Rimbeux Posted October 15, 2010 Posted October 15, 2010 Based on performance? I'm not against it per se, but the timing is odd
psl Posted October 15, 2010 Author Posted October 15, 2010 Based on performance? I'm not against it per se, but the timing is odd Agreed. Probably part of the agreement with Roy when he pushed for Rafa to be sacked
Benzo-13 Posted October 15, 2010 Posted October 15, 2010 He should be on pay as you play not that it would matter as he's an automatic choice under Hodgson.
Rimbeux Posted October 15, 2010 Posted October 15, 2010 He should be on pay as you play not that it would matter as he's an automatic choice under Hodgson. As he was under Rafa
Benzo-13 Posted October 15, 2010 Posted October 15, 2010 As he was under RafaHe wouldn've been phased out this season.He wasn't worth a place last year either.
Rimbeux Posted October 15, 2010 Posted October 15, 2010 He wouldn've been phased out this season.He wasn't worth a place last year either. Complete supposition, you've no idea of that at all. Rafa had nothing against age, and actually believed in experience at the back and you can trace that back through to Valencia
Benzo-13 Posted October 15, 2010 Posted October 15, 2010 Complete supposition, you've no idea of that at all. Rafa had nothing against age, and actually believed in experience at the back and you can trace that back through to ValenciaI think Rafa's pursuit of Shawcross, Turner and Cahill say different.
D.Boon Posted October 15, 2010 Posted October 15, 2010 This means we will be able to play for us until he's 36. Mmm......
Rimbeux Posted October 15, 2010 Posted October 15, 2010 (edited) I think Rafa's pursuit of Shawcross, Turner and Cahill say different. Which could have been a numbers up for Skrtl (not good enough) or Agger (too injury prone) just as easily, as well as replacement for Sami, which it really was. You're digging for s*** you dont need to. Hodgson is doing badly enough without you trying to rabidly invent charges against him Edited October 15, 2010 by Rimbeux
Benzo-13 Posted October 15, 2010 Posted October 15, 2010 Which could have been a numbers up for Skrtl (not good enough) or Agger (too injury prone) just as easily, as well as replacement for Sami, which it really was. You're digging for s*** you dont need to. Hodgson is doing badly enough without you trying to rabidly invent charges against himNo I'm not.I said Carragher don't warrant a spot.
Boca Posted October 15, 2010 Posted October 15, 2010 So who did he agree this with then? Hicks? Gillett? Broughton? Purslow? Henry? Snyder? Schar?
Jarg Armani Posted October 15, 2010 Posted October 15, 2010 He's going to be a pain in the a*** for the next two years if he's not getting his game.
Falconhoof Posted October 15, 2010 Posted October 15, 2010 shoddy business this. He needs to improve a hell of a lot to justify it.
carrafan Posted October 17, 2010 Posted October 17, 2010 f*** me, he was bad today. Not totally his fault though as he shouldnt be playing fullback. Dont suppose he refused like he did against Boro.
Nebraska Red Posted October 17, 2010 Posted October 17, 2010 f*** me, he was bad today. Not totally his fault though as he shouldnt be playing fullback. Dont suppose he refused like he did against Boro. "I'll do it for you Roy as you're a good old English guy, not like that git who asked me last time." "2 year extension for playing right back, thanks Boss!!!" He has his good days well behind him does Carragher, it's time we were moving on.
carrafan Posted October 17, 2010 Posted October 17, 2010 (edited) "I'll do it for you Roy as you're a good old English guy, not like that git who asked me last time." "2 year extension for playing right back, thanks Boss!!!" He has his good days well behind him does Carragher, it's time we were moving on. Yep. Best let him play once in a while like Hyypia and let his reading of the game improve us than give him 90 minutes game after game and see him be outmuscled by every clogger leading the line for each club and his aimless hoofs bypass midfield. I think it was Jim Boardman who tweeted the other day that the rumor going around was that Carra wouldnt sign a new deal with us as long "that c***" was managing us. (last year) Edited October 17, 2010 by carrafan
Elm0 Posted October 17, 2010 Posted October 17, 2010 Yep. Best let him play once in a while like Hyypia and let his reading of the game improve us than give him 90 minutes game after game and see him be outmuscled by every clogger leading the line for each club and his aimless hoofs bypass midfield. I think it was Jim Boardman who tweeted the other day that the rumor going around was that Carra wouldnt sign a new deal with us as long "that c***" was managing us. (last year) The hoofs are exactly how roy wants to play though, according to Agger anyway.
kop205 Posted October 17, 2010 Posted October 17, 2010 I think it was Jim Boardman who tweeted the other day that the rumor going around was that Carra wouldnt sign a new deal with us as long "that c***" was managing us. (last year) Thank Christ though that by getting rid of 'that c***' we have been immediately rewarded with a host of stellar performances form all those massive players wwe risked losing if he'd stayed...
fred Posted October 17, 2010 Posted October 17, 2010 Yep. Best let him play once in a while like Hyypia and let his reading of the game improve us than give him 90 minutes game after game and see him be outmuscled by every clogger leading the line for each club and his aimless hoofs bypass midfield. I think it was Jim Boardman who tweeted the other day that the rumor going around was that Carra wouldnt sign a new deal with us as long "that c***" was managing us. (last year) Time for a username change?
carrafan Posted October 17, 2010 Posted October 17, 2010 Time for a username change? Hehe no. First love and all that. He's come out with some right silly statements though in the recent past, with the support for Wenger and Arsenal over Rafa.
Barnes' left foot Posted October 17, 2010 Posted October 17, 2010 Thank Christ though that by getting rid of 'that c***' we have been immediately rewarded with a host of stellar performances form all those massive players wwe risked losing if he'd stayed... Exactly.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now