Aye, there was a gap between some of the monsters of the early decade in Nedved, Baraja and Ballack and the little guys who dominated the end of the decade in Xavi and Iniesta. The only midfielders seriously competing with Gerrard and Lampard at that point were Deco, Pirlo and to a lesser extent Essien.
RAWK Goes Into Meltdown (2012/2013)
- Thread starter Plan M
- Start date
- Status
Aye, there was a gap between some of the monsters of the early decade in Nedved, Baraja and Ballack and the little guys who dominated the end of the decade in Xavi and Iniesta. The only midfielders seriously competing with Gerrard and Lampard at that point were Deco, Pirlo and to a lesser extent Essien.
I presume you mean during the last couple of years?
Which I believes leads to him being under and overrated by many people. His goals against Olympiakos, Milan, West Ham etc have lasting memories. People don't forget goals like that.
Personally I think Lampard has been a better footballer than Gerrard. He's shown more consistency over about nine seasons. His ability to time his runs and score countless goals speaks for itself. I believe in nine consecutive seasons Lampard scored 10 league goals or more, I think Gerrard has done that three times. I'm not saying that goals=better player, but I do think it helps tip the scales.
Gerrard is a far more dynamic midfielder. He could make lung busting runs to make a sliding tackle, or he could sprint out of nowhere and absolutely thunder one in (see West Ham and Olympiakos). The goal he scored against United from about 30 yards. They catch the eye. Lampard was more the opposite - purposely not catching the eye, making ghosting runs, not being picked up. I think there was more intelligence to his play (excluding his numerous Rick O'Shea goals). Whereas Gerrard said about his West Ham goal that he just wanted to whack it back at goal, and I'd suggest he'd done that for a few goals.
Both been top class midfielders, and people will ask why England never managed a semi final with them in midfield, but Lampard just shades it for me, but to say either has never been a top class midfielder is wrong.
Hello, hello, hello. Is this the start of a caf romance?
Ole's_toe_poke said:You two are doing it on the side aren't you?
Well, bring me a great RAWK quote and I'm anyone's.
On the news that a Black Footballers Association may be in the offing:
Classy
Classy
Gets better
They can't help themselves.
Check it out for yourselves. Loads of mental comments
http://www.redandwhitekop.com/forum/index.php?topic=299082.0
http://www.redandwhitekop.com/forum/index.php?topic=299082.0
a@a said:
Wonder how he felt when they won and he got his money...
To be fair, I'm with them on this one. It's the stupidest idea I've ever heard of.
What we should do, is make sure the powers that be at the FA are fully represented by every minority.
Having a black only FA, would be a million times more racist that anything Suarez/Terry have done.
They made racist comments in the heat of the moment, horrible and should have been a harsher punishment but to go out of your way to create a governing body that will represent you, based purely on the colour of your skin, that is actually active racism. The idea should not even be entertained. It's ludicrous.
.
Does have a point in there somewhere.
Our strikers have been saving us far too often this season.
"It's a travesty to see players such as Suarez not play in the Champions League yet there is Georgios fecking Samaras trying to nutmeg Jordi Alba."
Djimi Traoré won the CL
Djimi Traoré won the CLI can't tell if this post is serious or not.
Really? You must be a bit thick, then.
If you take issue with what I've said, come out and say it and stop fannying about.
Why has the RAWK thread turned into the Uber boring gay butt hurt debate thread?
They are right about this tbf - as detestable as the cnut is, he should really be playing Champions League football. Why on earth he is wasting his prime years playing for a side that struggles to qualify for the Europa League is strange - his wages can't be that high to make that sacrifice surely?
Listen you are either being deliberately obtuse, or you are a grade A, special kind of retard. At the moment, I'm leaning towards the latter.
Racism, by it's very nature includes, singling out people based on the colour of their skin. Having a BLACK ONLY PFA, is racist. There is no two ways about it.
Will there be an Asian PFA, a Jewish PFA or other minorities in football? Will this Black PFA represent those people or are they only concerned with people of their own skin colour?
Just because I'm not pro black, pro white or pro any other kind of skin colour, doesn't mean I don't know anything about racism.
''Right lads, we want racism out of football, how do we go about it?''
