The all new official Albert Luque megathread

[Rich]

Robert got a good run in the first team in his favoured position, through thick and thin, a luxury Luque hasn't been afforded at Newcastle. Not saying he undoubtedly would offer as much as Larry did, but there's more to the argument than contribution, you can't just look at it on that level because it isn't a valid basis for comparison with the way Luque's career has gone.

 

We're just lucky that these days we have other players we can pick ahead of Luque when he does invariably play poorly, when Robert was here he was an automatic choice every week because he had absolutely no competition until Viana arrived - and even then Hugo wasn't a left-winger. Of course, he still did a hell of a lot of good for the team on a lot of occasions, though.

 

And Luque's record is alright for the games he has actually started - apparently out of position as well, he's got a few goals/assists to his name.

[Keefaz]

Sorry, lads, but I can't really see the similarity with Robert. Once Robert was on the ball you got excited, he could make things happen and put in great crosses from anywhere down the line. He was petulant and arrogant. Luque's just timid and you don't really care whether he's on the pitch or not. Robert had moments of absolute genius.

[Guest]

Robert got a good run in the first team in his favoured position, through thick and thin, a luxury Luque hasn't been afforded at Newcastle. Not saying he undoubtedly would offer as much as Larry did, but there's more to the argument than contribution, you can't just look at it on that level because it isn't a valid basis for comparison with the way Luque's career has gone.

 

We're just lucky that these days we have other players we can pick ahead of Luque when he does invariably play poorly, when Robert was here he was an automatic choice every week because he had absolutely no competition until Viana arrived - and even then Hugo wasn't a left-winger. Of course, he still did a hell of a lot of good for the team on a lot of occasions, though.

 

And Luque's record is alright for the games he has actually started - apparently out of position as well, he's got a few goals/assists to his name.

 

Robert got a good run in the team because he started like a house on fire. Luque didn't. Also, we didn't really have any competition for Robert's place, there's plenty for Luque's.

[Rich]

Robert got a good run in the first team in his favoured position, through thick and thin, a luxury Luque hasn't been afforded at Newcastle. Not saying he undoubtedly would offer as much as Larry did, but there's more to the argument than contribution, you can't just look at it on that level because it isn't a valid basis for comparison with the way Luque's career has gone.

 

We're just lucky that these days we have other players we can pick ahead of Luque when he does invariably play poorly, when Robert was here he was an automatic choice every week because he had absolutely no competition until Viana arrived - and even then Hugo wasn't a left-winger. Of course, he still did a hell of a lot of good for the team on a lot of occasions, though.

 

And Luque's record is alright for the games he has actually started - apparently out of position as well, he's got a few goals/assists to his name.

 

Robert got a good run in the team because he started like a house on fire. Luque didn't. Also, we didn't really have any competition for Robert's place, there's plenty for Luque's.

 

You've just repeated exactly what I said in the post you quoted, bravo :wink:

 

Luque didn't start badly against Man Utd and then got crocked, so unlike a lot of his problems the bad start wasn't exactly of his own fault.

[alpal78]

Spot on Andy, I find it hard to accept that some of the most fervent critics of Luque were also big fans of Robert who in many many games showed a complete lack of heart on a par or worse than anything Luque has displayed.

 

Because Luque's goals & assists record isn't anywhere near Robert's. If Luque was scoring or making goals regularly despite playing poorly there'd be a valid argument for him to play.

 

Maybe because Luque has only played a fraction of the games that Robert played. The difference is Robert started his career with us with a bang whereas Luque had a different type of bang to his hamstrings. You can only conclude that Luque is no Robert once he has played a decent amount of games, not on the basis of the few games last season and certainly not on the basis of the last game. Robert had some awful games that was as bad as Luque's previous game, the only difference is that those awful games for Robert came after he won over the fans. There is a possibility that if Luque is given a chance even as a 3rd striker or 2nd in the case that Ameobi flops, he will achieve what Robert did. Its only the sequence of the games that differ. If you are judging his potential on the basis of the last game, then you would similarly conclude that Robert can't achieve such brilliance judging on some of his lazy performaces for us, which we now know is wrong as Robert was for the most part brilliant for us.

