally has influence over others. He’ll need to learn to moderate that just as Jamie is doing.


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

I don't think anyone is saying Nate will turn out to be a bad guy. They're just saying, his arc this season is going darker. He started as a lighter character and now he's moving into the "having enough power to do damage without having the experience to manage it" phase. And the people who should be noticing this and helping him through it are not noticing, for various reasons. My suspicion is it will get worse, but then will get better again. Probably not a lot worse because, after all, it's Ted Lasso .


----------



## Saturn_V (Jun 2, 2007)

madscientist said:


> My suspicion is it will get worse, but then will get better again. Probably not a lot worse because, after all, it's Ted Lasso


It won't surprise me if Nate is off the team by season's end. Only to come back in S3. It's a setpiece they've ran more than once.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

TonyD79 said:


> That's not necessarily "bad" but just part of growth. Dealing with success and failure. His is the most human story on the show.


I agree. I don't see anything dark here or in the future. I could be wrong&#8230;


----------



## robojerk (Jun 13, 2006)

I completely buy the conspiracy theory that Roy Kent from Ted Lasso is CGI
I didnt know this was a thing...


----------



## deli99 (Nov 12, 2003)

robojerk said:


> I completely buy the conspiracy theory that Roy Kent from Ted Lasso is CGI
> I didnt know this was a thing...


Some NSFW language:

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1433471438384734210


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

I mean, it's Roy Kent. I think the disclaimer has to be superfluous


----------



## robojerk (Jun 13, 2006)

It kind of explains how he can be here, and there, and every ****in' where.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

**** SPOILERS FOR S02E07 "Headspace" START HERE****

i've been reflecting on the overall arc of the season, particularly the simmering online dialog that is, basically, "what happened to my happy show?" To be sure, this episode ended on a particularly savage note, with Nate tearing into Will, but more episodes than people might remember from last year ended on a melancholy if not outright downcast beat. There was Ted agreeing to the divorce, Ted signing his divorce papers after having a panic attack (a real about-face from the thrill of their road victory and the celebratory karaoke session), and of course, Higgins quitting and Keeley threatening to out Rebecca to Ted over the paparazzi photo (right on the heels of the justly-famous darts scene). I think even I have fallen victim to wanting the series to be comfortable, or comforting, when it very clearly often never has been. So while I am having a hard time with what is going on with Nate, the series very much wants me to feel discomfited. I've never doubted that Sudkeikis & co. were in complete control of what they are doing, and I am starting to think they are a lot more ambitious than even they've gotten credit for. This is not a show resting on its laurels. That's kind of exciting, even if I am now starting new episodes with a bit more trepidation than I ever did last season. Overall the message seems to be, "yes, but it's not really that simple".

Like the scenes with Ted and Dr. Sharon in this episode. We got nothing other than Ted finally accepting that he needs help, and it took a scene of manic Ted on the couch (echoing all his other interactions with Sharon this season -- "trash can! ceiling! floor!"), and another scene of Ted being uncharacteristically cruel to her, and finally a third scene of rapprochement, for him to get there. But all of that plays directly to things we have seen up to this point, and even last season. Ted is suspicious of therapy because he's tried it before and it didn't save his marriage, and while he did the mature thing and let his ex-wife go, he clearly has not accepted that nor his new role in his son's life -- where the failure of his marriage has him thousands of miles away from home and unable to even bring his son's lunch to school. So all those scenes in this episode were the necessary payoff to a bunch of other stuff we'd seen before, and now we can get on with the business of what's really eating Ted. Great scenes with the two of them here, especially where she tells him he offended her, and apologizes. I wasn't sure about Sarah Niles before this because she hadn't had a lot to do, but she was so good here.

One last bit about the show being in control of itself: starting the episode with "I Got You Babe"? Not only thematically appropriate lyrics given the setting between Roy and Keeley, but an obvious nod to Groundhog Day given what Keeley is experiencing. You've gotta have some self confidence to make that allusion and not look cheap or dumb. And, ha, Roy finally has the time to read The DaVinci Code.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1435312800293965828


----------



## logic88 (Jun 7, 2001)

I didn't get a chance to catch up with Ted until this week. The bad thing is that I had already read an interview last week from Nick Mohammed addressing his transformation into a heel so the dark turn this episode wasn't a surprise.

And I knew Ted wasn't the type to quote modernist poets so Sam being the anonymous admirer makes more sense.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

Well, well, well. The story of three holes in the ground.

So they went there after all. Bet you it'll end up circling back to the boycott story line and how Rebecca refused to cut Sam from the team. That part appears pretty obvious. The interesting part will be how they handle her response.


----------



## trainman (Jan 29, 2001)

I looked at the Wembley Stadium Wikipedia page while I was watching this episode Thursday night, and someone had edited the info box...










From the history, that text lasted about half an hour.


----------



## tigercat74 (Aug 7, 2004)

trainman said:


> I looked at the Wembley Stadium Wikipedia page while I was watching this episode Thursday night, and someone had edited the info box...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 Nice


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

**** SPOILERS FOR S02E08 "Man City" START HERE ***
*
Amazing episode. Wow. Going to rewatch as usual and then post more.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

So, "Sambecca"?


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

I just want to see Keeley when Rebecca tells her.

He's 21 years old. Awesome father. Pro soccer player. And dating Rebecca? I hate Sam.

Hate Sam I am.


----------



## Regina (Mar 30, 2003)

Got awfully dusty at my house when Roy Kent hugged Jamie Tartt...


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

Regina said:


> Got awfully dusty at my house when Roy Kent hugged Jamie Tartt...


That's a great example, I think, of the care the show usually takes in setting things up. The side story at the top with Roy and Phoebe, which was mostly light comedy, may have seemed an odd thing to include in an already very-long episode with a lot more serious stuff on its mind. But it, and especially Roy's kind of devastating comment that he was worried he was transferring all his worst qualities to Phoebe, was completely needed to for Roy to understand exactly the damage Jamie's dad had done (and was still doing) to him, and that authority figures can do to others generally. Without that setup, the hug would have been nice I guess, but completely inexplicable coming from Roy at all, much less to Jamie. Throw in the Phoebe context though, and it makes sense entirely (and is a more emotional moment).

Also notable that it was that it was Roy and Beard who took all the action there, while Ted looked on frozen. Of course, Ted was reliving his own father trauma that rendered him a statue, as we were about to learn.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

It was a nice moment but an "only in the movies" one. In a real locker room, Jamie would've dismissed anyone who tried to get close to him. Oh well. Like I said, it was a nice moment.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Regina said:


> Got awfully dusty at my house when Roy Kent hugged Jamie Tartt...


