I fear if I start posting in this thread, I'll do the same thing as I did to the Tevez one.
Too late.
Too late.
Hargreaves vs. Carrick, Feadingseagulls vs. Noodle, Chief (Bayern Fan!) vs. Logic
- Thread starter anything about now
- Start date
- Status
seriously, if you aren't gonna post facts or opinions on the subject at hand you shouldn't spam this thread. There were points being brought up by both sides which were valid and this spamming just ruins it.
I've read the last 8 pages of the thread, it doesn't appear that way.
Perhaps it needs a good clear up of the rubbish then?
Perhaps it needs a good clear up of the rubbish then?
I'd agree the peripheral stuff is annoying - so my apologies.
However, it started with me pointing out how people were misrepresenting the chief's pro-Hargreaves position. Incapable of adequate reply they launched into unfounded personal insults to which I feel entitled to reply. Still unable to make a case they ignore all arguments presented and rely on insults until one who happens to be a mod decides to abuse his position by continuing his libel in my tagline.
I'm pissed off and indicating it - I reckon justifiably.
So apologies once again.
There are some Hargreaves points on previous pages though.
academia.
don't get me started on academia
I hate academics
these are people who failed to get by in the real world so they locked themselves into a university and write papers on topics no one gives a shit about.
I apologise if anyone here is an academic. However, I do have ample proof of this
don't get me started on academia
I hate academics
these are people who failed to get by in the real world so they locked themselves into a university and write papers on topics no one gives a shit about.
I apologise if anyone here is an academic. However, I do have ample proof of this
if you take off your jay-z glasses you'll see the majority has been some valid points but yeah a clean up of the spam is in order Hectic
you'll see the majority has been some valid points but yeah a clean up of the spam is in order Hecticagain I'll post this as it has been lost in the drivel of the last two pages
just want to throw another log into the fire.
Rubberman's main argument is not really kaka
it's gattuso.
I will let him say that OH would stop Kaka. fair enough, that's his job. But if the whole concept of OH is to prevent someone liek gattuso from dominating the game, I would say he wouldn't
Gattuso and OH perform similar roles. They would not be marking up against eachother (on a regular basis) just as you won't see makalele take on mascherano.
having OH in the midfield (who is not as adept offensively) would mean that Gattuso has less threats to worry about.
Instead of Carrick and scholes (or whoever it might be) he only has ONE to deal with, making his job much easier.
the best way to counter a defensive midfielder is to give him too many options for him to cover them all
that would be my thoughts anyway
just want to throw another log into the fire.
Rubberman's main argument is not really kaka
it's gattuso.
I will let him say that OH would stop Kaka. fair enough, that's his job. But if the whole concept of OH is to prevent someone liek gattuso from dominating the game, I would say he wouldn't
Gattuso and OH perform similar roles. They would not be marking up against eachother (on a regular basis) just as you won't see makalele take on mascherano.
having OH in the midfield (who is not as adept offensively) would mean that Gattuso has less threats to worry about.
Instead of Carrick and scholes (or whoever it might be) he only has ONE to deal with, making his job much easier.
the best way to counter a defensive midfielder is to give him too many options for him to cover them all
that would be my thoughts anyway
I think you're putting the cart before the horse.
Most academics haven't 'failed... in the real world' instead they are far more interested in the rewards (must be intellectual - the pay isn't great) of academic life life than the compromises they must make outside it.
if you take off your jay-z glasses
I'll do it tomorrow.
Do you genuinely think I love Jay-Z?
I'd agree the peripheral stuff is annoying - so my apologies.
However, it started with me pointing out how people were misrepresenting the chief's pro-Hargreaves position. Incapable of adequate reply they launched into unfounded personal insults to which I feel entitled to reply. Still unable to make a case they ignore all arguments presented and rely on insults until one who happens to be a mod decides to abuse his position by continuing his libel in my tagline.
I'm pissed off and indicating it - I reckon justifiably.
So apologies once again.
There are some Hargreaves points on previous pages though.
My post wasn't really aimed at you in particular so there are no apologies needed.
nah bro, just busting your balls.
I honestly can't even remember what I wrote about Jay-Z at the time! It's been confusing me for days what I said, haha.
Anyway, I'll let you lot get back to the point.
Hargreaves.
I don't really agree with that. If you don't play a hargreaves then scholes or/and carrick will have to play against kaka (in this example) to stop his threat. If however you cut off someone like gattuso from getting the ball and passing it to someone like Kaka then you hurt a team greatly as gattuso isn't going to hurt you offensively on his own. It's easier said than done though and that's why milan have been a very good side over the years.
But then what do I know i'm just waffling shit instead of doing uni work.
I've not looked at this thread.
Is noodle making silly comments, then being unable to defend them, then pretending to not have made them, then repeating them, then pretending to not have made them again before finally fannying off in dramatic fashion?
