Aquilani set for Anfield bow against Birmingham on Monday night
- Thread starter Jürgen4PM
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Status
Just to detract from the subject slightly, but was Anelka actually that good on loan for us? I don't remember him standing out at all.
[quote author=rage link=topic=37031.msg986424#msg986424 date=1257969323]
[quote author=Farkmaster link=topic=37031.msg986420#msg986420 date=1257969001]
[quote author=rage link=topic=37031.msg986415#msg986415 date=1257968751]
are you suggesting that parry bought bellamy, kuyt, pennant and pelleta that summer?
[/quote]
You know Bellamy is doing really well at City this year, perhaps we should have... oh.
[/quote]
if bellamy had played in athens we would have won.
[/quote]
See, this is the thing that irritates many rage, we are having a discussion about one thing, you bring the discussion to one of your other talking points criticizing Rafa, we point out that your argument isn't particularly historical, even if we agree that we like Anelka, and wish we had him, and you decide to bring up another irrelevant talking point criticizing Rafa, one that again isn't historical, even if we might agree with parts of it, and is completely unknowable.
This whole message board isn't a running argument about Benitez that you can just invade any thread with. Yes the discussion is organic and at present tends to turn to this topic, but what does Bellamy playing in athens have to do with what we are talking about. It's a non sequitur connected by the word "Bellamy".
Overinclusion
Psychol.
The indiscriminate inclusion of apparently irrelevant responses to a stimulus, as observed in some forms of mental illness.
[quote author=Farkmaster link=topic=37031.msg986420#msg986420 date=1257969001]
[quote author=rage link=topic=37031.msg986415#msg986415 date=1257968751]
are you suggesting that parry bought bellamy, kuyt, pennant and pelleta that summer?
[/quote]
You know Bellamy is doing really well at City this year, perhaps we should have... oh.
[/quote]
if bellamy had played in athens we would have won.
[/quote]
See, this is the thing that irritates many rage, we are having a discussion about one thing, you bring the discussion to one of your other talking points criticizing Rafa, we point out that your argument isn't particularly historical, even if we agree that we like Anelka, and wish we had him, and you decide to bring up another irrelevant talking point criticizing Rafa, one that again isn't historical, even if we might agree with parts of it, and is completely unknowable.
This whole message board isn't a running argument about Benitez that you can just invade any thread with. Yes the discussion is organic and at present tends to turn to this topic, but what does Bellamy playing in athens have to do with what we are talking about. It's a non sequitur connected by the word "Bellamy".
Overinclusion
Psychol.
The indiscriminate inclusion of apparently irrelevant responses to a stimulus, as observed in some forms of mental illness.
[quote author=rage link=topic=37031.msg986415#msg986415 date=1257968751]
[quote author=Fabio Alrighty-o link=topic=37031.msg986398#msg986398 date=1257967458]
[quote author=rage link=topic=37031.msg986394#msg986394 date=1257966937]
that's it guys make it ridiculous if it makes you feel better. none the less we could have signed anelka for 8 million and there is no getting away from it.
[/quote]
and we could've signed ronaldo but parry didn't let us. Wait a minute.....are you saying that parry DIDN'T have anythign to do with how we spent our money at the time? For a player who, while doing well here, never set the world alight?
Well shiver my timbers
[/quote]
i remember everyone i knew at the time was excited by his arrival, he did well and even houllier has later come out and said not keeping anelka an bringing in spit was a huge mistake.
i also remember the threads during the time and when he went to bolton where significant numbers of posters wanted to see him here.
rafa could have bought him if he had wanted to and houllier should never have let him go.
are you suggesting that parry bought bellamy, kuyt, pennant and pelleta that summer?
[/quote]
I'm not suggesting that, however, kuyt was already a target which we were quite far into negotiations with, and the rest were to improve the overall squad. Whilst it would've been nice to not buy paletta and pennant and buy anelka, this however, wouldn't help the squad. Rafa believed these 2 would improve squad depth and give adequate cover. Just because they turned out to be flops doesn't mean you can use them in an argument as to why we didn't buy anelka
[quote author=Fabio Alrighty-o link=topic=37031.msg986398#msg986398 date=1257967458]
[quote author=rage link=topic=37031.msg986394#msg986394 date=1257966937]
that's it guys make it ridiculous if it makes you feel better. none the less we could have signed anelka for 8 million and there is no getting away from it.
[/quote]
and we could've signed ronaldo but parry didn't let us. Wait a minute.....are you saying that parry DIDN'T have anythign to do with how we spent our money at the time? For a player who, while doing well here, never set the world alight?
Well shiver my timbers
[/quote]
i remember everyone i knew at the time was excited by his arrival, he did well and even houllier has later come out and said not keeping anelka an bringing in spit was a huge mistake.
i also remember the threads during the time and when he went to bolton where significant numbers of posters wanted to see him here.
rafa could have bought him if he had wanted to and houllier should never have let him go.
are you suggesting that parry bought bellamy, kuyt, pennant and pelleta that summer?
