[Archived] Keith Andrews - Rovers Newest Signing

[broadsword]

Who cares though? All that should matter is how he performs for us surely.

Is he playing well enough? Well Sam seems to think so - 27 premier league starts proves that.

I don't think I'm saying anything new here, but let's try again.

You don't mind using the fact that Andrews starts games for Rovers and Ireland to support your argument that he is a decent player (or whatever phrase you've used), but the fact that he didn't start a single international or top-flight game for 10 years is of no consequence, presumably because it doesn't support your argument.

27 league starts doesn't prove that Sam thinks he's playing well enough (you don't say well enough for what, but presumably you mean well enough to merit starting more games than he doesn't). It means, to me anyway, that he was one of the least-worst options. That is not necessarily something in his favour.

Stop repeating the same old tired guff that doesn't actually prove anything and start judging things in context.

It's really very very tired, and your single-minded "rebuttal" of people's points of view with half-baked "proofs" is starting to get me down.

For pity's sakes, pack.it.in

[Tris]

It is posts like your own and the two previous which are forcing me to repeat myself.

Jesus, I can't be bothered with justfying myself anymore.

I'm not surprised.

Even casting the most favourable angle on your reply here, you are slagging off your own posts.

And you are far, far more repetitive than the person you have put on ignore.

[tcj_jones]

I'm not surprised.

Even casting the most favourable angle on your reply here, you are slagging off your own posts.

And you are far, far more repetitive than the person you have put on ignore.

I'm not really sure what you're getting at in the first part of your post, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

And what point am I being far, far more repetitive with then, exactly? It astounds me that you could say that when I have made a whole shed load of varied points on this topic and across the board as a whole for over five years.

EDIT: actually, PM me it. I'd still like to know, but people are clearly getting fed up with listening to these kind o arguments.

[Jonnolad]

I don't think I'm saying anything new here, but let's try again.

You don't mind using the fact that Andrews starts games for Rovers and Ireland to support your argument that he is a decent player (or whatever phrase you've used), but the fact that he didn't start a single international or top-flight game for 10 years is of no consequence, presumably because it doesn't support your argument.

Ok then, let's say for arguments sake that the reason he wasn't getting Premier League or international starts was he wasn't good enough for the last 10 years - that would be the best case situation for your point. Who cares though? Surely what matters is he is now good enough, because the undisputable fact is that he is now getting Premier League and international starts. Therefore for whatever reason he has improved himself immeasurably since he came to Rovers.

Should we hold it against him though that he wasn't good enough for the previous 10 years before he came to us? Why? If anything surely it's better that he didn't used to be good enough since we got him at a bargain price of £750k, and he has since improved and proved himself to be worth far more than that (which is testified by Fulham bidding far more and Rovers not even wanting to enter into negotiations).

By your logic we should be buying and applauding players based solely on their former glories, rather than how they perform in a Rovers shirt. Well that's clearly nuts. Should we put a bid in for Paul Gascoigne? Who cares if he's now a washed up alcoholic - he used to be really really good.

[broadsword]

You're completely missing the point.

yes, he is getting premier league starts.

before he wasn't

he didn't suddenly become good enough overnight at the age of 28 to play top-flight football

He only got his chance because of Paul Ince, who is by common consent a really woeful manager.

What i'm saying is that you can't say he's a premiership player because he's in the premiership so he must be good enough. it's far too simplistic, and doesn't take into account his talent or lack thereof. The point you continually miss is that we can all play that game and if I do then I win because 10:1 he's spent outside the premiership. Therefore I win 10-1.

I'm not sure what's going on with Fulham, the size of the bid wasn't confirmed but he would only ever be a back-up player for them.

I have no idea why you're bringing Paul Gascoigne into the argument, your thinking seems to be very muddled.

[jim mk2]

You're completely missing the point.

yes, he is getting premier league starts.

before he wasn't

he didn't suddenly become good enough overnight at the age of 28 to play top-flight football

He only got his chance because of Paul Ince, who is by common consent a really woeful manager.

What i'm saying is that you can't say he's a premiership player because he's in the premiership so he must be good enough. it's far too simplistic, and doesn't take into account his talent or lack thereof. The point you continually miss is that we can all play that game and if I do then I win because 10:1 he's spent outside the premiership. Therefore I win 10-1.

I'm not sure what's going on with Fulham, the size of the bid wasn't confirmed but he would only ever be a back-up player for them.

I have no idea why you're bringing Paul Gascoigne into the argument, your thinking seems to be very muddled.

