madras

One of the maddest posts ever in internet history It's mad now, sure, but at the time Lampard was in the final year of his contract with Chelsea stalling on a new deal, whilst we on the other hand had a supposed billionaire owner in charge who was willing to pump money into landing a major star player or two. If we had done what Man City did regarding Robinho (or what we did with Owen from Real), and offered Lampard £200k per week or more, would he honestly have said "no"? if rochdale offered him 1mill per week he probably wouldn't turn it down. however that wasn't the case. I agree, but in the context of the discussion, if Keegan was misled regarding the budget available and Ashley's intentions to make a star signing or two... err mods could we limit tmonkeys use of "if" in future.

One of the maddest posts ever in internet history It's mad now, sure, but at the time Lampard was in the final year of his contract with Chelsea stalling on a new deal, whilst we on the other hand had a supposed billionaire owner in charge who was willing to pump money into landing a major star player or two. If we had done what Man City did regarding Robinho (or what we did with Owen from Real), and offered Lampard £200k per week or more, would he honestly have said "no"? if rochdale offered him 1mill per week he probably wouldn't turn it down. however that wasn't the case.

No prizes for second best mate i put in more detail (1974)

sheare past an aston villa schmichael.

brazil zaire 1974. when as soon as the whistle blew for a brazil free kick the defender broke from the wall and brayed it away about 3 times. whats my prize ?

they are the default settings for the football section.

KK was in charge ; ) not so sure Shearer played for us then either. might be wrong on that like. No it was Dalglish. Was at the game Shearer was crocked. Bartez in goal for them wasted time like f***. im certain kk was in charge, was my first ever game. im trying to find out, but proving difficult!! dalglish had been i charge a month or two.

Iniesta is just back from injury, and Messi and Henry aren't 100% fit, and they play Inter on wednesday i think. all true it seems. didn't know about messi and henry though.

strange barce line up. messi,henry,iniesta,alves all starting on the bench.

you can get 12/5 that's just daft, where is that? betfair

you can get 12/5

did you forget it had 10 minutes plus to play? covered his bet as the others were looking good.

That'll get you what, £1. not now it wont tee hee edit...i see what you done there.

anyone else desperatly trying to work out exactly what goal it was. first though albert V scmichael but no other defenders and white shorts.

puts our paltry 2-0 into perspective.

we've had other forwards who got slagged off cos they didn't make any chances for themselves. When playing up front on their own on their full debut? played up front on his own ? seems like he got plenty of support (if he got no support how was his awareness to lay balls off being so hyped). he had a decent game. now to get worked up over. reminiscent of carroll and the end of last season in those couple of home games he played when he actually looked a decent touch player. He did lots of support, from midfield, but we had no other strikers on the pitch. It was a 4-5-1 wasn't it? I was encouraged heartily by his display in difficult circumstances on paper it was a 4-5-1 but it really means little. at times nolan pushed right up so did that make it 4-4-2. ? sometimes guthrie pulled right in...was that 4-3-1-2 ? the point is he was very rarely left isolated. He's been criticised on here for leaving his station and dropping too deep or pulling out to the flanks. So maybe he went and found the support. The bottom line is he did well non? we'd better hope so as it looks increasingly like the same line up on Sunday in attacking terms. he done well yes. aswell as carroll did on a couple of occasions last season. oh to me he didn't go to find the support,it was very much the pther way round.

we've had other forwards who got slagged off cos they didn't make any chances for themselves. When playing up front on their own on their full debut? played up front on his own ? seems like he got plenty of support (if he got no support how was his awareness to lay balls off being so hyped). he had a decent game. now to get worked up over. reminiscent of carroll and the end of last season in those couple of home games he played when he actually looked a decent touch player. He did lots of support, from midfield, but we had no other strikers on the pitch. It was a 4-5-1 wasn't it? I was encouraged heartily by his display in difficult circumstances on paper it was a 4-5-1 but it really means little. at times nolan pushed right up so did that make it 4-4-2. ? sometimes guthrie pulled right in...was that 4-3-1-2 ? the point is he was very rarely left isolated.