Yes, very much this.


cmontyburns said:


> That's a great example, I think, of the care the show usually takes in setting things up. The side story at the top with Roy and Phoebe, which was mostly light comedy, may have seemed an odd thing to include in an already very-long episode with a lot more serious stuff on its mind. But it, and especially Roy's kind of devastating comment that he was worried he was transferring all his worst qualities to Phoebe, was completely needed to for Roy to understand exactly the damage Jamie's dad had done (and was still doing) to him, and that authority figures can do to others generally. Without that setup, the hug would have been nice I guess, but completely inexplicable coming from Roy at all, much less to Jamie. Throw in the Phoebe context though, and it makes sense entirely (and is a more emotional moment).


Funny thing, I was unable to finish the episode when I first started. So when I was watching the end, and it got dusty during the Roy/Jamie hug, I didn't think of the opening scene with Roy and Phoebe at all. In fact, I didn't connect the two until I read your post. But I still clearly felt the emotion they were trying to convey.

(My take away from that opening scene was that the teacher was clearly enamored with Roy and wondered if that was a foreshadowing of something to come.)


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

Everyone is enamored with Roy. 

He’s everywhere.


----------



## Martha (Oct 6, 2002)

I'm guessing the physician that took care of Dr. Sharon is Roy's sister that he mentioned during the conference with the teacher, so we'll possibly see her again too.


----------



## Saturn_V (Jun 2, 2007)

'Ted Lasso' Stars, Writers Score Big Paydays for Season 3 - The Hollywood Reporter

So maybe we're going past three seasons now?


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

This hit me this week. This is not the first series centered on a sports team but it is the first (?) successful one. There is a pitfall on making a show maintainable with sports because you have to define the winning level and not get stuck in the miracle run to a championship that means the show ends. Ted Lasso has managed to walk the line so very well.


----------



## jtonra (Oct 19, 2001)

TonyD79 said:


> This hit me this week. This is not the first series centered on a sports team but it is the first (?) successful one. There is a pitfall on making a show maintainable with sports because you have to define the winning level and not get stuck in the miracle run to a championship that means the show ends. Ted Lasso has managed to walk the line so very well.


Friday Night Lights had plenty of ups and downs during its run.


----------



## robojerk (Jun 13, 2006)

TonyD79 said:


> This hit me this week. This is not the first series centered on a sports team but it is the first (?) successful one. There is a pitfall on making a show maintainable with sports because you have to define the winning level and not get stuck in the miracle run to a championship that means the show ends. Ted Lasso has managed to walk the line so very well.


You obviously never watched Friday Night Lights. Show centers around the team, but it's more about the ups and downs of the characters than "winning".


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

robojerk said:


> You obviously never watched Friday Night Lights. Show centers around the team, but it's more about the ups and downs of the characters than "winning".


I saw Friday night lights as being about the town not the team after the first season.

But that is why I put the question mark. It's a matter of opinion and even if you count FNL, it is a very small percentage that works.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

TonyD79 said:


> _*I saw Friday night lights as being about the town not the team after the first season. *_
> 
> But that is why I put the question mark. It's a matter of opinion and even if you count FNL, it is a very small percentage that works.


Not at all, in my opinion (based on my admittedly fading memory of the series). There was a lot of character development in that series.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

Bierboy said:


> Not at all, in my opinion (based on my admittedly fading memory of the series). There was a lot of character development in that series.


Character development, yes. But it was more about the social strata of the town than the team.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

Eh. 

We spend an episode exploring the least interesting character of the cast and one who is better being a shadow and a mystery. 

Didn’t care for Beard After Hours.

Guess a vanity piece for Brendan Hunt?


----------



## Random User 7 (Oct 20, 2014)

Maybe it was one of the extra episodes that Apple wanted.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

It’s rumored that it was.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

Not a rumor. It was.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

Anybody knows where to find those "light balls" that were in the hotel lobby? those looked awesome!


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

This is going to be a very divisive episode. People are going to love it or hate it. I understand what they were trying to do, but I’m in the latter.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

**** SPOILERS FOR S02E08 "Beard After Hours" STARTING NOW ****

I was going to say, the cohort out there who were already grinching about this season will really be set off by this one. Being one of the extra two episodes Apple ordered, we're not missing anything though, so I am a-ok with the series not being content to just replay the hits, and trying something new. In the end I found the results to be a mixed bag.

Beard is a character worthy of more screen time than he's gotten, so I'm glad they gave him an episode in this way. However the air of mystery about him only works if we don't see too much, and by the end of this one I felt we had seen too much. Him showing up at the coaches' meeting in the morning wearing the disco pants is a very Beard thing to do, and the sort of thing we might have gotten as a gag in another episode, accompanied by a cryptic line from Beard about what he had gotten up to last night. So it was cool to get a peek behind the curtain, but a 45-minute peek was too much. There was a lot of good stuff in here, but it all would have worked better with a much tighter edit.


----------



## gweempose (Mar 23, 2003)

I enjoyed the episode, but it definitely felt very out of place stylistically with the rest of the show. It was more akin to something you would see on Louie.


----------



## deli99 (Nov 12, 2003)

I loved the episode, and the soundtrack made it even better.


----------



## robojerk (Jun 13, 2006)

Anubys said:


> Anybody knows where to find those "light balls" that were in the hotel lobby? those looked awesome!


I'm assuming this ball.








Cropped








I did a reverse image search..
Reverse image search results 

Edit
Including link to reverse image search
Google Reverse Image Search


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

robojerk said:


> I'm assuming this ball.
> View attachment 62626
> 
> Cropped
> ...


Thank you!

I never heard of a reverse image search...that's nice!


----------



## gweempose (Mar 23, 2003)

Anubys said:


> Thank you!
> 
> I never heard of a reverse image search...that's nice!


There is a new feature on phones called "Google Lens" which allows you to perform a really quick reverse image search via your phone's camera. It works amazingly well. If you use the Google Search bar, there is even a direct shortcut to it:


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

Meh, didn't hate it but certainly didn't love it.


----------



## Saturn_V (Jun 2, 2007)

wprager said:


> Meh, didn't hate it but certainly didn't love it.


It felt "contractually obligated" to me.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

deli99 said:


> I loved the episode, and the soundtrack made it even better.


Just finished it. Not quite sure what to make of it, but I loved Beard in the disco pants doing the hula hoop. And agreed the soundtrack was awesome. Fit perfectly.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

Saturn_V said:


> It felt "contractually obligated" to me.


What does this mean?


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

cmontyburns said:


> What does this mean?


I assume he meant the actor had it written in his contract that he gets to be the focus of one episode.


