Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Everyone acts surprised when Liverpool do well without Gerrard.That's how bad it is.
-AC
Yeah, that's a real shame. It's also something that really gets on my nerves, I've been a Liverpool fan all my life and it makes me reminisce on times of the Fowler hype. Until the days he went awry, everybody was hitting the roof with arse licking.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Insults and "silly" ramblings?Do I need to remind you of the classic quote: "Statistics don't prove anything."? Do I really? I'm prepared to crack out that gem anytime you want, Bic.
So you can either reply to my post, which was entirely civil save for calling you an idiot for saying stats aren't proof (Which is idiotic), or you can just move on and be quiet.
-AC
entirely civil 😱 Childish and pathetic more like.
Where are the statistics which prove that Lampard is more effective than Gerrard for England. Give us the source and we´ll "get the gem out" and go halfs on the money.
What makes football so loved is the suprises, where underdogs can actually win games, look at the FA cup or the Euopean Championship competitions. These bring up loads of suprises which go totally against statistics.
I specifically told you I couldn't remember who sent them to me, I believe it was VVD, but it possibly wasn't. If you choose to not believe the stats exist, fair enough, since I don't have them readily available, but others have seen them and can vouch for me.
My point is; you said statistics in general do not prove anything, which is an idiotic statement seeing as their existence is to BE proof of something. Don't make an idiotic statement then have the nerve to get offended because you were called an idiot.
You can keep saying what makes football enjoyable, and I'll agree with you, but the FACT is, our enjoyment and what we see does not override what actually is. The fact that you prefer Gerrard does not overrule the fact that stats proved the contrary to your claims.
That's my MAIN point here, your denial that stats prove ANYTHING.
-AC
Originally posted by chillmeistergen
Well, yeah. But managers do not just go on a whim in giving out vice captaincy, they have to exhibit that skill in both training sessions and in games, otherwise anyone could just be slung a credential.
Yes, but it gets to the point where people claim Gerrard 'drives Liverpool on' (nonsense nebulous claim); moreover it's whether he's playing or not.
I think I saw that in this thread, but it may have been somewhere else (that they watch Sky).
Gerard and Lampard for England will never work, both are Attackers and leace England vulnerable at the back if ever a counter attack came on.
I am a Scottish man myself but enjoy watching England from time to time.
Hargreaves and Carrick like to play holding midfield, so its either one of them two, with one of the Gerard/Lampard.
Give Dyer a little more chances at starting for England, I would say he has a better work ate than both Gerrard and Lampard.
Wright-Phillips and Aaron Lennon are Englands answer for the future.
anyways, England are just rubbish just now for some reason, using probably the most expensive bunch of players in the planet. Sven won and his tactis were questionable.
Discos - anyway I have a 7/3 on Mclaren being sacked before the Euros, if england even make it.
Originally posted by Alpha CentauriThat's my MAIN point here, your denial that stats prove ANYTHING.
-AC
I see your point, but do the stats prove EVERYTHING?
Isn´t it the errors someone makes which decide games at the top level?
and seeing as everyone makes mistakes sometimes, and no one knows when that will be, stats cannot predict when a certain player is more likely to have blackout like Robinson did against Germany, otherwise the coach wouldn´t have played him WOULD HE.
Just because you don´t agree with what someone says, no need to call them an idiot. If we were eye to eye discussing this you definetly wouldn´t have said it to my face, so why do it on here hidden behind your monitor?
As for Gerrard and Lampard, I think the key is to get a manager who can get them to play together, this could be the key to an England success, but Mclaren won´t make it.
Originally posted by Bicnarok
I see your point, but do the stats prove EVERYTHING?Isn´t it the errors someone makes which decide games at the top level?
and seeing as everyone makes mistakes sometimes, and no one knows when that will be, stats cannot predict when a certain player is more likely to have blackout like Robinson did against Germany, otherwise the coach wouldn´t have played him WOULD HE.Just because you don´t agree with what someone says, no need to call them an idiot. If we were eye to eye discussing this you definetly wouldn´t have said it to my face, so why do it on here hidden behind your monitor?
As for Gerrard and Lampard, I think the key is to get a manager who can get them to play together, this could be the key to an England success, but Mclaren won´t make it.
I didn't call you an idiot for disagreeing about who you prefer, I called you an idiot for saying stats prove nothing. I never said they proved everything, they prove what they need to.