[/quote]
I'm not suggesting that, however, kuyt was already a target which we were quite far into negotiations with, and the rest were to improve the overall squad. Whilst it would've been nice to not buy paletta and pennant and buy anelka, this however, wouldn't help the squad. Rafa believed these 2 would improve squad depth and give adequate cover. Just because they turned out to be flops doesn't mean you can use them in an argument as to why we didn't buy anelka
Bellamy *is* doing really well for City, he's been superb
Am I helping?
No?
Ok
Am I helping?
No?
Ok
[quote author=Farkmaster link=topic=37031.msg986429#msg986429 date=1257969903]
[quote author=rage link=topic=37031.msg986424#msg986424 date=1257969323]
[quote author=Farkmaster link=topic=37031.msg986420#msg986420 date=1257969001]
[quote author=rage link=topic=37031.msg986415#msg986415 date=1257968751]
are you suggesting that parry bought bellamy, kuyt, pennant and pelleta that summer?
[/quote]
You know Bellamy is doing really well at City this year, perhaps we should have... oh.
[/quote]
if bellamy had played in athens we would have won.
[/quote]
See, this is the thing that irritates many rage, we are having a discussion about one thing, you bring the discussion to one of your other talking points criticizing Rafa, we point out that your argument isn't particularly historical, even if we agree that we like Anelka, and wish we had him, and you decide to bring up another irrelevant talking point criticizing Rafa, one that again isn't historical, even if we might agree with parts of it, and is completely unknowable.
This whole message board isn't a running argument about Benitez that you can just invade any thread with. Yes the discussion is organic and at present tends to turn to this topic, but what does Bellamy playing in athens have to do with what we are talking about. It's a non sequitur connected by the word "Bellamy".
Overinclusion
Psychol.
The indiscriminate inclusion of apparently irrelevant responses to a stimulus, as observed in some forms of mental illness.
[/quote]
The problem as well and another tell tale sign of how flawed Rage's thinking is, is that he used Bellamy's signing as a means to beat Rafa, over him signing Bellamy and others instead of Anelka, and then proceeded to beat Rafa further by saying we would have won in Athens, had Bellamy (Rafa's fuck up) played.
Mad.Womans.Piss.
[quote author=rage link=topic=37031.msg986424#msg986424 date=1257969323]
[quote author=Farkmaster link=topic=37031.msg986420#msg986420 date=1257969001]
[quote author=rage link=topic=37031.msg986415#msg986415 date=1257968751]
are you suggesting that parry bought bellamy, kuyt, pennant and pelleta that summer?
[/quote]
You know Bellamy is doing really well at City this year, perhaps we should have... oh.
[/quote]
if bellamy had played in athens we would have won.
[/quote]
See, this is the thing that irritates many rage, we are having a discussion about one thing, you bring the discussion to one of your other talking points criticizing Rafa, we point out that your argument isn't particularly historical, even if we agree that we like Anelka, and wish we had him, and you decide to bring up another irrelevant talking point criticizing Rafa, one that again isn't historical, even if we might agree with parts of it, and is completely unknowable.
This whole message board isn't a running argument about Benitez that you can just invade any thread with. Yes the discussion is organic and at present tends to turn to this topic, but what does Bellamy playing in athens have to do with what we are talking about. It's a non sequitur connected by the word "Bellamy".
Overinclusion
Psychol.
The indiscriminate inclusion of apparently irrelevant responses to a stimulus, as observed in some forms of mental illness.
[/quote]
The problem as well and another tell tale sign of how flawed Rage's thinking is, is that he used Bellamy's signing as a means to beat Rafa, over him signing Bellamy and others instead of Anelka, and then proceeded to beat Rafa further by saying we would have won in Athens, had Bellamy (Rafa's fuck up) played.
Mad.Womans.Piss.
[quote author=SaintGeorge67 link=topic=37031.msg986428#msg986428 date=1257969726]
Just to detract from the subject slightly, but was Anelka actually that good on loan for us? I don't remember him standing out at all.
[/quote]
Yes, he was. We were absolutely flying for those six months, we barely missed out on the league that season and it was no coincidence that that was when we had Anelka playing up front. Thommo, Sammy Lee and Stevie G all rated him very highly and were dumbstruck when GH chose not to sign him on a permanent deal. That decision was GH's first really serious blunder.
Just to detract from the subject slightly, but was Anelka actually that good on loan for us? I don't remember him standing out at all.
[/quote]
Yes, he was. We were absolutely flying for those six months, we barely missed out on the league that season and it was no coincidence that that was when we had Anelka playing up front. Thommo, Sammy Lee and Stevie G all rated him very highly and were dumbstruck when GH chose not to sign him on a permanent deal. That decision was GH's first really serious blunder.
[quote author=Judge Jules link=topic=37031.msg986443#msg986443 date=1257971154]
[quote author=SaintGeorge67 link=topic=37031.msg986428#msg986428 date=1257969726]
Just to detract from the subject slightly, but was Anelka actually that good on loan for us? I don't remember him standing out at all.
[/quote]
Yes, he was. We were absolutely flying for those six months, we barely missed out on the league that season and it was no coincidence that that was when we had Anelka playing up front. Thommo, Sammy Lee and Stevie G all rated him very highly and were dumbstruck when GH chose not to sign him on a permanent deal. That decision was GH's first really serious blunder.