----------



## Random User 7 (Oct 20, 2014)

Anubys said:


> I assume he meant the actor had it written in his contract that he gets to be the focus of one episode.


Nah, I think it was the Ted people satisfying Apple.


----------



## mlsnyc (Dec 3, 2009)

As much as I’d like them to get on with the season-long arcs, I thought the episode was pretty good.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

Random User 7 said:


> Nah, I think it was the Ted people satisfying Apple.


Apple ordered two extra episodes after the crew had already plotted out the season. Rather than stretch the plot, they wrote two standalones. So, yes.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

Anubys said:


> I assume he meant the actor had it written in his contract that he gets to be the focus of one episode.


Oh, I see. Not that. Brendan Hunt is one of the creators of the show, and aside from Jamie Tartt, his might be the most underserved character. Reasonable to do a deep dive on him since they had the extra episode to play with.


----------



## Regina (Mar 30, 2003)

Coach Beard at the Emmys last night!


----------



## jr461 (Jul 9, 2004)

One of the worst, most moronic episodes of any show I've seen in recent memory. 

Not funny. not touching, not anything really and no development, character or otherwise. Why couldn't this have been one of those 26 min episodes? No, instead we get 45 full minutes of grade A crap. 

Such a great show in general and then this happens. WTF?


----------



## jr461 (Jul 9, 2004)

Anubys said:


> I assume he meant the actor had it written in his contract that he gets to be the focus of one episode.





cmontyburns said:


> Oh, I see. Not that. Brendan Hunt is one of the creators of the show, and aside from Jamie Tartt, his might be the most underserved character. Reasonable to do a deep dive on him since they had the extra episode to play with.


A deep dive or focus on a character is fine but this was not deep and brought no insight. It did not have the storytelling we've come to expect and was such a mess there really was no story. It was like a bad dream sequence lasting the whole episode.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

jr461 said:


> One of the worst, most moronic episodes of any show I've seen in recent memory.
> 
> Not funny. not touching, not anything really and no development, character or otherwise. Why couldn't this have been one of those 26 min episodes? No, instead we get 45 full minutes of grade A crap.
> 
> Such a great show in general and then this happens. WTF?


Don't mince words. Tell us how you really feel!


----------



## jr461 (Jul 9, 2004)

Anubys said:


> Don't mince words. Tell us how you really feel!


Lol. An episode like this in your run of the mill, network sitcom replete with uproarious laughter after every line to tell us it's funny, is expected. But when a show that's written as well as Ted Lasso is, week after week, throws this at us it's glaring and very out of place (not out of place in that it was not tied to a particular story; out of place in that it was just so bad and amateurish). Even the Christmas episode, as hokey as it was, was very enjoyable and fun, even in August


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

Regina said:


> Coach Beard at the Emmys last night!
> View attachment 62651


Where's his frickin mask?!?


----------



## mooseAndSquirrel (Aug 31, 2001)

jr461 said:


> One of the worst, most moronic episodes of any show I've seen in recent memory.
> 
> Not funny. not touching, not anything really and no development, character or otherwise. Why couldn't this have been one of those 26 min episodes? No, instead we get 45 full minutes of grade A crap.
> 
> Such a great show in general and then this happens. WTF?


My wife and I had to turn it off, this episode was so bad. It was like a bad trip or a dream sequence, but with multiple people having the dream??


----------



## David Platt (Dec 13, 2001)

This week's episode certainly wiped away the bad memory of last week's episode. That was firing on all cylinders. I am loving the therapist more and more as we get to see more layers to her. She's just fantastic.


----------



## Saturn_V (Jun 2, 2007)

I never thought in a bazillion years that Rick Ashley would be redeemed after almost two decades of RickRoll.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

*Astley*


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

**** SPOILERS FOR S02E10 "No Weddings and a Funeral" START HERE ***
*


David Platt said:


> This week's episode certainly wiped away the bad memory of last week's episode. That was firing on all cylinders. I am loving the therapist more and more as we get to see more layers to her. She's just fantastic.


I don't have a bad memory of last week's bonus episode, but I wanted to quote this for the second part. Totally agree with it; Sarah Niles is so good as Dr. Sharon. I'll be watching the whole episode again as always, but the scene between her and Ted was just so good. I think I said a few episodes ago that I initially wasn't sure about the character or the actor, but that I had come around -- and she really keeps delivering.

Related: at first I thought maybe the intercutting between Ted and Rebecca, as each talked about finding their fathers in a way that scarred them for life, was undercutting the emotion of each of their scenes. By the end I had changed my mind. Great illustration of the powerful connection the two of them have, even if they aren't totally aware of it or why.

Bunch of other thoughts rattling around that I may post after a re-watch.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

I got a little dust in my eyes during the scene between Ted and the Doc.


----------



## jr461 (Jul 9, 2004)

Now that's the Ted Lasso we've come to know and love!

Nice play on words from Sam: "I don't like big buts and I cannot lie"


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

Bierboy said:


> I got a little dust in my eyes during the scene between Ted and the Doc.


More than a little for me. Especially coming after the hilarious scene before that. Wow.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

"I'll take your anger over your indifference any day."


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

It's good, but it's not as fun or funny as the last season. In the past three episodes we (1) first found out about Ted's father, (2) we had Beard moping around the entire ep, (3) the death of Rebecca's father and finding out more about Ted's father.

Good, but kind of sad.


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

I liked last week; I saw it as its own unique episode, almost apart from the rest of the show, and that was fine with me and I thought it was fun.

And I really liked this week as well. My only problem with this week's episode was the Jamie-Keeley conversation. It's nice to see Jamie grow into a better human being but I think the Keeley/Roy couple is perfect and a great romantic center for the show and it will make me unhappy if they upset that apple cart.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

How in the world did Keeley guess Sam on the first try? especially since the only clue is that he is tall; which is most certainly not correct?

Loved the "is his penis too big for your little vagina?" (not sure I got the quote right)...Sassy is awesome!


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

madscientist said:


> My only problem with this week's episode was the Jamie-Keeley conversation. It's nice to see Jamie grow into a better human being but I think the Keeley/Roy couple is perfect and a great romantic center for the show and it will make me unhappy if they upset that apple cart.


We'll see where, if anywhere, the show takes that, but it bugged me, too. It was so out of left field. The creative team is usually a lot more careful about planting seeds for those kinds of developments. Also, it is suggestive of a comment I saw elsewhere that I can't stop thinking about now. It was in regards to Rebecca, but applies to Keeley, too. Last season, Rebecca had her personal life recovering from her relationship on display, but she was also frequently seen running (or trying to ruin) the club and other non-relationship things. This season has largely defined her in terms of her search for a man. That's a bit more reductive than the show usually is with its female characters. It's the same for Keeley. Her existence this season has mostly been in service of her relationship with Roy and _his_ growth.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

madscientist said:


> I liked last week; I saw it as its own unique episode, almost apart from the rest of the show, and that was fine with me and I thought it was fun.