Is FS running circles around everyone, but getting frustrated that they don't even see that he's doing it?
Glad to see everything is about normal tonight.
Is noodle making silly comments, then being unable to defend them, then pretending to not have made them, then repeating them, then pretending to not have made them again before finally fannying off in dramatic fashion?
Is FS running circles around everyone, but getting frustrated that they don't even see that he's doing it?
Glad to see everything is about normal tonight.
You don't love me?
fecksake Jason, I'm trying my level best not to post here otherwise it's basically spam.
It's all love though.
but hargraeves wouldnt line up against gattuso
he'd be assigned to take out kaka
just like he was assigned to cancel fabregas
gattuso doesn't seek the ball.
He wins it and then distributes accordingly.
if you have two attacking players
it's harder for him to win it.
if he doesn't win it, kaka doesn't get the ball
and therefore through starving of possession you have nullified kaka
Since it's getting late, let's concentrate on your main Gattuso point as the chief appears to see it.
When I first saw the chief's point about OH stifling Kaka and simultaneously helping reduce Gattuso's effectiveness it did seem incredibly odd.
He seems to have 2 main strands to his argument:
1 It worked pretty well when Bayern played Milan - Kaka (& indeed Milan) did little, and Bayern were not shut down by Gattuso, despite the weakened nature of the Bayern side.
2 The idea as to how this might work is probably based on OH's mobility and the fact he functions further up the pitch than a standard defensive midfielder. By trying to control this area he has access to both players - he can challenge Gattuso directly and also help move the play away from him. He can also block passes to and from Kaka in this area and challenge him for possession regularly.
Having said that, I'm not entirely convinced by these combined points. Most people trying to comment on the chief's posts in this area are so inaccurate that you get no worthwhile comment from him. There seems to be some prima facie evidence for the chief's points but they do seem somewhat counterintuitive as you suggest.
I really would be interested to hear how he thinks this works.
It works both ways though. If we don't play him then scholes or carrick would have to be concentrating on Kaka thus nullifying them attacking wise.
Your kind words are appreciated - but I'm conscious that Noods' idiocy has resulted in too large a proportion of peripheral 'debate' - hence my contrition. (Hey - I haven't had that word come into my head for ages.
)FYI:
Here's my summary to Noods of his posts:
You're talking crap when saying the chief contradicts his main points.
You contradict yourself about your posts re. the chief - you can't both be 'tongue in cheek' and 'accurate' as you claim.
Your personal attacks on myself have no basis in fact.
My initial comments complained about your inaccuracy - and mildly.
You consistently misrepresent the chief's points even when 'explaining yourself' (ie. NOT 'tongue in cheek'.)
I'm only 'pretty sure' I've seen all the chief's posts in this thread because, being human, I may have scrolled too far once - VERY unlikely though.
Your evidence is selective and deficient - mine is relevant.
You are unable to notice the context of Sincher's remark - typical!
The somewhat more detailed version is here:
https://www.redcafe.net/f6/hargreaves-187879/index65.html#post4312570
Both. Being also a Bayern fan, I know we were elated with how well we faired vs Milan, bearing in mind the injuries we had, the crisis of a season we were having and the fact men like Hargreaves had just returned from long term injury. Personally I had expected a heavy pasting. So did many of my compatriots.
That is one reason when United (my second team) drew Milan, I was so confident we'd go through. Because we had wasted Roma, who for my money where better outfit than Bayern, who Milan didn't put away with any ease frankly. Unfortunately though, football doesn't always work that way.
How many chromosomes do you have?
Thing is the damage Gattuso did in Milan was to keep winning the ball not far from the front of our 18 yard box. While the rest of his team mate pushed up, and the fullback physically reduced our space to lay by not retreating during attacks. We on the other and didn't try to win the ball physically, neither did we physically try to close down space. We simply stood off, making Milan occupy the majority of our own half. Due to having no person who could go to to toe in a combative battle with Gattuso. This made it hard for is to get out of our box, or to keep tabs on men like Seedorf, let alone find the space or time to pick out our then isolated front men.
Having a player like a Hargreaves around to win it back immediately pushes a Gattuso further into his own half, because he i forced to retreat to protect his back four due to a risk of a counter, due to the fact his fullbacks, by your men winning back the ball, have not had the time to get forward to occupy your half. In turn, exposing Pirlo, Milan's chief play maker, to the rest of your midfield. Who thus close down the space he operates in. Hence, since he is slow, it becomes much harder for him to pick out men like Kaka or a Seedorf with the ease he normally does, when under pressure and in less space. Ensuring Milan have less and less of the ball. In addition due to having a hard guy around, men like Kaka would not be given much of chance to get the opportunity to run at your defence. Arsenal did all these things perfectly. Yet they only had Flamini, with defensive duty in midfield. A side like ours that can employ both a Carrick and a Hargreaves would do it in a much more pronounced fashion. Because Hargreaves would win the ball, while also taking care of men like Kaka when the try to run at the defence, while Carrick would close down space and intercept loose and hurried balls from Pirlo, while launching wave after wave of counter attacks. With the impact increasing all the more if, like now, we factored in an Anderson.
yep, clearly you and the rubberman know what happened that match contrary to all the evidence
you even claimed that Hargreaves kept kaka quiet in that game ffs!
