kop205

He is slow. But he was never quick anyway. And Garcia, Alonso, Sami and Crouch also lack pace. He is old, but still younger than one other regular first teamer. But fine, I'll give you those two as statements of fact. Whether he is past it is a matter of opinion (which, just to reinforce the point as you seem to be having great difficulty understanding it, is not the same as saying 'Given a few games he'll be as good as he was at his peak') If all you had ever said was 'Robbie is old and slow' then the hyperbole accuastion would be unfair. When the pearlers you have actually come out with have included 'the old fraud', and 'could scarcely be worse' (to name just two) then the accusation has some substance to it.

What point would that be? 'The only tool..' comment was tongue in cheek. In all fairness, there has been plenty attempt to instigate deabte, none of it from Poolfrog.

Some of those points are fairly reasonable, but once again you exaggerate and misrepresent the level of devotion that there is to Fowler. One poster in this thread has likened him to Bergkamp. None (that I am aware of, though I may be wrong) have said he should be playing for England. Who are you actually quoting when you accuse people of saying 'All Robbie needs is a few games to get his sharpness back'. There has actually been very little that constitutes 'unswerving blind faith'. Most of us are well aware of Fowler's limitations - the assessment given by Leo 8 probably reflects how most people view him, myself included. As I said before, most of the hyperbole / exageration has come from you in your descriptions of him. That is what bizarre - not the level of blind faith that people have in Fowler since this is laregly a figment of your imagination, certainly as regards this thread You mention people's attitudes to Krompkamp and I agree fully with your point but it cuts both ways. If you want people to be balanced in their assessments of him, then be balanced in your assessment of Fowler. And I'm sorry, but if you continue to be so unrelentingly negative about someone who, in the eyes of the manager, clearly has a role to play this season, then the chances are you will be called a tool by people who generally try to back the players, whether that be Fowler, Krompkamp or whoever. And you still haven't responded to any of the reasosn I've given as to why Fowler could have a role to play, in the way that I've tried to respond to your reasons. That is why people have been getting pissed off with you - not because you have a different opinion but because you are guilty of the thing that you accuse Fowler's advocates of doing - having a blind, unswerving, extreme opinion. In that case, what a bizarre thing to post when quoting me. Either way, I think Pretty Boy called this correctly a full page back. Thread should be closed. Most people have a perfectly balanced view of Fowler. One or two are a bit nostalgic about him. One is overly critical. In my opinion of course.

No, I mean actually offering sensible responses that bear scrutiny and responding to the evidence that I have posted, instead of ignoring it, inventing spurious reasons why his goals 'don't count', or constantly regurgitating the same myth that to see any worth in Fowler is to also think he is the best player in the world. The only reasons you have come up with to justify your hatred of Fowler are: 1 He is old and has had injuries - well the same is true about a few others in the squad. 2 He hasn't performed at the top level for 5 years - not totally true. His goals record has always been good, it is injuries that have held him back. Now that he isn't needed to play every week, there is less stress and strain on his body so that when he does play he is more likely to be able to have an impact. 3 No other 'big' clubs were after him - I've already posted a list of names of others in the squad about whom that is equally true. Are they s*** as well? 4 His goals have been either pens, or against s*** sides - Not actually true, but even if it was, they all count. The same is true of most centre forwards. How many does Henry score away from Highbury? Does that make him s***? 5 He was a bit of t** in the 'spice boy' days - Yes, he probably was, but as you are so quick to remind us all that was 10 years ago now. Let it go. When was the last time there was any suggestion that his attitude was poor? I assume not since January at the least as the chances of Rafa keeping him if it were would have minimal. Stop setting yourself up as a paragon of virtue in this thread. The 'personal abuse' you have recieved has been tame and shows no less respect than your continued ignorance of the reasons that have been presented as to why Fowler is far from the write off you think he is, or your childish 'Ooh, Fowler is God, I take it all back' reaction. To be honest, it is you who have prevented any proper reasoned debate taking place with your hyperbolic criticisms of Robbie - 'old fraud' etc. If you find yourself having to be quite so negative about one of our players, then I struggle to identify woth you as a 'supporter' of any sort and can't be arsed debating any further with you. You've wasted enough of my time already.