 

At least I don't have double standards, I supported Robert right to the end and I will support Luque until he conclusively proves that he can't achieve the heights that Robert achieved for us.

[Guest Wannabe Surfer]

I think Luque is awesome

 

when or if Roeder teams him up with Martins he will be awesome!

 

Just hope he gets a few more chances to prove how good he is!

[Guest Wannabe Surfer]

Sorry, lads, but I can't really see the similarity with Robert. Once Robert was on the ball you got excited, he could make things happen and put in great crosses from anywhere down the line. He was petulant and arrogant. Luque's just timid and you don't really care whether he's on the pitch or not. Robert had moments of absolute genius.

 

Ill agree with you there about Robert

 

Again I hated seing him go, he had one hell of a left boot!

[Rich]

Sorry, lads, but I can't really see the similarity with Robert. Once Robert was on the ball you got excited, he could make things happen and put in great crosses from anywhere down the line. He was petulant and arrogant. Luque's just timid and you don't really care whether he's on the pitch or not. Robert had moments of absolute genius.

 

From open play I don't remember Robert offering as much as people make out, his dribbling was atrocious and he often passed poorly or lost posession, in his early days (as Nut says) he was a lot better from open play, but for the most part his threat came from set-pieces, first-time crosses and long-shots. I was still a huge fan of his, though, and he did brilliantly in a hell of a lot of games for us.

 

I'm no Luque fan either, he frustrates me as much as anyone, but all I'm trying to do is to make people see things from a balanced perspective instead of having double standards: do you think Robert would have been half-as effective played as a lone striker, or paired with the likes of Ameobi/Milner/an ageing Shearer?

 

In the game against Man Utd a half-fit Luque looked a very similar sort of player to Robert (evidence can be seen via NUFC.co.uk and reading match reports), he put in some good balls, took set-pieces and had a couple of difficult chances at the back-post, also had a goal rightly disallowed, but his contribution from open-play was generally poor (too much dwelling, ala Robert) - but then it all went horribly wrong and for whatever reason he's never looked like recovering his form and probably never will now that Zoggy and Duff are around.

 

It's easy to say he's "crap", but there are mitigating factors about it - he can't have just turned shite overnight.

[Howaythelads]

Sorry, lads, but I can't really see the similarity with Robert. Once Robert was on the ball you got excited, he could make things happen and put in great crosses from anywhere down the line. He was petulant and arrogant. Luque's just timid and you don't really care whether he's on the pitch or not. Robert had moments of absolute genius.

 

From open play I don't remember Robert offering as much as people make out, his dribbling was atrocious and he often passed poorly or lost posession, in his early days (as Nut says) he was a lot better from open play, but for the most part his threat came from set-pieces, first-time crosses and long-shots. I was still a huge fan of his, though, and he did brilliantly in a hell of a lot of games for us.

 

I'm no Luque fan either, he frustrates me as much as anyone, but all I'm trying to do is to make people see things from a balanced perspective instead of having double standards: do you think Robert would have been half-as effective played as a lone striker, or paired with the likes of Ameobi/Milner/an ageing Shearer?

 

In the game against Man Utd a half-fit Luque looked a very similar sort of player to Robert (evidence can be seen via NUFC.co.uk and reading match reports), he put in some good balls, took set-pieces and had a couple of difficult chances at the back-post, also had a goal rightly disallowed, but his contribution from open-play was generally poor (too much dwelling, ala Robert) - but then it all went horribly wrong and for whatever reason he's never looked like recovering his form and probably never will now that Zoggy and Duff are around.

 

It's easy to say he's "crap", but there are mitigating factors about it - he can't have just turned shite overnight.

 

What's happened to you, Andy? I can only think that grassroots has taken over your login.........

[Rich]

I'm only trying to offer up some constructive debate for people, without any sniping. Howay, just because it doesn't agree with your philosophy on this particular matter doesn't mean I'm not still a fountain of knowledge and common sense :wink:.