[/quote]
Followed swiftly by his second when he signed El Hadj Diouf as his replacement
........speaking of El Spit. what was the story with the Papa Bouba Diouf poster who joined the other evening. Was he the bloke that does Glock does anyone know?
[quote author=SaintGeorge67 link=topic=37031.msg986428#msg986428 date=1257969726]
Just to detract from the subject slightly, but was Anelka actually that good on loan for us? I don't remember him standing out at all.
[/quote]
Yes, he was. We were absolutely flying for those six months, we barely missed out on the league that season and it was no coincidence that that was when we had Anelka playing up front. Thommo, Sammy Lee and Stevie G all rated him very highly and were dumbstruck when GH chose not to sign him on a permanent deal. That decision was GH's first really serious blunder.
[/quote]
Followed swiftly by his second when he signed El Hadj Diouf as his replacement
........speaking of El Spit. what was the story with the Papa Bouba Diouf poster who joined the other evening. Was he the bloke that does Glock does anyone know?
Amen to that. I still shudder to think of it now.
[quote author=Farkmaster link=topic=37031.msg986429#msg986429 date=1257969903]
[quote author=rage link=topic=37031.msg986424#msg986424 date=1257969323]
[quote author=Farkmaster link=topic=37031.msg986420#msg986420 date=1257969001]
[quote author=rage link=topic=37031.msg986415#msg986415 date=1257968751]
are you suggesting that parry bought bellamy, kuyt, pennant and pelleta that summer?
[/quote]
You know Bellamy is doing really well at City this year, perhaps we should have... oh.
[/quote]
if bellamy had played in athens we would have won.
[/quote]
See, this is the thing that irritates many rage, we are having a discussion about one thing, you bring the discussion to one of your other talking points criticizing Rafa, we point out that your argument isn't particularly historical, even if we agree that we like Anelka, and wish we had him, and you decide to bring up another irrelevant talking point criticizing Rafa, one that again isn't historical, even if we might agree with parts of it, and is completely unknowable.
This whole message board isn't a running argument about Benitez that you can just invade any thread with. Yes the discussion is organic and at present tends to turn to this topic, but what does Bellamy playing in athens have to do with what we are talking about. It's a non sequitur connected by the word "Bellamy".
Overinclusion
Psychol.
The indiscriminate inclusion of apparently irrelevant responses to a stimulus, as observed in some forms of mental illness.
[/quote]
you're the one that introduced bellamy into the conversation.
[quote author=rage link=topic=37031.msg986424#msg986424 date=1257969323]
[quote author=Farkmaster link=topic=37031.msg986420#msg986420 date=1257969001]
[quote author=rage link=topic=37031.msg986415#msg986415 date=1257968751]
are you suggesting that parry bought bellamy, kuyt, pennant and pelleta that summer?
[/quote]
You know Bellamy is doing really well at City this year, perhaps we should have... oh.
[/quote]
if bellamy had played in athens we would have won.
[/quote]
See, this is the thing that irritates many rage, we are having a discussion about one thing, you bring the discussion to one of your other talking points criticizing Rafa, we point out that your argument isn't particularly historical, even if we agree that we like Anelka, and wish we had him, and you decide to bring up another irrelevant talking point criticizing Rafa, one that again isn't historical, even if we might agree with parts of it, and is completely unknowable.
This whole message board isn't a running argument about Benitez that you can just invade any thread with. Yes the discussion is organic and at present tends to turn to this topic, but what does Bellamy playing in athens have to do with what we are talking about. It's a non sequitur connected by the word "Bellamy".
Overinclusion
Psychol.
The indiscriminate inclusion of apparently irrelevant responses to a stimulus, as observed in some forms of mental illness.
[/quote]
you're the one that introduced bellamy into the conversation.
[quote author=Brendan link=topic=37031.msg986435#msg986435 date=1257970524]
Bellamy *is* doing really well for City, he's been superb
Am I helping?
No?
Ok
[/quote]
That was my point, simply looking at any player we didn't sign, years after the fact and saying look, they've been a success there, they'd definitely have worked here, is incredibly simplistic.
Bellamy *is* doing really well for City, he's been superb
Am I helping?
No?
Ok
[/quote]
That was my point, simply looking at any player we didn't sign, years after the fact and saying look, they've been a success there, they'd definitely have worked here, is incredibly simplistic.
[quote author=rage link=topic=37031.msg986459#msg986459 date=1257972522]
[quote author=Farkmaster link=topic=37031.msg986429#msg986429 date=1257969903]
[quote author=rage link=topic=37031.msg986424#msg986424 date=1257969323]
[quote author=Farkmaster link=topic=37031.msg986420#msg986420 date=1257969001]
[quote author=rage link=topic=37031.msg986415#msg986415 date=1257968751]
are you suggesting that parry bought bellamy, kuyt, pennant and pelleta that summer?
[/quote]
You know Bellamy is doing really well at City this year, perhaps we should have... oh.
[/quote]
if bellamy had played in athens we would have won.
[/quote]
See, this is the thing that irritates many rage, we are having a discussion about one thing, you bring the discussion to one of your other talking points criticizing Rafa, we point out that your argument isn't particularly historical, even if we agree that we like Anelka, and wish we had him, and you decide to bring up another irrelevant talking point criticizing Rafa, one that again isn't historical, even if we might agree with parts of it, and is completely unknowable.
