joey_big_nose

Um, i think thats because redbull only comes in cans! As it is not alcholic there is no problem mixing drinks, no different to Vodka coke or a G and T

We still have an outstanding side without Rooney or even Owen. Liverpool managed to win the European cup and FA cup without an outstanding striker, Greece won Euro 2004 without any world class players. It comes down to whether we can get Gerrard, Lampard, J Cole and Beckham to perofrm, they can cause problems for any side. If Owen gets fit thane that is another string to our bow. Quarter finals for me. Shame as if Rooney was fit I would say odds on for the semis. Hey ho!

Well Parker is still the obvious candidate for me, it is a shame he is ill (would Sven even of picked him for the squad if he was fit?) I'm not really sure Carrick is 'too ambitituous' passing though. He can keep it very simeple at times, like Tugay, and just make sure things tick over. In most world cup matches there is not a big midfield battle so his lack of tackling is only really a problem then. To be fair to Hargreaves he hasn't had a proper shot at the holding role, at least as far as I can remember. Worth a crack perhaps?

I didn't quite understand either. English football, especially in the Premiership, is extremely safe these days. My understanding, although I don't really know that much about it, is that the risk of violence is much higher in Italian, Greek, Dutch and Turkish football. I am more than willing to be corrected though.

Apparently Sven is going to play Carragher as the holding midfielder tomorrow. What the hell is that all about? Carrick is infinitey more suited to the role. I suppose it will make us more solid but still... I will be very interested to see how Gerrard does up front!

Um, it's a bit cheeky I suppose, but I wouldn't mind giving England-Sweden a crack. And France South Korea woul dbe interesting too! I have just realised Eddie has nailed down the France games. I will ponder some more...

Well if you look at all the flops that every single premiership club has had in their history it does suggest that buying players and selecting ones that will flourish at your club is vital. It is a difficlt art, indeed perhaps te most difficult as it defines what kind of side you have. Perhaps it is easy for Mourinho who can go out and buy whoever he likes. But Paul Jewell has shown genius in the players he has bought. If your theory is correct, "its easy to spot good players" why didn't anyone with more status buy chimbonda or Bellamy or Mendes or Gabbidon or any of the other numerous players who turned out to look absolute bargains? Ultimately you have to be the one who says- I believe this player can succeed and then back them. It is not easy at all. Teams live and die by their signings. Just ask Sunderland.

Well I suppose that is a factor! But seriously I doubt that Tugay has ever been on the money that Ferguson, or Cole, or Yorke, or Bellamy. Mainly becuse there weren't too many sides in for him when he came to us, and we have not had to offer big deals to get him to stay as far as I remember (there was some interest from Galatasary, but that was it I think).

I have had a bit of a think about this and reckon there really isn't much point taking Defoe and leaving Rooney behind. If Owen makes it then we are going to play a Gerrad-Owen combination up front with Crouch coming off the bench with Walcott employed as a supersub to hit other teams on the break. For Defoe to start he will need, I reckon, both Owen and Crouch to be injured as well as Rooney. His involvement would be negligiable if he is on the bench as I rekon Walcott woul dbe preferred as an impact player. So any which way you look at it Defoe is in a bind. It's going to be strange, playing without two 'proper' strikers, but I rekon it could well be interesting and produce some attractive footie.

Jan, some of your favourite players at the club are Souness signings: Freidal, Todd, Niell, Tugay. Give the man some credit. Personally if you look at transfer record I reckon it's better when he has no money, as then he seems to pull off some outstanding coups. If I was the paalce chairman I would be encouraged by that record.

While I agree with the latter part of the statement, Dickov himself (in terms of footballer generally- the rumors are that MGP is going to get 3x that wage) was well worth it IMHO. 13k a week for a player who scored 10 goals a season? Golden. In the light of Gresko, Amoruso, Emerton, Grabbi, Matteo etc - who earn much more than that and do/did f-all -that is a positive bargain! ps. I rekon, although I have no real evidence of this, that Tugay has earnt over the period he has been at Rovers a fraction of the 'star' players at the club. Yet he has been, at some points at least, the most important individual in our side. The crazy world of footie, eh? Yours salary is not determined by your ability/recent performance but rather how many clubs are interested in you at the time of negotiation.

Why should he take it? Because your blessed with insight beyond the average follower of footie? How so? Just because we get someone for a minimal fee it does not mean that the player will get the balance of what the transfer would of been had he been in contract. In order to do that the player would negotiating leverage from somewhere. We don't just give money away. The only way he would be extraordinarily well paid would be if the price was forced up by other clubs banging his door down a la Sol Cambell at the end of his time at Spurs. Didn't happen in this case.

I doubt that. For the 1.5 million to be eaten up in wages he would of needed to be on around 30k a week. The only reason we would ever of paid that is if other clubs put in offers that forced us to do that to tempt him. Sure, I rekon he got a decent signing bonus, but nowhere near those kind of figures. He was cheap-cheap-cheapy-cheep-cheep. Like the budgie. Thats why we signed him.

how was boussouffa?

Although I am not the most patriotic sort I still find it a bit embarassing that the Aussies will STILL have a bigger stadium than us after Wembley is built... I mean we are twice the size in terms of population, much bigger economy, blah blah blah I would love to check the MCG out one day though. For footie are the fans very far away from the pitch, it being an oval and all?

Poubd for pound we got much more out of Dickov than Cole- especially if you consider that Paul's wages must of been a fraction of Andy's. Souness made some great value signings: Dickov, Tugay, Niell, Freidal, Stead, Pedersen, Reid, even Thompson to an extent. But then there have been some clangers too...

We should start with Steven Gerrard and Owen up front. Everybody in this country will get behind that and it will provide a nice balance if we keep the ball on the floor. If we are getting nowhere and we need to aim for heads we can always bring on Crouchy. Personally I would actually think a fully fit combination of Owen and Gerrard up front would be preferable to a Rooney at 80% and Owen.

To be honest I don't think we should need Rooney till the second round. If we are serious about winning the world cup then Beckham, J Cole, A Cole, Lampard, Gerrard, Owen (who does look like he will make it) should have enough collective firepower to win all three group games, at least on paper. The Swedes are never easy, and have looked the better side the last few times we have played them (and in Ljungberg and Ibrahimovich have two genuinely worldclass players), BUT we still shouldn't be looking for Rooney to make the difference.

It's absolutely, definately, undeniably a pointless discussion. I can't believe people keep on posting pointless posts. Outrageous.

I agree with that, but we were working on the hypothetical basis that Rooney was fit. And I guess my point is that Carrick can't b dropped for any of those players because he is the only one who will look to hold the side together.

My sentiments exactly! Still a top side if getting a little old. Like Germany they could win the competition but really other sides with more all round quality should tke the trophy

Granted. So we are agreed- he should of hesitated and and blown after the goal then sending off the keeper awarding the the goal. Failing that, due to blowing too early, he should of sent the keeper off and given a free kick, which he did.

Eddie!!!! THe referee is not supposed to make decisions on the basis of 'what's better for the neutal observer', but on the basis of the culpability of those who break the rules of the came. It is supposed to be a fair contest, remember? The rule of law and all that. Bejesus. It is people who exercise judgement like that that get Rovers into so much grief. They equate the concept of an unattractive game with justification for refereeing decisions. Favourable decsions are given to the big clubs in the interest of creating a 'more attractive game' which equates to soft cards being handed out to 'those cloggers' (ie us, Bolton, FUlham etc).