Wanted to pull this comment out separately because it reminded me of a thought about Beard After Hours. As I mentioned, I was up and down with it, but overall thought it was, at worst, an interesting thing to do. There was one part I actively disliked, though, which was Beard getting beaten up by James Tartt. Up to that point, we had heard (and seen) just enough of Jamie's dad for him to be a truly malevolent figure. The thing that isn't entirely in focus can be scarier than the thing that is. By having Beard run into him, the show turned him into almost a literal bogeyman, a cartoon figure skulking around dark alleys and feasting on the helpless. It made him ridiculous. Jamie cares what this guy thinks? I thought it really undid some of the drama of the locker-room scene after the semifinals.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

Back to "No Weddings and Funeral": so for me the big question concerns the obviously-pointed shot of Rupert saying something to Nate on his way out of the funeral. I saw speculation that perhaps the reason Rupert is having Bex give her shares back to Rebecca is that Rupert is going to buy another team and hire Nate away. I don't think it was just for jokes that this episode had relentless truth-teller Jan Maas observing Nate wearing the suit Ted bought him, and embarrassing him. Nate is dying for respect he may just never get from this team given their shared history. He may need to go elsewhere to get it. One thing I think we know from Nick Mohammed's comments is that



Spoiler



the season appears to end somewhat controversially for Nate.



So that could fit, even if it seems like a big leap.


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

Anubys said:


> How in the world did Keeley guess Sam on the first try? especially since the only clue is that he is tall; which is most certainly not correct?


I think she was half-joking and laughed and screamed when it was true.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

Turtleboy said:


> I think she was half-joking and laughed and screamed when it was true.


Yep, she was more surprised that she got it than even we were.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

Finally caught up. The one part of the Nate storyline that strains credulity are the reactions that he's reading that he should be a head coach. He has basically one season of experience as an assistant coach at a championship level team that, thus far this season, has had few if any "quality" wins, and far more ties and losses. I'd expect more people to correctly recognize that he got extremely lucky on one set piece in one match.

Frankly, if Rupert did buy into another FA team, and picked up Nate to be a coach, Richmond wouldn't lose a thing. I frankly don't see right now what Nate contributes to Richmond.


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

It's been a while since that episode but I don't recall reactions that he should be *a* head coach. There were some reactions that he should be _the_ head coach of Richmond FC specifically; I guess they think Nate has more experience (with coaching football (soccer) specifically) than Ted and so of the coaches currently at Richmond, he's the best choice.

Of course we know that's hooey .

I agree with you that Nate, as currently presented to us, is really more of a liability than an asset. I expect that, IF Rupert does try to lure him away, that will become more obvious to everyone (maybe including Nate).


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

Not sure how you conclude that he’s a liability. He’s been shown over and over to be a good strategist.


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

He had one good idea: he hasn't been very helpful outside of that. And, he's treating the players and staff under him really badly. Net, I think he's a liability. It's just my opinion though.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

madscientist said:


> He had one good idea: he hasn't been very helpful outside of that. And, he's treating the players and staff under him really badly. Net, I think he's a liability. It's just my opinion though.


Well, that's not true...until Roy came onboard, Nate was the only coach who knew football and he bailed the team out many times in season 1...


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

I meant, what he'd done in S2 after he became a coach. But even for S1 I don't agree he was indispensable. Beard studied football before they arrived and that was who Ted leaned on. Nate provided some ideas for trick plays and he had the "insult the players" speech before one game, but he wasn't a coach until the final episode of S1.

In any event, if they are trying to set Nate up as some sort of football savant that the team can't do without, they haven't done enough to sell it to me.


----------



## cbrrider (Feb 2, 2005)

madscientist said:


> In any event, if they are trying to set Nate up as some sort of football savant that the team can't do without, they haven't done enough to sell it to me.


Wonderkid, not savant.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

I don't think Rupert doing something with Nate is about Nate but more about sticking it to Richmond/his ex.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

madscientist said:


> It's been a while since that episode but I don't recall reactions that he should be *a* head coach.


IIRC, There were a few of the tweets that Nate was reading that suggested that he should be a head coach.


----------



## jeetkunedo (Jul 24, 2006)

Man, I knew Nate was going to do something to piss me off, but I didn't know I'd be this pissed off at him. After all Ted did for him too....


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

The most unrealistic and ridiculous part is that there is no way that Trent Crimm would burn his source, no matter how much he respected Ted.


----------



## mlsnyc (Dec 3, 2009)

Or maybe he’s doing damage control with Ted, who he sees as more valuable over the long-term, and threw Nate under the bus because he didn’t see much value in him beyond this one scoop.


----------



## gweempose (Mar 23, 2003)

cmontyburns said:


> Wanted to pull this comment out separately because it reminded me of a thought about Beard After Hours. As I mentioned, I was up and down with it, but overall thought it was, at worst, an interesting thing to do. There was one part I actively disliked, though, which was Beard getting beaten up by James Tartt. Up to that point, we had heard (and seen) just enough of Jamie's dad for him to be a truly malevolent figure. The thing that isn't entirely in focus can be scarier than the thing that is. By having Beard run into him, the show turned him into almost a literal bogeyman, a cartoon figure skulking around dark alleys and feasting on the helpless. It made him ridiculous. Jamie cares what this guy thinks? I thought it really undid some of the drama of the locker-room scene after the semifinals.


As I mentioned earlier in the thread, I liked the episode overall, but this part really bugged me as well. What are the odds that Beard randomly runs into Jamie's dad of all people in a random dark alley in the middle of London?


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

**** SPOILERS FOR S02E11 "Midnight Train to Royston" FROM HERE ****


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

mlsnyc said:


> Or maybe he's doing damage control with Ted, who he sees as more valuable over the long-term, and threw Nate under the bus because he didn't see much value in him beyond this one scoop.


I know it's a TV show. But journalists will not bring their sources like that. Under any circumstances.

especially trench cream of independence

(that's how Siri heard it and that's how I'm leaving it)


----------



## kaszeta (Jun 11, 2004)

Yeah. I could see Trent saying “within the organization”. But naming names? That’s a solid way to burn your reputation in journalism.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

I can let that go. It's a means to an end, narratively. My main disappointment is that it had be Trent Crimm (The Independent). He's a good journalist!