This whole message board isn't a running argument about Benitez that you can just invade any thread with. Yes the discussion is organic and at present tends to turn to this topic, but what does Bellamy playing in athens have to do with what we are talking about. It's a non sequitur connected by the word "Bellamy".
Overinclusion
Psychol.
The indiscriminate inclusion of apparently irrelevant responses to a stimulus, as observed in some forms of mental illness.
[/quote]
you're the one that introduced bellamy into the conversation.
[/quote]
What? First, see in bold above. Second I brought up Bellamy to point out that players can sometimes be more fruitful in other teams, than they were/would be in ours, so looking at their success in another team alone is quite limited. That is in line with the discussion we've been having. Your bringing up Bellamy in the CL was just taking a cheap shot at Rafa that didn't bring anything to the discussion.
At any rate, you throw a rock and you'll hit a striker in the premiership that would be a useful addition to our squad. Of course I'd love Anelka now, and would have liked him then, you pick any striker that has worked out very well at a top club, and I'd say the same thing, but it tends to miss out the flops, hindsight is 20/20.
[quote author=Farkmaster link=topic=37031.msg986429#msg986429 date=1257969903]
[quote author=rage link=topic=37031.msg986424#msg986424 date=1257969323]
[quote author=Farkmaster link=topic=37031.msg986420#msg986420 date=1257969001]
[quote author=rage link=topic=37031.msg986415#msg986415 date=1257968751]
are you suggesting that parry bought bellamy, kuyt, pennant and pelleta that summer?
[/quote]
You know Bellamy is doing really well at City this year, perhaps we should have... oh.
[/quote]
if bellamy had played in athens we would have won.
[/quote]
See, this is the thing that irritates many rage, we are having a discussion about one thing, you bring the discussion to one of your other talking points criticizing Rafa, we point out that your argument isn't particularly historical, even if we agree that we like Anelka, and wish we had him, and you decide to bring up another irrelevant talking point criticizing Rafa, one that again isn't historical, even if we might agree with parts of it, and is completely unknowable.
This whole message board isn't a running argument about Benitez that you can just invade any thread with. Yes the discussion is organic and at present tends to turn to this topic, but what does Bellamy playing in athens have to do with what we are talking about. It's a non sequitur connected by the word "Bellamy".
Overinclusion
Psychol.
The indiscriminate inclusion of apparently irrelevant responses to a stimulus, as observed in some forms of mental illness.
[/quote]
you're the one that introduced bellamy into the conversation.
[/quote]
What? First, see in bold above. Second I brought up Bellamy to point out that players can sometimes be more fruitful in other teams, than they were/would be in ours, so looking at their success in another team alone is quite limited. That is in line with the discussion we've been having. Your bringing up Bellamy in the CL was just taking a cheap shot at Rafa that didn't bring anything to the discussion.
At any rate, you throw a rock and you'll hit a striker in the premiership that would be a useful addition to our squad. Of course I'd love Anelka now, and would have liked him then, you pick any striker that has worked out very well at a top club, and I'd say the same thing, but it tends to miss out the flops, hindsight is 20/20.
wanting anelka here when we could have got him for 8 million isn't hindsight - plenty of people wanted to see it happen because we knew he was world class, still young, premiership proven and also a bargain. we instead brought pennant for just under 7 and paletta for 2.
what did bellamy playing well for city have to do with a conversation about not buying anelka?
and as for suggesting players can be more fruitful in other teams - well yes but seeing as though anelka had already been fruitful in ours you're really grasping at straws. the lad's far better than any striker we had until the arrival of torres
both houllier and rafa fucked up big time in letting anelka slip through their fingers.
what did bellamy playing well for city have to do with a conversation about not buying anelka?
and as for suggesting players can be more fruitful in other teams - well yes but seeing as though anelka had already been fruitful in ours you're really grasping at straws. the lad's far better than any striker we had until the arrival of torres
both houllier and rafa fucked up big time in letting anelka slip through their fingers.
stop what?
i merely picked up on the anelka thing - someone tried to bullshit that we only had the chance to buy him when he went to chelsea which clearly wasn't the case and now farky's claiming hindsight is a marvelous thing when anyone who'd seen anelka play for us would have signed him for 8 million.
what exactly do you disagree with here ryan? if you were making this point what would you have done differently? are you telling me you would let inaccuracies like this just pass you by?
i merely picked up on the anelka thing - someone tried to bullshit that we only had the chance to buy him when he went to chelsea which clearly wasn't the case and now farky's claiming hindsight is a marvelous thing when anyone who'd seen anelka play for us would have signed him for 8 million.
what exactly do you disagree with here ryan? if you were making this point what would you have done differently? are you telling me you would let inaccuracies like this just pass you by?
[quote author=rage link=topic=37031.msg986579#msg986579 date=1257982508]
stop what?
i merely picked up on the anelka thing - someone tried to bullshit that we only had the chance to buy him when he went to chelsea which clearly wasn't the case and now farky's claiming hindsight is a marvelous thing when anyone who'd seen anelka play for us would have signed him for 8 million.
what exactly do you disagree with here ryan? if you were making this point what would you have done differently? are you telling me you would let inaccuracies like this just pass you by?
