They don't play the same role in the team so it's a pretty pointless question TBH. Aquilani has more talent in his big toe than Poulsen will ever dream about, but that doesn't mean he'd ever have suited us.
aquilani
- Thread starter redhorizon2
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Status
I don't think Aqualini would make much of a defensive midfielder if that is what you are asking.
A proper question would be who I prefer, Aqualini or Meireles, and the answer is of course Meireles and I suspect the vast majority of the site would be in agreement with me.
A proper question would be who I prefer, Aqualini or Meireles, and the answer is of course Meireles and I suspect the vast majority of the site would be in agreement with me.
The point is Roy swapped Poulson for Aqualini and £13m. So it damn well is Roy's fault. I persoanlly would've given Aquilani till jan to proove himself.
Signing Poulsen was a mistake. Keeping Aquilani would also have been a mistake.
[quote author=redhorizon link=topic=42682.msg1262579#msg1262579 date=1295987123]
The point is Roy swapped Poulson for Aqualini and £13m. So it damn well is Roy's fault. I persoanlly would've given Aquilani till jan to proove himself.
[/quote]
Neither Roy nor Rafa played the crock.
Poulsen was a shit transfer,and yeah, we should have kept the crock.
But it was a shitfest all round.
The point is Roy swapped Poulson for Aqualini and £13m. So it damn well is Roy's fault. I persoanlly would've given Aquilani till jan to proove himself.
[/quote]
Neither Roy nor Rafa played the crock.
Poulsen was a shit transfer,and yeah, we should have kept the crock.
But it was a shitfest all round.
Returned fully to fitness and under a manager that wants to play a passing game, Aquilani could hav been a star player for us.
He might not be particularly tough, but he's an excellent footballer.
Gerrard is plenty tough and Meireles is stil settling in. The three of them could have been very good together in a 433
He might not be particularly tough, but he's an excellent footballer.
Gerrard is plenty tough and Meireles is stil settling in. The three of them could have been very good together in a 433
I can't see it myself. Aquilani has the talent, but I don't think his heart was ever truly in it over here.
[quote author=robinhood link=topic=42682.msg1262630#msg1262630 date=1295988729]
Returned fully to fitness and under a manager that wants to play a passing game, Aquilani could hav been a star player for us.
He might not be particularly tough, but he's an excellent footballer.
Gerrard is plenty tough and Meireles is stil settling in. The three of them could have been very good together in a 433
[/quote]
Yes. He is excellent and I think we should recall him if that is possible. I think that (to some extent) Roy shipped him out because he was Rafas signing and (so far) a flop.
Recall.
Returned fully to fitness and under a manager that wants to play a passing game, Aquilani could hav been a star player for us.
He might not be particularly tough, but he's an excellent footballer.
Gerrard is plenty tough and Meireles is stil settling in. The three of them could have been very good together in a 433
[/quote]
Yes. He is excellent and I think we should recall him if that is possible. I think that (to some extent) Roy shipped him out because he was Rafas signing and (so far) a flop.
Recall.
god knows i wasn't aquilani's biggest fan, but surely it was worth giving him another go given the really quite limited chance he'd had. for every foreign softy who never adjusts to english football there's one who takes a season - i don't think any of us can say for sure which one aquilani would've been. i could understand more if we'd sold him outright, but the benefit of a loan was so minimal we might as well have just kept him on.
bad move by hodgson imo.
bad move by hodgson imo.
T
the_khl
Guest
[quote author=peterhague link=topic=42682.msg1262937#msg1262937 date=1296033270]
god knows i wasn't aquilani's biggest fan, but surely it was worth giving him another go given the really quite limited chance he'd had. for every foreign softy who never adjusts to english football there's one who takes a season - i don't think any of us can say for sure which one aquilani would've been. i could understand more if we'd sold him outright, but the benefit of a loan was so minimal we might as well have just kept him on.
bad move by hodgson imo.
[/quote]
Fact of the matter is Aquilani would've looked amazingly inept under Roy's longball-tactics as well. At least that's what I reckon.
He'd fit much better in now as we're going to enjoy loads more of the ball under Kenny.
god knows i wasn't aquilani's biggest fan, but surely it was worth giving him another go given the really quite limited chance he'd had. for every foreign softy who never adjusts to english football there's one who takes a season - i don't think any of us can say for sure which one aquilani would've been. i could understand more if we'd sold him outright, but the benefit of a loan was so minimal we might as well have just kept him on.
bad move by hodgson imo.
[/quote]
Fact of the matter is Aquilani would've looked amazingly inept under Roy's longball-tactics as well. At least that's what I reckon.
He'd fit much better in now as we're going to enjoy loads more of the ball under Kenny.
[quote author=KHL link=topic=42682.msg1262940#msg1262940 date=1296033441]
[quote author=peterhague link=topic=42682.msg1262937#msg1262937 date=1296033270]
god knows i wasn't aquilani's biggest fan, but surely it was worth giving him another go given the really quite limited chance he'd had. for every foreign softy who never adjusts to english football there's one who takes a season - i don't think any of us can say for sure which one aquilani would've been. i could understand more if we'd sold him outright, but the benefit of a loan was so minimal we might as well have just kept him on.
bad move by hodgson imo.
