Pouge that's chance was completely different in all fairness.
9
Season Average Rating
- Appearances
- 29
- Goals
- 4
- Assists
- 5
- Yellow cards
- 2
- Status
Pouge that's chance was completely different in all fairness.
Lo lo lololo lo lo Alberto Morenoooooo
In ligue 1 there is Brandao and Romao but you don't want them, otherwise it could work with Ronaldo.
He made a meal out of it all the same. A confident striker at least hits the target or makes the goalkeeper work.
we need to retire the song in his honour
You can just about fudge Angel Di Maria's name into the song, but is he any more deserving of it?
Just do the Lololo bits as normal, and then just everybody yell "PHIL JONES!"
Just do the Lololo bits as normal, and then just everybody yell "PHIL JONES!"
lo lo lo lo, anybody but falcao, anybodyyy but fal-cao
I hope so!
Unfortunately for us, we don't have a single one.
It's odd that no one refers to the fact that that was the only chance he had all game, and it came from a player who's not good enough to start.
The talking point shouldn't be Falcaos touches, or his one missed chance, we should be asking why we created so few chances in a game where we had 400 more passes than Chelsea, in addition to 70% possession.
The thing is abuot Falcao, he doesn't feel you with any confidence that he is not going to feck chances if he gets them. I know it's sort of unfair to think like that but when I look at him, I don't see a player strong enough nor good enough to control the ball in a situation with pressure and "look" dangerous by at the very least working the keeper. Football is a psychological game and when defenders see him, they must feel already so confident that they're gonna contain him without much pb.
Do you mean aside from the one that was blocked by Cahill and the left foot effort from just outside he area?
Not to mention the 7 other shots that were actually on target.
It's clear why though, they sat back and parked the bus while we had our main creative midfielder in DM, no Carrick playmaking and our best striker in midfield.
But yeah questions to be asked...
So, you believe that a player can go from being a 4 goal/season striker to 30 goal/season striker?
Has this ever happened to a player of his age (or older)?
By my reckoning he is getting worse, not better.
It could be that the EPL just doesnt suit him and that if he goes back to Spain he could score 20+ goals/season, but in the EPL, this guy is a bit of a joke. The way he falls around like he is a new born calf is actually quite funny.
Torres prevented Chelsea from winning the title and I'm sure Falcao could do a similar job for another team in the EPL. My preferred destination for Falcao is Chelsea, Arsenal, Man City or LFC.
What does amaze me is that LVG keeps giving his non-scoring striker, game time. He isnt going to score for us, so why play him? Maybe I am missing something.
What a strange post????
Do you mean aside from the one that was blocked by Cahill and the left foot effort from just outside he area?
Not to mention the 7 other shots that were actually on target.
It's clear why though, they sat back and parked the bus while we had our main creative midfielder in DM, no Carrick playmaking and our best striker in midfield.
But yeah questions to be asked...
There were 7 shots on goal, yes, 2 of which were on target. 4 of these shots were from well outside the box, of which 2 were from McNair, our centre back. That's quite simply not good enough. The simple fact that McNair had the most shots target should be embarrassing, especially, given that it was from 30-35 yards out. The other shot on target was that lifeless chip from Rooney, we really did test Courtois.
Hard man to please!
There were 15 shots on goal, 7 of which were on target.
Or even why WC Rooney couldn't hit the target with his two sitters, laid on a plate for him.
Shhhh don't want to detract away from how shit Falcao is.
Really, he was a little unlucky not to score, if he had been playing with confidence under his belt, he probably would have scored.
Be interesting if on MNF Gary does a deep analysis of how Falcao actually played like Rooney against City. Only difference, there was no ACM (Herrera) or Carrick to make that incisive pass.
The pass came from Luke Shaw, who started.
Re the last paragraph, two reasons. Chelsea defended very well and Falcao himself. A stronger, quicker and harder working striker would have asked Chelsea's central defensive pairing a lot more questions.
Hererra, Rooney and Mata can all pick a pass. Can't blame absent players for Falcao's lack of opportunities.
Yeah, you're correct, it was Shaw.
As with the last part, I don't agree, completely. Yes, Chelsea were organised, however, Young, unlike Shaw, failed to create a single chance having seen quite a bit of the ball. The, going to the right side, Mata and Valencia offered very little and Rooney did nothing to help, as he was more interested in his long diagonals across the pitch.
You could see a massive change in tempo and intent in the last 10 or so minutes were we realised that we had to push harder to get an equaliser, but it was a little bit too late. I think we were far too complacent and maybe even over confident in our ability and philosophy, added to the fact that our midfield probably didn't offer enough creativity.
I don't think he had a lack of opportunites, I think he would have had more if Herrera was playing his normal role and Carrick had been in Rooney's position. I think Falcao had 3 reasonable chances, 1 hit the post (when he probably should have scored), he had a long range effort where his movement opened up a gap, and Cahill blocked one of his shots from a good pass back on the right side.
I don't think we were complacent but I do think we lacked a bit of creativity. I also think you're not giving enough credit to Chelsea. They were at home, on a smallish pitch and are masters at sucking the life out of a game of football. With a full squad to choose from Mourinho was always in a good position to shut us out and that's what they did. We were still the width of a post away from getting a draw, though, which would have been a very acceptable result.
