Fergie On Saha

[Fat Tom]

skysports.com

Sir Alex Ferguson has insisted that Louis Saha is still deserving of a starting role ahead of Ruud van Nistelrooy at Manchester United.

The Dutch hitman has now been benched for The Red Devils' last three outings, prompting a wave of speculation about his status at Old Trafford.

Saha started against Newcastle on Sunday but wasted a number of good chances as Ferguson's side triumphed 2-0, with van Nistelrooy also missing a gilt-edged opportunity after being introduced as a substitute.

Van Nistelrooy's limited outing allowed Thierry Henry to draw level with him as The Premiership's top goalscorer and Ferguson has now hinted the Dutchman may have to get used to a place on the bench.

The United boss again praised Saha after the victory over Newcastle, stating that the former Fulham man was fully deserving of his elevated squad status.

"The only issue that counts is whether Louis Saha deserves to play, I say he does," said Ferguson.

"There is a lot of stupid talk going on over this.

"You have to give Louis credit for the way he battled, for the fact his scoring record has been good and for creating such a good partnership with Wayne Rooney.

"I am doing the right thing by him."

Ferguson has always been of the opinion that four top class strikers are required to deal with the demands of a long season, and the Scot hopes he will soon have the same depth he enjoyed when Ole Gunnar Solskjaer, Teddy Sheringham, Andy Cole and Dwight Yorke were in top condition.

"I just think back to 1999 when we had four outstanding strikers and you always had two who were disappointed at being left out," Ferguson added.

"They always seemed to come on and do something special and it is healthy for this club if we are getting into a similar position now."

[ho chi feen]

Ferguson has always been of the opinion that four top class strikers are required to deal with the demands of a long season, and the Scot hopes he will soon have the same depth he enjoyed when Ole Gunnar Solskjaer, Teddy Sheringham, Andy Cole and Dwight Yorke were in top condition.

"I just think back to 1999 when we had four outstanding strikers and you always had two who were disappointed at being left out," Ferguson added.

"They always seemed to come on and do something special and it is healthy for this club if we are getting into a similar position now."

What good are four strikers when you've got zero central midfielder? FFS wiz, sort it out.

[Del]

What good are four strikers when you've got zero central midfielder? FFS wiz, sort it out.

They'll be one hell of a team if he is able to sort out the midfield

[ho chi feen]

They'll be one hell of a team if he is able to sort out the midfield

Agreed. Here's hoping. If he signs well in the summer, we'll have a great chance of knocking Chelski right off their fucking perch next season. Arsenal and Liverpool still have quite some distance to go.

[Del]

Agreed. Here's hoping. If he signs well in the summer, we'll have a great chance of knocking Chelski right off their fucking perch next season. Arsenal and Liverpool still have quite some distance to go.

They have the potential to be better than the 99 team, whether they do or not is another story

[KolaKubes]

Watch as Chelsea sign every available central midfielder this summer just to foil Fergie's master plan. ;)

In saying that, you could have good fun with Chelsea if you were so inclined. Chasing all sorts of "targets". I think Chelsea's humiliation by Barcelona, such a lacklustre and comprehensive defeat, kind of highlighted why Chelsea are a long way off being the same sort of draw for the really top players as Barcelona, Milan, Madrid etc are. They might even be able to bludgeon their way to a third title in a row but noone is giving them any credit for buying trophies with a complete lack of grace and it seems like at least some of the romance of playing for a real "name" club still holds. Arsenal have probably been more successful in raising the profile of the club in recent years through the brand of football they purvey.

[west cork rebel]

some are saying that fergie is only playing Saha so much, so that hes in the shop window. load of balls i think ferige likes to have a good number of strikers, worked well in 1999.

[KolaKubes]

some are saying that fergie is only playing Saha so much, so that hes in the shop window. load of balls i think ferige likes to have a good number of strikers, worked well in 1999.

It's Rossi coming through which is impacting on all this I reckon. Ferguson knows Rooney has one of the spots wrapped up which means that space is tight for the other spot. Saha has an awful record with injuries so it's hard to imagine Ferguson relying too strongly on him but I think Utd look more potent in attack overall with Saha up there than RVN. Ruud's not getting any younger either but could play for another 4-5 years somewhere like Italy. A likely swap for Gattuso in the offing this summer perhaps?

[Del]

It's Rossi coming through which is impacting on all this I reckon. Ferguson knows Rooney has one of the spots wrapped up which means that space is tight for the other spot. Saha has an awful record with injuries so it's hard to imagine Ferguson relying too strongly on him but I think Utd look more potent in attack overall with Saha up there than RVN. Ruud's not getting any younger either but could play for another 4-5 years somewhere like Italy. A likely swap for Gattuso in the offing this summer perhaps?

He'd be a fool to get ride of Ruud, he's a great striker and will guarantee you goals all season long. Sure he's not getting any younger but it's not like he's past his sell by date.

[DrH.]

fuckin dreamers the lot of ye.
ye got a shit back 4, a fuckin useless midfield, no young fellas coming through. rossi my fuck. if hes that good he'd be playing week in week out just like a young rooney, owen ,fowler etc... if he cant in to the team ahead of boody saha then he's not that good is he. come on like.

[bricktop]

i dont think the pool would refuse rossi with their strikeforce at the minute, would they?

[DrH.]

rossi plays with the reserves cause he's shit

[bricktop]

rossi plays with the reserves cause he's shit
what's crouches excuse?

[DrH.]

hes shit too but at least he makes the first team

[STEVIEG]

fuckin dreamers the lot of ye.
ye got a shit back 4, a fuckin useless midfield, no young fellas coming through. rossi my fuck. if hes that good he'd be playing week in week out just like a young rooney, owen ,fowler etc... if he cant in to the team ahead of boody saha then he's not that good is he. come on like.


He's not playing because he can't get ahead of players who are scoring all around them
United's problems are in midfield and will be addressed during the summer
Even midfielders like Ronaldo are scoring an amount of goals that some teams can only dream of-Kieran fucking Richardson has scored more in 2006 than some entire stikeforces of other teams
"Argentina" will further strengthen their defense aswell
As Del and Ho Chi says, United will be some team, IF, they sort the midfield
And as for dreamers sceneraio, i haven't heard the term "power shift" in at least 7 days

[KolaKubes]

And as for dreamers sceneraio, i haven't heard the term "power shift" in at least 7 days

Excellent.

[Rebelred]

fuckin dreamers the lot of ye.
ye got a shit back 4, a fuckin useless midfield, no young fellas coming through. rossi my fuck. if hes that good he'd be playing week in week out just like a young rooney, owen ,fowler etc... if he cant in to the team ahead of boody saha then he's not that good is he. come on like.
hahahahaha,that post has brightened up my day no end.haven't seen a rant like that in a good while,top stuff!



On a different note, Is Ruud being given the Beckham treatment? We all know how back in 2003,Beckham was dropped for Solksjaer a number of times in the spring,then shipped off to madrid in the summer.Problem is Fergie never truly replace Beckham, although Ronaldo's recent performances have been far more encouraging.
My point is though,if Fergie does choose to get rid of Ruud,who does he bring in to replace the top scorer in the league??? World class strikers are hard to come by,just look at liverpool. Yes, we have Rooney, Saha and Rossi, but Ruud is a proven goalscorer,he has shown that time and time again.While it would make good economic sense for the Glazers to cash in on Ruud while he still holds a decent price,they've got interest repayments to make after all people, I doubt the team would benefit from his sale,I wouldn't be in favour of selling him this summer to be honest

[KolaKubes]

fuckin dreamers the lot of ye.
ye got a shit back 4,

We have a choice of Ferdinand, Neville, Brown, Vidic, Heinze, Evra. I'd argue they're better than Chelsea's lot.



a fuckin useless midfield

Granted.


no young fellas coming through.

That's simply an ignorant comment. We won the youth cup last time out in fine style. Pique, Bardsley, Evans, Martin, Gibson, Cathcart, D. Jones, R. Jones, Brandy, Lee, there's a staggering array of talent in the Utd youth ranks at the moment. The general consensus is that this is a finer crop than the Beckham, Scholes, Neville generation.

Without mentioning...
rossi my fuck. if hes that good he'd be playing week in week out just like a young rooney, owen ,fowler etc... if he cant in to the team ahead of boody saha then he's not that good is he. come on like.

Ruud Van Nistelrooy can't get in the team at the moment you twit.

[Fat Tom]

hahahahaha,that post has brightened up my day no end.haven't seen a rant like that in a good while,top stuff!



On a different note, Is Ruud being given the Beckham treatment? We all know how back in 2003,Beckham was dropped for Solksjaer a number of times in the spring,then shipped off to madrid in the summer.Problem is Fergie never truly replace Beckham, although Ronaldo's recent performances have been far more encouraging.
My point is though,if Fergie does choose to get rid of Ruud,who does he bring in to replace the top scorer in the league??? World class strikers are hard to come by,just look at liverpool. Yes, we have Rooney, Saha and Rossi, but Ruud is a proven goalscorer,he has shown that time and time again.While it would make good economic sense for the Glazers to cash in on Ruud while he still holds a decent price,they've got interest repayments to make after all people, I doubt the team would benefit from his sale,I wouldn't be in favour of selling him this summer to be honest

Neither would I.
You saw how we struggled for Goals without him last season.
We have no other top class finisher in the side and that includes Rooney.
Ruud is our only natural out and out striker and would be an awful loss.

[Fat Tom]

They have the potential to be better than the 99 team, whether they do or not is another story

The midfield needs a lot of strengthening to be anyhwhere near 99.
I can't see it being as strong again for a while or as balanced.

[Sound]

Dr H, you are talking nonsense apart from the midfield bit.