 

Bad craic that instead of debating my points or, heaven forbid, perhaps seeing my point of view and conceding that I just might be right you've went down the road you've taken. I am honestly disappointed - I used to love you, man - loved you like an angry Uncle.

[Howaythelads]

I'm only trying to offer up some constructive debate for people, without any sniping. Howay, just because it doesn't agree with your philosophy on this particular matter doesn't mean I'm not still a fountain of knowledge and common sense :wink:.

 

Bad craic that instead of debating my points or, heaven forbid, perhaps seeing my point of view and conceding that I just might be right you've went down the road you've taken. I am honestly disappointed - I used to love you, man - loved you like an angry Uncle.

 

I haven't gone down any road, mate. I just don't think there is any similarity at all between the contributions of L Robert and A Luque. Zero. I can't see it. I never believed he was a lazy bastard, he became disenchanted with Souness like everybody else did, but I recall how he turned the performances of the team around when Souness did start to select him. He became hacked off again after one poor display ( again when the team performed badly ) caused Souness to make him the scapegoat. The bottom line for me is that Robert was a very good player for us for the majority of his time at the club. Luque has so far done absolutely nowt at all and because of his shit attitude is unlikely to do anything either. 

[Guest Bellers]

Robert is very similar to Luque, both are players who don't work hard, but can provide a spark which can win a match. The difference is Robert never got found out until the Souness era when were up against it...

[Rich]

I'm only trying to offer up some constructive debate for people, without any sniping. Howay, just because it doesn't agree with your philosophy on this particular matter doesn't mean I'm not still a fountain of knowledge and common sense :wink:.

 

Bad craic that instead of debating my points or, heaven forbid, perhaps seeing my point of view and conceding that I just might be right you've went down the road you've taken. I am honestly disappointed - I used to love you, man - loved you like an angry Uncle.

 

I haven't gone down any road, mate. I just don't think there is any similarity at all between the contributions of L Robert and A Luque. Zero. I can't see it. I never believed he was a lazy bastard, he became disenchanted with Souness like everybody else did, but I recall how he turned the performances of the team around when Souness did start to select him. He became hacked off again after one poor display ( again when the team performed badly ) caused Souness to make him the scapegoat. The bottom line for me is that Robert was a very good player for us for the majority of his time at the club. Luque has so far done absolutely nowt at all and because of his shit attitude is unlikely to do anything either. 

 

For the merry sake of Jesus, I never claimed there was any similarity between the contributions, I swear I didn't. I compared them technically and positionally and in a few other ways, but I never mentioned anything about contribution in the posts you took exception to. I'm not quite that daft.

 

That's all I was upset about, you've argued with something I had never implied in the first place. We share exactly the same opinion about how good Robert was and how bad Luque has been, that's not in question, all I've done is try and offer up some balanced reasons about why Luque has been so bad for people to discuss.

 

Yet you called my original post ridiculous and then compared me to HTT! Surely you can see why that would wind me up... especially the latter one, I mean howay, low blow or what? :wink:

[Howaythelads]

I'm only trying to offer up some constructive debate for people, without any sniping. Howay, just because it doesn't agree with your philosophy on this particular matter doesn't mean I'm not still a fountain of knowledge and common sense :wink:.

 

Bad craic that instead of debating my points or, heaven forbid, perhaps seeing my point of view and conceding that I just might be right you've went down the road you've taken. I am honestly disappointed - I used to love you, man - loved you like an angry Uncle.

 

I haven't gone down any road, mate. I just don't think there is any similarity at all between the contributions of L Robert and A Luque. Zero. I can't see it. I never believed he was a lazy bastard, he became disenchanted with Souness like everybody else did, but I recall how he turned the performances of the team around when Souness did start to select him. He became hacked off again after one poor display ( again when the team performed badly ) caused Souness to make him the scapegoat. The bottom line for me is that Robert was a very good player for us for the majority of his time at the club. Luque has so far done absolutely nowt at all and because of his shit attitude is unlikely to do anything either. 