Wasting your time. He's not interested in the evidence before his eyes, only spurious "stats" and arguments that have been demolished several times but which he keeps repeating ad nauseum in the belief that he is right and everyone else is wrong. It's a personality defect.

Better to leave him be as proud president of the Keith Andrews Appreciation Society.

Membership of one.

[Roaming Rover]

Keith, Keith, Keith Andrews

[Jonnolad]

You're completely missing the point.

yes, he is getting premier league starts.

before he wasn't

he didn't suddenly become good enough overnight at the age of 28 to play top-flight football

He only got his chance because of Paul Ince, who is by common consent a really woeful manager.

What i'm saying is that you can't say he's a premiership player because he's in the premiership so he must be good enough. it's far too simplistic, and doesn't take into account his talent or lack thereof. The point you continually miss is that we can all play that game and if I do then I win because 10:1 he's spent outside the premiership. Therefore I win 10-1.

Your argument is clearly tosh with regard to him being a Premier League player or not.

Should Sam base his decision to play Andrews on what happened 10 or even 5 years ago?

"I'm sorry Keith, I know you're doing really well in training, and are better than other players, but on February 16th 2003 you were only playing against Brentford, therefore I have to play someone worse instead"

This clearly shouldn't and doesn't happen - it's bordering on laughable that you would use it as back up of your opinion in fact.

Either Andrews is now getting Premier League starts now or he isn't - and unfortunately for you he is. Therefore, in Sam Allardyce's opinion at the very least, he is a Premier League player. End of. Only you are bothered what happened in the past 10 years before he came to Rovers because you have nothing else to back up your skewed opinion of the player.

It doesn't matter that it was Ince who gave Andrews a chance in the first place btw. What matters is that Sam Allardyce and Giovanni Trappatoni think he's good enough for the top level - and Roy Hodgson clearly does too. You obviously haven't got past the fact that Ince bought Andrews to our club, but I suggest you do since our current manager not Ince rates the player.

[LeChuck]

Giovanni Trappatoni think he's good enough for the top level

I don't know why I keep bothering answering this.

The only thing Andrews' Ireland selection tells us is that Trappatoni believes he is better than Liam Miller. If he was being selected ahead of other 'top level' players, fair enough.

[47er]

Jonnolad----------all the points you've made in the last couple of posts have been made and responded to over and over again, but you continue to raise them as if they are new. I once asked you if you were Vinjay, now I'm wondering if you're a goldfish. Please,let it go. You rate Andrews, several agree with you, more don't. Can we leave it there and maybe return when/if he plays?

[Jonnolad]

Wasting your time. He's not interested in the evidence before his eyes, only spurious "stats" and arguments that have been demolished several times but which he keeps repeating ad nauseum in the belief that he is right and everyone else is wrong. It's a personality defect.

Better to leave him be as proud president of the Keith Andrews Appreciation Society.

Membership of one.

You seem to have 2 very clear problems Jim:

1) None of my arguments have been demolished - just saying they have doesn't make it so (no matter how much you want it to).

2) I'm not in the minority - you now are. Have a good careful read of thenodrog's post and then see how many people openly agreed with it.

[broadsword]

No, *you're* missing the point. Time and time and time again.

Allardyce rates the player? yes, of course because he played when so many other midfielders were available. He's getting played by *default* can you not see that? or are you just refusing to see it? An incapable manager was his route into the Premiership, and he's still there because at the minute we have no better options. can you not see that?

He's getting starts, but don't bother seeing past that because that's obviously enough for you to win the argument!

I'm bringing up his past history because for 10 years no-one thought he was good enough, and it's only by pure fluke he's getting starts now.

it's really startlingly obvious, and you can deride my arguments all you like (thought we weren't meant to get personal on here?) but it's clear to a lot of other people he's simply not up to par.

Edited to appease Anti-Dingle-Brigade

[Jonnolad]

Jonnolad----------all the points you've made in the last couple of posts have been made and responded to over and over again, but you continue to raise them as if they are new. I once asked you if you were Vinjay, now I'm wondering if you're a goldfish. Please,let it go. You rate Andrews, several agree with you, more don't. Can we leave it there and maybe return when/if he plays?

I haven't raised them though have I - Bryan did. Unsurprisingly (some would say spinelessly) I don't see you berating him though.

You are right about the goldfish thing though - the points have been gone through before. I wish this was PM's question time and I could just refer people to answers I supplied earlier.

[broadsword]

Wasting your time. He's not interested in the evidence before his eyes, only spurious "stats" and arguments that have been demolished several times but which he keeps repeating ad nauseum in the belief that he is right and everyone else is wrong. It's a personality defect.

Better to leave him be as proud president of the Keith Andrews Appreciation Society.