KK, Utd have a better defensive squad than Chelsea? Please, please spare me. Terry, Gallas or Carvalho would instantly be the best defender in the Utd squad.

[Fat Tom]

fuckin dreamers the lot of ye.
ye got a shit back 4, a fuckin useless midfield, no young fellas coming through. rossi my fuck. if hes that good he'd be playing week in week out just like a young rooney, owen ,fowler etc... if he cant in to the team ahead of boody saha then he's not that good is he. come on like.

Shit back 4 - we have 8 internationals in our defensive ranks.
A useless midfield in the centre - we are as strong on the wings as any team in the league.
And Rossi is only 18 and would be in the side only for the quality at our disposal.
Potential.
Its a word - look it up.

[Fat Tom]

Dr H, you are talking nonsense apart from the midfield bit.

KK, Utd have a better defensive squad than Chelsea? Please, please spare me. Terry, Gallas or Carvalho would instantly be the best defender in the Utd squad.

I think the point is that we have cover in every position.
8 internationals across the back.
Chelsea had to play Geremi right back and Essien left against Boro.
Carvalho is not better than Rio and I'd even go so far as to say Brown has been better this season.
Chelsea's defenders look better due to their negative defensive formation.
If refs had any balls Carvalho would be giving away a penno a game.

[Fat Tom]

hes shit too but at least he makes the first team

rossi would make yer first team at the moment yer strikers are so bad.
he doesn't make United because we actually have quality up front.
And where are all these brilliant products of the pool academy?

[Sound]

Ferreira, Del Horno, Bridge, Johnson, Terry, Gallas, Carvalho, Huth, Geremi. All 9 are internationals even if Johnson is pants and all part of the best defense in the league for the past two seasons. I'm with ye on everything else but any claims to have better defenders, a better defensive squad- in fact, a better defensive anything than Chelsea are a tragic mockery.

Admit it.

[Rebelred]

Neither would I.
You saw how we struggled for Goals without him last season.
We have no other top class finisher in the side and that includes Rooney.
Ruud is our only natural out and out striker and would be an awful loss.
true, unfortunately,the way things have been brewing the last few weeks in the press is far too similar to the beckham scenario for my liking.a good world cup would probably up his value too.
P.S: I wouldn't take Carvalho but Terry and Gallas, yes please

[Rebelred]

Ferreira, Del Horno, Bridge, Johnson, Terry, Gallas, Carvalho, Huth, Geremi. All 9 are internationals even if Johnson is pants and all part of the best defense in the league for the past two seasons. I'm with ye on everything else but any claims to have better defenders, a better defensive squad- in fact, a better defensive anything than Chelsea are a tragic mockery.

Admit it.
no you're on the ball there.Carvalho i wouldnt touch with barge pole though,gives away far too many frees.Johnson,well,t hats the easiest 6 million west ham ever got.

[STEVIEG]

United don't have a better defensive squad than Chelsea
And Ruud will stay
The latest word is that he's gonna be offered a 3 year contract with an increase in wages
There's nothing wrong with playing Saha and trying him out at the moment, it's not as if United are losing that much or playing for that much
United need Ruud, Rooney, Saha, Rossi to make a challenge next year

[Fat Tom]

Ferreira, Del Horno, Bridge, Johnson, Terry, Gallas, Carvalho, Huth, Geremi. All 9 are internationals even if Johnson is pants and all part of the best defense in the league for the past two seasons. I'm with ye on everything else but any claims to have better defenders, a better defensive squad- in fact, a better defensive anything than Chelsea are a tragic mockery.

Admit it.

Well Bridge on loan leaves them short of cover at left back as was exposed by Boro.
I don't rate Huth or Carvalho but we are not as strong defensively as Chelsea.

[KolaKubes]

I actually split myself laughing when (I think it was) Carragher hoofed the ball clear to fucking noone with five minutes to go on Sunday. It just beat Steve Finnan thumping the ball mindlessly into the corner about 10 minutes beforehand. Jack Charlton stuff except for the getting a result bit.

Chelsea are as bad, fucking the ball in the general direction of Drogba or Robben. Who wants to watch that?

Great to see such purveyors of tedium dumped out of the Champion's League this week while the likes of Barcelona and Arsenal went on.

Before Sound bores us with "United watering the pitch", they provided some of the best football of the season so far Sunday afternoon, lost as it would have been on the sort of people that think Peter Crouch has a "great first touch for a big man".

For the sort of football United want to play, players like Ferdinand are more important than a Terry. We need ball playing defenders not someone whose job it is to stick his coke-filled head in front of cross after cross as Chelsea file the opposition out wide for just that purpose.

[Sound]

I actually split myself laughing when (I think it was) Carragher hoofed the ball clear to fucking noone with five minutes to go on Sunday. It just beat Steve Finnan thumping the ball mindlessly into the corner about 10 minutes beforehand. Jack Charlton stuff except for the getting a result bit.

Chelsea are as bad, fucking the ball in the general direction of Drogba or Robben. Who wants to watch that?

Great to see such purveyors of tedium dumped out of the Champion's League this week while the likes of Barcelona and Arsenal went on.

Before Sound bores us with "United watering the pitch", they provided some of the best football of the season so far Sunday afternoon, lost as it would have been on the sort of people that think Peter Crouch has a "great first touch for a big man".

For the sort of football United want to play, players like Ferdinand are more important than a Terry. We need ball playing defenders not someone whose job it is to stick his coke-filled head in front of cross after cross as Chelsea file the opposition out wide for just that purpose.

Anyone can play good football against the comedy club that is Newcastle. But, like Chelsea, when the big boys come to town it's like a bad Gardener's World!

Classic! Which of them has a drugs ban?

[ho chi feen]

fuckin dreamers the lot of ye.
ye got a shit back 4, a fuckin useless midfield, no young fellas coming through. rossi my fuck. if hes that good he'd be playing week in week out just like a young rooney, owen ,fowler etc... if he cant in to the team ahead of boody saha then he's not that good is he. come on like.


Fuck.

Off.

Wum.


That is all.

[ho chi feen]

Classic! Which of them has a drugs ban?

Neither?

[Fat Tom]

I actually split myself laughing when (I think it was) Carragher hoofed the ball clear to fucking noone with five minutes to go on Sunday. It just beat Steve Finnan thumping the ball mindlessly into the corner about 10 minutes beforehand. Jack Charlton stuff except for the getting a result bit.

Chelsea are as bad, fucking the ball in the general direction of Drogba or Robben. Who wants to watch that?

Great to see such purveyors of tedium dumped out of the Champion's League this week while the likes of Barcelona and Arsenal went on.

Before Sound bores us with "United watering the pitch", they provided some of the best football of the season so far Sunday afternoon, lost as it would have been on the sort of people that think Peter Crouch has a "great first touch for a big man".

For the sort of football United want to play, players like Ferdinand are more important than a Terry. We need ball playing defenders not someone whose job it is to stick his coke-filled head in front of cross after cross as Chelsea file the opposition out wide for just that purpose.

I wouldn't just call Chelsea long ball.
A few weeks ago I thought the pool had more to their game but Arsenal match it was constant to Crouch.
Its all well and good giving the ball back to poor opposition but quality teams will punish you with possession.
Chelsea play a lot of long balls but are more a sit and when the other teams fuck up attack sort of side.
Basically this works well in the prem due to the lack of quality central midfield players (in terms of pass and move) - we have plenty box to box scorers and tacklers who have good physique.
Arsenal play far better soccer to watch than any side in the league.
United play better to watch than anyone else.

[KolaKubes]

Anyone can play good football against the comedy club that is Newcastle. But, like Chelsea, when the big boys come to town it's like a bad Gardener's World!

Classic! Which of them has a drugs ban?

The "big boys"??!! Who do you mean exactly? Peter Crouch? Cause he scored the one goal we conceded to Liverpool, Arsenal and Chelsea this year and that was a classic alright.

For fuck's sake, don't let the facts get in the way of your preconceptions though. Plus a struggling Arsenal side made your lot look like a "comedy club" on Sunday.

[KolaKubes]

Basically this works well in the prem due to the lack of quality central midfield players (in terms of pass and move) - we have plenty box to box scorers and tacklers who have good physique.

Exactly. Most Premiership sides are technically incapable of attacking in a measured and efficient manner. It's not even new. I watched the last half hour of a replay of United versus Forest from 5/6 years ago (when Ole got the hat-trick late on). Forest just kept mindlessly throwing bodies forward with little care for what they'd do when they lost the ball and United just picked them off with very simple football on the day.

Ferguson moved away from that in 02/03 because he realised that Utd weren't able to get away with that sort of basic counter-attacking style against clubs who themselves could defend well and who were willing to be patient in their use of the ball in possession in Europe.

Liverpool's frankly bizarre and incongrous victory in last year's CL has masked the fact that the Premiership simply is not all its cracked up to be these days. The league has been effectively won at a canter with the last three seasons now by sides that flopped when tested against the cream of Europe. Actually, I'd say that the Prem should probably have claimed another CL title over the past 4 years with the problems in Italy and Germany if the general standard in the league had been more testing for that season's champions.

At least in Arsenal's case it was through an overly ambitious style of football but Chelsea and, latterly, Liverpool have adopted a game based on defending and set pieces which will only ever get you so far in normal circumstances but when there's a dearth of the players of Messi and Ronaldinho's class about the place, the sort of players that can overcome such nonsense, you only need to be the best at that sort of negative shite or just ride your luck. Actually, it was Greece winning the Euros which epitomised this best/worst. Shocked me to the core that one.