[/quote]
Firstly: He didn't do an awful lot for us in his time here. I can see how even the little he did was a marked improvement upon what Diouf eventually brought, but it's unfair and incorrect to cite his appearances for us as anything greater than what they were; ordinary.
Secondly: Rafa wasn't directly privvy to what he did for us. Different era, different manager. To draw any correlations between Anelka being a Liverpool player and Rafa as our Manager are pointless really.
And thirdly, Anelka was available to everyone when he was leaving City. You seem to be insinuating that Rafa alone is to blame for not "picking him up at 8M" when, if you look at it in the wider context - every manager worth their salt in the PL at that time turned him down. In hindsight, Allardyce and Bolton got themselves a bargain, but let's not forget that plenty of other Managers spurned the opportunity also. If anything I'd point the finger more at Chelsea for missing out on this opportunity to get him for half what they eventually paid 2 years later. Ditto Ferguson, who would have been looking for a RVN replacement down the track. EVERY manager bar Fat Sam turned him down, yet you've brought this back to a sole 'Rafa Issue' despite their being no pertinent links between them, and Rafa being one of many like-minded Managers.
stop what?
i merely picked up on the anelka thing - someone tried to bullshit that we only had the chance to buy him when he went to chelsea which clearly wasn't the case and now farky's claiming hindsight is a marvelous thing when anyone who'd seen anelka play for us would have signed him for 8 million.
what exactly do you disagree with here ryan? if you were making this point what would you have done differently? are you telling me you would let inaccuracies like this just pass you by?
[/quote]
Firstly: He didn't do an awful lot for us in his time here. I can see how even the little he did was a marked improvement upon what Diouf eventually brought, but it's unfair and incorrect to cite his appearances for us as anything greater than what they were; ordinary.
Secondly: Rafa wasn't directly privvy to what he did for us. Different era, different manager. To draw any correlations between Anelka being a Liverpool player and Rafa as our Manager are pointless really.
And thirdly, Anelka was available to everyone when he was leaving City. You seem to be insinuating that Rafa alone is to blame for not "picking him up at 8M" when, if you look at it in the wider context - every manager worth their salt in the PL at that time turned him down. In hindsight, Allardyce and Bolton got themselves a bargain, but let's not forget that plenty of other Managers spurned the opportunity also. If anything I'd point the finger more at Chelsea for missing out on this opportunity to get him for half what they eventually paid 2 years later. Ditto Ferguson, who would have been looking for a RVN replacement down the track. EVERY manager bar Fat Sam turned him down, yet you've brought this back to a sole 'Rafa Issue' despite their being no pertinent links between them, and Rafa being one of many like-minded Managers.
[quote author=Ryan link=topic=37031.msg986584#msg986584 date=1257982980]
[quote author=rage link=topic=37031.msg986579#msg986579 date=1257982508]
stop what?
i merely picked up on the anelka thing - someone tried to bullshit that we only had the chance to buy him when he went to chelsea which clearly wasn't the case and now farky's claiming hindsight is a marvelous thing when anyone who'd seen anelka play for us would have signed him for 8 million.
what exactly do you disagree with here ryan? if you were making this point what would you have done differently? are you telling me you would let inaccuracies like this just pass you by?
[/quote]
Firstly: He didn't do an awful lot for us in his time here. I can see how even the little he did was a marked improvement upon what Diouf eventually brought, but it's unfair and incorrect to cite his appearances for us as anything greater than what they were; ordinary.
Secondly: Rafa wasn't directly privvy to what he did for us. Different era, different manager. To draw any correlations between Anelka being a Liverpool player and Rafa as our Manager are pointless really.
And thirdly, Anelka was available to everyone when he was leaving City. You seem to be insinuating that Rafa alone is to blame for not "picking him up at 8M" when, if you look at it in the wider context - every manager worth their salt in the PL at that time turned him down. In hindsight, Allardyce and Bolton got themselves a bargain, but let's not forget that plenty of other Managers spurned the opportunity also. If anything I'd point the finger more at Chelsea for missing out on this opportunity to get him for half what they eventually paid 2 years later. Ditto Ferguson, who would have been looking for a RVN replacement down the track. EVERY manager bar Fat Sam turned him down, yet you've brought this back to a sole 'Rafa Issue' despite their being no pertinent links between them, and Rafa being one of many like-minded Managers.
[/quote]
Just because he was in a group of people that were wrong doesn't make it any better.
[quote author=rage link=topic=37031.msg986579#msg986579 date=1257982508]
stop what?
i merely picked up on the anelka thing - someone tried to bullshit that we only had the chance to buy him when he went to chelsea which clearly wasn't the case and now farky's claiming hindsight is a marvelous thing when anyone who'd seen anelka play for us would have signed him for 8 million.
what exactly do you disagree with here ryan? if you were making this point what would you have done differently? are you telling me you would let inaccuracies like this just pass you by?
[/quote]
Firstly: He didn't do an awful lot for us in his time here. I can see how even the little he did was a marked improvement upon what Diouf eventually brought, but it's unfair and incorrect to cite his appearances for us as anything greater than what they were; ordinary.
