RooneyLegend
New Member
- Joined
- May 3, 2013
- Messages
- 12,963
You actually think keane had more ability than Bruno? As in this is a real conversation that you believe can be had?Did you actually watch Keane and Scholes?
You actually think keane had more ability than Bruno? As in this is a real conversation that you believe can be had?Did you actually watch Keane and Scholes?
Oh that's very true but in terms of control of the ball and command of it Bruno owes nothing to Scholes. Obviously passing and ball striking technique Scholes takes it but Bruno also has it in his locker.Agree regarding Keane although wouldn't say there's too much in it but he's not near Scholes technique wise. Scholes was able to consistently pick out passes of all types and distances under pressure while making it look easy. One of the best passers, technique wise, the game has ever seen IMO.
But go on lets keep making excuses for low IQ football
Low IQ player. Always said as soon as the penalties dry up and he isnt stats padding people will open their eyes and start realizing what exactly he is offering in open play ie absolute feck all. hasnt put a good 90 min in ages but was covering it up with penalties (mostly won by others) and getting free passes on 2/10 performances because of it.
No better than Sanchez . Only Sanchez didnt take set pieces and penalties to boost his stats
Bruno is amazing. But gosh some of his passes are infuriating. When theres a good simple pass to make he should do that instead of attempting something impossible. It would really elevate his game.
A few good games and we all heralded him the second coming.
A few bad games and now he's Jimmy Bullard.
Reminds me of the arsenal fan base.
It seems the technical ability of Keane is really underappreciated here. Probably because he kept things simple and didn't do those flashy Hollywood stuffs.You actually think keane had more ability than Bruno? As in this is a real conversation that you believe can be had?
To be fair Jimmy Bullard is very good at imitating famous goals that happened in history iwatch him on youtube and heß quality.A few good games and we all heralded him the second coming.
A few bad games and now he's Jimmy Bullard.
Reminds me of the arsenal fan base.
I'm a huge fan of him. Met him at Sky, lovely bloke. Just wants to always have a laugh. I think Roy Keane would punch him if they ever did punditry together and disagreed.To be fair Jimmy Bullard is very good at imitating famous goals that happened in history iwatch him on youtube and heß quality.
It seems the technical ability of Keane is really underappreciated here. Probably because he kept things simple and didn't do those flashy Hollywood stuffs.
It seems like time is unfortunately increasingly remembering him as a good Lee Cattermole. He was better than Scholes let alone BrunoIt seems the technical ability of Keane is really underappreciated here. Probably because he kept things simple and didn't do those flashy Hollywood stuffs.
Btw you still didn't answer my question?
You actually think keane had more ability than Bruno? As in this is a real conversation that you believe can be had?
Keane was a brilliant footballer, the rise of a narrative and the younger generation means that is being forgotten.It seems the technical ability of Keane is really underappreciated here. Probably because he kept things simple and didn't do those flashy Hollywood stuffs.
Btw you still didn't answer my question?
Yeah but it's normal I think. There was no Youtube at that time. And Keane was never the flashy type. That's why I asked if that poster watched Keane.Keane was a brilliant footballer, the rise of a narrative and the younger generation means that is being forgotten.
This team would win the league if Roy Keane was in the middle of the park.
He didn't do those flashy Hollywood stuffs cause he didn't have the ability to do them. That's the primary reason why players 'keep things simple'.It seems the technical ability of Keane is really underappreciated here. Probably because he kept things simple and didn't do those flashy Hollywood stuffs.
Btw you still didn't answer my question?
He was better than Scholes, he was nowhere near as technically gifted as Scholes.It seems like time is unfortunately increasingly remembering him as a good Lee Cattermole. He was better than Scholes let alone Bruno
He didn't do those flashy Hollywood stuffs cause he didn't have the ability to do them. That's the primary reason why players 'keep things simple'.
What's your question? Whether I watched him play? Yes, I did. No more than a limited combative midfielder. Pretty much up there with the best ones around at the time. Anything else is make believe stuff from the caf.
This team would win the league if Roy Keane was in the middle of the park.
No more than a limited combative midfielder.
We can’t carry a player that gives the ball away that many times. It’s just not sustainable
what are you suggesting? Sell Bruno?
how he dragged us singlehandedly through last season