• You may have to login or register before you can post and view our exclusive members only forums.
    To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Gary Neville hits the nail on the head

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yeah, I like Neville as a pundit (spit) but I never buy that it's just the players. Sterling is below par because of fatigue and having to carry alot of the burden, Gerrard is still all over the place, Markovic & Lovren haven't settled very well, Balotelli and Lambert can't buy a goal. You can say, ok, we've been unlucky in some instances, but every one of those factors can be attributed at least in small part to the manager.

The whole committee thing is a grey area, I'm not sure I buy half of it, given Rodgers turned us down initially because he didn't want to work with someone over him, having a say on transfers etc.

I don't think his transfer policy has been as disastrous as some make out, there are alot of good young players with time on their side and who look to have alot of promise. The problem really is in the two crucial areas that we needed him to be shrewd, centre back and upfront, he fucked up, certainly on the latter anyway, I'm still confused as to whether our centre backs are shit or his system just leaves them horribly exposed. When we compacted against Madrid, we looked alot better.

The players do have to take responsibility though, it's not solely down to the manager once they step on the pitch, some of them could have given alot more, but then he identifies the psychological side of the players too, so if he's bought players who are mentally not upto it, who's fault's that?
 
It's no good pundits like Neville saying that we should have bought 'a Tevez or a Sanchez'. As he knows full well, Tevez wasn't available and Sanchez, in spite of the fact we DID try to sign him, didn't want to come. So that's a lazy statement of the bleeding obvious posing as insight. Which is the overrated Neville's speciality. The problem then as now is that, as far as most of us know, there wasn't anyone of the calibre who was 'signable'. It's just tiresome to hear that kind of cliche. If he wants to show how smart he is, make the effort to suggest two genuinely top class prospects who we CAN get.
 
It's true, I guess people can say "there must have been someone out there, we could have paid Falcao X amount", but this is us and we never have been able to consistently attract big names and we've never been that willing (rightfully in most cases) to overpay on wages. That said, our scouting department gets paid a shit load of money to identify up and comers, but then so do United's and they just paid out shitloads for the bleeding obvious.

It's lame and naive to say, United finished 7th and we finished 2nd, ergo if we had tried they would have come. There's plenty of other things to factor with players choosing other clubs, like attraction, money, sustained/recent success, players already at the club, the status/pedigree of the manager, the wages available, the location.. etc, we've been stung on all of those. And as said, the two examples are piss poor, it's like that poster on here (can't remember who) who kept saying all Summer we fucked up over Sanchez, we didn't - he admitted why chose Arsenal, Rodgers did the same, move on.
 
We obviously dont know the full story but we should have gambled on Remy.
Fits our team perfectly.
 
According to BR, the players have been brilliant. Just heard his interview on talk sport.
 
While I do think Neville gets it fairly right as a pundit, am I the only one who thinks he just states the fucking obvious all the time?
 
While I do think Neville gets it fairly right as a pundit, am I the only one who thinks he just states the fucking obvious all the time?


No, that's what I usually think when he talks. There's the odd insight but most of the time it's just banalities dressed up as astounding revelations.
 
So a statement of the obvious can't necessarily be factually correct? I suppose not if you're just dogmatically pursuing your own agenda.
 
Of course they can be factually correct. Its just that he gets the reputation of being a fantastic pundit for pointing out things that would be obvious to Stevie Wonder
 
The same is true of most other pundits, of course. Carragher spouts some real Sybil Fawlty stuff each week. It's just that Neville, mainly because people expected nothing but snide whines from him when he first started in the job, surprised people so pleasantly that they exaggerated how good he is. Sky know what they're doing with the fancy computer graphics - it makes unimpressive chat suddenly sound terribly clever when all those coloured circles and fancy lines are in motion.
 
Of course they can be factually correct. Its just that he gets the reputation of being a fantastic pundit for pointing out things that would be obvious to Stevie Wonder
Things that are evidently not obvious to some of the posters on this site.
 
So a statement of the obvious can't necessarily be factually correct? I suppose not if you're just dogmatically pursuing your own agenda.

Did you even read the first part of my post? I mean, I intentionally kept it short, simple and to the point so that people with an IQ over 1 could understand it.

What is your IQ level, BTW?
 
Did you even read the first part of my post? I mean, I intentionally kept it short, simple and to the point so that people with an IQ over 1 could understand it.

What is your IQ level, BTW?
High enough to decipher your badly constructed, admittedly short, post.
 
The thing is with Neville, that yes he says some obvious things, but most other pundits don't actually say them and they actually say a load of of shite most of the time.

It's obviously more difficult that it would seem to actually say the obvious.
 
The thing is with Neville, that yes he says some obvious things, but most other pundits don't actually say them and they actually say a load of of shite most of the time.

It's obviously more difficult that it would seem to actually say the obvious.


Obviously or you wouldn't have had to explain the obvious.
 
The thing is with Neville, that yes he says some obvious things, but most other pundits don't actually say them and they actually say a load of of shite most of the time.

Most pundits try to sound more educated and sophisticated than they actually are so even if they do know their stuff they sound utterly ridiculous. Neville calls it as it is and loathe him as I do, he is usually on the money.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom