Dear Guest
Thank you for visiting! est189 will soon be closing its doors (do forums have doors?) please visit the following thread - (to wail & cry perhaps?)
https://www.est1892.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?p=4002484#post4002484
Thanjk you.
Paul.S
The only gracious way to accept an insult is to ignore it; if you can't ignore it, top it; if you can't top it, laugh at it; if you can't laugh at it, it's probably deserved.
The thing about the chances he does miss, more often than not are fashioned by himself or cheeky first time shots which other players can't or won't attempt. I don't deny that he could improve upon that or a true poacher would improve our squad, but in relation to Suarez I'm not sure if it'd subsidise that "weakness" in his game.
He's not ruthless in front of goal, but he's far from awful.
We need to make Carroll work. He's a great finisher who never really got the chances in the box here to show it. Newcastle knew how to use him, at the tip of the attack, we need to start doing the same.
Suarez is a Beardsley type of player. Carroll is Aldo mark II.
Hate harping on about it but yeah, I agree we lack something. And I don't like talking about him but Torres up top with Suarez playing off him would've been ace.
Something like:
Reina
Johnson Carragher Agger Enrique
Alonso Lucas
Gerrard Suarez Maxi / Riera
Torres
Off topic but Sky are showing highlights of the 2005 CL final now on sky sports 2, for anyone who is interested
The only gracious way to accept an insult is to ignore it; if you can't ignore it, top it; if you can't top it, laugh at it; if you can't laugh at it, it's probably deserved.
Clearly we lack quite a few things but if we play good football and continue getting decent results we have a good chance of getting into the top 4. Once we're in the CL we can really make the required additions to the squad to get the player who'll make the difference.
Sorry, I haven't read all the thread but who are we blaming?
. Suppose you have a physicist and a sociologist standing at the side of a field, observing a set of events unfolding on the field. The physicist does [describes] it using the terminology of mass and velocity and frequency of radiation and the rest. And the sociologist does it by describing it as a rugby match.
F*ck, really? I was hoping we would be lynching one of our own.
. Suppose you have a physicist and a sociologist standing at the side of a field, observing a set of events unfolding on the field. The physicist does [describes] it using the terminology of mass and velocity and frequency of radiation and the rest. And the sociologist does it by describing it as a rugby match.
Comment