 

For the merry sake of Jesus, I never claimed there was any similarity between the contributions, I swear I didn't. I compared them technically and positionally and in a few other ways, but I never mentioned anything about contribution in the posts you took exception to. I'm not quite that daft.

 

That's all I was upset about, you've argued with something I had never implied in the first place. We share exactly the same opinion about how good Robert was and how bad Luque has been, that's not in question, all I've done is try and offer up some balanced reasons about why Luque has been so bad for people to discuss.

 

Yet you called my original post ridiculous and then compared me to HTT! Surely you can see why that would wind me up... especially the latter one, I mean howay, low blow or what? :wink:

 

Andy, calm down man. I haven't taken exception to anything you've posted. If you didn't say what I thought you did then ok, I apologise. I take the point that Souness got rid of Robert because he thought he was a lazy bastard and has replaced him with a player who turns out to really be a lazy bastard.

 

I realise now the comparison to grassroots was way below the belt, I understand I'm risking a ban for a couple of days for posting such a thing,  or even a permanent IP ban come to think of it. I'm really sorry about that one.

[Rich]

I'm only trying to offer up some constructive debate for people, without any sniping. Howay, just because it doesn't agree with your philosophy on this particular matter doesn't mean I'm not still a fountain of knowledge and common sense :wink:.

 

Bad craic that instead of debating my points or, heaven forbid, perhaps seeing my point of view and conceding that I just might be right you've went down the road you've taken. I am honestly disappointed - I used to love you, man - loved you like an angry Uncle.

 

I haven't gone down any road, mate. I just don't think there is any similarity at all between the contributions of L Robert and A Luque. Zero. I can't see it. I never believed he was a lazy bastard, he became disenchanted with Souness like everybody else did, but I recall how he turned the performances of the team around when Souness did start to select him. He became hacked off again after one poor display ( again when the team performed badly ) caused Souness to make him the scapegoat. The bottom line for me is that Robert was a very good player for us for the majority of his time at the club. Luque has so far done absolutely nowt at all and because of his shit attitude is unlikely to do anything either. 

 

For the merry sake of Jesus, I never claimed there was any similarity between the contributions, I swear I didn't. I compared them technically and positionally and in a few other ways, but I never mentioned anything about contribution in the posts you took exception to. I'm not quite that daft.

 

That's all I was upset about, you've argued with something I had never implied in the first place. We share exactly the same opinion about how good Robert was and how bad Luque has been, that's not in question, all I've done is try and offer up some balanced reasons about why Luque has been so bad for people to discuss.

 

Yet you called my original post ridiculous and then compared me to HTT! Surely you can see why that would wind me up... especially the latter one, I mean howay, low blow or what? :wink:

 

Andy, calm down man. I haven't taken exception to anything you've posted. If you didn't say what I thought you did then ok, I apologise. I take the point that Souness got rid of Robert because he thought he was a lazy bastard and has replaced him with a player who turns out to really be a lazy bastard.

 

I realise now the comparison to grassroots was way below the belt, I understand I'm risking a ban for a couple of days for posting such a thing,  or even a permanent IP ban come to think of it. I'm really sorry about that one.

 

It's no bother, I'm not an admin these days anyway so I wouldn't be the one to enforce it :wink:

 

And anyway, did you realise you've just posted something civil... borderline canny!? You'll be doing your reputation on here all sorts of damage with that one, should have stuck it in a PM. I appreciate it though, mate. Just glad I don't disagree with you on much else!

 

But aye, everyone else, I reckon Luque should be sold and replaced ASAP, he's obviously never going to make it. Put that in your pipes and smoke it! Especially you, SLK...

[Howaythelads]

I'm only trying to offer up some constructive debate for people, without any sniping. Howay, just because it doesn't agree with your philosophy on this particular matter doesn't mean I'm not still a fountain of knowledge and common sense :wink:.

 

Bad craic that instead of debating my points or, heaven forbid, perhaps seeing my point of view and conceding that I just might be right you've went down the road you've taken. I am honestly disappointed - I used to love you, man - loved you like an angry Uncle.