we've had other forwards who got slagged off cos they didn't make any chances for themselves. When playing up front on their own on their full debut? played up front on his own ? seems like he got plenty of support (if he got no support how was his awareness to lay balls off being so hyped). he had a decent game. now to get worked up over. reminiscent of carroll and the end of last season in those couple of home games he played when he actually looked a decent touch player.

we've had other forwards who got slagged off cos they didn't make any chances for themselves.

he's a typical "number 10". he can't head the ball, couldn't really tackle a dinner, not too bothered about tracking back, only uses his right foot to stand on!, is quick,strong and has a wand of a left peg and is absolute quality. Not sure the Chronicle should be doing articles like today though as its just increases the hype and pressure on the lad for when he does break into the team! I know you see a lot of reserve and youth team games but have you ever been employed by the club as a scout? You seem pretty sharp with your appraisals. lets see if he's right first.

lets be honest if they are a much bigger club he'd probably be away regardless of who is in control.

Me to, they've played some really enjoyable football in the qualifiers so far. Dzeko, Ibisevic, Muslimovic, Salihovic etc. can break down any defence. f*** off, there isn't a player called Muslimovic, whats he supposed to be a Russian Muslim? Why Russian when he is Bosnian? He's actually Swedish and called Zlatan too: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zlatan_Muslimovi%C4%87 Also, Ibrahimovic in English would be something like "Abrahamson" so there doesn't seem to be any real religious attachment to their names... Muslimovic was absolutely mint on CM 99/00. I assumed he didn't really exist though, a bit like Mads Jorgensen, Kennedy Bakircioglu, Tonton Zola Moukoko and Adrian Mihalcea. Bakircioglu plays for Ajax doesn't he? this him...http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:QXEe0ODHsYsP7M:http://www.toonarama.co.uk/piotr2/538BarrowcloughS.gif

keep your head down kasper. some of us are gunning for your accy busting ass.

finland hold on for a 1-1 at the mighty liechtenstein. kasper...fuck you and your ilk. (2 accys dead cos of your softy suominess)

It needs to be said because people make rash statements such as it being easy to turn this club into a success and other daft comments such as they don't want to see "son of fred" in charge (whatever that means). The fact is it is not easy to turn a football club into a success, implying it is easy does a disservice to a group of people who did a decent job for most of their time in charge. I realise I'm pissing against the wind because their work wasn't appreciated (and still isn't) by a lot of members of this forum. They even take large crowds for granted, as though we've always had large crowds. I don't think it's easy to make it a success as such, but I think it would be relatively easy to make it a moderate success (i.e. more than we'll achieve under Ashley). Only because of the improvement that happened under the last lot. They turned it around from sub 15,000 crowds ( I could stand in the Paddock and swing a cat and not hit anybody if I wanted to ) to the interest we see today. The irony is that Ashley is exactly what people thought Fred was. A clueless, inept nob. HTL could you point to or name one person who thought that the previous board were crap all the time ? as i've pointed out enough times the vast majority see fred and co as doing very well for a good long while, the best and most attractive and most succesful we'd seen in our lifetimes.....but then it went backewards with seemingly bloody obvious stuff going a miss and not seemingly capable of being able to turn it. would the right thing be to say "hey they done it a while a go so we should stick with them" (even though the total ethos had changed....ie spend what we've earned replaced by borrow,borrow,borrow and hope) Madras could you point to where I said people thought the previous board were crap all the time? I mean, now that you mention it, I think there are some who always hated FFS but I've never said that before. In any event, I'm not going to argue because: 1. I don't care who the individuals are/were 2. I can't be arsed 3. You know exactly what I'm on about Cheers i don't know exactly what you are on about. you seem to be having a go at people for blaming fred and co for what they quite probably should be blamed for.