Membership of one.

Agreed, it's actually quite alarming.

[Anti-Dingle-Brigade]

it's clear to everyone else he's simply not up to par.

Nice to see you're speaking for everybody.

Enough is enough now, lets make a poll and see how people really rate him and stop the "everyone thinks this or that" crap.

1. Andrews should be club captain.

2. Andrews is a starter.

3. Andrews is a rotational squad player.

4. Andrews is a fringe player/back up worth keeping.

5. Andrews is not good enough.

6. Sell him at any price.

[broadsword]

---

[Jonnolad]

No, *you're* missing the point. Time and time and time again.

Allardyce rates the player? yes, of course because he played when so many other midfielders were available. He's getting played by *default* can you not see that? or are you just refusing to see it? An incapable manager was his route into the Premiership, and he's still there because at the minute we have no better options. can you not see that?

He's getting starts, but don't bother seeing past that because that's obviously enough for you to win the argument!

I'm bringing up his past history because for 10 years no-one thought he was good enough, and it's only by pure fluke he's getting starts now.

it's really startlingly obvious, and you can deride my arguments all you like (thought we weren't meant to get personal on here?) but it's clear to everyone else he's simply not up to par.

Pointing out the ridiculousness of your arguments clearly isn't the same as personal insults - it's a bit bizarre to suggest it is.

Now you claim that Andrews is getting played by default, i.e. there's no-one else to play. If that's the case though, and since he's been played out of position by default, that means you are personally admitting that Andrews is therefore better than at least 10 other Rovers players. Are all these players not Premier League standard therefore, even as squad players? If that's your argument (and that has to be your argument if you are saying he is only there by default), then that's fair enough, but I don't see you (or anyone else) berating any of these other players - especially considering these players are almost certainly getting paid more than Andrews.

Nice to see you're speaking for everybody.

Enough is enough now, lets make a poll and see how people really rate him and stop the "everyone thinks this or that" crap.

1. Andrews should be club captain.

2. Andrews is a starter.

3. Andrews is a rotational squad player.

4. Andrews is a fringe player/back up worth keeping.

5. Andrews is not good enough.

6. Sell him at any price.

Agreed.

[LeChuck]

The choices don't suffice. I wouldn't sell him at any price, but I would sell him for £2 million +. On that scale I'd be 4.5.

[Anti-Dingle-Brigade]

Amend them as you see fit then.

EDIT: Actually, no. That is a scale of talent, not "how much is he worth".

[philipl]

Is Jonnolad Keith Andrews?

[broadsword]

Being so dismissive of someone's arguments is inferring that they're not very bright in my book. It was the tone of what you said. So, no, it's not a "bit bizarre", you've been baitey, derisive and truculent all the way through. It's a bit sad.

Rovers didn't have enough decent fit midfielders (or decent right backs last year), that's why he got played. I wouldn't berate Tugay, Dunn, Reid, Diouf for a lack of talent -- although I've certainly stuck the boot into Grella enough times.

I can't think of any decent players that Andrews would keep out of the side.

[Jonnolad]

Being so dismissive of someone's arguments is inferring that they're not very bright in my book. It was the tone of what you said. So, no, it's not a "bit bizarre", you've been baitey, derisive and truculent all the way through. It's a bit sad.

Rovers didn't have enough decent fit midfielders (or decent right backs last year), that's why he got played. I wouldn't berate Tugay, Dunn, Reid, Diouf for a lack of talent -- although I've certainly stuck the boot into Grella enough times.

I can't think of any decent players that Andrews would keep out of the side.

Would you call Ooijer decent? Khizanishvili?

Andrews was started out of position over those players in position - so there's obviously a huge problem with your argument.

Andrews was started in front of Ooijer at right back in some games (that's Andrews being preferred out of position over the hugely experienced Ooijer). He was also preferred at right back, with Ooijer at centre back, and Khizanishvili on the bench in some games (that's Andrews played out of position rather than both the other players in position).

It's not my fault that your arguments are so weak incidentally - perhaps you need to re-evaluate them if you don't want them to be so easily dismissed.

[broadsword]

That's the Ooijer who've we've just let go back to Holland, yeah?

[LeChuck]

You're the most infuriating person I've ever come across on this board, and that's saying something.

I've answered Andrews at right back MANY times for you. He only ever played there when Ooijer was injured, or when Ooijer was needed at centre back. He was never picked at right back ahead of Ooijer, he was always filling in there because of injuries/suspensions.

[broadsword]

You're the most infuriating person I've ever come across on this board, and that's saying something.

Glad it's not just me then