Secondly: Rafa wasn't directly privvy to what he did for us. Different era, different manager. To draw any correlations between Anelka being a Liverpool player and Rafa as our Manager are pointless really.
And thirdly, Anelka was available to everyone when he was leaving City. You seem to be insinuating that Rafa alone is to blame for not "picking him up at 8M" when, if you look at it in the wider context - every manager worth their salt in the PL at that time turned him down. In hindsight, Allardyce and Bolton got themselves a bargain, but let's not forget that plenty of other Managers spurned the opportunity also. If anything I'd point the finger more at Chelsea for missing out on this opportunity to get him for half what they eventually paid 2 years later. Ditto Ferguson, who would have been looking for a RVN replacement down the track. EVERY manager bar Fat Sam turned him down, yet you've brought this back to a sole 'Rafa Issue' despite their being no pertinent links between them, and Rafa being one of many like-minded Managers.
[/quote]
Just because he was in a group of people that were wrong doesn't make it any better.
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=37031.msg986585#msg986585 date=1257983143]
[quote author=Ryan link=topic=37031.msg986584#msg986584 date=1257982980]
[quote author=rage link=topic=37031.msg986579#msg986579 date=1257982508]
stop what?
i merely picked up on the anelka thing - someone tried to bullshit that we only had the chance to buy him when he went to chelsea which clearly wasn't the case and now farky's claiming hindsight is a marvelous thing when anyone who'd seen anelka play for us would have signed him for 8 million.
what exactly do you disagree with here ryan? if you were making this point what would you have done differently? are you telling me you would let inaccuracies like this just pass you by?
[/quote]
Firstly: He didn't do an awful lot for us in his time here. I can see how even the little he did was a marked improvement upon what Diouf eventually brought, but it's unfair and incorrect to cite his appearances for us as anything greater than what they were; ordinary.
Secondly: Rafa wasn't directly privvy to what he did for us. Different era, different manager. To draw any correlations between Anelka being a Liverpool player and Rafa as our Manager are pointless really.
And thirdly, Anelka was available to everyone when he was leaving City. You seem to be insinuating that Rafa alone is to blame for not "picking him up at 8M" when, if you look at it in the wider context - every manager worth their salt in the PL at that time turned him down. In hindsight, Allardyce and Bolton got themselves a bargain, but let's not forget that plenty of other Managers spurned the opportunity also. If anything I'd point the finger more at Chelsea for missing out on this opportunity to get him for half what they eventually paid 2 years later. Ditto Ferguson, who would have been looking for a RVN replacement down the track. EVERY manager bar Fat Sam turned him down, yet you've brought this back to a sole 'Rafa Issue' despite their being no pertinent links between them, and Rafa being one of many like-minded Managers.
[/quote]
Just because he was in a group of people that were wrong doesn't make it any better.
[/quote]
Naturally.
But if we're going to select every player that was ever refused by top-flight Managers only to go on and prove them wrong, we'll be here for quite some time.
Rage is nitpicking to suit his agenda Ross, and you know that.
[quote author=Ryan link=topic=37031.msg986584#msg986584 date=1257982980]
[quote author=rage link=topic=37031.msg986579#msg986579 date=1257982508]
stop what?
i merely picked up on the anelka thing - someone tried to bullshit that we only had the chance to buy him when he went to chelsea which clearly wasn't the case and now farky's claiming hindsight is a marvelous thing when anyone who'd seen anelka play for us would have signed him for 8 million.
what exactly do you disagree with here ryan? if you were making this point what would you have done differently? are you telling me you would let inaccuracies like this just pass you by?
[/quote]
Firstly: He didn't do an awful lot for us in his time here. I can see how even the little he did was a marked improvement upon what Diouf eventually brought, but it's unfair and incorrect to cite his appearances for us as anything greater than what they were; ordinary.
Secondly: Rafa wasn't directly privvy to what he did for us. Different era, different manager. To draw any correlations between Anelka being a Liverpool player and Rafa as our Manager are pointless really.
And thirdly, Anelka was available to everyone when he was leaving City. You seem to be insinuating that Rafa alone is to blame for not "picking him up at 8M" when, if you look at it in the wider context - every manager worth their salt in the PL at that time turned him down. In hindsight, Allardyce and Bolton got themselves a bargain, but let's not forget that plenty of other Managers spurned the opportunity also. If anything I'd point the finger more at Chelsea for missing out on this opportunity to get him for half what they eventually paid 2 years later. Ditto Ferguson, who would have been looking for a RVN replacement down the track. EVERY manager bar Fat Sam turned him down, yet you've brought this back to a sole 'Rafa Issue' despite their being no pertinent links between them, and Rafa being one of many like-minded Managers.
[/quote]
Just because he was in a group of people that were wrong doesn't make it any better.
[/quote]
Naturally.
But if we're going to select every player that was ever refused by top-flight Managers only to go on and prove them wrong, we'll be here for quite some time.
Rage is nitpicking to suit his agenda Ross, and you know that.
