- Jun 28, 2009
- 10,292
- 8,250
You are sitting down :wink:
As a matter of fact, I'm lying down, StartingPrice. But fuck my old boots. Just fuck my old boots.
You are sitting down :wink:
As a matter of fact, I'm lying down, StartingPrice. But fuck my old boots. Just fuck my old boots.
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.
I eventually got around to watching the Blank game, you know, and for the life of me I could not work out what it was about Parker's performance that had people spilling their seed all over the shop.
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.
last 6 games he's played could read as this.
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.
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.
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.
what a load of shit. the post of a stubborn,jealous man. GTFO
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.
You must have missed his thread about VDV? The Hypnotic Slug thread?
It all began when I called O'Horror a jumped up little shit.
Better than Parker apparently.
I'haven't claimed to be a pro; neither real or imagined.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.