kop205

This content is not viewable to guests.

So good you posted it twice? Maybe nobody has called him 's***' but saying he 'clearly hasn't got it anymore' and 'could scarcely be worse' comes as close as you can get without using the actual word. That was the comment I was responding to. If he is so s***, oops sorry 'clearly hasn't got it anymore', then why did Rafa bring him in? How do you explain his goals per game record since returning to us? Why do all of the other players rave about his contribution? And you'll have to point out to me where I said he should play every game rather than accepting a bit part. Of course he'll play a bit part - but if he was 'clearly past it' then he wouldn't even be able to do that. Saying he has nothing to offer is as delusional as saying that he will be the key man. But I tell you what, you lay in to the people who actually support one of our players rather than those who lay into him after his first game of the season. All right, but apart from setting up the move that led to the pen, and scoring the equaliser - what have the Romans ever done for us?

This content is not viewable to guests.

Hardly unprecendented for a game to still be discussed a whole 1 day after it has taken place - but f*** it, close the whole forum down eh? Can't have people debating points or anything like that as us discussing transfers or formations or whatever the f*** else isn't going to influence what actually happens. Much better to just be an arrogant t*** and/or self-appointed dictator of what can and can't be discussed.

It was the bold bit that my argument was based on though really. Losing players during a game the way we did is totally different from losing them in adavnce of a game and being able to plan accordingly. You are splitting hairs, and being more than a little precious, with the stuff about accusing people of talking b******s - in my opinion of course. But either way, sorry for any offence caused. I still think we should have been good enough to win yesterday, and have said that it was a poor performance with loads to improve on - but at the same time can see why we were hindered by some of what happened. I'd agree with you that the midfield underperformed but there were other factors. And it doesn't really wash to say that the defence wasn't affected by the injuries and reorganisation, given that Aurelio badly lost his man for their goal - regardless of how well he played other than that (and I think he was no better than ok, certainly not MOM as he was in The Observer). To be honest, I've been getting pissed off at people raving over how this our best squad ever when there are so many untested players in there. I think we've got a shot at the league this year but I also think a few people have been getting carried away a bit. It cuts bith ways - if the squad are as good as people have been saying then yes, it is disappointing to not win, but it also means they should be backed to not let this be a fatak blow to our title hopes like some are almost making it out to be.

This content is not viewable to guests.

Oh do f*** off. Averaging not far off a goal every other game since he came back I'd say. Yeah, he's s***.

Fowler is not a great penalty taker by any means. He has missed plenty in his time. If he is the best after Murphy then we have had some pretty poor ones. For me, he comes after (in no particular order) Molby, Murphy, Gary Mac, Jari, Phil Neal to name but a few.

It is you who are talking b******s now mate. It doesn't matter how strong your squad is, when you lose players to injury during a game it inevitably has a negative impact on the side - especially when those players are both from the same parts of the side, and even more especially when they are from a part of the side which relies more than most on having a bit of continuity, and which was already missing a first choice pick who had been replaced by a bit of a weak link. The other thing that losing two players to injury in the first half does is seriously limit your ability to 'change things' later on - I think Crouch would have been brought on, for example, if we had the opportunity. As it was we only had one change left to make so the primary advantage of having a quality squad - the ability to bring top players off the bench when the opposition are tiring a bit - was largely taken away from us. 1 Agree 2 Nonesense. Complete accident. 3 Nonesense. Forward's tackle, should have been booked, nothing more. 4 Agree 5 If that is all it takes to disrupt us we are in for a long season. The grass was long but I don't think it was much of a factor. If it was, excpect a f***ing meadow when we go to Goodison. 6 Agree 7 We'll have far worse than him this year and as our pen wasn't exactly clear cut I don't think we can complain. 8 If my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle

Sensible way of looking at I think. Not a good result, not a good performance, lots that needs improving on - but every reason to believe that we will do so.

This content is not viewable to guests.

Best point made in this thread. Not a good result today and the fact that it is the first game is largely irrelevant - two points dropped is two points dropped and that is what it was today. Excusing it because it is the first game is the kind of mentality that will see us make a slow start again. What is more of an excuse is the disruption to the backline - losing one of them before the game and two during it is unfortunate. In the circumstances, I'll take a point today. Can't say I'm happy, but we'll only be able to tell the significance of this result in May. I really don't think there will be juch between the top 4/5 this season and can see all of them dropping points so perhaps the biggest positive from this result is that it may stop the ludicrous over confidence that some have developed, who seem to think that all we need to do is send 11 players out onto the field and we'll win every game (probably the same people who are responsible for the doom and gloom in this thread). We live to fight another day.

This content is not viewable to guests.

This content is not viewable to guests.

This content is not viewable to guests.

Strictly / officially speaking I don't think it is.

This content is not viewable to guests.

This content is not viewable to guests.

This content is not viewable to guests.

This content is not viewable to guests.

This content is not viewable to guests.

If I remember correctly, Aldridge had come towards the end of the previous season and Houghton came a couple of months into the new one. Just to be pedantic.

Almost as funny as that article from The Evening Chronicle. Only ever rated Kuyt at 5m my a***. As if they were ever going to get him for that.

Don't think that moving Carragher over to right back would be the best myself as it means disrupting two areas of the team instead of just the one. Don't get me wrong, I think Carra could easily do a good enough job for us there but it means relying on Agger staying fit to cover at centre back. If he got injured as well then it would have to be Palletta, who did ok at times pre-season but probably didn't look quite ready. If selling Kromkamp is necessary in order to bring Kuyt in then fair enough, needs must, but ideally we need recognised cover for right back which doesn't involve shifting people around elsewhere. Could Peltier do it?

This content is not viewable to guests.