[quote author=Sunny link=topic=37031.msg986589#msg986589 date=1257983359]
We had Anelka. Houllier foolishly let him go, not Benitez. There's a difference to possessing something and then losing it than trying to obtain something you haven't got. You cannot blame Benitez for us not having Anelka - that's ridiculous
[/quote]
Correct
We had Anelka. Houllier foolishly let him go, not Benitez. There's a difference to possessing something and then losing it than trying to obtain something you haven't got. You cannot blame Benitez for us not having Anelka - that's ridiculous
[/quote]
Correct
[quote author=rage link=topic=37031.msg986593#msg986593 date=1257983809]
firstly i don't care about other teams failures. secondly he did plenty for us whilst on loan here thirdly we needed a striker the likes of chelsea and utd didn't.
i didn't say rafa was to blame but there is no denying rafa missed an opportunity with anelka.
[/quote]
I see it's now downgraded from "fucked up big time" to "missed an opportunity". Of course.
Oh, and here you go;
Nicolas Anelka, Liverpool;
22 games, 4 goals.
HOLD THE PHONE!
firstly i don't care about other teams failures. secondly he did plenty for us whilst on loan here thirdly we needed a striker the likes of chelsea and utd didn't.
i didn't say rafa was to blame but there is no denying rafa missed an opportunity with anelka.
[/quote]
I see it's now downgraded from "fucked up big time" to "missed an opportunity". Of course.
Oh, and here you go;
Nicolas Anelka, Liverpool;
22 games, 4 goals.
HOLD THE PHONE!
[quote author=Ryan link=topic=37031.msg986595#msg986595 date=1257984243]
[quote author=rage link=topic=37031.msg986593#msg986593 date=1257983809]
firstly i don't care about other teams failures. secondly he did plenty for us whilst on loan here thirdly we needed a striker the likes of chelsea and utd didn't.
i didn't say rafa was to blame but there is no denying rafa missed an opportunity with anelka.
[/quote]
I see it's now downgraded from "fucked up big time" to "missed an opportunity". Of course.
Oh, and here you go;
Nicolas Anelka, Liverpool;
22 games, 4 goals.
HOLD THE PHONE!
[/quote]
yea them same stats prove lucas to have one of the best tackle rates and pass completions
did you see him play ryan? if you did then you'll have seen what he brought to our team.
in the end we had the chance to sign him, we chose not to.
there are quality bargains out there, its not just about buying 20 million pound superstars. our attacking bargains in recent years have more often than not failed.
[quote author=rage link=topic=37031.msg986593#msg986593 date=1257983809]
firstly i don't care about other teams failures. secondly he did plenty for us whilst on loan here thirdly we needed a striker the likes of chelsea and utd didn't.
i didn't say rafa was to blame but there is no denying rafa missed an opportunity with anelka.
[/quote]
I see it's now downgraded from "fucked up big time" to "missed an opportunity". Of course.
Oh, and here you go;
Nicolas Anelka, Liverpool;
22 games, 4 goals.
HOLD THE PHONE!
[/quote]
yea them same stats prove lucas to have one of the best tackle rates and pass completions
did you see him play ryan? if you did then you'll have seen what he brought to our team.
in the end we had the chance to sign him, we chose not to.
there are quality bargains out there, its not just about buying 20 million pound superstars. our attacking bargains in recent years have more often than not failed.
Wasn't Anelka a massive risk to any team because of his attitude? Hence, his nickname of Le Sulk. All managers shied away from him because of that.
Bolton got him for only 8m because they were willing to accept his attitude. In fact if Anelka didn't have such a poor attitude then he would have cost far more money, say 20 million.
He subsequently improved his attitude at Bolton and showed his real talents.
Tis the way I remember it.
Obv. Anelka attitude problem is rafas fault.
Bolton got him for only 8m because they were willing to accept his attitude. In fact if Anelka didn't have such a poor attitude then he would have cost far more money, say 20 million.
He subsequently improved his attitude at Bolton and showed his real talents.
Tis the way I remember it.
Obv. Anelka attitude problem is rafas fault.
As I said before, I really don't remember him doing anything of note whilst at Liverpool. I may be wrong of course, but nothing sticks out.
[quote author=rage link=topic=37031.msg986573#msg986573 date=1257981829]
seeing as though anelka had already been fruitful in ours you're really grasping at straws.
[/quote]
Anelka never played in our team. It was fucking years earlier. We are a vastly different team than then. Or does Anelka play well in any team named Liverpool, regardless of manager or personnel?
The reason I even brought this up has nothing to fucking do with Anelka, or anything else, as again, I wouldn't mind us having Anelka nor several strikers in the league, including ones Rafa has let go. It has to do with the fact that you routinely bring up things that have fuck all to do with the discussion at hand, to have a dig at the manager. What the fuck does your hopeful guess about Bellamy in the CL have to do with Aquilani against Birmingham, or Anelka, or anything else?
Macca makes a fucking innocuous comment about a retarded statement made by a hack pundit, and you make an unfounded assertion based on it, as if you are thinking "well, even though the idiot didn't find a foothold to criticise Rafa, I can make one up with hindsight."