[Killyoursons]

Exactly. Most Premiership sides are technically incapable of attacking in a measured and efficient manner. It's not even new. I watched the last half hour of a replay of United versus Forest from 5/6 years ago (when Ole got the hat-trick late on). Forest just kept mindlessly throwing bodies forward with little care for what they'd do when they lost the ball and United just picked them off with very simple football on the day.

Ferguson moved away from that in 02/03 because he realised that Utd weren't able to get away with that sort of basic counter-attacking style against clubs who themselves could defend well and who were willing to be patient in their use of the ball in possession in Europe.

Liverpool's frankly bizarre and incongrous victory in last year's CL has masked the fact that the Premiership simply is not all its cracked up to be these days. The league has been effectively won at a canter with the last three seasons now by sides that flopped when tested against the cream of Europe. Actually, I'd say that the Prem should probably have claimed another CL title over the past 4 years with the problems in Italy and Germany if the general standard in the league had been more testing for that season's champions.

At least in Arsenal's case it was through an overly ambitious style of football but Chelsea and, latterly, Liverpool have adopted a game based on defending and set pieces which will only ever get you so far in normal circumstances but when there's a dearth of the players of Messi and Ronaldinho's class about the place, the sort of players that can overcome such nonsense, you only need to be the best at that sort of negative shite or just ride your luck. Actually, it was Greece winning the Euros which epitomised this best/worst. Shocked me to the core that one.

When did Chelsea flop against the 'cream of Europe' last year? When did the Arse flop against the 'cream of Europe' the season before that?
Chelsea also score an awful lot of goals for a team who play 'a game based on defending and set pieces'. But who am I to let facts and nuances get in the way of a rant?

[Del]

The midfield needs a lot of strengthening to be anyhwhere near 99.
I can't see it being as strong again for a while or as balanced.

If they sort of the midfield then I believe they can be as good if not better

[AmadeusDC]

If refs had any balls Carvalho would be giving away a penno a game.

So true!!! I've been saying this forever. He's some dirty player and sooner or later it'll come back to haunt Chelsea with a needless sending off/peno at a crucial moment. -AmadeusDC-

[ho chi feen]

When did Chelsea flop against the 'cream of Europe' last year? When did the Arse flop against the 'cream of Europe' the season before that?

Re: Arsenal beating Real Madrid recently was the first time thay they've gotten the better of any decent-ranking European side in the Wenger era (barring a paricularly shambolic Roma side) over two matches, be it group stage, or knockout. In that time they've gone down to Valencia, Barca, Panathinaikos, Lens, Fiorentina, Juventus, Bayern, Chelsea, etc etc etc. Celta Vigo were relegated the year they knocked them out. This is only the second time they've made it to the quarters. On the balance, Arsenal have been a disaster in Europe since Wenger took over. This year, things are looking a bit better.

Also, I think he may have meant Chelsea this season. As in:

United, champions 2003, knocked out by the mighty FC Porto. (Last 16).
Arsenal, champions 2004, knocked out by Bayern. (Last 16).
Chelsea, champions 2005, knocked out by Barcelona (Last 16).

Okay, I don't agree with this guy a lot of the time, but this is a point I've made myself in the past about the premiership not living up to its billing against the two strongest leagues in Europe (La Liga & Serie A). Even the relatively cash-starved Bundesliga has consistently produced on the European strage.

I just thought I'd clarify his (in my opinion, valid) point because he'll just go off on a tangent and detract from it when he gets around to responding.

[Langer Dan]

Fergie On Saha

Im just amazed POL hasnt been all over this.
Sounds like his dream come true.

[DrH.]

all ye fuckin do ......... is dreammmmmmmmmmmmmmmm ,
dream dream dream dream dreammmmmmmmmmmmmmm.
ye guys should be on MUTV..... world class back 4....hehehe

[bricktop]

all ye fuckin do ......... is dreammmmmmmmmmmmmmmm ,
dream dream dream dream dreammmmmmmmmmmmmmm.
ye guys should be on MUTV..... world class back 4....hehehe

what's your idea of a world class back 4 then doctor?
i'm curious

[Sound]

The "big boys"??!! Who do you mean exactly? Peter Crouch? Cause he scored the one goal we conceded to Liverpool, Arsenal and Chelsea this year and that was a classic alright.

For fuck's sake, don't let the facts get in the way of your preconceptions though. Plus a struggling Arsenal side made your lot look like a "comedy club" on Sunday.

Can you even read? 'Big boys' means big clubs. What was classic was you banging on about Terry's 'coke-filled head'. The irony!

Did you see the Liverpool V Arsenal on Valentine's day? Liverpool dominated completely without pressing the point home due to their shit strikers. So, as I'm bored of saying, let's not get ahead of ourselves. This place is like a tabloid sometimes- knee-jerk over reactions to everything. The Man U Rowdies were the worstest team ever before Christmas and now they play the best footie in the PL. The Pool were impregnable and now they're shite.

Spare me.

[Fat Tom]

Can you even read? 'Big boys' means big clubs. What was classic was you banging on about Terry's 'coke-filled head'. The irony!

Did you see the Liverpool V Arsenal on Valentine's day? Liverpool dominated completely without pressing the point home due to their shit strikers. So, as I'm bored of saying, let's not get ahead of ourselves. This place is like a tabloid sometimes- knee-jerk over reactions to everything. The Man U Rowdies were the worstest team ever before Christmas and now they play the best footie in the PL. The Pool were impregnable and now they're shite.

Spare me.

I've said it before and I'll say it again - people in glass houses and all that.
The only fans that should be slagging others at the moment is Chelsea.
But we have too many come backs for them too.
Yer fans were getting a bit ahead of themselves on here too.

[Fat Tom]

So true!!! I've been saying this forever. He's some dirty player and sooner or later it'll come back to haunt Chelsea with a needless sending off/peno at a crucial moment. -AmadeusDC-

He'd be crucified in a European league.

[Killyoursons]

Re: Arsenal beating Real Madrid recently was the first time thay they've gotten the better of any decent-ranking European side in the Wenger era (barring a paricularly shambolic Roma side) over two matches, be it group stage, or knockout. In that time they've gone down to Valencia, Barca, Panathinaikos, Lens, Fiorentina, Juventus, Bayern, Chelsea, etc etc etc. Celta Vigo were relegated the year they knocked them out. This is only the second time they've made it to the quarters. On the balance, Arsenal have been a disaster in Europe since Wenger took over. This year, things are looking a bit better.

Also, I think he may have meant Chelsea this season. As in:

United, champions 2003, knocked out by the mighty FC Porto. (Last 16).
Arsenal, champions 2004, knocked out by Bayern. (Last 16).
Chelsea, champions 2005, knocked out by Barcelona (Last 16).

Okay, I don't agree with this guy a lot of the time, but this is a point I've made myself in the past about the premiership not living up to its billing against the two strongest leagues in Europe (La Liga & Serie A). Even the relatively cash-starved Bundesliga has consistently produced on the European strage.

I just thought I'd clarify his (in my opinion, valid) point because he'll just go off on a tangent and detract from it when he gets around to responding.

His point isn't valid at all.
Arsenal won the league in 2003-04. They were beaten by Bayern well into the following season, when their form had gone to hell. Similarly, if you're going to talk about Chelsea being outclassed by Barca this season, you should note that they beat them the season before, when again they were in better form than they have been for most of this season. When those teams were playing well, they weren't outclassed by anyone (although each was deservedly eliminated, by Chelsea and Liverpool respectively).
Furthermore, if you go back over the results in Europe for the last five or six seasons, you'd see that Italian clubs in general have, bar one season, done poorly. Even the Spanish had a terrible year last year, and don't look up to much this season (Barca excepted).
Finally, I'd be slow to draw conclusions about the strength in depth of a league based purely on the results of its top three/four clubs. What relevance could that possibly have for saying whether, say, the bottom half of the Premiership is weaker or stronger than the bottom half of La Liga? The number of clubs in question is too small, and the form of those top clubs can vary wildly as well. 2003: Serie A provides three CL semi-finalists. 2004: Serie A provides none. Did Serie A sudenly become massively weaker in that period, or was it more to do with the fluctuations in form and fortune of a couple of teams?

[Rebelred]

all ye fuckin do ......... is dreammmmmmmmmmmmmmmm ,
dream dream dream dream dreammmmmmmmmmmmmmm.
ye guys should be on MUTV..... world class back 4....hehehe
know when you're beaten fella.you're first post was so full of utter shite i doubt anybody could ever take anything you post seriously again.

[KolaKubes]

The top four or five clubs in the Premiership, plus one or two other underperformers in the domestic league, ARE up to standard. The problem is the sheer bulk of clubs are fucking awful. United's side in 1994 was genuinely a fine assembly of talent but they simply couldn't raise their game against better European sides. I think the period from 1998 to 2003 was the best the Premiership got. United had a very good side but hadn't a monopoly on what talent there was available with Leeds, Arsenal, Liverpool, Newcastle, Spurs, Chelsea all having fine teams and the likes of Southampton, Derby, Wednesday, Charlton all having a couple of good players too. Sure, Utd still seemed to dominate but they were made work for each of those titles and there were certainly no unbeaten runs through an entire season - which is a mark of a weak-ish league really if you think about it.

It's really not a situation that's too difficult to address. Place a limit on how certain clubs can accumulate the most talented players (and Utd were guilty of this themselves) and you'll see more even games and better development of players at clubs where they'll get regular football.

