**Football 5th-9th Mar 2010/2011

Tom84 said:
You remember incorrectly then.
Click to expand...

I believe Wilkens said he should be off but not Souness though :)
Weebull said:
I thought that. Best thing Hodgson did for them, eh?
Click to expand...

I know what you're going to think but......

Meireles was signed purely on the recommendation of Liverpool's chief scout at the time :p I suppose the final call was with Hodgson though.

And for what it's worth, I'm still not 100% convinced by him. When we're playing well and knocking the ball about he looks really good, and he's been popping up with goals but in high tempo games or where we're not playing well, the game passes him by.
 
Weebull said:
He still had to say "Yes" though. :p
Click to expand...

On a completely serious note. Had he not sent Aquilani out on loan in the first place we wouldn't have needed him and would have had near enough £12m to spend on a winger/striker.

And that's before taking into account the ~£12m wasted on Jones (can't even get on the bench since Roy left), Konchesky and Poulsen (behind Spearing and Shelvey in the pecking order).

For a club with no money, we sure could have spent a bit more wisely.
 
:o

I was enjoying Tom's 'passion' in this thread thus far, in fact it's why I came here.

Well, that and RDM/Jokester's 'conservatism for conservatism's sake' carry-on in your SC thread... I love's stubborness me.
 
BaZ87 said:
On a completely serious note. Had he not sent Aquilani out on loan in the first place we wouldn't have needed him and would have had near enough £12m to spend on a winger/striker.

And that's before taking into account the ~£12m wasted on Jones (can't even get on the bench since Roy left), Konchesky and Poulsen (behind Spearing and Shelvey in the pecking order).

For a club with no money, we sure could have spent a bit more wisely.
Click to expand...

Weren't Jones and Konchesky needed to make up your "homegrown" quota?
 
Stag said:
Weren't Jones and Konchesky needed to make up your "homegrown" quota?
Click to expand...

Hodgson and Purslow would like you to believe that but no.

This 'homegrown' quota stuff is slightly misleading. You don't need 8 'homegrown' players over the age of 21, you just can't have more than 17 non-homegrown players over the age of 21 in your squad; iirc, we only had 13.

If a club doesn't have 8 'homegrown' players, they simply make up the numbers with youngsters, who don't need to be included in the squad.
 
Would it not still be preferable to have Jones and Konchesky in your substitutes or immediate reserves over some soon-to-be-moved-on academy fodder Baz? As in, are there other players of capable of bringing up the quota that could feasibly be started?

(And as harsh as Liverpool fans are on the aforementioned players, in all honesty surely they would still be better than most if not all of your academy graduates?)
 
guyfawkes5 said:
I was enjoying Tom's 'passion' in this thread thus far, in fact it's why I came here.
Click to expand...
He seems to have left after the "but that's what Sky Sports said" defence failed.

Well, that and RDM/Jokester's 'conservatism for conservatism's sake' carry-on in your SC thread... I love's stubborness me.
Click to expand...
RDM was at least trying to provide some decent arguments. Jokester's just stamping his foot and going "DOES NOT WANT" repeatedly. :(
 
Loki said:
It's a team game. You seriously excell at the art of Muppetry. On the day Liverpool were better than us. Yes the defeat hurts like hell but we will get over it.
.
Click to expand...

No, its one persons responsibility and one persons only.

Players can make mistakes, players can have bad games.

A manager can choose to start three OAP's, a midfielder who plays like he is taking part in the special Olympics, and set those players out in a horribly exposed formation against their hated rivals.

A player can be rubbish, A manager however, can choose to play that player, week in week out, or admit he has made a mistake in buying him or admit he cant train him up, and do something about it.

On the one hand you cant say Fergie is great we are top of the league look at how great he is, then on the other hand deny he has any responsibility for the pathetic away form and the results against Chelsea and Liverpool.

He is either responsible for how the team plays, or he isnt, which is it?

I've heard these kind of pathetic excuses at work "Its not my fault, they didnt do as I asked, they wont listen, we didnt get done because of x/y/z"

Well guess what? It not getting done all falls at my doorstep, your failings, and the staff below you failing are all MY fault when they happen, as I should be putting people in place that can perform, regardless of what happens.

If had a member of staff that was good for 50% of the time, poor for 25% of the time and a ******* disaster for the other 25%, no matter how good he has been in the past, I'd be having words to buck his ideas up or he would be off.
And I'm not talking about sacking a man who has a multi million pound fortune, who never needs to lift a finger for the rest of life where the only thing I'll be hurting is pride, but real people, where the job is the difference between them having a home, or not.
 
Last edited:
G|mp said:
Stupid ****ing Nani, it's all his fault for not wearing proper shin pads!!!!!1!!!1
Click to expand...
Yeah, I bet Ronaldo wears proper pads.

EDIT (aimed at atpbx's post above, though not at him): I'm no Man Utd basher (no, really!), but you've got to admit that when Fletcher and O'Shea are the best you can bring on to chase a game, something's pretty wrong there. Nani going off was a blow to the team, but you resorted to that odd "Giggs on the right, Rooney on the left" formation that just did nothing for you, and then, like I said, you had no more options left to make, and Fergie clearly didn't see any issues to change it at any point.

No wonder he's not giving any interviews today. Woe betide any poor soul that would dare to question that in person.
 
Last edited:
I don't think any of them wear 'proper' pads anyway, they slow you down for one but lets not let Purdy and his wild excuses come in for any criticism.
 
guyfawkes5 said:
Would it not still be preferable to have Jones and Konchesky in your substitutes or immediate reserves over some soon-to-be-moved-on academy fodder Baz? As in, are there other players of capable of bringing up the quota that could feasibly be started?

(And as harsh as Liverpool fans are on the aforementioned players, in all honesty surely they would still be better than most if not all of your academy graduates?)
Click to expand...

Simple answer, yes. There's no good reason for signing Jones, we've got at least 2 young keepers who are better than Jones. Poulsen has gone from starting under Hodgson to being behind Spearing and Shelvey and Konchesky is so useless that we decided we'd be better without him all together, even without signing a replacement.

That's only half the story though. In an ideal world, of course you'd want to have 25 senior players to pick from but money for us in the summer was incredibly tight and what was spent on them could and should have been spent elsewhere.

To sum up the madness of our transfer dealings; imagine had we not signed Jones, Konchesky and Poulsen and also not loaned out Insua and Aquilani. We'd have been 1 senior player short but the squad would have been stronger and we'd be ~£12m better off.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom