The Fish 10663 Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 Yeah, we're just going in circles. I don't think his performance was the best on the pitch. And repeating my point in response to your repeated point isn't going to change anyones mind. For what it's worth I've never claimed his second goal was poor. His second goal was top class, really excellent finish, good positioning, brave etc. Part of me thinks I'm digging my heels in because I'm so frustrated with the club. This doesn't mean I'm taking a position for sport, just that I'm defending it with more fervour than a squabble over who gets the club-sites MoM award, really deserves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norbert Colon 0 Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 I dunno alex, I just don't see him as the best performer on the park. Not by a long way. I'm not being pernickety and picking his performance apart piece by piece, I just think overall he was poor. Yes he finished the chances, but so often he was the reason attacks came to nought. We're clearly not going to agree, but I just don't believe scoring three times whilst playing poorly in the other facets of the game is justification for MoM when there were better performers on the pitch who contributed as much, if not more. As much as Shola put the ball away, Enrique and Raylor served it up with such quality it'd be implausible to fail to. That's utterly ridiculous. For the first he still had to beat his markers and for the second he got between two defenders and put the ball past the keeper from a fairly tight angle with a great header. You make it sound like both were like Luque's against Palermo. He scared the shite out of the opposition - his confidence is obviously shot but as it started to come back he looked better - he took his goals , the first one was a bit lucky but it was telling that the second one from a similar position was taken with aplomb. He needs to keep the aggression and hunger and keep scoring to win the fans over but i would rather have him than alot of other strikers in this league. Raylor was fuckin awful bar that cross and hid constantly until we were three up - Enrique is what he is which can be very good and then ten seconds later try to make a two yard pass and kick it straight out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 Yeah, we're just going in circles. I don't think his performance was the best on the pitch. And repeating my point in response to your repeated point isn't going to change anyones mind. For what it's worth I've never claimed his second goal was poor. His second goal was top class, really excellent finish, good positioning, brave etc. Part of me thinks I'm digging my heels in because I'm so frustrated with the club. This doesn't mean I'm taking a position for sport, just that I'm defending it with more fervour than a squabble over who gets the club-sites MoM award, really deserves. No, but you did say it was 'implausible to miss' because of the quality of the cross. Yet it was (according to you) an excellent finish that required bravery and good positioning. OK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 10663 Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 Yeah, we're just going in circles. I don't think his performance was the best on the pitch. And repeating my point in response to your repeated point isn't going to change anyones mind. For what it's worth I've never claimed his second goal was poor. His second goal was top class, really excellent finish, good positioning, brave etc. Part of me thinks I'm digging my heels in because I'm so frustrated with the club. This doesn't mean I'm taking a position for sport, just that I'm defending it with more fervour than a squabble over who gets the club-sites MoM award, really deserves. No, but you did say it was 'implausible to miss' because of the quality of the cross. Yet it was (according to you) an excellent finish that required bravery and good positioning. OK You never use hyperbole? I think you know what I'm saying. Both crosses were top top class, better than the finishes that followed imo. Anyway I'm getting dragged into this again and I don't want to. Shola was not MoM in my opinion and there's sweet fanny adams you can say to convince me otherwise. So.. stfu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 Yeah, we're just going in circles. I don't think his performance was the best on the pitch. And repeating my point in response to your repeated point isn't going to change anyones mind. For what it's worth I've never claimed his second goal was poor. His second goal was top class, really excellent finish, good positioning, brave etc. Part of me thinks I'm digging my heels in because I'm so frustrated with the club. This doesn't mean I'm taking a position for sport, just that I'm defending it with more fervour than a squabble over who gets the club-sites MoM award, really deserves. No, but you did say it was 'implausible to miss' because of the quality of the cross. Yet it was (according to you) an excellent finish that required bravery and good positioning. OK You never use hyperbole? I think you know what I'm saying. Both crosses were top top class, better than the finishes that followed imo. Anyway I'm getting dragged into this again and I don't want to. Shola was not MoM in my opinion and there's sweet fanny adams you can say to convince me otherwise. So.. stfu The only reason you don't like it Fish is because I'm showing that you're talking