[Sound]

The top four or five clubs in the Premiership, plus one or two other underperformers in the domestic league, ARE up to standard. The problem is the sheer bulk of clubs are fucking awful. United's side in 1994 was genuinely a fine assembly of talent but they simply couldn't raise their game against better European sides. I think the period from 1998 to 2003 was the best the Premiership got. United had a very good side but hadn't a monopoly on what talent there was available with Leeds, Arsenal, Liverpool, Newcastle, Spurs, Chelsea all having fine teams and the likes of Southampton, Derby, Wednesday, Charlton all having a couple of good players too. Sure, Utd still seemed to dominate but they were made work for each of those titles and there were certainly no unbeaten runs through an entire season - which is a mark of a weak-ish league really if you think about it.

It's really not a situation that's too difficult to address. Place a limit on how certain clubs can accumulate the most talented players (and Utd were guilty of this themselves) and you'll see more even games and better development of players at clubs where they'll get regular football.

Super post.

[homer jay]

Super post.

chalk it down,he's back with a bang

[KolaKubes]

Unfortunately you just know the FA will only act if they rub those two brain cells they share amongst their number and wonder whether someone like Scott Parker might have made the difference to another failed Ingerlund WC tilt if he hadn't been sat on his arse at Chelsea for over a year.

I'm sure Van Basten will be delighted to see Ruud sitting on the Utd bench between now and the summer also while Fergie rotates his stupid embarrassment of riches up front.

Football is just an even more capitalistic extension of the corporate world with an even more ludicrous faith on behalf of those charged with its "running" that the football industry will regulate itself. Does anyone think Roman Abramovich, Malcolm Glazer or David Dein give a flying fuck about the state of the game in general?

[edit]

Actually, the situation of Le Tissier is a case in point, nowadays he'd have been garnish on the bench at a top four club rather than improving at his own pace at Southampton and lighting up many any otherwise humdrum mid-table fixture over his career.

[Killyoursons]

The top four or five clubs in the Premiership, plus one or two other underperformers in the domestic league, ARE up to standard. The problem is the sheer bulk of clubs are fucking awful. United's side in 1994 was genuinely a fine assembly of talent but they simply couldn't raise their game against better European sides. I think the period from 1998 to 2003 was the best the Premiership got. United had a very good side but hadn't a monopoly on what talent there was available with Leeds, Arsenal, Liverpool, Newcastle, Spurs, Chelsea all having fine teams and the likes of Southampton, Derby, Wednesday, Charlton all having a couple of good players too. Sure, Utd still seemed to dominate but they were made work for each of those titles and there were certainly no unbeaten runs through an entire season - which is a mark of a weak-ish league really if you think about it.

It's really not a situation that's too difficult to address. Place a limit on how certain clubs can accumulate the most talented players (and Utd were guilty of this themselves) and you'll see more even games and better development of players at clubs where they'll get regular football.

AC Milan, unbeaten in 91-92. In Serie A. Which wasn't a bad league at the time, if I remember correctly.

[KolaKubes]

AC Milan, unbeaten in 91-92. In Serie A. Which wasn't a bad league at the time, if I remember correctly.

The exception that proves the rule? Generally, it's unheard of for a team to go unbeaten through a whole season and I think it's fair to say that neither of the sides that went on their runs in the past 2 or 3 years were anything special in the grander scheme of things. Chelsea, certainly, look decidedly mundane much of the time and the Arsenal side proved remarkably fallible once the bubble burst - a collapse I predicted well before they ultimately got beaten at Old Trafford, as happens.

[ho chi feen]

His point isn't valid at all.
Arsenal won the league in 2003-04. They were beaten by Bayern well into the following season, when their form had gone to hell. Similarly, if you're going to talk about Chelsea being outclassed by Barca this season, you should note that they beat them the season before, when again they were in better form than they have been for most of this season. When those teams were playing well, they weren't outclassed by anyone (although each was deservedly eliminated, by Chelsea and Liverpool respectively).
Furthermore, if you go back over the results in Europe for the last five or six seasons, you'd see that Italian clubs in general have, bar one season, done poorly. Even the Spanish had a terrible year last year, and don't look up to much this season (Barca excepted).
Finally, I'd be slow to draw conclusions about the strength in depth of a league based purely on the results of its top three/four clubs. What relevance could that possibly have for saying whether, say, the bottom half of the Premiership is weaker or stronger than the bottom half of La Liga? The number of clubs in question is too small, and the form of those top clubs can vary wildly as well. 2003: Serie A provides three CL semi-finalists. 2004: Serie A provides none. Did Serie A sudenly become massively weaker in that period, or was it more to do with the fluctuations in form and fortune of a couple of teams?


Spanish clubs have had a period of dominance since the introduction of the CL, mostly due to Real's 3 titles between 1998 and 2002. In 2000, three Spanish sides reached the semis. In 2001, Valencia were beaten in the final. Likewise Italy, with Milan winning the title in 94, and finishing runners up in 1993 and 1995. This was followed by Juventus winning the title in 1996, and bottling it in the final in 1997 and 1998 when they lost out to inferior sides. In 2003, we had an all Italian final, this year there are 4 Italian sides in the last 8. Dortmund won the title in 1997, Bayern finished runners up in 1999, reached the semis in 2000, and won it in 2001.

In other words, Bayern Munich alone have reached as many finals as every English entrant combined in the last 16 years, as have Ajax. Juve alone have made twice as many appearances as all English entrants in that period, Real Madrid alone have made more (and won more), and Milan have been in 3 more finals than all English sides combined.

What have the English sides done that can compare to this? United reached the quarters 7 years straight, and made it a bit further in 1997, 1999 and 2002. Chelsea have made the semis a couple of times. Liverpool have won it once. Arsenal had a habit of going out in the first round, and before 2004, there were only two seasons when any English entrant other than United made it to the last 8.

Can you honestly say that this compares favourably with the other leagues? Liverpool and Chelsea, praised for flying the PL flag have both been shown up rather badly this term.

[ho chi feen]

AC Milan, unbeaten in 91-92. In Serie A. Which wasn't a bad league at the time, if I remember correctly.

With a cash strapped Napoli team, a mere shadow of the their former selves finishing a distant second, Juventus going throught the poorest spell in their entire history, and Inter, well, just being Inter, Serie A as a whole was hardly at an all-time high either. FFS, Sampdoria even managed a scudetto in that period.

[Langer Dan]

With a cash strapped Napoli team, a mere shadow of the their former selves finishing a distant second, Juventus going throught the poorest spell in their entire history, and Inter, well, just being Inter, Serie A as a whole was hardly at an all-time high either. FFS, Sampdoria even managed a scudetto in that period.

Samp had a decent team at the time, Gullit, Lombardo, Mancini, em Platt.
As for Inter they wernt too shoddy either with the likes of Klinsman and Matthaus in the side.

But that AC side of the early 90's were a phenomenal team.

[ho chi feen]

Samp had a decent team at the time, Gullit, Lombardo, Mancini, em Platt.
As for Inter they wernt too shoddy either with the likes of Klinsman and Matthaus in the side.

But that AC side of the early 90's were a phenomenal team.

That's true, but his point about weaker leagues leading to unbeaten runs has a grain of truth in it too. None of the sides who should have been challenging AC that particular season were in good shape on and off the field (i.e., Juve, Inter and, at a push Samp), as is evidenced by the fact that Napoli, who were a shambles that season after losing Maradona, still finished second. Now, wind the clock forward a couple of years and it was a different story.

[Killyoursons]

Spanish clubs have had a period of dominance since the introduction of the CL, mostly due to Real's 3 titles between 1998 and 2002. In 2000, three Spanish sides reached the semis. In 2001, Valencia were beaten in the final. Likewise Italy, with Milan winning the title in 94, and finishing runners up in 1993 and 1995. This was followed by Juventus winning the title in 1996, and bottling it in the final in 1997 and 1998 when they lost out to inferior sides. In 2003, we had an all Italian final, this year there are 4 Italian sides in the last 8. Dortmund won the title in 1997, Bayern finished runners up in 1999, reached the semis in 2000, and won it in 2001.

In other words, Bayern Munich alone have reached as many finals as every English entrant combined in the last 16 years, as have Ajax. Juve alone have made twice as many appearances as all English entrants in that period, Real Madrid alone have made more (and won more), and Milan have been in 3 more finals than all English sides combined.

What have the English sides done that can compare to this? United reached the quarters 7 years straight, and made it a bit further in 1997, 1999 and 2002. Chelsea have made the semis a couple of times. Liverpool have won it once. Arsenal had a habit of going out in the first round, and before 2004, there were only two seasons when any English entrant other than United made it to the last 8.

Can you honestly say that this compares favourably with the other leagues? Liverpool and Chelsea, praised for flying the PL flag have both been shown up rather badly this term.

Simply put, you can't make generalisations about the strength of a league by looking only at the results of the very top few clubs. Germany are the perfect example: since the demise of Dortmund, it's basically been Bayern flying their flag year in, year out (bar one slightly freakish run by Leverkusen). Bayern's success in the CL doesn't mean that German football has any great strength in depth. Look at it this way: three German clubs have made the semis of the CL since it began, four English clubs have made the semis in that time.
Similarly in Italy, since Roma and Lazio ran into big financial difficulties only three clubs from that league have made any impact in the CL. Again, only three Italian clubs have made the semis of the CL since it began. Spain have done a bit better, they've had four clubs in the semis.
I know I'm not factoring in how many times those clubs made the semis. That's exactly my point; you can't simply read off the strength of an entire division (let alone the strength of a country's whole domestic football league) from the results of the elite clubs. As I said before, Italian football didn't become massivley weaker between 2003 and 2004, despite CL results.

[Killyoursons]

With a cash strapped Napoli team, a mere shadow of the their former selves finishing a distant second, Juventus going throught the poorest spell in their entire history, and Inter, well, just being Inter, Serie A as a whole was hardly at an all-time high either. FFS, Sampdoria even managed a scudetto in that period.