It was obvious this sort of thing was coming. We had that random small scene several episodes back, when Crimm saw Ted at the pub, and asked him to comment on the report he had left the game due to food poisoning. We knew at the time that scene was not there by accident, and that Trent presumably would eventually learn the truth. Given Nate's arc this season, it was probably predictable that Nate would snitch. Although he has been more generally angry than angry at Ted specifically; that was a bit of a new wrinkle this episode. So maybe not entirely predictable, but in hindsight, the dots were all there to be connected. 

Has anyone else noticed how grey Nate's hair has gotten? I checked some recent photos of Nick Mohammed and it's not his natural look, unless he is coloring his hair away from the show. I wonder if it's supposed to be a sign of just how much Nate is roiled inside.


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

I was shocked that Trent disclosed his source as well. I mean I literally gasped. Then I wondered: maybe things like that aren't so completely taboo for UK journalists as they are (at least are supposed to be) for US journalists.

I had to laugh a bit when Nate came out in the suit that Keeley loved: he was dressed exactly like Roy.

I said above and I'll say it again: if they screw up the Roy/Keeley relationship I will be very bummed.


----------



## Megamind (Feb 18, 2013)

I thought this episode was a great return to form for Ted Lasso after the previous three, two of which were average and the other unspeakably poor (for me, anyway). Yes, the reveal at the end was a bit clunky and unrealistic, but then if we're going to start insisting on realism we've got an awful lot to discuss here, don't we?


----------



## Random User 7 (Oct 20, 2014)

I too noticed how gray his hair has become.


----------



## alpacaboy (Oct 29, 2004)

I didn't understand the thing near the end with Sharon's beer and Goodbye note.
Was Ted still upset about Sharon just leaving?
Or was it meant to be a funny joke for her?


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

alpacaboy said:


> I didn't understand the thing near the end with Sharon's beer and Goodbye note.
> Was Ted still upset about Sharon just leaving?
> Or was it meant to be a funny joke for her?


It was just a joke, him turning the tables on her since she didn't like goodbyes.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

madscientist said:


> I
> I said above and I'll say it again: if they screw up the Roy/Keeley relationship I will be very bummed.


The show has earned trust in the writing staff that they have carefully considered the plot points they choose to go with, but if I were going to have doubt, this is a place where I'd have it. The show has spent the entire last season-plus both telling and showing us what a perfect pairing they are, with deep understanding and trust, so I just didn't buy the implication at the end that they might be in some trouble. If we see them having a struggle in the next episode, it will have been entirely fabricated, and unearned. Maybe all that was for some other purpose... I have to hope so.

One other place I'm disappointed, as I'm on the subject, is the handling of Rebecca and Sam. That's not a relationship I particularly care for, but it doesn't bother me that the show is trying it so much as its willful blind eye to how hugely unfair the power imbalance is to Sam. We've had exactly one line, from Rebecca when she realized she had arrived at the restaurant to meet Sam, that it was a bad idea because she is his boss. From there it has been not only roundly ignored, everybody else is so encouraging of the relationship that the show has implicitly said there's no problem here. When she showed up at his place and said, "I can't tell you to stay, but I hope you do," I just thought "that's some BS right there". It bugs me that the show has not grappled with this even in the slightest.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

Turtleboy said:


> I know it's a TV show. But journalists will not bring their sources like that. Under any circumstances.
> 
> especially trench cream of independence
> 
> (that's how Siri heard it and that's how I'm leaving it)


I'm totally with you there. First, there's no way a journalist would. Second, he's not from a fly-by-night operation; this is The Independent. No way he would burn his source.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

madscientist said:


> I said above and I'll say it again: if they screw up the Roy/Keeley relationship I will be very bummed.


Um...not sure how to break it to you, then...Keeley still loves Jamie and Roy really likes the teacher. Roy and Keeley are about to realize that they are best buds but not lovers.

Sorry!


----------



## Family (Jul 23, 2001)

I am disapponted in this season.

What made Ted Lasso great was it was a feel good comedy that didn't bog us down with drama. Why all the dark personal arcs and network like personal relationships now?

Ted Lasso was a comedy about an team coming together in an unconventional way. What is it now? I know current trends are comedys that aren't really funny, but does this remotely seem like an "outstanding comedy series" anymore?

It's like they changed a hugely successful series after one season. It's not the same show. I know there are fans in the thread that would love the show just hearing Ted saying anything, but humor has become thin.

And why is Higgins who is the best background character on the show, seem to be the only one without an expanded role?


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

Anubys said:


> Um...not sure how to break it to you, then...Keeley still loves Jamie and Roy really likes the teacher. Roy and Keeley are about to realize that they are best buds but not lovers.


Keeley loves Jamie : probably
Roy really likes the teacher : definitely
Roy and Keeley are best buds but not lovers : we'll see.
It's not uncommon in real life for people to still have strong feelings for former lovers and to have crushes outside of their relationship.



Family said:


> What made Ted Lasso great was it was a feel good comedy that didn't bog us down with drama. Why all the dark personal arcs and network like personal relationships now?


I'm afraid I can't agree with this assessment of S1. Ted Lasso is a *big-hearted* comedy, but it was never drama-free. Its big strength is that it's funny while not being completely trivial and superficial. The entire show has been about personal arcs and personal relationships. The impetus of the entire show is Rebecca's divorce. You may recall that Ted's divorce and first panic attack happened in S1. And there was plenty of "drama" on the team, especially between Jamie and Roy. And of course Rebecca trying to scuttle the team was a betrayal.

Maybe S1 was just better at allowing you to ignore the dramatic parts.


----------



## Family (Jul 23, 2001)

"I'm afraid I can't agree with this assessment of S1. Ted Lasso is a *big-hearted* comedy, but it was never drama-free. Its big strength is that it's funny while not being completely trivial and superficial. The entire show has been about personal arcs and personal relationships. The impetus of the entire show is Rebecca's divorce. You may recall that Ted's divorce and first panic attack happened in S1. And there was plenty of "drama" on the team, especially between Jamie and Roy. And of course Rebecca trying to scuttle the team was a betrayal.

Maybe S1 was just better at allowing you to ignore the dramatic parts."
********************************************************************

I never said it was drama free. I said it didn't bog us down with drama. Which is the center of the show now.

Sorry quote came out incorrectly.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Family said:


> I never said it was drama free. I said it didn't bog us down with drama. Which is the center of the show now.
> 
> Sorry quote came out incorrectly.


Even light and airy sitcoms have to include some drama. Drama is how stories get told, and TV series are just a long-running story. And once you've established a bunch of characters, you've got to start expanding on them to keep the audience interested. You can't just keep all the characters at arms length and have them say a few funny lines here and there and expect the audience to keep watching. The characters are supposed to be real people, and real people experience drama.


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

I agree that I don’t like this season as much either. I’m not sure I like Nate’s arc. But let’s see how they tie it together.