shit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 10663 Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 Fucks sake alex, I'm not "talking shit", I'm not saying he was utter garbage, I'm saying I thought there were better performers on the pitch. Shola deserves praise for his hat-trick, but his overall game on saturday was, in my opinion, poor. Why has this got your hackles up so much? Why do you honestly care about who I think should get MoM? It makes no earthly difference to anything what-so-ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 Fucks sake alex, I'm not "talking shit", I'm not saying he was utter garbage, I'm saying I thought there were better performers on the pitch. Shola deserves praise for his hat-trick, but his overall game on saturday was, in my opinion, poor. Why has this got your hackles up so much? Why do you honestly care about who I think should get MoM? It makes no earthly difference to anything what-so-ever. You are talking shit, take it from me. You thought Ryan Taylor had a canny game ffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 10663 Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 And as I said to you, I'm happy to admit through the tv, performances can seem far better or worse. But if Shola, who scored a hat-trick, can still seem poor to me, you've got to ask yourself why? Like I said, his overall game was poor in my opinion. He gave up the ball too often, he made stupid runs (when he could be arsed) he made bad decisions and he committed stupid fouls. I've repeated this ad infinitum and still you say I'm wrong (despite it being an opinion) and that I'm talking shit. So despite giving reasonable explanations for my opinion, you're not satisfied and want me to change it. I'm absolutely not going to do that. There's nothing you can say that will make me forget about his failings against Reading unless you show me whatever game you saw where his game was free from the mistakes and faults I mention above. and I still don't understand why you care who I think performed better than others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 And as I said to you, I'm happy to admit through the tv, performances can seem far better or worse. But if Shola, who scored a hat-trick, can still seem poor to me, you've got to ask yourself why? Like I said, his overall game was poor in my opinion. He gave up the ball too often, he made stupid runs (when he could be arsed) he made bad decisions and he committed stupid fouls. I've repeated this ad infinitum and still you say I'm wrong (despite it being an opinion) and that I'm talking shit. So despite giving reasonable explanations for my opinion, you're not satisfied and want me to change it. I'm absolutely not going to do that. There's nothing you can say that will make me forget about his failings against Reading unless you show me whatever game you saw where his game was free from the mistakes and faults I mention above. and I still don't understand why you care who I think performed better than others. I'm just discussing it to be honest. I took issue mainly with your underplaying of the value of the goals, which then became a suggestion they were tap-ins and also that he did very little other than score. I'm not saying it was a perfect performance but I think it's a gross injustice to even consider anyone else for MOTM. No one else did anything remotely as important as what he did in the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 10663 Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 I'm just discussing it to be honest. I took issue mainly with your underplaying of the value of the goals, which then became a suggestion they were tap-ins and also that he did very little other than score. I'm not saying it was a perfect performance but I think it's a gross injustice to even consider anyone else for MOTM. No one else did anything remotely as important as what he did in the game. I think Enrique was more important to the outcome of the game than Shola. I think the fullback was creating enough going forward that someone was going to score. He also was pretty resolute in defence. He contributed more to the teams performance, on the whole, in my eyes. I feel the need to clarify, however. I do think Shola deserves credit for hitting the net, but I think the play of others is being overlooked because of the hat-trick. Bestowing MoM tends to give the impression the player gave a good performance and I don't think that Shola's overall performance was good. But like I said, we're going in circles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trophyshy 7066 Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 Interested to see who will let this lie, even money at the minute. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 9/10 times the hat-trick scorer will get MOM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noelie 103 Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 9/10 times the hat-trick scorer will get MOM. Sadly that's very true, any given player can be playing pretty poorly throughout the match but if he scores 3 goals, regardless of the calibre. more than likely he will be MOM. Scoring goals has always seemed to boost a player's performence, often overshadowing the performence of other players who have put in a far better days work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig 6670 Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 I dunno alex, I just don't see him as the best performer on the park. Not by a long way. I'm not being pernickety and picking his performance apart piece by piece, I just think overall he was poor. Yes he finished the chances, but so often he was the reason attacks came to nought. We're clearly not going to agree, but I just don't believe scoring three times whilst playing poorly in the other facets of the game is justification for MoM when there were better performers on the pitch who contributed as much, if not more. As much as Shola put the ball away, Enrique and Raylor served it up with such quality it'd be implausible to fail to. Hoang on one second, are you suggesting Shola wasn't deserving of it but Raylor was? Oh that's priceless.