BS. Italian clubs reached the finals of two of the three European competitions that year. Sampdoria lost in extra time to a very strong Barca team, Torino only lost on away goals to Ajax. The following year, Italian clubs won two of the three European trophies, and Milan lost the CL final in famously murky circumstances.
This isn't conclusive evidence, but it's as good as we've got. The point is that clubs other than the traditional big three (Sampdoria, Genoa, Torino, Parma) were coming through. In the early ninties Italian football had a strength in depth which is nonexistent nowadays.

[Killyoursons]

Samp had a decent team at the time, Gullit, Lombardo, Mancini, em Platt.
As for Inter they wernt too shoddy either with the likes of Klinsman and Matthaus in the side.

But that AC side of the early 90's were a phenomenal team.

Just to be clear, Gullit and Platt didn't join Sampdoria until later on, summer 1993 I think.

[Langer Dan]

Just to be clear, Gullit and Platt didn't join Sampdoria until later on, summer 1993 I think.

I am clear, we were talking about the strong Samp side of the 90's.

[Killyoursons]

I am clear, we were talking about the strong Samp side of the 90's.

Actually, we were originally talking about Milan being unbeaten in 91-92. But I agree with you that Sampdoria were a strong team back then.

[AmadeusDC]

Inter had Matthaus, Brehme, Klinnsmann, Bergomi and Zenga.

Sampdoria had Vialli, Mancini, Lombardo, Vierchowod and Pagliuca in goal.

Juve had Baggio approaching if not in his prime (21 goals in 27 games in 92-93). they also had Kohler and Schillachi amongst others at that time.

The Milan team was just incredible!!

Yet there were still a load of teams who could give the sides of this quality some good tough games. The Italian league at this point was about as a high a standard for any league i've seen in my lifetime. -AmadeusDC-

[ho chi feen]

BS. Italian clubs reached the finals of two of the three European competitions that year. Sampdoria lost in extra time to a very strong Barca team, Torino only lost on away goals to Ajax. The following year, Italian clubs won two of the three European trophies, and Milan lost the CL final in famously murky circumstances.
This isn't conclusive evidence, but it's as good as we've got. The point is that clubs other than the traditional big three (Sampdoria, Genoa, Torino, Parma) were coming through. In the early ninties Italian football had a strength in depth which is nonexistent nowadays.

Nah man, just take a look at the table that season. Juve were in a poor spell, as I've said earlier, the lowest ebb (domestically) in their history. Inter had a decent side, but struglled that season. Take a looik at Napoli's squad, man for man, and tell me that was a good team. Ciro Ferrara aside, it comprised journeymen. Milan were streets ahead of the competition that year. Had the other clubs been performing, it's highly unlikely that they could have gone a season unbeaten. Any club going unbeaten in the one of the top leagues has to go down as a freak occurence, or be the result of a lack of competition, or both. In 1992, the competition just wasn't there. Serie A was still by some distance the strongest league in Europe at that time though, so it's entirely undestandable that European competitions were dominated by Italian sides that season, as they were from the laste 1980's until the mid 1990's. I thin you'll also find that, historically speaking, Torino would be classed as one of Italy's big clubs. Juve and Parma provided stiffer competition in the years to come, just as Inter and the Napoli of Maradona had in the years preceding.

[Killyoursons]

Nah man, just take a look at the table that season. Juve were in a poor spell, as I've said earlier, the lowest ebb (domestically) in their history. Inter had a decent side, but struglled that season. Take a looik at Napoli's squad, man for man, and tell me that was a good team. Ciro Ferrara aside, it comprised journeymen. Milan were streets ahead of the competition that year. Had the other clubs been performing, it's highly unlikely that they could have gone a season unbeaten. Any club going unbeaten in the one of the top leagues has to go down as a freak occurence, or be the result of a lack of competition, or both. In 1992, the competition just wasn't there. Serie A was still by some distance the strongest league in Europe at that time though, so it's entirely undestandable that European competitions were dominated by Italian sides that season, as they were from the laste 1980's until the mid 1990's. I thin you'll also find that, historically speaking, Torino would be classed as one of Italy's big clubs. Juve and Parma provided stiffer competition in the years to come, just as Inter and the Napoli of Maradona had in the years preceding.

See Amadeus' post above. Milan were streets ahead because they had a truly exceptional team, compared to other sides that were merely pretty good (I'm thinking more of Sampdoria, Genoa and Torino here than Juve).
Also, bear in mind that Milan had a very light schedule that year, as they had been banned for a year from European competition. Plus they had a remarkably injury-free campaign, as did Arsenal when they went unbeaten in 2003-04. This helps explain the long unbeaten run.
Torino were, historically speaking, a big club in Italy, but have had very little success since Superga. By 'big three' you know what I mean, those three clubs have dominated Italian domestic football for the last half-century and more.
Anyway, we're a long way from Kansas on this one...

[Killyoursons]

With a cash strapped Napoli team, a mere shadow of the their former selves finishing a distant second, Juventus going throught the poorest spell in their entire history, and Inter, well, just being Inter, Serie A as a whole was hardly at an all-time high either. FFS, Sampdoria even managed a scudetto in that period.

I thought you were mistaken, alright:

http://www.zanziball.it/en/12/40.html

Napoli didn't finish second. Juve did. I think you might be confusing this season with 1990-91, when they finished seventh.

[ho chi feen]

I thought you were mistaken, alright:

Napoli didn't finish second. Juve did. I think you might be confusing this season with 1990-91, when they finished seventh.


Gah! SunbabeFitzAbbey mockery of biblical proportions from me there.:D

*Tries to call back from the abyss*

But back to the original topic that spawned this, in trophy haul, in yearly and in numerical representation at the latter stages of the competition, England has been found wanting time and time again. And I do think it's a fair baromoter- Now they have got four teams (5 this season) in the competition year in, year out, you can't say the entrants on any given season in no way offer a fair reflection of the quality at the top of the league, surely. And once you take this over a number of years, 5, 10, 15, a pattern starts to emerge. Of course you can point to Serie A's annus horribilus in 2002, and last years abysmal showing by La Liga as one offs, but in isolation these examples show you as little of the bigger picture as a Porto V Monaco final did in 1994. Nada.

Note that I didn't even mention Bayer Leverkusen because of the flash in the pan character of their run (Some people night now feel justified in tarring Liverpool's achievements last season with that brush), I focussed instead on achievements sustained over the course of consecutive seasons.

The again, who knows? Arsenal could go and win the thing this year and make the trophy count a little bit less embarrassing for the self-styled 'Greatest league in the world'. Unfortunately I can't see that happening. I think they've gotten the worst draw they could have hoped for in QF.

On what footballing grounds would you say that the Premiership has shown itself to be the equal of the other major leagues in Europe? Out of curiosity, as I've already presented my logic for believing otherwise. You don't feel, in any way, that the Premiership clubs have underperformed, or failed to live up to their billing?

[Killyoursons]

Gah! SunbabeFitzAbbey mockery of biblical proportions from me there.:D

*Tries to call back from the abyss*

But back to the original topic that spawned this, in trophy haul, in yearly and in numerical representation at the latter stages of the competition, England has been found wanting time and time again. And I do think it's a fair baromoter- Now they have got four teams (5 this season) in the competition year in, year out, you can't say the entrants on any given season in no way offer a fair reflection of the quality at the top of the league, surely. And once you take this over a number of years, 5, 10, 15, a pattern starts to emerge. Of course you can point to Serie A's annus horribilus in 2002, and last years abysmal showing by La Liga as one offs, but in isolation these examples show you as little of the bigger picture as a Porto V Monaco final did in 1994. Nada.

Note that I didn't even mention Bayer Leverkusen because of the flash in the pan character of their run (Some people night now feel justified in tarring Liverpool's achievements last season with that brush), I focussed instead on achievements sustained over the course of consecutive seasons.

The again, who knows? Arsenal could go and win the thing this year and make the trophy count a little bit less embarrassing for the self-styled 'Greatest league in the world'. Unfortunately I can't see that happening. I think they've gotten the worst draw they could have hoped for in QF.

On what footballing grounds would you say that the Premiership has shown itself to be the equal of the other major leagues in Europe? Out of curiosity, as I've already presented my logic for believing otherwise. You don't feel, in any way, that the Premiership clubs have underperformed, or failed to live up to their billing?

I never said it was. I'm not sure what gave you that impression.
Here's my point: the CL is a measure, not of the strength of an entire division, but of the strength of the top few clubs in that division. The fact that the big leages have four entries nowadays, as opposed to, say, two, doesn't alter this fact substantially. I'll say it again: what do results in the CL tell us about the relative strength of the 16th strongest clubs in England, Italy and Spain? Absolutely nothing.
Furthermore, the time-frame chosen matters a lot. Italian clubs were by far the most successful in the first seven years of the CL, but have not been as successful since. Suggesting that 2002 was a one-off is disingenuous. Between 1999 and 2005, it was 2003 that was more of a one-off.
Here's a rough test: take the years 2000-2005, look at the CL semi-finalists. Spain are clearly ahead (nine), but even their results drop off after 2002. The next best league is the Premiership (five). Italy had four over that period, Germany had three.
If the Premiership really has failed to live up to its billing over that period of time, it's only fair to suggest that the same is true of Serie A.
BTW, I think Arsenal have a reasonable chance against Juventus. The latter seem to be a very good side when it comes to grinding out results in a league, week-in week-out basis, against opponents with whom they're familiar. But in a knock-out competition, when they'll have to deal with unexpected situations and novel opposition, I think they mightn't be flexible enough to cope. We shall see.

