joey_big_nose

Well if you look at all the flops that every single premiership club has had in their history it does suggest that buying players and selecting ones that will flourish at your club is vital. It is a difficlt art, indeed perhaps te most difficult as it defines what kind of side you have. Perhaps it is easy for Mourinho who can go out and buy whoever he likes. But Paul Jewell has shown genius in the players he has bought. If your theory is correct, "its easy to spot good players" why didn't anyone with more status buy chimbonda or Bellamy or Mendes or Gabbidon or any of the other numerous players who turned out to look absolute bargains? Ultimately you have to be the one who says- I believe this player can succeed and then back them. It is not easy at all. Teams live and die by their signings. Just ask Sunderland.

Well I suppose that is a factor! But seriously I doubt that Tugay has ever been on the money that Ferguson, or Cole, or Yorke, or Bellamy. Mainly becuse there weren't too many sides in for him when he came to us, and we have not had to offer big deals to get him to stay as far as I remember (there was some interest from Galatasary, but that was it I think).

I have had a bit of a think about this and reckon there really isn't much point taking Defoe and leaving Rooney behind. If Owen makes it then we are going to play a Gerrad-Owen combination up front with Crouch coming off the bench with Walcott employed as a supersub to hit other teams on the break. For Defoe to start he will need, I reckon, both Owen and Crouch to be injured as well as Rooney. His involvement would be negligiable if he is on the bench as I rekon Walcott woul dbe preferred as an impact player. So any which way you look at it Defoe is in a bind. It's going to be strange, playing without two 'proper' strikers, but I rekon it could well be interesting and produce some attractive footie.

Jan, some of your favourite players at the club are Souness signings: Freidal, Todd, Niell, Tugay. Give the man some credit. Personally if you look at transfer record I reckon it's better when he has no money, as then he seems to pull off some outstanding coups. If I was the paalce chairman I would be encouraged by that record.

While I agree with the latter part of the statement, Dickov himself (in terms of footballer generally- the rumors are that MGP is going to get 3x that wage) was well worth it IMHO. 13k a week for a player who scored 10 goals a season? Golden. In the light of Gresko, Amoruso, Emerton, Grabbi, Matteo etc - who earn much more than that and do/did f-all -that is a positive bargain! ps. I rekon, although I have no real evidence of this, that Tugay has earnt over the period he has been at Rovers a fraction of the 'star' players at the club. Yet he has been, at some points at least, the most important individual in our side. The crazy world of footie, eh? Yours salary is not determined by your ability/recent performance but rather how many clubs are interested in you at the time of negotiation.

Why should he take it? Because your blessed with insight beyond the average follower of footie? How so? Just because we get someone for a minimal fee it does not mean that the player will get the balance of what the transfer would of been had he been in contract. In order to do that the player would negotiating leverage from somewhere. We don't just give money away. The only way he would be extraordinarily well paid would be if the price was forced up by other clubs banging his door down a la Sol Cambell at the end of his time at Spurs. Didn't happen in this case.

I doubt that. For the 1.5 million to be eaten up in wages he would of needed to be on around 30k a week. The only reason we would ever of paid that is if other clubs put in offers that forced us to do that to tempt him. Sure, I rekon he got a decent signing bonus, but nowhere near those kind of figures. He was cheap-cheap-cheapy-cheep-cheep. Like the budgie. Thats why we signed him.

how was boussouffa?

Although I am not the most patriotic sort I still find it a bit embarassing that the Aussies will STILL have a bigger stadium than us after Wembley is built... I mean we are twice the size in terms of population, much bigger economy, blah blah blah I would love to check the MCG out one day though. For footie are the fans very far away from the pitch, it being an oval and all?

Poubd for pound we got much more out of Dickov than Cole- especially if you consider that Paul's wages must of been a fraction of Andy's. Souness made some great value signings: Dickov, Tugay, Niell, Freidal, Stead, Pedersen, Reid, even Thompson to an extent. But then there have been some clangers too...

We should start with Steven Gerrard and Owen up front. Everybody in this country will get behind that and it will provide a nice balance if we keep the ball on the floor. If we are getting nowhere and we need to aim for heads we can always bring on Crouchy. Personally I would actually think a fully fit combination of Owen and Gerrard up front would be preferable to a Rooney at 80% and Owen.

To be honest I don't think we should need Rooney till the second round. If we are serious about winning the world cup then Beckham, J Cole, A Cole, Lampard, Gerrard, Owen (who does look like he will make it) should have enough collective firepower to win all three group games, at least on paper. The Swedes are never easy, and have looked the better side the last few times we have played them (and in Ljungberg and Ibrahimovich have two genuinely worldclass players), BUT we still shouldn't be looking for Rooney to make the difference.

It's absolutely, definately, undeniably a pointless discussion. I can't believe people keep on posting pointless posts. Outrageous.