----------



## Howie (May 3, 2004)

Well, obviously Keeley is going to hookup with Nate. That kiss was magical.


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

Although we all saw it coming, Nate's heel turn was a bit much.


----------



## Generic (Dec 27, 2005)

Nate's explanation seemed pretty weak. I guess Nate expected Ted to dote on him every day? Lame. I am guessing there will be redemption at some point next season unless they decide to continue beyond season 3 so they can have more storylines. Otherwise, I really enjoyed the episode/season.


----------



## Random User 7 (Oct 20, 2014)

Meh to the Nate storyline. Hopefully it’s just a minor part of next season. He’s compensating for the lack of love from his father with Ted and that’s just not interesting.

It was a good enough season; season 2s of great shows are never as good as great season 1s.


----------



## Gunnyman (Jul 10, 2003)

I really enjoyed this season with the exception of the coach Beard(?) episode.


----------



## Regina (Mar 30, 2003)

I loved Roy Kent with the Dawg Pound.. "It hurt my...feeling.."


----------



## tigercat74 (Aug 7, 2004)

I've kept telling my cousin how great the show was and she kept saying she would get to it. Last Saturday I shared my subscription with her and she watched both seasons since then. It is now one of her favorite shows. She also called Nate a b*tch.


----------



## Family (Jul 23, 2001)

Generic said:


> Nate's explanation seemed pretty weak. I guess Nate expected Ted to dote on him every day? Lame. I am guessing there will be redemption at some point next season unless they decide to continue beyond season 3 so they can have more storylines. Otherwise, I really enjoyed the episode/season.


Nate's explanation were words from someone too damaged for a Ted Lasso induced recovery. Feel good just isn't going to cut it.

Nate has lost his grip on reality. It's too much for this show IMO.

It's like changing hair symbolizes this Nate comes from a parallel universe. Like the Star Trek one with the evil Kirk and Spock.

Maybe this isn't our Nate.


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1446498835686064135


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

Turtleboy said:


> I know it's a TV show. But journalists will not bring their sources like that. Under any circumstances.


... except as an intentional act from someone no longer wanting to be a journalist?

I think that was a satisfying payoff to that plot point, no?


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

LoadStar said:


> ... except as an intentional act from someone no longer wanting to be a journalist?
> 
> I think that was a satisfying payoff to that plot point, no?


Sure. They closed the plot hole.


----------



## jeetkunedo (Jul 24, 2006)

Gunnyman said:


> I really enjoyed this season with the exception of the coach Beard(?) episode.


That was due to the classic network butting in when they should leave well enough alone. Apple insisted on two additional episodes, so they created the Christmas and "Beard After Hours" standalone episodes. Although I admit, I did like the Christmas episode, but I'm a sucker for holiday shows lol


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

I risked seeing spoilers (I am only about half way through the season), but I HAD to comment on the Christmas episode. I'm not even Christian and I LOVED that episode. Maybe the best Christmas episode I've ever seen on TV. My wife doesn't usually watch this with me and she loved it as well. EVERY story thread was great. This along with "Christmas in Canada" South Park episode will have to become a yearly watch during the holiday season. Loved all the rom-com references. Also, is Secret Santa not a thing in the UK? Some of them seemed surprised by the tradition.


----------



## MScottC (Sep 11, 2004)

Steveknj said:


> I risked seeing spoilers (I am only about half way through the season), but I HAD to comment on the Christmas episode. I'm not even Christian and I LOVED that episode. Maybe the best Christmas episode I've ever seen on TV. My wife doesn't usually watch this with me and she loved it as well. EVERY story thread was great. This along with "Christmas in Canada" South Park episode will have to become a yearly watch during the holiday season. Loved all the rom-com references. Also, is Secret Santa not a thing in the UK? Some of them seemed surprised by the tradition.


I agree... said that the day or two after it aired.... I'm about the most "Bah Humbug" type of guy around and I loved that episode. I also found the Coach Beard episode fun, for what it is. Obviously they did not fall in the story arcs, and once I heard the explanation for their being, it was all fine with me.

Personally, I considered both of these episodes "bonuses."


----------



## Family (Jul 23, 2001)

I wonder how many one month subscribers Apple picks in December(s) just for the Xmas episode?


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

I also really liked the "Beard After Hours" episode.

I wonder if it was in any way inspired by the 1985 movie "_After Hours_" with Griffin Dunne and Rosanna Arquette. Great movie! 
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0088680/


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

LoadStar said:


> ... except as an intentional act from someone no longer wanting to be a journalist?
> 
> I think that was a satisfying payoff to that plot point, no?


Also, it's an anxiety attack by a football coach, not the Pentagon Papers

-smak-


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

smak said:


> Also, it's an anxiety attack by a football coach, not the Pentagon Papers
> 
> -smak-


Still, no way any journalist, especially Trent Crimm, _The Independent_, would burn a source, under any circumstance and no matter what the story is about. But they fixed it. The only possible way is that if Trent Crimm, _The Independent_, decided he wanted to blow up his career and never be a journalist again. There were other issues there that they showed the written, typeset, published story to Ted before getting a comment from him. But that I can say "that's TV".


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Family said:


> I am disapponted in this season.
> 
> What made Ted Lasso great was it was a feel good comedy that didn't bog us down with drama. Why all the dark personal arcs and network like personal relationships now?
> 
> ...


I respectfully disagree. Like you said, the trend is comedy is the write shows that are dark and not really funny. Ted Lasso managed to have some really dark moments, yet maintain it's quirky funniness. Sure there were a couple of episodes where it was MUCH more dark than funny (the Coach Beard episode), but overall, this show, to me, still had an interesting mix of being really funny, and yet, do deep dives into these complex characters. A show where Ted Lasso is overly optimistic every episode and Roy curses constantly, would get very boring, very quickly. And there were plenty of feel good moments which kept up with the spirit of the show. But that's just me. And I'm one who generally hates this dark turn we've gone through with everything on TV, comedies AND dramas. Give me more Ted please!


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Surprisingly little about the finale here. So all the speculation about Nate and Rebecca's ex is true. The ex buys West Ham and hires Nate to coach (though it's unclear to me if he's the HEAD coach). I didn't like where the Nate character went this year, because I never felt that he could be anything more than an assistant or strategist. I know they made a big deal of him coming out of his shell for a few episodes, but I didn't think he'd go total jerk the way he did, giving Ted no respect when after all it was Ted who's responsible for his career in many respects and it was Ted who stuck with his strategy during the last match when others said it was time to try something else. Just seemed too out of character for Nate to be that way. It looks like Keeley and Roy are indeed going to stay a couple and I'm fine with that. I expect they will write a new love interest for Jamie next season. I thought Ted and Sharon had great chemistry and was sad to see her go. I thought (though maybe obvious) that they could have become a couple. And the Rebecca/Sam thing, also seemed a bit out of left field, but in the end I knew he was going to stay, though not quite sure if the reason was because of Rebecca or just because he felt it was better for his career (and really, playing in the EPL is probably a good career move for a soccer player, no?)