Isn't there enough to focus on with the players Rafa bought, that ARE shit, that you have to talk about the one's that he didn't, that you THINK he could have, that MIGHT not have been shit for us. Couldn't these other threads be a factual ground for all your one sided, boring criticism? What's the problem, can't find a thread criticizing Rafa on players he has bought, no threads on Lucas, Dossena etc? No threads on it being a massive risk to buy Aquilani? Try looking harder.
Then, when you are pressed by my bringing up the counterexample of Bellamy, a player who, if he hadn't played for us, you'd could, just like with Anelka have said "why didn't we buy him several years ago". Only despite success on a different team now, he didn't fit here, he had personality issues (as in Anelka's past), he didn't get playing time (as Anelka might well not have with Torres). We just don't know, that's why it's ahistorical. Instead of having the limited reading comprehension required to actually respond to that point, instead you flick through your retarded Rolodex of Anti-Rafa talking points and, under "Bellamy" find stupid bare assertion #452910, to wit, that we'd have a second CL, had Rafa played him.
Well that's got fuck all to do with anything, other than if you think this is your football forum to argue about one single issue, every fucking time. It's fucking aggravating.
seeing as though anelka had already been fruitful in ours you're really grasping at straws.
[/quote]
Anelka never played in our team. It was fucking years earlier. We are a vastly different team than then. Or does Anelka play well in any team named Liverpool, regardless of manager or personnel?
The reason I even brought this up has nothing to fucking do with Anelka, or anything else, as again, I wouldn't mind us having Anelka nor several strikers in the league, including ones Rafa has let go. It has to do with the fact that you routinely bring up things that have fuck all to do with the discussion at hand, to have a dig at the manager. What the fuck does your hopeful guess about Bellamy in the CL have to do with Aquilani against Birmingham, or Anelka, or anything else?
Macca makes a fucking innocuous comment about a retarded statement made by a hack pundit, and you make an unfounded assertion based on it, as if you are thinking "well, even though the idiot didn't find a foothold to criticise Rafa, I can make one up with hindsight."
Isn't there enough to focus on with the players Rafa bought, that ARE shit, that you have to talk about the one's that he didn't, that you THINK he could have, that MIGHT not have been shit for us. Couldn't these other threads be a factual ground for all your one sided, boring criticism? What's the problem, can't find a thread criticizing Rafa on players he has bought, no threads on Lucas, Dossena etc? No threads on it being a massive risk to buy Aquilani? Try looking harder.
Then, when you are pressed by my bringing up the counterexample of Bellamy, a player who, if he hadn't played for us, you'd could, just like with Anelka have said "why didn't we buy him several years ago". Only despite success on a different team now, he didn't fit here, he had personality issues (as in Anelka's past), he didn't get playing time (as Anelka might well not have with Torres). We just don't know, that's why it's ahistorical. Instead of having the limited reading comprehension required to actually respond to that point, instead you flick through your retarded Rolodex of Anti-Rafa talking points and, under "Bellamy" find stupid bare assertion #452910, to wit, that we'd have a second CL, had Rafa played him.
Well that's got fuck all to do with anything, other than if you think this is your football forum to argue about one single issue, every fucking time. It's fucking aggravating.
[quote author=mark1975 link=topic=37031.msg986390#msg986390 date=1257966118]
Hey, you really could take this somewhere, go and drag out the transfers for that Summer, pick out all the really good ones and then you can have a field day, the thread could just roll and roll, you'd love it you really would x
[/quote]
Yup it is all Rafa's and especially Sammy's fault that we did not sign Kaka, Christiano, Messi (playing in a Spanish team, how did Rafa missed him and not sign him? sack!), Zidane, Drogba, Cesc (he is Spanish isn't he, Rafa must have known, sack!), Zlatan, Theirry, Eto, ........ (fill in the blanks for your favourite players, past and present)
Hey, you really could take this somewhere, go and drag out the transfers for that Summer, pick out all the really good ones and then you can have a field day, the thread could just roll and roll, you'd love it you really would x
[/quote]
Yup it is all Rafa's and especially Sammy's fault that we did not sign Kaka, Christiano, Messi (playing in a Spanish team, how did Rafa missed him and not sign him? sack!), Zidane, Drogba, Cesc (he is Spanish isn't he, Rafa must have known, sack!), Zlatan, Theirry, Eto, ........ (fill in the blanks for your favourite players, past and present)
[quote author=Ryan link=topic=37031.msg986667#msg986667 date=1257993876]
Fark, I'm beginning to think you don't like rage.
[/quote]
How dare you Ryan, I attack the post, not the poster...
It makes sense, I mean, at the end of the day we have all sorts of other communication with these people don't we? Why would I let someone's consistent posting habits determine how I view them as a post-er, and who hasn't seen fruitful discussion between someone named Farkmaster and someone named Rage, in their every day life? We wouldn't want the internet to be any different would we?
Fark, I'm beginning to think you don't like rage.
[/quote]
How dare you Ryan, I attack the post, not the poster...
It makes sense, I mean, at the end of the day we have all sorts of other communication with these people don't we? Why would I let someone's consistent posting habits determine how I view them as a post-er, and who hasn't seen fruitful discussion between someone named Farkmaster and someone named Rage, in their every day life? We wouldn't want the internet to be any different would we?
- Status
Similar threads