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbo 172 Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew 4713 Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 10663 Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 I dunno alex, I just don't see him as the best performer on the park. Not by a long way. I'm not being pernickety and picking his performance apart piece by piece, I just think overall he was poor. Yes he finished the chances, but so often he was the reason attacks came to nought. We're clearly not going to agree, but I just don't believe scoring three times whilst playing poorly in the other facets of the game is justification for MoM when there were better performers on the pitch who contributed as much, if not more. As much as Shola put the ball away, Enrique and Raylor served it up with such quality it'd be implausible to fail to. Hoang on one second, are you suggesting Shola wasn't deserving of it but Raylor was? Oh that's priceless.... No spacker boy I'm not. Read it again and apologise for being a massive mong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig 6670 Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 Fish man, you're such a fucking mong.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 9/10 times the hat-trick scorer will get MOM. Sadly that's very true, any given player can be playing pretty poorly throughout the match but if he scores 3 goals, regardless of the calibre. more than likely he will be MOM. Scoring goals has always seemed to boost a player's performence, often overshadowing the performence of other players who have put in a far better days work. Imagine that, scoring 3 goals in a 3-0 win and overshadowing your colleagues? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 10663 Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 Fish man, you're such a fucking mong.... ...? You get it staggeringly wrong and I'm the mong? Jesus, Craig just admit you fucked up and didn't read the post properly. Nobody will think you're a bigger twat than they do now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig 6670 Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 Fish man, you're such a fucking mong.... ...? You get it staggeringly wrong and I'm the mong? Jesus, Craig just admit you fucked up and didn't read the post properly. Nobody will think you're a bigger twat than they do now Jesus christ it's captain kling-on - Alex is right... You claimed that there were better performances on the pitch than Shola and in the very next sentence brought up Enrique & Ryan Taylor. If that's not suggestion for your argument then you need to consider how you construct paragraphs m'laddo.... Careful how you run along now, that tail's getting stuck in your arse cheeks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom 14011 Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 The thinking man's striker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig 6670 Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 The thinking man's striker Trainers need 'christening' tbh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 If Ryan Taylor didn't have a set-piece (which isn't even that great to be honest) would he even be a professional footballer? He's the sort of lad you could imagine getting released then ending up playing in the Conference in a couple of years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 10663 Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 Fish man, you're such a fucking mong.... ...? You get it staggeringly wrong and I'm the mong? Jesus, Craig just admit you fucked up and didn't read the post properly. Nobody will think you're a bigger twat than they do now Jesus christ it's captain kling-on - Alex is right... You claimed that there were better performances on the pitch than Shola and in the very next sentence brought up Enrique & Ryan Taylor. If that's not suggestion for your argument then you need to consider how you construct paragraphs m'laddo.... Careful how you run along now, that tail's getting stuck in your arse cheeks. Pipe down Potter. I said that there were better performances on the pitch and then in the next sentence state that I thought that the delivery from Enrique and Taylor for the goals from open play were excellent. At no point did I say that Ryan Taylor's performance was better than Ameobi's, I think the highest praise I bestowed on it was that it wasn't as bad as Colo's... I may have used the word decent. You're leap of illogic was your own downfall. If you can't be arsed to read something properly, you shouldn't bother. Still not going to admit you made an erroneous assumption then? No surprises Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.png.403f4a475ac3bb53997c2626c09ef800.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now