[DrH.]

know when you're beaten fella.you're first post was so full of utter shite i doubt anybody could ever take anything you post seriously again.


vidic and erva you fucking tool...world class is it.......hehehehehe

[Rebelred]

vidic and erva you fucking tool...world class is it.......hehehehehe
You named the subs there, well done.

[Lamps]

vidic and erva you fucking tool...world class is it.......hehehehehe

have you ever met general dick collins, ye'd make a loverly couple

[DrH.]

You named the subs there, well done.


hehehehehehehehehehe ..i can go on.......... rio and wes........heheheheh e

[Fat Tom]

hehehehehehehehehehe ..i can go on.......... rio and wes........heheheheh e

hehehehehehehehehehe - two England Internationals.
hehehehehehehehehehe he

[Rebelred]

hehehehehehehehehehe ..i can go on.......... rio and wes........heheheheh e
you really do know how to kill your own points, you've definitely earned that Idiot of the year nomination

[Fat Tom]

you really do know how to kill your own points, you've definitely earned that Idiot of the year nomination

You know Langer Dan may well lose his crown.
I thought Boxoid had it sewn up - but then out of the blue comes this muppet.
Time to put another idiot on ignore.

[DrH.]

you really do know how to kill your own points, you've definitely earned that Idiot of the year nomination


???????????????????? ???????????????????? ?/

[DrH.]

hehehehehehehehehehe - two England Internationals.
hehehehehehehehehehe he

???????????????????? ???????????????????? ????????????

[Lamps]

Time to put another idiot on ignore.

ah i dunno about that. i think DrH has that cannon fodder thing goin on that is a necessary part of this forum. like an antelope wandering aimlessly about the place. i think he has potential

[Sound]

Jesus H Christ, this place gets more retarded by the day- is there some sort of day release program in Cork going on that I dont know about? Dr H, as a fellow Pool fan I have no time for the Rio's of the world. But, by making no attempt at reasoned debate or, at least decent wumming, you are making a tit of yourself and giving Pool fans a bad name. Buck up your ideas or be forever black-balled by the forum elite. You dont want to end up like poor boxoid now surely?

You have been warned.

[DrH.]

Jesus H Christ, this place gets more retarded by the day- is there some sort of day release program in Cork going on that I dont know about? Dr H, as a fellow Pool fan I have no time for the Rio's of the world. But, by making no attempt at reasoned debate or, at least decent wumming, you are making a tit of yourself and giving Pool fans a bad name. Buck up your ideas or be forever black-balled by the forum elite. You dont want to end up like poor boxoid now surely?

You have been warned.


sorry bout that but these guys are too easy to wind up. How can i enter reasoned debate with these guys............. world class back four.......bunch of jokers...as i said MUTV material.....class

[Lamps]

sorry bout that but these guys are too easy to wind up. How can i enter reasoned debate with these guys............. world class back four.......bunch of jokers...as i said MUTV material.....class

give us your thoughts on Cisse

[Fat Tom]

sorry bout that but these guys are too easy to wind up. How can i enter reasoned debate with these guys............. world class back four.......bunch of jokers...as i said MUTV material.....class

Who said we have a World Class back four?
Neither do Liverpool FFS

[KolaKubes]

Who said we have a World Class back four?

I did. And I'll stick by it. Neville, Ferdinand, Brown, Heinze is as good as it gets and without the snide, cynical approach of Chelsea's equivalent. They do remarkably well given there's nothing related to a decent centre mid in front of them, something people tend to forget.

Sorry, but Jack Charlton coming out and having a pop at Ferdinand and his tendency to pass the ball out of defence ended the "argument" about Rio's class. It's only flat-earthers like him who prefers mullackers like Terry, Carragher and Campbell. I still don't see why Ferdinand can't a) stick that ugly mug in front of a couple more shots and b) why he can't cut out a few more of the now occasional lapses in concentration but he is simply a class footballer. A shit of a man though.

[Fat Tom]

I did. And I'll stick by it. Neville, Ferdinand, Brown, Heinze is as good as it gets and without the snide, cynical approach of Chelsea's equivalent. They do remarkably well given there's nothing related to a decent centre mid in front of them, something people tend to forget.

Sorry, but Jack Charlton coming out and having a pop at Ferdinand and his tendency to pass the ball out of defence ended the "argument" about Rio's class. It's only flat-earthers like him who prefers mullackers like Terry, Carragher and Campbell. I still don't see why Ferdinand can't a) stick that ugly mug in front of a couple more shots and b) why he can't cut out a few more of the now occasional lapses in concentration but he is simply a class footballer. A shit of a man though.

I'm with you.
Not a World Class back four though.
Brown is good, but a man who can't start for England is not World Class.
Neville for me is an accomplished defender, World Class is probably stretching but there aren't too many good right backs at the moment.
I believer Rio is world class and so is Heinze.
As a unit they also aren't World Class in my opinion but as you say a lot of the reason they are exposed is due to an obvious lack of defensive capabilities in midfield.

[Sound]

Rio is not a great defender. Call me old-fashioned or even a flat earther but I class that as a pre-requisite when attempting to call a defender world class.

I'm all for the Carr V Rio debate but even trying to compare Rio to Terry isn't even a mockery. It's just stupid.

[Fat Tom]

Rio is not a great defender. Call me old-fashioned or even a flat earther but I class that as a pre-requisite when attempting to call a defender world class.

I'm all for the Carr V Rio debate but even trying to compare Rio to Terry isn't even a mockery. It's just stupid.

I won't argue - just one point.
If Terry played with United he'd be more exposed due to the system.
I don't think your opinion of him would be as high if he played for a different side. i.e a non negative one where a midfielfer sweeps up in front of him.

[Sound]

I won't argue - just one point.
If Terry played with United he'd be more exposed due to the system.
I don't think your opinion of him would be as high if he played for a different side. i.e a non negative one where a midfielfer sweeps up in front of him.

Rio has had the best in the business for years in Roy and he's still been exposed. That's as moot a point as ever I've heard.

[Fat Tom]

Rio has had the best in the business for years in Roy and he's still been exposed. That's as moot a point as ever I've heard.

Bullshit.
United play attacking football - Roy performed a very different role to Makelele and they play a sit and counter attack formation.

Plus look at Rio's record before his suspension, in that season.
We had a very good defensive record.
Chelsea have Essien and Makelele in front of him.

Terry would be more exposed at United in a 4-4-2 formation.

[KolaKubes]

I'm all for the Carr V Rio debate but even trying to compare Rio to Terry isn't even a mockery. It's just stupid.

Sorry Sound (and I'll endeavour to keep this civil boy) I think John Terry is a decidedly limited player. Slow, awkward, technically limited. Chelsea ask him only to stand in the box and hack at anything that moves. I've heard more than one person voice the suspicion that he'll be exposed at International level where the standard and style of forward is more Ronaldinho, Messi, Henry than effin Beattie, McBride, Marcus Bent.

I felt the same about Sol Campbell, just another from the Tony Adams school of defending "ball comes near, phunt ball away, ball comes back, attempt pass, fuck up pass, make brilliant interception, phunt ball away".

When Ferdinand turns the forward and sprays an accurate pass over 40 yards to set the full back away while still doing the primary job of limiting the opponent's goal threat, that's where he's in a different class and it's why his starting for England at the World Cup was never in doubt.

[Killyoursons]

Sorry Sound (and I'll endeavour to keep this civil boy) I think John Terry is a decidedly limited player. Slow, awkward, technically limited. Chelsea ask him only to stand in the box and hack at anything that moves. I've heard more than one person voice the suspicion that he'll be exposed at International level where the standard and style of forward is more Ronaldinho, Messi, Henry than effin Beattie, McBride, Marcus Bent.

I felt the same about Sol Campbell, just another from the Tony Adams school of defending "ball comes near, phunt ball away, ball comes back, attempt pass, fuck up pass, make brilliant interception, phunt ball away".

When Ferdinand turns the forward and sprays an accurate pass over 40 yards to set the full back away while still doing the primary job of limiting the opponent's goal threat, that's where he's in a different class and it's why his starting for England at the World Cup was never in doubt.

He's also in a different class to Terry when it comes to bad defending leading to NI beating England...

[Sound]

Sorry Sound (and I'll endeavour to keep this civil boy) I think John Terry is a decidedly limited player. Slow, awkward, technically limited. Chelsea ask him only to stand in the box and hack at anything that moves. I've heard more than one person voice the suspicion that he'll be exposed at International level where the standard and style of forward is more Ronaldinho, Messi, Henry than effin Beattie, McBride, Marcus Bent.

I felt the same about Sol Campbell, just another from the Tony Adams school of defending "ball comes near, phunt ball away, ball comes back, attempt pass, fuck up pass, make brilliant interception, phunt ball away".

When Ferdinand turns the forward and sprays an accurate pass over 40 yards to set the full back away while still doing the primary job of limiting the opponent's goal threat, that's where he's in a different class and it's why his starting for England at the World Cup was never in doubt.

I woundn't mind being exposed by Ronaldinho but I would mind being exposed by Duncan Bloody Ferguson and many other pish strikers.

[Fat Tom]

I woundn't mind being exposed by Ronaldinho but I would mind being exposed by Duncan Bloody Ferguson and many other pish strikers.

Like Yakubu?
1 goal.
Rio is more equipped to deal with the likes of Ronaldinho with his pace(not saying he would).
they are two different types of centre half, both are class acts but both also have flaws.
Rio has been in great form for United recently.
Look at how little Henry has contributed against United recently.
Wes and Rio's pace see them more able to cope with this type of player.

[Sound]

Rio is in decent form and was in very good form when he came back from suspension. He was also abject before Christmas and patchy last season.
Terry has been exemplary in the best defence in the PL for the, soon to be back-to-back title winners for two years.