One thing I wanted to ask about but was waiting for the season to be over. The panel show that they show every week (the one that Roy was on for a bit) is called something like "Soccer Today". Do they call it "soccer" at all in Britain? I thought it was strictly "football".


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Steveknj said:


> One thing I wanted to ask about but was waiting for the season to be over. The panel show that they show every week (the one that Roy was on for a bit) is called something like "Soccer Today". Do they call it "soccer" at all in Britain? I thought it was strictly "football".


Soccer Saturday - Wikipedia

In the list of "reporters" who have appeared on the program, Roy Kent is one of the names.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

DevdogAZ said:


> Soccer Saturday - Wikipedia
> 
> In the list of "reporters" who have appeared on the program, Roy Kent is one of the names.


He's everywhere.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

DevdogAZ said:


> Soccer Saturday - Wikipedia
> 
> In the list of "reporters" who have appeared on the program, Roy Kent is one of the names.


But why "Soccer"? I thought the English call it Football?


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Steveknj said:


> But why "Soccer"? I thought the English call it Football?


Probably just for the alliteration.


----------



## realityboy (Jun 13, 2003)

Steveknj said:


> But why "Soccer"? I thought the English call it Football?


Soccer is one of those weird British slang words that we picked up, and they stopped using (as much).


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

From Britannica.com

Linguistically creative students at the University of Oxford in the 1880s distinguished between the sports of “rugger” (rugby football) and “assoccer” (association football). The latter term was further shortened to “soccer” (sometimes spelled “socker”), and the name quickly spread beyond the campus. However, “soccer” never became much more than a nickname in Great Britain.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

Steveknj said:


> But why "Soccer"? I thought the English call it Football?


Names for association football - Wikipedia

tl;dr: Soccer and Football have both historically been used, and it's semi-recent that football became the predominantly accepted term for the sport.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

LoadStar said:


> Names for association football - Wikipedia
> 
> tl;dr: Soccer and Football have both historically been used, and it's semi-recent that football became the predominantly accepted term for the sport.


Thanks. I've been corrected more than once that it's NOT soccer, but football, so that's why I was surprised to see that.


----------



## kaszeta (Jun 11, 2004)

Steveknj said:


> Thanks. I've been corrected more than once that it's NOT soccer, but football, so that's why I was surprised to see that.


"Soccer" does tend to linger in the vocabulary, and get back-imported as well. I was a little surprised to hear my extremely British sister-in-law refer to a suburb of London as "all IT professionals and their soccer mum wives".


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

kaszeta said:


> "Soccer" does tend to linger in the vocabulary, and get back-imported as well. I was a little surprised to hear my extremely British sister-in-law refer to a suburb of London as "all IT professionals and their soccer mum wives".


So I'm getting the feeling that soccer is used as slang for football in the same way that "hoops" is used as slang for basketball. Does that make sense?


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

Don’t forget my favorite…where American football is called hand egg.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

The Hollywood Reporter's TV podcast, TV's Top Five, did an extended interview with Bill Lawrence a few weeks back. Lawrence is a terrific interviewee because he's candid, conversational, relaxed, curious, and funny. In it, they ask about and he discusses many of the things that have come up in this thread from season two. For example, he said they knew full well how serious Trent Crimm burning Nate was when they wrote it, but they did so knowing not only that they would have Trent quit the next episode, but that (minor spoiler) Trent will be around next season and this is all part of his arc. As always with this show, it pays to be patient.

Anyway, check out the podcast episode for the interview. It's really good.

Apple podcasts link: ‎TV's Top 5 on Apple Podcasts


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

I used to be a reporter, and, I can tell you that what Trent did (revealing his source) would be sacrilege IF he remained on the job or as a reporter in some form. Yes, he has quit, but it remains to be seen if he is still a reporter is some form. If so, then yes, totally unbelievable. If not, I can certainly understand it.


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

When I repeatedly wrote that “Trent Crimm of the Independent would never burn a source under any circumstances,” it was implied that “unless he never wanted to be a journalist ever again.”


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

cmontyburns said:


> The Hollywood Reporter's TV podcast, TV's Top Five, did an extended interview with Bill Lawrence a few weeks back. Lawrence is a terrific interviewee because he's candid, conversational, relaxed, curious, and funny. In it, they ask about and he discusses many of the things that have come up in this thread from season two. For example, he said they knew full well how serious Trent Crimm burning Nate was when they wrote it, *but they did so knowing not only that they would have Trent quit the next episode, but that (minor spoiler) Trent will be around next season and this is all part of his arc. * As always with this show, it pays to be patient.
> 
> Anyway, check out the podcast episode for the interview. It's really good.
> 
> Apple podcasts link: ‎TV's Top 5 on Apple Podcasts


Speculation here, but I think Trent will take Keeley's spot as team publicist as Keeley is moving on. Trent / Ted moments are always interesting and fun, so I can see them playing off that.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

Steveknj said:


> Speculation here, but I think Trent will take Keeley's spot as team publicist as Keeley is moving on. Trent / Ted moments are always interesting and fun, so I can see them playing off that.


I came here to post exactly that. You beat me to it!


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

I do wonder why they showed Trent locked out of his car in his scene in the finale. Outside of some ribbing about his de facto tagline, "...the Independent", they've pretty laboriously respected his gravitas. It was unusual having that beat of him suffering a common indignity. I wonder if that was deliberate, getting us ready for whatever's in store for him next season.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Steveknj said:


> Speculation here, but I think Trent will take Keeley's spot as team publicist as Keeley is moving on. Trent / Ted moments are always interesting and fun, so I can see them playing off that.


The thing I didn't understand about it being a big emotional thing for Keeley to leave the team - Wouldn't it make sense for Rebecca to hire her new firm as the team's PR firm? So Keeley would continue to work with the team, just as a third-party PR rather than in house.


cmontyburns said:


> I do wonder why they showed Trent locked out of his car in his scene in the finale. Outside of some ribbing about his de facto tagline, "...the Independent", they've pretty laboriously respected his gravitas. It was unusual having that beat of him suffering a common indignity. I wonder if that was deliberate, getting us ready for whatever's in store for him next season.