''I know, lets make a players union for only black people''
''Yeah, that isn't racist at all, and the us vs them mentality it creates will be brilliant for the game''
''That settles it then''
Oh the fecking irony.
You know what you can do mate? Crawl back into whatever spastic hole it is you came out of and stay there.
He is at the absolute right place, no doubt about that
Clueless. Let's leave it there though, the thread's getting derailed.
I reckon you're the clueless one in this case
Creating a union for an under-represented minority is a "million times more racist" than a white man calling Anton Ferdinand a black cnut. Okey dokey.
Not quite what he said though, is it?
A Black ONLY union. It's racist.
There is a world of difference between someone using a racial slur, in the heat of the moment, because they knew it would hurt the other person and creating a group that will exclude people based on the colour of their skin. It's racial discrimination. How you can't see that is baffling.
"It's a travesty to see players such as Suarez not play in the Champions League yet there is Georgios fecking Samaras trying to nutmeg Jordi Alba."
Given the problems Liverpool have up front and Rodgers' style of play, Samaras wouldn't be a kick in the arse away from getting a game for them. Never mind the insinuation that champions of minor leagues shouldn't be entitled to a spot in the 'Champions' League.
Am I right in thinking that about 24% of Prem players are black? I have been trying to find out the exact figure, because I wouldn't have described black players in the Prem to be part of an under-represented minority, to use your phrase. Minority, yes - but a very significant percentage, all the same.
I think the 'under represented' wasn't in reference to players numbers, but in reference to representation for that large number of players on the various boards and associations that claim to represent the players. Management is a prime example.
If this is going to go on much longer an you move it to the racism thread or create a new one.
This is absurd, what's next? South American players only FA? Japanese FA? Chinese FA?
To be fair, there already is a Japanese FA. It's in Japan.
Is it racist that I left China out of my obviously lame joke? I think we should let the Chinese FA decide.
You're telling me. We should just ignore it. It's not like football is real life ffs!
Perhaps a separate PFA should be open to all blacks, Asians, Hispanics, et al to serve as one.
That said it does not appear Asians and Hispanics are anywhere near as racially targeted as blacks so the formation of a black PFA makes a bit of sense in that regard.
But the current PFA (and governing bodies) should be taking procactive actions - there shouldn't be a need for a separate PFA based on ethnicity or skin color.
That said it does not appear Asians and Hispanics are anywhere near as racially targeted as blacks so the formation of a black PFA makes a bit of sense in that regard.
But the current PFA (and governing bodies) should be taking procactive actions - there shouldn't be a need for a separate PFA based on ethnicity or skin color.
I can see a lot of problems arising if this Black players FA is formed.
This will mean more division of people and football.
Must find some other ways to tackle racism even if its difficult.
This will mean more division of people and football.
Must find some other ways to tackle racism even if its difficult.
I'm fecking delighted all this shit is in the RAWK meltdown thread. Delighted
There has been a new thread created.
feck off with the race debate.
You're saying we should go ahead with "black only"
That word alone is racist, racist goes both way, not just because you're black you can't be deemed as racist.
It's one thing for a few fans to to be racist, but if they go ahead and make the platform for that, lord knows what's next.
It is not racist then to have a white only PFA?
At the moment there is only one non-white on the PFA board. In fact, apart from the deputy chief executive, the rest of the PFA leading staff are all caucasian. How can they be parity or comprehension of black players experiences and grievances when there is such discrepancy within the organisation itself? Its like a male police force trying to handle rape cases in the near past. Male officers just didn't "get it". They were insensitive to the point of being indifferent. Women wanted serious and heavy sentences handled out to rapists, most men believed that a slap on the wrist was enough. How can an average caucasian under racism? They can't!
Rio Ferdinand got (what was it) an 8 month ban for MISSING a drug test. Suarez got an 8 game ban and Terry a 4 match ban for racism.
Simply put, caucasians just don't get racism - even those who sympathise with black players who experience it. In all honesty, how many sympathisers would for example, agree with an 8 month or one season ban on a United player if he made a racist remark?
I'm always excited when new posts are in this thread, because it's a chance to find absolute gems from the RAWK forum. However lately there's none of that unfortunately with all this race nonsense. There's a thread about it here: https://www.redcafe.net/f7/potential-formation-black-players-fa-thread-360672/
- Status