 

I haven't gone down any road, mate. I just don't think there is any similarity at all between the contributions of L Robert and A Luque. Zero. I can't see it. I never believed he was a lazy bastard, he became disenchanted with Souness like everybody else did, but I recall how he turned the performances of the team around when Souness did start to select him. He became hacked off again after one poor display ( again when the team performed badly ) caused Souness to make him the scapegoat. The bottom line for me is that Robert was a very good player for us for the majority of his time at the club. Luque has so far done absolutely nowt at all and because of his shit attitude is unlikely to do anything either. 

 

For the merry sake of Jesus, I never claimed there was any similarity between the contributions, I swear I didn't. I compared them technically and positionally and in a few other ways, but I never mentioned anything about contribution in the posts you took exception to. I'm not quite that daft.

 

That's all I was upset about, you've argued with something I had never implied in the first place. We share exactly the same opinion about how good Robert was and how bad Luque has been, that's not in question, all I've done is try and offer up some balanced reasons about why Luque has been so bad for people to discuss.

 

Yet you called my original post ridiculous and then compared me to HTT! Surely you can see why that would wind me up... especially the latter one, I mean howay, low blow or what? :wink:

 

Andy, calm down man. I haven't taken exception to anything you've posted. If you didn't say what I thought you did then ok, I apologise. I take the point that Souness got rid of Robert because he thought he was a lazy bastard and has replaced him with a player who turns out to really be a lazy bastard.

 

I realise now the comparison to grassroots was way below the belt, I understand I'm risking a ban for a couple of days for posting such a thing,  or even a permanent IP ban come to think of it. I'm really sorry about that one.

 

It's no bother, I'm not an admin these days anyway so I wouldn't be the one to enforce it :wink:

 

And anyway, did you realise you've just posted something civil... borderline canny!? You'll be doing your reputation on here all sorts of damage with that one, should have stuck it in a PM. I appreciate it though, mate. Just glad I don't disagree with you on much else!

 

But aye, everyone else, I reckon Luque should be sold and replaced ASAP, he's obviously never going to make it. Put that in your pipes and smoke it! Especially you, SLK...

 

Doctors appointment next week then. Must be developing a split personality, or something.  :winking:

[Rich]

I'm only trying to offer up some constructive debate for people, without any sniping. Howay, just because it doesn't agree with your philosophy on this particular matter doesn't mean I'm not still a fountain of knowledge and common sense :wink:.

 

Bad craic that instead of debating my points or, heaven forbid, perhaps seeing my point of view and conceding that I just might be right you've went down the road you've taken. I am honestly disappointed - I used to love you, man - loved you like an angry Uncle.

 

I haven't gone down any road, mate. I just don't think there is any similarity at all between the contributions of L Robert and A Luque. Zero. I can't see it. I never believed he was a lazy bastard, he became disenchanted with Souness like everybody else did, but I recall how he turned the performances of the team around when Souness did start to select him. He became hacked off again after one poor display ( again when the team performed badly ) caused Souness to make him the scapegoat. The bottom line for me is that Robert was a very good player for us for the majority of his time at the club. Luque has so far done absolutely nowt at all and because of his shit attitude is unlikely to do anything either. 

 

For the merry sake of Jesus, I never claimed there was any similarity between the contributions, I swear I didn't. I compared them technically and positionally and in a few other ways, but I never mentioned anything about contribution in the posts you took exception to. I'm not quite that daft.

 

That's all I was upset about, you've argued with something I had never implied in the first place. We share exactly the same opinion about how good Robert was and how bad Luque has been, that's not in question, all I've done is try and offer up some balanced reasons about why Luque has been so bad for people to discuss.

 

Yet you called my original post ridiculous and then compared me to HTT! Surely you can see why that would wind me up... especially the latter one, I mean howay, low blow or what? :wink:

 

Andy, calm down man. I haven't taken exception to anything you've posted. If you didn't say what I thought you did then ok, I apologise. I take the point that Souness got rid of Robert because he thought he was a lazy bastard and has replaced him with a player who turns out to really be a lazy bastard.