[/quote]
Fact of the matter is Aquilani would've looked amazingly inept under Roy's longball-tactics as well.
[/quote]
Good point that.
While we're talking, why are you not in the 6CM Xpert11 league? We need a Danish team in there.
[quote author=peterhague link=topic=42682.msg1262937#msg1262937 date=1296033270]
god knows i wasn't aquilani's biggest fan, but surely it was worth giving him another go given the really quite limited chance he'd had. for every foreign softy who never adjusts to english football there's one who takes a season - i don't think any of us can say for sure which one aquilani would've been. i could understand more if we'd sold him outright, but the benefit of a loan was so minimal we might as well have just kept him on.
bad move by hodgson imo.
[/quote]
Fact of the matter is Aquilani would've looked amazingly inept under Roy's longball-tactics as well.
[/quote]
Good point that.
While we're talking, why are you not in the 6CM Xpert11 league? We need a Danish team in there.
[quote author=peterhague link=topic=42682.msg1262937#msg1262937 date=1296033270]
god knows i wasn't aquilani's biggest fan, but surely it was worth giving him another go given the really quite limited chance he'd had. for every foreign softy who never adjusts to english football there's one who takes a season - i don't think any of us can say for sure which one aquilani would've been. i could understand more if we'd sold him outright, but the benefit of a loan was so minimal we might as well have just kept him on.
bad move by hodgson imo.
[/quote]
It was, but the logic was understandable.
The Aquilani transfer was initially derided as the worst of the year. 18 million, crocked and deemed a total shithouse by everyone. Rafa hardly played him, and if we'd tried to sell him then it would have probably been the biggest loss in our history.
Roy should have definitely tried to keep him, but loaning him out to regain his form in a league more suited to him or to at least increase his value was a good idea.
The stupid bit was in giving Juventus the option to buy AND replacing him with Crapsen.
Shitfest all round.
god knows i wasn't aquilani's biggest fan, but surely it was worth giving him another go given the really quite limited chance he'd had. for every foreign softy who never adjusts to english football there's one who takes a season - i don't think any of us can say for sure which one aquilani would've been. i could understand more if we'd sold him outright, but the benefit of a loan was so minimal we might as well have just kept him on.
bad move by hodgson imo.
[/quote]
It was, but the logic was understandable.
The Aquilani transfer was initially derided as the worst of the year. 18 million, crocked and deemed a total shithouse by everyone. Rafa hardly played him, and if we'd tried to sell him then it would have probably been the biggest loss in our history.
Roy should have definitely tried to keep him, but loaning him out to regain his form in a league more suited to him or to at least increase his value was a good idea.
The stupid bit was in giving Juventus the option to buy AND replacing him with Crapsen.
Shitfest all round.
[quote author=Avvy link=topic=42682.msg1262962#msg1262962 date=1296036249]
[quote author=peterhague link=topic=42682.msg1262937#msg1262937 date=1296033270]
god knows i wasn't aquilani's biggest fan, but surely it was worth giving him another go given the really quite limited chance he'd had. for every foreign softy who never adjusts to english football there's one who takes a season - i don't think any of us can say for sure which one aquilani would've been. i could understand more if we'd sold him outright, but the benefit of a loan was so minimal we might as well have just kept him on.
bad move by hodgson imo.
[/quote]
It was, but the logic was understandable.
The Aquilani transfer was initially derided as the worst of the year. 18 million, crocked and deemed a total shithouse by everyone. Rafa hardly played him, and if we'd tried to sell him then it would have probably been the biggest loss in our history.
Roy should have definitely tried to keep him, but loaning him out to regain his form in a league more suited to him or to at least increase his value was a good idea.
The stupid bit was in giving Juventus the option to buy AND replacing him with Crapsen.
Shitfest all round.
[/quote]
He was shifted because to Purslow and thus Hodgson by default, he was seen to be emblematic of Rafa's mistakes. He was clearly being moved on, not being loaned to regain form. He had just started to show his form at the end of the last season.
[quote author=peterhague link=topic=42682.msg1262937#msg1262937 date=1296033270]
god knows i wasn't aquilani's biggest fan, but surely it was worth giving him another go given the really quite limited chance he'd had. for every foreign softy who never adjusts to english football there's one who takes a season - i don't think any of us can say for sure which one aquilani would've been. i could understand more if we'd sold him outright, but the benefit of a loan was so minimal we might as well have just kept him on.
bad move by hodgson imo.
[/quote]
It was, but the logic was understandable.
The Aquilani transfer was initially derided as the worst of the year. 18 million, crocked and deemed a total shithouse by everyone. Rafa hardly played him, and if we'd tried to sell him then it would have probably been the biggest loss in our history.
Roy should have definitely tried to keep him, but loaning him out to regain his form in a league more suited to him or to at least increase his value was a good idea.