I've done neither. If you are going to wade in, then at least look properly at the thread. If you did so, then you'd see that every time any evidence of Fowler's worth is put forward he just trotted out the same old s**** about 'Fowler is past it, its pathetic how everyone thinks he is the best player in the world, no other clubs wanted him so he must be s**** blah de blah de f***ing blah' Like I said, I've refrained from the name calling but given the utter crap that he's posted and his failure to enter into any proper debate, I can understand why others haven't.

This content is not viewable to guests.,This content is not viewable to guests.

Agree with some of that - the intial premise behind the thread was absurd, he didn't play well on Saturday - but the thread stopped being about his pen long ago and would have run its course pretty quickly if it hadn't been for wind up merchants failing to see that Fowler has things to offer to the side still.

But when mature debate has been attemtped you have desperately clutched whatever straws you think might be available to you to defend your frankly ludicrous opinion of Fowler. 'No-one else was in for him'. So f***ing what? How many 'top clubs' were in for Sami? Garcia? Reina? Finnan? JAR? Gonzalez? Pennant? Bellamy? Crouch? Or, going a bit further back to use an even more pertinent example, McAllister,? Wait, let me guess - they are all s*** too. The only tool (how apt) you have left to back up your position is the idea that anyone who disagrees with you must think Fowler is all of the things you say he is in your oh-so-funny post above. I don't, but nor will I accept he is the 'old fraud', 'clearly past it', 'whatever other total b******s you have come out with' that you say he is. Seriously, drag yourself of Championship Manager and give me a real reason that explains how such a s*** player has sustained such a good goal scoring record for us since rejoining the club, because I'm still waiting.

I've tried reasoning with him but that, in fairness, is much better than any of the arguments I've produced. He still has no valid explanation for Fowler's excellent goals record since returning and continues to spout this myth that anyone who sees worth in Fowler is totally blind to his limitations. The great thing about having brough in two genuine centre forwards this year is that it gives us the luxury of not having to rely on Fowler for every game as we all know his body isn't up to playing week in week out - instead we get to use him as appropriate and as he has shown, he can do a job. End of. But then I'm getting dangerously close to reasoning with him again there.

Those teams were so rubbish that in several of the games we needed Fowler to score either the only or the crucial first goal. Does your criticism about those teams being so s**** negate all of Gerrard's goals? Pepe's clean sheets? You need to do better than that. His record speaks for itself and if you are going to try and start qualifying it, then I can do the same and say that with a couple of kinder of ofside decisions it could have been even better. I don't need to though because like I said, his record speaks for itself. I can understand why people had major doubts about him being brought back. I can't understand why people are continuing to doubt his worth to the sqaud.

Ah - that would explain it.

7 - 10 wasn't my prediction - I was just agreeing that it possibly isn't far off what we should expect. As my crystal ball isn't working at the moment I can't actually tell you how many he will get or how many will be penalties but to be honest I find your question pretty irrelvant as his penalty on Saturday got us the same point as we would have got had he dribbled around the whole team and nutmegged the keeper. Obviously what you are still trying to do is show that he is no longer good enough to score goals from open play and, as we can't expect pens every week, then he therefore has nothing to offer. All I can do is point out again the thing that you have consistently ignored and never been able to explain given Fowler's supposed s***ness - his goals record since returning. About 7 in 15 in the League, with only one penalty amongst them. I'll ask again - if he is now so rubbish, how do you explain that?

This content is not viewable to guests.,This content is not viewable to guests.

This content is not viewable to guests.,This content is not viewable to guests.

So good you posted it twice? Maybe nobody has called him 's***' but saying he 'clearly hasn't got it anymore' and 'could scarcely be worse' comes as close as you can get without using the actual word. That was the comment I was responding to. If he is so s***, oops sorry 'clearly hasn't got it anymore', then why did Rafa bring him in? How do you explain his goals per game record since returning to us? Why do all of the other players rave about his contribution? And you'll have to point out to me where I said he should play every game rather than accepting a bit part. Of course he'll play a bit part - but if he was 'clearly past it' then he wouldn't even be able to do that. Saying he has nothing to offer is as delusional as saying that he will be the key man. But I tell you what, you lay in to the people who actually support one of our players rather than those who lay into him after his first game of the season. All right, but apart from setting up the move that led to the pen, and scoring the equaliser - what have the Romans ever done for us?