 

I realise now the comparison to grassroots was way below the belt, I understand I'm risking a ban for a couple of days for posting such a thing,  or even a permanent IP ban come to think of it. I'm really sorry about that one.

 

It's no bother, I'm not an admin these days anyway so I wouldn't be the one to enforce it :wink:

 

And anyway, did you realise you've just posted something civil... borderline canny!? You'll be doing your reputation on here all sorts of damage with that one, should have stuck it in a PM. I appreciate it though, mate. Just glad I don't disagree with you on much else!

 

But aye, everyone else, I reckon Luque should be sold and replaced ASAP, he's obviously never going to make it. Put that in your pipes and smoke it! Especially you, SLK...

 

Doctors appointment next week then. Must be developing a split personality, or something.  :winking:

 

Aye, HTT's hacked your account more like... the swine.

 

I fear this sidetrack could kill the thread, we need someone controversial in here and quick.

[toontownman]

there is some complete tosh being written here, well thats my opinion anyways.

 

Luque and Robert are NOTHING like each other. Roberts game was based around his pace (which initially made him such a hit here) and his Crosses and Flair, the set pieces came later and put him in a league with Ginola and even above Solano IMO.

 

Luque doesnt have pace, certainly not half as much as Robert, isnt a dribbler of the ball like Robert was and has basically a completely different game. Sure Luque looks lethargic, obviously Robert was at times towards the end of his Newcastle career, but i would take a Robert on top of his game over Luque any day.

 

Robert undid himself though, under Souness we did actually see the most rounded Robert i think there has ever been, but alas it couldnt last, due to both idiot parties acting like childeren, it was best both went, and Robert has lost the plot further since leaving.

 

Robert was less interested and to an extend clueless tracking back, but anything going forward there was a different player involved.

 

Luque has just looked lost, although he tries hard all over the pitch, he just hasnt settled anywhere, he isnt lazy he just doesnt seem to know what he is doing, and often reverts to going deep, where we have seen the best of him.

 

Luque is more about power (whilst we havent seen it), strength and skill rather than pace, flair and dribbling. Luque does look better playing deeper though from what i have seen of him.

 

He does have a good cross on him though and he is left footed, he has played in a spanish league too so they do have a few things in common.

[Rich]

there is some complete tosh being written here, well thats my opinion anyways.

 

Luque and Robert are NOTHING like each other. Roberts game was based around his pace (which initially made him such a hit here) and his Crosses and Flair, the set pieces came later and put him in a league with Ginola and even above Solano IMO.

 

Luque doesnt have pace, certainly not half as much as Robert, isnt a dribbler of the ball like Robert was and has basically a completely different game. Sure Luque looks lethargic, obviously Robert was at times towards the end of his Newcastle career, but i would take a Robert on top of his game over Luque any day.

 

Robert undid himself though, under Souness we did actually see the most rounded Robert i think there has ever been, but alas it couldnt last, due to both idiot parties acting like childeren, it was best both went, and Robert has lost the plot further since leaving.

 

Robert was less interested and to an extend clueless tracking back, but anything going forward there was a different player involved.

 

Luque has just looked lost, although he tries hard all over the pitch, he just hasnt settled anywhere, he isnt lazy he just doesnt seem to know what he is doing, and often reverts to going deep, where we have seen the best of him.

 

Luque is more about power (whilst we havent seen it), strength and skill rather than pace, flair and dribbling. Luque does look better playing deeper though from what i have seen of him.

 

He does have a good cross on him though and he is left footed, he has played in a spanish league too so they do have a few things in common.

 

When you said Robert could dribble and to say he was only lethargic at points towards the end of his Newcastle career defies belief. He made a living out of cutting inside and losing the ball because of his lack of ability to take his man on. Robert made himself with a set-piece, too, against Man Utd... so to say they came later doesn't register with me, either. As for pace... he was relatively quick, but certainly nothing spectacular, I refuse to accept his game was BUILT around pace... it was built around long-shots, freekicks, corners and moments of individual magic.