I agree with that, but we were working on the hypothetical basis that Rooney was fit. And I guess my point is that Carrick can't b dropped for any of those players because he is the only one who will look to hold the side together.

My sentiments exactly! Still a top side if getting a little old. Like Germany they could win the competition but really other sides with more all round quality should tke the trophy

Granted. So we are agreed- he should of hesitated and and blown after the goal then sending off the keeper awarding the the goal. Failing that, due to blowing too early, he should of sent the keeper off and given a free kick, which he did.

Eddie!!!! THe referee is not supposed to make decisions on the basis of 'what's better for the neutal observer', but on the basis of the culpability of those who break the rules of the came. It is supposed to be a fair contest, remember? The rule of law and all that. Bejesus. It is people who exercise judgement like that that get Rovers into so much grief. They equate the concept of an unattractive game with justification for refereeing decisions. Favourable decsions are given to the big clubs in the interest of creating a 'more attractive game' which equates to soft cards being handed out to 'those cloggers' (ie us, Bolton, FUlham etc).

So who would you drop out of Beckham, Lampard, Gerrard and J Cole to accomodate Carrick? Or would you not accomodate Carrick?

If SGE had some balls then Beckham, even though he has playerd well recently, should be the one to give way with Stevie G on the right. As SGE generally does not have balls (but maybe in the post Walcottgate era...) it would probably be Cole who would lose out, with Gerrard on the left. Either way I think Sven has committed himself to the notion that the midfield can only work if there is someone to hold it together and Carrick is that guy. Gerrard just cannot help himself but burst forward, fair enough if you have that level of talent, but we just lose the ball so much and have little cohesion. It's a tough decision, but one that I think will massively improve our chances. One less top quality player, but a lot more balance. I'll bet a tenner on it if anybody fancies a wager.

Look, Lehman committed a PROFESSIONAL FOUL. He intended to do what he did. It's like saying an assassin should be punished lesh harshly merely because he missed. The question is the intent and the commitment of that intent and he did both. He shouldn't be allowed to stay on the pitch because he failed to do what he intended to to the full extent (ie. prevent a goal through committing a foul). His rubbishness as a cgheater should not mean he gets treated more leiniently. If it is within the referees powers, and I didn't realise it was until someone mentioned it, Lehman should have been sent off AND the goal allowed! So actually Arsenal could be construed as quite lucky, rather than the other way around.

Barcelona are just Catalan. Being Catalan and Basque would be like being Welsh and Northern Irish! The Basque country is a pocket of the country, culturally, linguistically and historically distinct from the rest of spain (and even runs a little into France), even more so than the Catalans. Anyhow here's the wiki page: Baque Country There are three basque teams: Real Sociedad, Athletic Bilbao and Deportivo Alves (beaten by liverpool in the Uefa cup final a few years back). Bilbao are the only ones who have the Basque only player policy. And they still managed to finish 13th- food for thought? ps. Just looked into it. THey have operated the Basque only system ("cantera") since 1920 odd and still been a top club throughout most of the peiod since. They have supplied more players to the Spain national team than any other club and eight league championships including back to back titles in '82 and '83. And, to prove it is not something that can't happen in contemprary football, they managed to come second in 1998 and have not been relegated in ages if at all.

Well, I don' quite get your complaint. Lehman committed a professional foul and by any interpretation of the rules he should have been sent off. In the rule book I have never seen a clause which says "if a sending off will be detrimental to the spectacle let the player stay on the pitch". The ref had a straight choice as to whether the goal would be an adequate compensation and he decided Barcelona got greater compensation for the foul through the sending off. With players like Deco and Ronaldinho with a free kick just outside the box, and playing a man extra for a vast 72 minutes, it is easy to understand his decision. Sure it was bad for the game to watch, but aren't referees supposed to apply the rules fairly? Oh, and how were Barca lucky? How was two great passes by Larsson and two good finishes by Eto'o and Benetti 'luckier' than shots by Henry and Ljungberg? I wanted Arsenal to win but they lost fair and square, why winge about it? And the biggest cheat in that match was Eboue by a long chalk. The dive for the opening free kick is the sort of thing they should have a panel for to go and punish the player retrospectively.

I don't think thats quite right. Carrick will almost certainly start, I reckon, even if everybody is fit. He gets the number 18 because of the other 4 midfielders senority.

Not sure why everybody was so underwhelmed by Ronaldinho, while not spectacular he still caused Arsenal more problems than Henry did at the other end. The array of talent Barca have is breathtaking, if they get henry as well then that is just taking the wee. If I was Thierry I would be looking at that side and thinking 'I'm not going to be the daddy in that side', rather one of a vertiable collection of footballing superstars. I think Henry likes being the biggest fish. Plus he didn't look like he was too keen on the treatment dealt out by his potential collegues. I can't quite see him in different colours. ps. For England the performances of Campbell and Cole were massively encouraging. Along with Gerrard and Beckham they seem to be hitting form just at the right time...