This content is not viewable to guests.,This content is not viewable to guests.

Hardly unprecendented for a game to still be discussed a whole 1 day after it has taken place - but f*** it, close the whole forum down eh? Can't have people debating points or anything like that as us discussing transfers or formations or whatever the f*** else isn't going to influence what actually happens. Much better to just be an arrogant t*** and/or self-appointed dictator of what can and can't be discussed.

It was the bold bit that my argument was based on though really. Losing players during a game the way we did is totally different from losing them in adavnce of a game and being able to plan accordingly. You are splitting hairs, and being more than a little precious, with the stuff about accusing people of talking b******s - in my opinion of course. But either way, sorry for any offence caused. I still think we should have been good enough to win yesterday, and have said that it was a poor performance with loads to improve on - but at the same time can see why we were hindered by some of what happened. I'd agree with you that the midfield underperformed but there were other factors. And it doesn't really wash to say that the defence wasn't affected by the injuries and reorganisation, given that Aurelio badly lost his man for their goal - regardless of how well he played other than that (and I think he was no better than ok, certainly not MOM as he was in The Observer). To be honest, I've been getting pissed off at people raving over how this our best squad ever when there are so many untested players in there. I think we've got a shot at the league this year but I also think a few people have been getting carried away a bit. It cuts bith ways - if the squad are as good as people have been saying then yes, it is disappointing to not win, but it also means they should be backed to not let this be a fatak blow to our title hopes like some are almost making it out to be.

This content is not viewable to guests.,This content is not viewable to guests.

Oh do f*** off. Averaging not far off a goal every other game since he came back I'd say. Yeah, he's s***.

Fowler is not a great penalty taker by any means. He has missed plenty in his time. If he is the best after Murphy then we have had some pretty poor ones. For me, he comes after (in no particular order) Molby, Murphy, Gary Mac, Jari, Phil Neal to name but a few.

It is you who are talking b******s now mate. It doesn't matter how strong your squad is, when you lose players to injury during a game it inevitably has a negative impact on the side - especially when those players are both from the same parts of the side, and even more especially when they are from a part of the side which relies more than most on having a bit of continuity, and which was already missing a first choice pick who had been replaced by a bit of a weak link. The other thing that losing two players to injury in the first half does is seriously limit your ability to 'change things' later on - I think Crouch would have been brought on, for example, if we had the opportunity. As it was we only had one change left to make so the primary advantage of having a quality squad - the ability to bring top players off the bench when the opposition are tiring a bit - was largely taken away from us. 1 Agree 2 Nonesense. Complete accident. 3 Nonesense. Forward's tackle, should have been booked, nothing more. 4 Agree 5 If that is all it takes to disrupt us we are in for a long season. The grass was long but I don't think it was much of a factor. If it was, excpect a f***ing meadow when we go to Goodison. 6 Agree 7 We'll have far worse than him this year and as our pen wasn't exactly clear cut I don't think we can complain. 8 If my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle

Sensible way of looking at I think. Not a good result, not a good performance, lots that needs improving on - but every reason to believe that we will do so.

This content is not viewable to guests.,This content is not viewable to guests.

Best point made in this thread. Not a good result today and the fact that it is the first game is largely irrelevant - two points dropped is two points dropped and that is what it was today. Excusing it because it is the first game is the kind of mentality that will see us make a slow start again. What is more of an excuse is the disruption to the backline - losing one of them before the game and two during it is unfortunate. In the circumstances, I'll take a point today. Can't say I'm happy, but we'll only be able to tell the significance of this result in May. I really don't think there will be juch between the top 4/5 this season and can see all of them dropping points so perhaps the biggest positive from this result is that it may stop the ludicrous over confidence that some have developed, who seem to think that all we need to do is send 11 players out onto the field and we'll win every game (probably the same people who are responsible for the doom and gloom in this thread). We live to fight another day.