....
Wow. I don't really know how to respond to you. I don't think I've ever come across someone quite so blind in my entire life.
What evidence are you suggesting exists that contradicts what Chief said? Right, the article says that Hargreaves sucked and that Bayern got dominated. It then goes on to say that Bayern had the majority of the possession and more chances to score. That is what is called a contradiction. Objective analysis of the game versus subjective opinion on the performance? The objective analysis is there in short. You chose to ignore it and take up the writers subjective opinion on the performance. Ya you're bright.
Then you quote something from me and you selectively quote it ignoring the more important part not two lines below. I'll bold it for you, almost an entire game.
Bloody Hell!
You care why? I'm also a Bayern supporter.
I guess you're not a real United fan unless you grew up in the fecked up world of English football fans where you actually hate people that live across the street from you because they support Liverpool right? ;p
I'll take a wild guess and say because this is a Manchester United fansite and also because I've always thought Chiefy was a United fan. And let me throw your own question back at you... wasn't my post aimed at chiefy, what's got your knickers in a twist?
Stop being such a drama queen.
You're Owen Hargeaves, aren't you?
Hahaha...
Chiefy IS a United fan. He just love Bayern as much.
at the thread title.68 pages. An absolute piss take.
fair point
the only problem with what you propose is that carrick and hargraeves has not worked (as of yet!)
How can you support two elite teams? Glory hunters.
And why does every thread that FS post in turn out to be ridiculously boring? It's like being in an English lesson taught by Hitler.
And why does every thread that FS post in turn out to be ridiculously boring? It's like being in an English lesson taught by Hitler.
HARGO'S PLEA: "NOT IN MY NAME"
Owen Hargreaves has finally broken his silence and issued a plea for the interminable
Owen Hargreaves thread to end. Hargreaves, appalled at the way the eponymous
online bickerthon has spiraled out of control, gave an emotional press conference
at Old Trafford's Carrington training ground earlier today.
“Please make it stop now,” begged the German-haired enforcer, “Please. Stop the posts.”
Thread
The internet monstrosity, now sixty-five pages long and still growing at an alarming rate,
began when the Rubberman said something spastic - or possibly didn’t, no-one knows.
Since then, it has mushroomed into an entity of frightening size and scope, swamping
all other attempted discussion and causing electrical storms in Lesotho (at least, according
to notorious liar noodlehair).
Hargo: “It’s surfaced porpoise”.
Ointment factory
And now Hargreaves himself has been drawn into the row. Friends last night described the
bustling Canadian anchorman as “tired”, “concerned” and “fecking average”. Meanwhile,
Chelsea sharpshooter Frank Lampard has offered support to his fellow England midfielder,
saying “It’s a tough situation, definitely. Obviously you don’t want noodle telling all these
lies about you, definitely - especially when you’re already comfort-eating marine mammals
to a certain extent...” adding, “Su’agoaws.”
Brambles
But it’s not just the amazing/rubbish demi-Welsh water-carrier that’s feeling the pressure.
Serious questions are being asked of much-loved Caf personality The Rubberman -
questions like, “What?” and “Do you genuinely believe that?” Some have even suggested
that his entire life might be one enormous, elaborate internet hoax. However, last night
a close friend of the Chief's, who declined to be named, angrily denied the allegation,
commenting, “That’s a heinous lie, a blatant hypocrisy and a libelous infamy.”
He helpfully supplied dictionary definitions of these terms, before adding, “How dare you:
1) wave that self-evidently phallic, nay phallogocentric microphone in my visage?
2) Willfully, flagrantly and with callousness aforethought disagree with me on the internet?
3) Tell pseudologous falsehoods about chickens crossing roads when it is established fact
that chickens live in coops and do not traverse public thoroughfares. .” He then went
purple and threatened to call the police, before mercifully running away.
Owen Hargreaves
But evil bastard noodlehair responded fiercely to the aspersions of the Chief's mysterious ally:
"He's literally the biggest penis I've ever come across," said the mouse-attracting oddball, "And
given my love-life, that's up against some pretty stiff competition...literally".
Owen Hargreaves is twenty-seven, slightly pointless and cost seventeen million pounds.
You got any evidence for this Plech? You can't post bollocks on an internet forum without backing it up. Those are the rules mate.
- Status