Maybe that was to show how out of sorts he was after blowing up his career and now being a bit lost as to where his life is going.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

DevdogAZ said:


> Maybe that was to show how out of sorts he was after blowing up his career and now being a bit lost as to where his life is going.


Yes, that makes perfect sense. Good thought!


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

DevdogAZ said:


> The thing I didn't understand about it being a big emotional thing for Keeley to leave the team - Wouldn't it make sense for Rebecca to hire her new firm as the team's PR firm? So Keeley would continue to work with the team, just as a third-party PR rather than in house.


It would still be emotional as it is big growth for Keely and she wouldn't be as involved but that's what I thought would happen. Rebecca would just outsource PR to the new firm.


----------



## robojerk (Jun 13, 2006)

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1453208214569295875Roy Kent he's here, he's there, he's at the LAFC vs Seattle Sounders game tonight with Ted Lasso


----------



## Howie (May 3, 2004)

Oi.


----------



## tigercat74 (Aug 7, 2004)

robojerk said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1453208214569295875Roy Kent he's here, he's there, he's at the LAFC vs Seattle Sounders game tonight with Ted Lasso


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

I am having so much fun with Ted Lasso. 
I made a friend of mine sit down and watch the first episode and he is hooked. We are watching them about one every other day (I had already seen season one) and we just got into season two. I haven't read anything here, just posting at the end. 
I am great at totally forgetting spoilers so all that I have heard about Nasty Nate is sort of a blur. We just finished the Christmas episode and had to play it twice because we were laughing so much the first time.
What a great show!
I saw a clip with Jason and Jimmy Kimmel (?) and he said that season two is like Empire Strikes Back. That gives me hope for season three.


----------



## robojerk (Jun 13, 2006)

Someone got bored during the lockdowns.


----------



## Generic (Dec 27, 2005)




----------



## Generic (Dec 27, 2005)




----------



## Zevida (Nov 8, 2003)

Finally watched season 2. I think my enthusiasm for the show has waned a bit, maybe the novelty wore off, but I found myself getting distracted by my phone quite a bit.

Things I liked:

Rebecca and Sam: Love seeing the opposite of what we usually do (older man, younger woman) and I think by having them meet and bond on an anonymous dating app first it helps alleviate some of the concerns around office power dynamics. They are too cute 
Everything Sam: Maybe should have started here but I really enjoyed Sam's character and stories this season, from the Dubai Air sponsorshop to deciding if he was going to leave the team. 
And of course this allowed for maybe the funniest scene the whole show, Afuko's reaction to Sam turning him down. Sam Richardson is a comedic genius, perfect casting for that role, and played that scene perfectly - epic!

Girls bonding: Rebecca and Keely as best friends, Rebecca with her goddaughter, Rebecca and her mom, Rebecca and her friend, all of it was great. (Maybe the common theme is that anything with Rebecca is great)
Dr Sharon: Great character, underused!
Things I liked less

The episode lengths - I think a lot of the reason the show doesn't feel as funny or as poignant is that the runtimes are too long. It was fine in season 1 when the show was a novelty, but if they had the constraints of runtime I think they'd be a lot punchier. The Beard standalone episode could have been good but was just too long.
Ted's anxiety - too obvious where it was going and took too long to get there and mostly cheated us out of seeing the work put in via the therapy sessions. It felt like character development on paper but it didn't feel like actual character development
Nate's story - too dark and not earned
Keely and Roy verging on break-up: Feels cheap and lazy for the writers to do this - it is possible to have a couple get together and stay together and be funny and entertaining without threatening break-ups (see: Parks & Rec, Brooklyn 99, others I'm sure). There hasn't been anything earned about their relationship troubles - Roy is a really supportive boyfriend, Keely is a supportive girlfriend, they lift each other up, and there is a ton of sexual chemistry.


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

RE Keely and Roy: Maybe the point is that even with all that going for them as a couple, sometimes you discover that it's not what you want and it still doesn't work out. And that's OK.


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

Or maybe, it will end up being that even the best relationships are tested and they decide to re-commit to each other anyway.


----------



## JohnB1000 (Dec 6, 2004)

I think the truth is that it's just Roy F#$&ing Kent.


----------



## Zevida (Nov 8, 2003)

madscientist said:


> RE Keely and Roy: Maybe the point is that even with all that going for them as a couple, sometimes you discover that it's not what you want and it still doesn't work out. And that's OK.


Sure it’s ok but I don’t like it or want to watch it. I want happy couple. 😝


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

While we wait for season three (which may be a while), there is this:









Ted Lasso and AFC Richmond Coming to FIFA 23


Ted Lasso, Roy Kent, and the AFC Richmond team will be available in FIFA 23 when it launches on September 30, EA Games announced today. The...




www.macrumors.com





I don’t game, but this strikes me as a clever bit of promotion.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

cmontyburns said:


> While we wait for season three (which may be a while), there is this:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I saw this too. Are they going to include the McIleney / Reynolds team as well (Wrexit or something like that from their FX Documentary)? That would be fun. I have had a few seasons of FIFA soccer over the years. I don't generally watch soccer but the FIFA game is fun to play. But it would be fun to play with Richmond AFC, so I might wind up buying it.


----------



## tigercat74 (Aug 7, 2004)

Steveknj said:


> I saw this too. Are they going to include the McIleney / Reynolds team as well (Wrexit or something like that from their FX Documentary)? That would be fun. I have had a few seasons of FIFA soccer over the years. I don't generally watch soccer but the FIFA game is fun to play. But it would be fun to play with Richmond AFC, so I might wind up buying it.


Wrexham


----------



## Saturn_V (Jun 2, 2007)

cmontyburns said:


> I don’t game, but this strikes me as a clever bit of promotion.


It's kinda standard really. Not the primary marketing thrust that's for sure, but aimed at collecting the outliers.

Top Gun Maverick had promotional content/DLC tie-ins in at least three different video games a few months ago.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Steveknj said:


> I saw this too. Are they going to include the McIleney / Reynolds team as well (Wrexit or something like that from their FX Documentary)? That would be fun. I have had a few seasons of FIFA soccer over the years. I don't generally watch soccer but the FIFA game is fun to play. But it would be fun to play with Richmond AFC, so I might wind up buying it.


Unlikely they'd include Wrexham, as that's a real team in a much lower British football league. If they started including lower-tier teams like that, they'd probably have a revolt if they didn't include all other teams at the same and higher levels, which would probably require adding 100+ lower-tier teams to the game.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

Actually, it seems like they are available someway in FIFA 22









The saga of Wrexham in FIFA 22 just took a weird turn


UPDATE 13TH SEP 2021: EA and Wrexham have announced the club is playable in FIFA 22 via Kick Off mode.Confirmation come…




www.eurogamer.net


----------