The stupid bit was in giving Juventus the option to buy AND replacing him with Crapsen.
Shitfest all round.
[/quote]
He was shifted because to Purslow and thus Hodgson by default, he was seen to be emblematic of Rafa's mistakes. He was clearly being moved on, not being loaned to regain form. He had just started to show his form at the end of the last season.
Oh, I have no arguments about that.
He was a creative outlet in a team practically devoid of them; and he shouldnt have been moved on.
It's hard to say if he'd really be able to shake off the 'shithouse' label, but he should have had that chance and probably would have had it been Kenny instead of Roy.
He was a creative outlet in a team practically devoid of them; and he shouldnt have been moved on.
It's hard to say if he'd really be able to shake off the 'shithouse' label, but he should have had that chance and probably would have had it been Kenny instead of Roy.
Well, I do have an argument about it. I don't buy the notion that they'd have done what they did simply to make a point, not least given the financial loss it was always likely to involve. I'm sure they thought Aquilani's improvement was neither extensive enough nor likely to prove reliable enough, and (for once, in Roy's case) I agree with that.
T
the_khl
Guest
[quote author=doctor_mac link=topic=42682.msg1262943#msg1262943 date=1296033839]
Fact of the matter is Aquilani would've looked amazingly inept under Roy's longball-tactics as well.
Good point that.
While we're talking, why are you not in the 6CM Xpert11 league? We need a Danish team in there.
[/quote]
What's the what what?
Link please.
Fact of the matter is Aquilani would've looked amazingly inept under Roy's longball-tactics as well.
Good point that.
While we're talking, why are you not in the 6CM Xpert11 league? We need a Danish team in there.
[/quote]
What's the what what?
Link please.
[quote author=Judge Jules link=topic=42682.msg1263060#msg1263060 date=1296041849]
Well, I do have an argument about it. I don't buy the notion that they'd have done what they did simply to make a point, not least given the financial loss it was always likely to involve. I'm sure they thought Aquilani's improvement was neither extensive enough nor likely to prove reliable enough, and (for once, in Roy's case) I agree with that.
[/quote]
It was still worth a try,Jules.
Well, I do have an argument about it. I don't buy the notion that they'd have done what they did simply to make a point, not least given the financial loss it was always likely to involve. I'm sure they thought Aquilani's improvement was neither extensive enough nor likely to prove reliable enough, and (for once, in Roy's case) I agree with that.
[/quote]
It was still worth a try,Jules.
[quote author=KHL link=topic=42682.msg1263078#msg1263078 date=1296042498]
What's the what what?
Link please.
[/quote]
You haven't noticed the vibrant 6CM sub-society that is the Xpert11 league (a management game). I can asure you that you can create a team with Danish player names.
http://sixcrazyminutes.com/forums/index.php?topic=43781.0
What's the what what?
Link please.
[/quote]
You haven't noticed the vibrant 6CM sub-society that is the Xpert11 league (a management game). I can asure you that you can create a team with Danish player names.
http://sixcrazyminutes.com/forums/index.php?topic=43781.0
[quote author=doctor_mac link=topic=42682.msg1263090#msg1263090 date=1296042883]
You haven't noticed the vibrant 6CM sub-society that is the Xpert11 league (a management game). I can asure you that you can create a team with Danish player names.
http://sixcrazyminutes.com/forums/index.php?topic=43781.0
[/quote]
Come on in K.
all your friends are there already
Doc, you are playing a stormer. Keep it up mate.
You haven't noticed the vibrant 6CM sub-society that is the Xpert11 league (a management game). I can asure you that you can create a team with Danish player names.
http://sixcrazyminutes.com/forums/index.php?topic=43781.0
[/quote]
Come on in K.
all your friends are there already
Doc, you are playing a stormer. Keep it up mate.
[quote author=the count link=topic=42682.msg1263135#msg1263135 date=1296044949]
Come on in K.
all your friends are there already
Doc, you are playing a stormer. Keep it up mate.
[/quote]
It is all about identifying talent Count. I think scouting is my forte.
Come on in K.
all your friends are there already
Doc, you are playing a stormer. Keep it up mate.
[/quote]
It is all about identifying talent Count. I think scouting is my forte.
[quote author=Herr Onceared link=topic=42682.msg1263686#msg1263686 date=1296069197]
How are my lads doing?
[/quote]
They died of neglect.
How are my lads doing?
[/quote]
They died of neglect.
They can try for Charlie Adam instead.
[quote author=Binny link=topic=42682.msg1275347#msg1275347 date=1296641215]
They can try for Charlie Adam instead.
[/quote]
Hasn't he supposed to have had a brill season for them? What's the source on this, can't imagine they wouldn't shell out £10m if he played that great.
They can try for Charlie Adam instead.
[/quote]
Hasn't he supposed to have had a brill season for them? What's the source on this, can't imagine they wouldn't shell out £10m if he played that great.
Exactly. They're trying it on, and we absolutely must not let them get away with it.
- Status