-AC
Originally posted by Discos
Give Dyer a little more chances at starting for England, I would say he has a better work ate than both Gerrard and Lampard.
No, no. He's really not very good at football. At all. Unlike the rest of England's international failures, he's done nothing in his club career to merit selection. And in Dyer's case, ''work rate'' equates with sprinting around like a decapitated chicken for half and hour, doing nothing in particular aside from wasting the odd chance that someone like Bent or Johnson who do actually deserve more chances, would more than likely put away with ease.
Originally posted by Deathblow
And in Dyer's case, ''work rate'' equates with sprinting around like a decapitated chicken for half and hour, doing nothing in particular aside from wasting the odd chance that someone like Bent or Johnson who do actually deserve more chances, would more than likely put away with ease.
Sounds like Rooney or Kuyt
Originally posted by DiscosI am a Scottish man myself but enjoy watching England from time to time.
W-why?
Originally posted by Discosanyways, England are just rubbish just now for some reason, using probably the most expensive bunch of players in the planet. Sven won and his tactis were questionable.
I thought so at the time, but I think in hindsight Sven probably got as much out of the team as was probably possible.
He did make the odd silly decision, though. Then again, who doesn't? Buying Tevez and no other strikers springs to mind.
Originally posted by Deathblow
That's a bit unfair. As overrated as he is, Rooney scored a lot of goals last season and is dangerous even when not on form for Man United (as apparently he wasn't last season), and Kuyt was just lacking a competent strike partner.
Kuyt seems to just run into the ball and hope for the best.
kuyts pretty good, he just needs the service
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KzfrXk6e41I
while i was on youtube i thought i might as well, mark viduka is my new favourite player.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Gerrard usually just cracks the ball and hopes for the best (Quite evident by the way he strikes), doesn't stop people claiming he means to do most of what he does.-AC
Well, his hope has yielded a lot of good results then. Have you seen what happens when most footballers crack it and hope for the best? Most certainly do not get the same results as Gerrard.
Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
Well, not only does Lampard do it, but he also manages to make it deflect off someone every time. All 20 goals, each season.T-that's how shit he is.
yep I´d like to see his stats
#Shots at goal x
#Shots misses x
#Shots gone in by deflection
Lampard and Gerrard are similar in their shooting success, but Gerrard has scored some rockets from far away, excellent headers and tap ins from runs compared to Lampards "lucky" wild shots.
As for players who run about like blue arsed fly´s, is it worth it?
Watching Kuyt in the champions League final I thought it was very ineffective. Against a passing team, with top ball control who like to hold the ball and move as a team, headless chicken type players produce nothing.
Originally posted by Df02
i'm sure a professional footballer of his caliber doesnt just hit and hope...
Based on what? When, besides the recent free kick, have we ever seen him score anything like Henry, Ronaldinho, Eto'o etc? He is known for running up and pelting the ball at goal, that is essentially hit and hope, as proven by the fact that some of them go screaming over. If he was aiming for goal with any kind of pre-planned precision this wouldn't happen as often as it does.
A typical Gerrard goal, for example Vs West Ham in the F.A Cup final, was blatantly a hit and hope. Anyone saying different is just being silly.
The free kick he took was a genuinely well crafted, well executed shot, most of the time he genuinely does just pelt it. Fine, if that works, but it's people claiming that he means it everytime is what annoys me, then claiming the exact opposite for his supposed counterpart in Chelsea.
Originally posted by Bicnarok
Gerrard has scored some rockets from far away, excellent headers and tap ins from runs compared to Lampards "lucky" wild shots.
Just pull Gerrard's shorts down and say "May I?" if this is how far you're going to go.
Somehow Lampard's are lucky, despite often being way more crafted, and Gerrard's aren't, despite obviously being smacked and hoped for more often than not.
You'd like to see stats? What, that stats that allegedly don't prove anything? I believe you should probably stop contradicting yourself before you look even worse than you do now.
-AC
Originally posted by Bicnarok
yep I´d like to see his stats#Shots at goal x
#Shots misses x
#Shots gone in by deflectionLampard and Gerrard are similar in their shooting success, but Gerrard has scored some rockets from far away, excellent headers and tap ins from runs compared to Lampards "lucky" wild shots.
I'm not sure you understand stats if you imagine there are some that will prove how wild each shot was, or how lucky.
There's only so many times, surely, you can get 20 a season from midfield before it becomes more than luck.
If anyone can just continually have shots until they score, then everyone would do that.