Dont forget the other chance when Fellaini squared it to him in the box. For me that was the best chance of the game along with Rooney's - a bit more composure and he would have scored.
Context is important if comparing with Rooney last week - as Pogue said, Rooney did manage an assist, and frankly you dont put 4 goals past City if your striker isnt contributing anything.
Comparatively, against Chelsea we didnt score and had limited chances, despite ending up with 70% possession, outpassing and outplaying them. To me, that says there is an issue with the striker(s). Of course Chelsea are well organised defensively, but thats why we are meant to have world class attackers capable of breaking it down and producing something.
I think the difference between this week and last was more in the role Rooney played (vs. Carrick) and the role Herrera played (more defensive). Rooney did not have a bad game, but he is not Carrick. And from what I saw, Rooney had the two best chances in the game, and fluffed both (and he is our best striker).
this isn't a debate. there is probably less than 1% chance that he'll be here next season.
That's the problem right there Pexbo! But Rooney missed 3 chances also where he should have atleast worked the keeper!
Of all the weaknesses he's shown this season, slow, weak, poor finishing, the most bizarre one is his total lack of balance.
He seems to just be constantly falling over or about to fall over. Even when he's stood still he looks like he could go at any moment. It's weird.
I thought he was crap against Chelsea as he has been all season really. It's surprising he's managed to score as many as 4 the way he's been.
He seems to just be constantly falling over or about to fall over. Even when he's stood still he looks like he could go at any moment. It's weird.
I thought he was crap against Chelsea as he has been all season really. It's surprising he's managed to score as many as 4 the way he's been.
I dont think we should make a decision based on 1 game. Even the best strikers in the World can have a stinker.
Rooney had an average game against Chelsea. As did Falcao.
The difference is that Rooney has had many great games for us this year. Falcao hasnt.
Rooney had an average game against Chelsea. As did Falcao.
The difference is that Rooney has had many great games for us this year. Falcao hasnt.
He doesn't deserve to be the scapegoat for Saturday but he definitely doesn't deserve any praise either, it was a bit of a nothing performance from him really. He couldn't get involved in the game, he didn't beat anyone, win any duels or put the centre halves under any pressure etc etc, when he was involved he didn't produce any real quality and all his attempts were off target.
He didn't offer the team anything and if you look round the league and elsewhere in Europe there are plenty of players who can offer a lot more, he is being paid the going rate for a world class player and judging him by those standards he has been pathetic in virtually every game he has played and hasn't even produced 45 minutes at that level all season.
He didn't offer the team anything and if you look round the league and elsewhere in Europe there are plenty of players who can offer a lot more, he is being paid the going rate for a world class player and judging him by those standards he has been pathetic in virtually every game he has played and hasn't even produced 45 minutes at that level all season.
Would this bother many if it was true.
http://thepeoplesperson.com/2015/04/20/agent-radamel-falcao-contact-liverpool-report-90733/
http://thepeoplesperson.com/2015/04/20/agent-radamel-falcao-contact-liverpool-report-90733/
Not really. But this might.
http://www1.skysports.com/football/...d-still-make-manchester-united-move-permanent
I'd take him at £25m and £120k a week, he'll get better next season.
On reduced wages i'd take him over Ings but that's about that.
"According to the Express" - enough said.
Would be typical if he went there and scored 25 goals though.
Ings has looked miles the better player this season. He can run and control a football for a start.
And Ings isn't good enough for United.
Yea, i want neither at United but if it was between the two i would take Falcao over Ings. My muppet striker signing however remains Dybala.
The falling over part is really unfortunate though. Not trying to make any excuses for him here, but there might be a possible explanation for the phenomenon of someone who actually looks quite built and was not so prone to falling over in his previous clubs, which imo is a combination of a confidence issue (self perpetuated negativity leading to reduced resistance), perception changes (referee tends to believe that someone who falls over is weak and hence less likely to call a foul even if it should be called) and defenders simply being more willing to shove him due to this expected leniency from the referees, as well as knowing that others have tried and often succeeded in the past. A problem that just will not go away so easily imo.
Lets not be so harsh on Falcao. We expect miracles sometimes. He's struggled with the rhythm of the premiership but so has Di Maria. A lot of great players have. He's had his injury problems so the target is bigger on his back. With a pre season things might fall for him. He's been unlucky at times. We obviously have a few decisions to make but I don't think we should be against it at a reduced price. Let's not beat around the bush. It took us a good while to find the confidence to attack teams because perhaps we were worried about the back. If you think back, he's not had THAT many efforts on goal because at times we've created zip and at times it's not run for him. If we play with a quick tempo and good wing play, he'll be alright. This season is a write off. He had no pre season with us and he's missed too much football to be match fit. How can people expect so much of him against Chelsea, when he's barely featured over the last few months? If we can get the price down to 20 million give or take, it could still be a decent option as a back up to rooney
I don't really care what he looks like. If he looks fecked or not. We've seen that with Rooney in the past as well. With it being a loan and going the way it has, it adds a lot of psychological baggage. Without that worry, you see a better player
I don't really care what he looks like. If he looks fecked or not. We've seen that with Rooney in the past as well. With it being a loan and going the way it has, it adds a lot of psychological baggage. Without that worry, you see a better player
- Status