Would say yes or no to the following?

[red g]

He really doesn't and he is considerably worse under pressure and often makes a lot of poor decisions.

with his assist record he obviously makes quite a few good ones though too......

[Fosterbloke]

NO and **** off.

[Mostar]

with his assist record he obviously makes quite a few good ones though too......

[Zapater]

The only player out of those I could possibly find a use for is Young. Parker would've been a decent shout 5 years ago, but he'd be nothing more than a stop gap, which I don't mind because unlike others on here I do like experienced players but only in certain situations. The problem is with the fee that West Ham would demand added to his over exorbitant wages I don't think it represents value for money, we can find other, cheaper alternatives to get the same job done.

Downing I'd rather steer clear of altogether and we already did a smashing job to get rid of Warnock once, I don't want to have that task again. Even though Warnock hasn't really been a crock lately he was in the past and could easily become Aurelio 2.0 but the main reason I don't want him again is because he's ****ing tripe.

Also, for me it's vital for our midfield that Aquilani stays next season if Juve don't activate his clause. With the kind of target it seems we'll be looking to acquire and the current players we have we'll need Aquilani to add some much needed creativity, variety and depth to our squad. Also, he gives a great option of a someone to play between the lines to vary things up.

That said that rest of them (perhaps excluding Insua - I'm 50-50 on him) can **** off, don't care how much we get really as long as they're not playing for us and we're not paying them wages it's an improvement. We need players that are good enough or can potentially be good enough - not the kind of dead wood that Poulsen and Konchesky personify.

[Mattshark]

with his assist record he obviously makes quite a few good ones though too......

How much of that is from set pieces?

[dww]

apart from being black and fast I dont see any other simalarities at all.

Young has proved he can score, beat a man and cross a ball and has been consistently good in the premiership .....apart from the odd blip

Young is the player babel could have been.

I'm not sure that Young does as much man beating as people give him credit for. He crosses earlier than Babel, but most times I have seen him play he has run into blind alley ways and wasted possession much more frequently. Like Babel his movement seems poor and the positions he takes often easy to mark. It's that lack of intelligence, combined with the fact that they both have obvious talent and speed that makes them similar for me.

He looked better for England in the last two games and I can believe that Houllier playing him up front has helped him in some ways - as Capello seemed to indicate. Even if it is more of a learning experience than something which has worked out for Villa as a team.

[Baracus]

I'm not sure that Young does as much man beating as people give him credit for. He crosses earlier than Babel, but most times I have seen him play he has run into blind alley ways and wasted possession much more frequently. Like Babel his movement seems poor and the positions he takes often easy to mark. It's that lack of intelligence, combined with the fact that they both have obvious talent and speed that makes them similar for me.He looked better for England in the last two games and I can believe that Houllier playing him up front has helped him in some ways - as Capello seemed to indicate. Even if it is more of a learning experience than something which has worked out for Villa as a team.

Spot on