►►►►►► Match Ratings vs Wolverhampton Wanderers ◄◄◄◄◄◄

MOTM


  • Total voters
    122

Spurs_Bear

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
14,143
#42
As a matter of fact, I'm lying down, StartingPrice. But fuck my old boots. Just fuck my old boots.
:lol:

It's funny isn't it, Livermore has one decent game and all of a sudden he's a better option than a player who has been one of the main reasons we turned our season round after the first two games.
 
Joined
Jun 28, 2009
Messages
10,251
#44
:lol:

It's funny isn't it, Livermore has one decent game and all of a sudden he's a better option than a player who has been one of the main reasons we turned our season round after the first two games.
I eventually got around to watching the Everton game, you know, and for the life of me I could not work out what it was about Livermore's performance that had people spilling their seed all over the shop.
 

mpickard2087

Fantastic Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2008
Messages
19,199
#46
I eventually got around to watching the Everton game, you know, and for the life of me I could not work out what it was about Livermore's performance that had people spilling their seed all over the shop.
For me he put in a very competent performance. In our defensive/ball-winning midfielder (whatever you want to call it) all I want is for them to hold their position well, win the ball back and just lay it off simply to one of our more creative players. He did all this pretty well from what I saw the other night. Its what Parker does very fucking well most weeks, I just didnt understand his advanced role yesterday, I have big love for the guy but its not really what he is suited to.
 
Joined
Jun 28, 2009
Messages
10,251
#48
For me he put in a very competent performance. In our defensive/ball-winning midfielder (whatever you want to call it) all I want is for them to hold their position well, win the ball back and just lay it off simply to one of our more creative players. He did all this pretty well from what I saw the other night. Its what Parker does very fucking well most weeks, I just didnt understand his advanced role yesterday, I have big love for the guy but its not really what he is suited to.
When the opposition run at us in our own half, I could not tell you how many times Livermore backs off and does nothing. He's a big lad, I want to see him putting himself about.

I need to look at yesterday's game again but I have certainly seen Scott play incisive passes in the opposition's half. In fact, I think if superstar Modric's passing were more incisive, we would't see VDV dropping deep so often or Parker trying to take the bull by the horns.
 

jamesc0le

SISS:LOKO:plays/thinks/eats chicken like sissoko!
Joined
Jun 17, 2008
Messages
4,792
#49
i think Jake and Parker are the most similar players in the squad so the polarised opinions don't really add up. not surprised though!
 

punkisback

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2004
Messages
1,487
#50
When the opposition run at us in our own half, I could not tell you how many times Livermore backs off and does nothing. He's a big lad, I want to see him putting himself about.

I need to look at yesterday's game again but I have certainly seen Scott play incisive passes in the opposition's half. In fact, I think if superstar Modric's passing were more incisive, we would't see VDV dropping deep so often or Parker trying to take the bull by the horns.
Who would you rather have as the attacking midfielder Modric or Parker?
Parker is a workhorse with little football ability but a decent tackle and good leadership skills

Modric is a technical, creative player who always seems to find that extra bit of space for himself, which is useful in the opposition third.
 

Spurs_Bear

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
14,143
#51
Who would you rather have as the attacking midfielder Modric or Parker?
Parker is a workhorse with little football ability but a decent tackle and good leadership skills

Modric is a technical, creative player who always seems to find that extra bit of space for himself, which is useful in the opposition third.
That overtakes Dan Ashcroft as one of the worst things I have read about one of our players on this site. Ever.

Bugger my ancient footwear.
 
Joined
Jun 28, 2009
Messages
10,251
#52
Who would you rather have as the attacking midfielder Modric or Parker?
Parker is a workhorse with little football ability but a decent tackle and good leadership skills

Modric is a technical, creative player who always seems to find that extra bit of space for himself, which is useful in the opposition third.
Modric is more comfortable on the ball-there's no doubt about it in my mind-but he's about as incisive as a butter knife and I think he's a big girl's blouse when there's defending to be done. I think he's most valuable in the middle third. Good at keeping the ball moving.

I am actually considering emailing Gary Neville (an outstanding pundit, in my opinion) to ask him why he thinks he's the best central midfielder in the PL.
 

jamesc0le

SISS:LOKO:plays/thinks/eats chicken like sissoko!
Joined
Jun 17, 2008
Messages
4,792
#53
Modric is more comfortable on the ball-there's no doubt about it in my mind-but he's about as incisive as a butter knife and I think he's a big girl's blouse when there's defending to be done. I think he's most valuable in the middle third. Good at keeping the ball moving.

I am actually considering emailing Gary Neville (an outstanding pundit, in my opinion) to ask him why he thinks he's the best central midfielder in the PL.
what a load of shit. the post of a stubborn,jealous man. GTFO
 

Archibald&Crooks

Aegina Expat
Admin
Joined
Feb 1, 2005
Messages
44,815
#55
What is it with you two? I disagree with you therefore, you sir, are a **** sir.

Be nice. Now kiss and make up. I mean it. On the lips.
 

JimmyG2

SC Supporter
Joined
Dec 7, 2006
Messages
7,197
#59
Yeah, only the real pro's rate O'Hara eh?

Poor against Norwich and Chelsea? Do me a favour.

But then you do rate Pav as well don't you Jimmy....
I'haven't claimed to be a pro; neither real or imagined.

I did post a thread questioning whether Scott was any improvement on Jamie before he had played for us and in the light of his first half a dozen performances I admitted that he was an upgrade.
But I still have my reservations about just how good he is for the reasons stated.

Pavlyuchenko was our most effective striker for the two seasons prior to this in terms of goals/minutes on the pitch.
If he had the same amount of game time as Defoe he would have been close to 20 goals per season.
Much underated, has good movement, poor control and an excellent shot.

I have argued for Livermore for more than a season and he was many people's MOM. though not mine.

I have no axe to grind I just call it as I see it.
 

Spurs_Bear

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
14,143
#60
I'haven't claimed to be a pro; neither real or imagined.

I did post a thread questioning whether Scott was any improvement on Jamie before he had played for us and in the light of his first half a dozen performances I admitted that he was an upgrade.
But I still have my reservations about just how good he is for the reasons stated.

Pavlyuchenko was our most effective striker for the two seasons prior to this in terms of goals/minutes on the pitch.
If he had the same amount of game time as Defoe he would have been close to 20 goals per season.
Much underated, has good movement, poor control and an excellent shot.

I have argued for Livermore for more than a season and he was many people's MOM. though not mine.

I have no axe to grind I just call it as I see it.
I'm not doing the Pav argument, I don't class what he does as 'football'. Unfortunately it's far too simplistic to do the whole 'yeah but minutes per goal' argument, and it's a far cry from using reasoned logic.

Very good of you to admit Parker was an upgrade on O'Hara although I've got to say more of a relief than anything else.
 
Top