If ye, in your hearts of hearts, would honestly rather Rio than Terry- then this is a pointless discussion.

[homer jay]

If ye, in your hearts of hearts, would honestly rather Rio than Terry- then this is a pointless discussion.

your only realising this now? both players have flaws, but i'd take terry over rio, just about.

[KolaKubes]

If ye, in your hearts of hearts, would honestly rather Rio than Terry- then this is a pointless discussion.

Hand on heart (literally), I would not take Terry over Rio. Terry's lack of pace would be terribly exposed the way Utd try to play football and I don't reckon he's that much better than a fit Wes Brown.

[Killyoursons]

Hand on heart (literally), I would not take Terry over Rio. Terry's lack of pace would be terribly exposed the way Utd try to play football and I don't reckon he's that much better than a fit Wes Brown.

Post Of The Year.

[Fat Tom]

Hand on heart (literally), I would not take Terry over Rio. Terry's lack of pace would be terribly exposed the way Utd try to play football and I don't reckon he's that much better than a fit Wes Brown.

I agree with you on Rio.
Not on Wes, albeit he has been top notch this season.
If the point you are trying to make is that Terry wouldn't improve us that much in that money is needed in other areas far more importantly then you have a point.

It'd be like someone from Chelsea saying they don't need Gerrard, as they need to strengthen other areas first.

[KolaKubes]

If the point you are trying to make is that Terry wouldn't improve us that much in that money is needed in other areas far more importantly then you have a point.

Exactly.

But I genuinely don't think much of Terry, for reasons stated earlier.

Having played football at some sort of level, having a centre-half there who can actually find his man with a ball rather than giving you some bullshit longball to chase is a Godsend. That's Cork AUL, what's John Terry's excuse for being a fucking clogger and no better than that and supposedly the best centre-half in the Premiership.

The best defenders in Europe are the Italians and more often than not their centre-halves are in the Ferdinand mould rather than the John Terry mould, no?

Edit: Just to clarify, my point is that John Terry doesn't exactly seem technically inept but is opting to just hoof it everytime. He'll never really develop into a truly top player that way.

Oh and Wes Brown has been immense with the last couple of months and will be unlucky if he doesn't get going to Germany imho.

[Fat Tom]

Exactly.

But I genuinely don't think much of Terry, for reasons stated earlier.

Having played football at some sort of level, having a centre-half there who can actually find his man with a ball rather than giving you some bullshit longball to chase is a Godsend. That's Cork AUL, what's John Terry's excuse for being a fucking clogger and no better than that and supposedly the best centre-half in the Premiership.

The best defenders in Europe are the Italians and more often than not their centre-halves are in the Ferdinand mould rather than the John Terry mould, no?

Edit: Just to clarify, my point is that John Terry doesn't exactly seem technically inept but is opting to just hoof it everytime. He'll never really develop into a truly top player that way.

Oh and Wes Brown has been immense with the last couple of months and will be unlucky if he doesn't get going to Germany imho.

True, I was watching Barca at the weekend.
Whenever the ball is in the air they try to head it down to their own man - not like the head volleyball you see in the Premiership.
I still rate Terry very highly though.
See Puyol for Barca.

[KolaKubes]

True, I was watching Barca at the weekend.
Whenever the ball is in the air they try to head it down to their own man - not like the head volleyball you see in the Premiership.
I still rate Terry very highly though.
See Puyol for Barca.

The true genius of Mourinho was determining early on that possession was squandered so cheaply in the Premiership that he could get away with playing a high-tempo, technically proficient game but without having to worry about the ball retention which characterised his Porto sides. That is a prerequisite for success in most European leagues as you simply will not get the ball back and teams are happy to be patient.

Chelsea can opt for the simple option of just fucking the ball into the stand or into the corners every time in the Premiership rather than trying to pass it out of defence because most of the teams will just give the fucking thing back to them.

In fact, Mourinho has gone so far as to base his gameplan on the promise that the opposition will give the ball away tamely. They are quite happy to let them have the ball and play on the counter-attack, even at home. Unsurprisingly, the defence does not ship goals (after all, there's about 6/7 of them defending virtually all the time) and Mourinho has really polished up the finishing of every Chelsea player so they really only need the slightest sniff to punish any slip.

I've been surprised that Arsenal, in particular, haven't punished them for this (I'd view Arsenal as being the best side in the technical basics in the Prem) but I think the problem there is that Arsenal are just too fucking soft to deal with Chelsea.

In contrast, I wasn't surprised that Arsenal were comfortably better than the pseudo-Chelsea from bubblepermland and looked like punishing Liverpool every time they opted to simply punt the ball aimlessly downfield. Liverpool have a woeful forward line and are not remotely as strong defensively as they appear when the defenders are backpeddling or exposed one on one - something which most of the Chelsea defenders excel at, perhaps with the exception of Terry and Ferreira.

[ho chi feen]

Rio has had the best in the business for years in Roy and he's still been exposed. That's as moot a point as ever I've heard.

Not getting into this whole debate at all at all but Roy was never the same player post hip-op in 2000, so that's hardly a valid point.

Terry had a fairly poor Euro 2004, and was exposed for his lack of pace more than once.

I still think he's the best in the business from a PL point of view, as it happens.

[ho chi feen]

The best defenders in Europe are the Italians.

Strongly beg to differ. Name the last decent defender to come from Italy? They've not been producing defenders for some time. It's the main reason why their national team, and most of their clubs, have had to adopt a more attacking style. The Baresis, Gentiles and Bergomis simply aren't there anymore. In a few years time, Cannavaro and Nesta will be gone. Who do they have to replace them?

[Philby]

Not getting into this whole debate at all at all but Roy was never the same player post hip-op in 2000, so that's hardly a valid point.

Up until ~12 months ago most of the United fans on here were still saying that Keane was better than Gerrard (one which I hotly contested at the time & one which isn't even worth debating now) but now were are hearing that he wasn't a patch on his old self for the last 6 years - which is it?

[Fat Tom]

Up until ~12 months ago most of the United fans on here were still saying that Keane was better than Gerrard (one which I hotly contested at the time & one which isn't even worth debating now) but now were are hearing that he wasn't a patch on his old self for the last 6 years - which is it?

I think you are missing the point.
He was equally as effective in terms of controlling games.
But his box to box mentality differed, it made him a different player yes but arguabally not a lesser one.
His best form was circa 99/00 though.
but Gerrard is really only eliminating his flaws now as you rightly say he has matured.
Class act though and by far and away the best central midfielder in the league.

[STEVIEG]

Up until ~12 months ago most of the United fans on here were still saying that Keane was better than Gerrard (one which I hotly contested at the time & one which isn't even worth debating now) but now were are hearing that he wasn't a patch on his old self for the last 6 years - which is it?


Up until about 2 weeks ago you had dissapeared for a while and weren't to be seen as (like Gerrard) Liverpool went missing against Charlton, Benfica and Arsenal. Sure he been brillant since, but don't let the hype get you carried away-he wasn't there in the big games this season and against the big teams in the league (Chelsea, Arsenal, united)
Sure he got a consolation against Chelsea (a good goal at the time to equalise) and helped get one against Arsenal but for such a supposedly dominant player he should surely have had more of an impact
Don't get me wrong, he's captianed my fantasy football team a lot lately (and not got me as much points as Lampard used to by the way) and i think he's one of the best player s in England, but sometimes a bit of perspective is required. Even as Keane was getting older he was still more than matching him in the big games

[bricktop]

Up until about 2 weeks ago you had dissapeared for a while and weren't to be seen as (like Gerrard) Liverpool went missing against Charlton, Benfica and Arsenal. Sure he been brillant since, but don't let the hype get you carried away-he wasn't there in the big games this season and against the big teams in the league (Chelsea, Arsenal, united)
Sure he got a consolation against Chelsea (a good goal at the time to equalise) and helped get one against Arsenal but for such a supposedly dominant player he should surely have had more of an impact
Don't get me wrong, he's captianed my fantasy football team a lot lately (and not got me as much points as Lampard used to by the way) and i think he's one of the best player s in England, but sometimes a bit of perspective is required. Even as Keane was getting older he was still more than matching him in the big games
i have to agree. before it was all about the big 3 keane,viera,gerrard and i thought with gerrard left this season that he would stamp his authority on the PL, which he hasn't

[Sound]

i have to agree. before it was all about the big 3 keane,viera,gerrard and i thought with gerrard left this season that he would stamp his authority on the PL, which he hasn't

So far we have:
1) Gerrard should be there ot thereabouts for player of the year.
2) But he hasn't been a dominant player.

It's hard to be dominant from the right wing...

[Fat Tom]

So far we have:
1) Gerrard should be there ot thereabouts for player of the year.
2) But he hasn't been a dominant player.

It's hard to be dominant from the right wing...

I think Gerrard has had a great season but again his record against the top teams wasn't great.
I think the fact that he has been on the right wing and out of position will go against him and player of the year will go to Lampard or Terry even though Chelseas best player again this season has been Makelele.

Rooney would be my choice but like the pool fans touting Gerrard I'm biased.

[bricktop]

So far we have:
1) Gerrard should be there ot thereabouts for player of the year.
2) But he hasn't been a dominant player.

It's hard to be dominant from the right wing...
ha has not taken control of the PL like keane or viera had.
dont get me wrong , i thought he was outstanding in the champs league final but he should be in control now and to me he isnt.

[homer jay]

ha has not taken control of the PL like keane or viera had.
dont get me wrong , i thought he was outstanding in the champs league final but he should be in control now and to me he isnt.

he's playing on the wing. look at the arsenal game a few weeks ago. pool were largely outplayed until gerrard moved into centre midfield and it was his shot the led to garcia's equaliser. hold judgement on him till he's in his preferred position

[Sound]

ha has not taken control of the PL like keane or viera had.
dont get me wrong , i thought he was outstanding in the champs league final but he should be in control now and to me he isnt.

I dont seem to remember Keane or Vieira being on the right wing? Even Beckham in his pomp didn't control games from there..

[bricktop]

I dont seem to remember Keane or Vieira being on the right wing? Even Beckham in his pomp didn't control games from there..
blame benitez then lads

[Philby]

1. Bringing Fantasy Football points into this demeans us all

2. As I've said 100 times, the notion that keane had the upper hand over Gerrard is a myth. Most games were 50/50 and on a number of occassions Gerrard was streets ahead (esp. during that winning streak liverpool had over united). Paddy Vieira has though, in the past, given Gerrard a lesson in midfield play. Keane never has & I'm sure he'd admit as much
"Even as Keane was getting older he was still more than matching him in the big games" - simply not true

3. "ha has not taken control of the PL like keane or viera had" - what does this even mean? He is playing very very well and on a consistent basis. Every liverpool fan (and Rafa I'm sure) is delighted with his contribution. Questioning whether he has "taken control of the PL", whatever that means, is nonsense

4. Rooney, Lampard, Makalele, Terry - In the big games Gerrard has been every bit as good as them. Fat Frank goes missing so much when the going gets tough that it's not even funny

5. Gerrard has played consistently well out of position (wide right & up front), there aren't many players in the prem. who have done that this year

6. Stevie - I was up the frickin walls at work in or around a month ago (project coming to an end, a mountain of admin). Whether that coincided with any perceived downturn in SG's form I've no idea but it's good to know that you're looking out for me ;-)

[Paddy Wagon]

Sorry I must have ventured into the wrong thread.. For some strange reason I thought this thread was about Louis Saha, instead I find its another Liverpool v United v Chelsea thread..
Again my apologies..

[homer jay]

Sorry I must have ventured into the wrong thread.. For some strange reason I thought this thread was about Louis Saha, instead I find its another Liverpool v United v Chelsea thread..
Again my apologies..

thats alright, call back when its gone full circle, or when POL and Lamps turn it into a "rugby is shite" thread.

[bricktop]

[QUOTE=Philby]

2. As I've said 100 times, the notion that keane had the upper hand over Gerrard is a myth. Most games were 50/50 and on a number of occassions Gerrard was streets ahead (esp. during that winning streak liverpool had over united). Paddy Vieira has though, in the past, given Gerrard a lesson in midfield play. Keane never has & I'm sure he'd admit as much
"Even as Keane was getting older he was still more than matching him in the big games" - simply not true
august '02 supposedly when keane was past it.
scroll down to 'keane's still the man we fear most'-steven gerrard exclusivewww.manutd. com/news/fullstory.sps?iNewsI D=21502&itype=466&iCategoryID=

[Fat Tom]

1. Bringing Fantasy Football points into this demeans us all

2. As I've said 100 times, the notion that keane had the upper hand over Gerrard is a myth. Most games were 50/50 and on a number of occassions Gerrard was streets ahead (esp. during that winning streak liverpool had over united). Paddy Vieira has though, in the past, given Gerrard a lesson in midfield play. Keane never has & I'm sure he'd admit as much
"Even as Keane was getting older he was still more than matching him in the big games" - simply not true

3. "ha has not taken control of the PL like keane or viera had" - what does this even mean? He is playing very very well and on a consistent basis. Every liverpool fan (and Rafa I'm sure) is delighted with his contribution. Questioning whether he has "taken control of the PL", whatever that means, is nonsense

4. Rooney, Lampard, Makalele, Terry - In the big games Gerrard has been every bit as good as them. Fat Frank goes missing so much when the going gets tough that it's not even funny

5. Gerrard has played consistently well out of position (wide right & up front), there aren't many players in the prem. who have done that this year

6. Stevie - I was up the frickin walls at work in or around a month ago (project coming to an end, a mountain of admin). Whether that coincided with any perceived downturn in SG's form I've no idea but it's good to know that you're looking out for me ;-)

Some valid points there especially about Lampard.
I still don't believe Stevie has done enough and with his team in 3rd I can't see him getting it as final standings usually dictates who gets the award.

When is this judged anyway?
Because there are a few games to come yet.

[Lamps]

2. As I've said 100 times, the notion that keane had the upper hand over Gerrard is a myth. Most games were 50/50 and on a number of occassions Gerrard was streets ahead (esp. during that winning streak liverpool had over united). Paddy Vieira has though, in the past, given Gerrard a lesson in midfield play. Keane never has & I'm sure he'd admit as much
"Even as Keane was getting older he was still more than matching him in the big games" - simply not true



this is very true and often glossed over

[bricktop]

this is very true and often glossed over
yeah boy

[Fat Tom]

2. As I've said 100 times, the notion that keane had the upper hand over Gerrard is a myth. Most games were 50/50 and on a number of occassions Gerrard was streets ahead (esp. during that winning streak liverpool had over united). Paddy Vieira has though, in the past, given Gerrard a lesson in midfield play. Keane never has & I'm sure he'd admit as much
"Even as Keane was getting older he was still more than matching him in the big games" - simply not true


This is typical shite. Last season keane got man of the match against the pool and the come back is oh Gerrard wasn't in direct opposition to him but when Gerrard plays well in the game its taken as a given that he gave Keane the run around - me hole.

[STEVIEG]

1.

6. Stevie - I was up the frickin walls at work in or around a month ago (project coming to an end, a mountain of admin). Whether that coincided with any perceived downturn in SG's form I've no idea but it's good to know that you're looking out for me ;-)


We missed you!
On the Gerrard argument we'll beg to differ
We both agree he's a fine player and we'll leave it at that

[Lamps]

This is typical shite. Last season keane got man of the match against the pool and the come back is oh Gerrard wasn't in direct opposition to him but when Gerrard plays well in the game its taken as a given that he gave Keane the run around - me hole.

3 words

5 man midfield

[Philby]

Bricktop - I never said he was past it (In fact he was quite competitive up until the season before this one), my point related to the fact that Gerrard more than held his own against Keane (even from a very early age when Roy was in his prime). You've missed the point completely.

Question for the Utd fans: At what point did Gerrard surpass Keane? (or are you still labouring under the assumption that an old man playing in the graveyard that is scottish football is better than Gerrard?

[Lamps]

Bricktop - I never said he was past it (In fact he was quite competitive up until the season before this one), my point related to the fact that Gerrard more than held his own against Keane (even from a very early age when Roy was in his prime). You've missed the point completely.

Question for the Utd fans: At what point did Gerrard surpass Keane? (or are you still labouring under the assumption that an old man playing in the graveyard that is scottish football is better than Gerrard?

there was a poll run here last year which says keane was still the better player, so i would guess maybe in the last 6 months

[STEVIEG]

Bricktop - I never said he was past it (In fact he was quite competitive up until the season before this one), my point related to the fact that Gerrard more than held his own against Keane (even from a very early age when Roy was in his prime). You've missed the point completely.

Question for the Utd fans: At what point did Gerrard surpass Keane? (or are you still labouring under the assumption that an old man playing in the graveyard that is scottish football is better than Gerrard?


It's a useless one trying to solve this
Most will agree that Gerrard has the ability to surpass him overall but its early yet
Loads of us reckon Kenae has been consitently great for many years, a few hate him with a passion and won't recognise anything, and a few will jsut dig in and go with whoever club they support
I'm outta this argument, it's going nowhere

[bricktop]

[QUOTE=Philby]

2. As I've said 100 times, the notion that keane had the upper hand over Gerrard is a myth. Most games were 50/50 and on a number of occassions Gerrard was streets ahead (esp. during that winning streak liverpool had over united). Paddy Vieira has though, in the past, given Gerrard a lesson in midfield play. Keane never has & I'm sure he'd admit as much
"Even as Keane was getting older he was still more than matching him in the big games" - simply not true

i havent missed the point philby.you said gerrard was streets ahead of keane on occasions i beg to differ and i know you didn't say keane was past it but it was in the thread

[Sound]

This thread sucks.

[homer jay]

This thread sucks.

they all suck lately

[ho chi feen]

Up until ~12 months ago most of the United fans on here were still saying that Keane was better than Gerrard (one which I hotly contested at the time & one which isn't even worth debating now) but now were are hearing that he wasn't a patch on his old self for the last 6 years - which is it?

Eh, 2002 was four years ago, Philby.

[ho chi feen]

Eh, 2002 was four years ago, Philby.


D'oh.

Just spotted the typo in my original post. All the same, you should be well aware that the hip-op was in 2002.

[ho chi feen]

I think the fact that he has been on the right wing and out of position will go against him and player of the year will go to Lampard or Terry even though Chelseas best player again this season has been Makelele.


I think Joe Cole has been Chelsea's player of the season, and a fair contender for player of the year- From what I've seen anyway. Admittedly, I don't go out of my way to watch Chelsea games in full, for obvious reasons.

[ho chi feen]

1. Bringing Fantasy Football points into this demeans us all

Post of the month, for that line alone.

[Sound]

The post of the month is my new sig.

[ho chi feen]

The post of the month is my new sig.

As Mockery posts go, your sig wins hands down. Although I quite like my one too. This holding posts up for ridicule in sig lines is trés DHesque.

[Sound]

As Mockery posts go, your sig wins hands down. Although I quite like my one too. This holding posts up for ridicule in sig lines is trés DHesque.

Indeed it is.

It pains me to do it but this place needs something to drag it from the mire of Keane V Gerrard, POL V Keane, ManU V Pool snoozathon it's become. If that means humour from a superior forum- so be it.