 

You go on to say Luque is about strength... are you for real here? Have you seen him play for us? Skill? He's hardly Ronaldinho, to me he looks clunky in possession and doesn't have a natural flair for anything out of the ordinary: Luque made his name scoring powerful shots, as you mentioned, can't disagree there.

 

If Luque was played in Robert's position we'd see a lot more similarities in the way they play, it was proven to some extent in Luque's debut against Man Utd, he was like an identikit version of Larry, but it's never worked out for him since that injury and probably never will.

 

To say he's "NOTHING" like him is a bit of a stretch, and to call other people's opinions "tosh" is arseholic behaviour of the highest proportion. :wink:

 

We've established that Luque hasn't offered anything like what Robert has because he quite simply hasn't done the business/played the games, but this debate rages on - and I appreciate you for bringing it back in such an utterly moronic fashion

 

Let's break it down, though:

 

Luque/Robert's Similarities

 

Powerful shooting.

Good crossers of the ball.

Both fairly quick, but not spectacularly fast.

Good goalscoring records from the left-hand side.

Limited dribbling ability.

Both fairly workshy by traditional Geordie standards.

Set-piece takers.

Play the same position.

Cost the same amount of money.

Both not favoured by their managers (Souness/Roeder)

Both destined to have left for far less than we paid for them.

Both joined from a foreign county/league of origin in their home country.

Outcasts of their national teams while at NUFC.

Signed at very similar ages.

 

A few of these are fairly gash, but they're facts

[Guest Knightrider]

Robert wasn't a pacey player at all and wasn't the type to dribble past players either Toontownman. He had two strengths - shooting and crossing. His control was poor and his team play suspect. His passing was also poor and when he tried to take on players he often got pushed off the ball or miscontroled it which infuriated the crowd, even more so when he stood hands on hips as others tried to win it back for him or track the opposition player he lost out to.

 

His whole game was based around quick and early crossing from deep and explosive shooting from distance. We forget just how poor he was on his day. When he was poor he was a complete passenger and offered nothing, just like Luque the other night.

 

When he was bang on form he was dynamite but that was the exception to the rule and even when he was on form he never took games by the scruff of the neck of dominated that area of the pitch.

 

The perfect example of that would be his performance at home to Spurs, two wonder goals and some brilliant crosses, other than that, very little.

 

He was a success under SBR because we had other players in the team who all made an impact meaning we could compensate for his no shows and inconsistency. We also had a centre-forward who could grab us a goal from nothing from one of his crosses so his contribution stats were always impressive but in actual game play he was hit and miss.

 

Put him in today's side and he'd struggle, or rather his flaws would be heightened.

 

He was very similar to Luque as Andy quite rightly points out, only Robert got a chance to show us what he was all about under a manager who gave him a starring role in a team that played some great football, in his natural position too.

 

IMO of course.

[Northern Monkey]

So we've never seen Luque on the left? Cos i have, and he was shite.

[Howaythelads]

Robert wasn't a pacey player at all and wasn't the type to dribble past players either Toontownman. He had two strengths - shooting and crossing. His control was poor and his team play suspect. His passing was also poor and when he tried to take on players he often got pushed off the ball or miscontroled it which infuriated the crowd, even more so when he stood hands on hips as others tried to win it back for him or track the opposition player he lost out to.

 

His whole game was based around quick and early crossing from deep and explosive shooting from distance. We forget just how poor he was on his day. When he was poor he was a complete passenger and offered nothing, just like Luque the other night.

 

When he was bang on form he was dynamite but that was the exception to the rule and even when he was on form he never took games by the scruff of the neck of dominated that area of the pitch.

 

The perfect example of that would be his performance at home to Spurs, two wonder goals and some brilliant crosses, other than that, very little.

 

He was a success under SBR because we had other players in the team who all made an impact meaning we could compensate for his no shows and inconsistency. We also had a centre-forward who could grab us a goal from nothing from one of his crosses so his contribution stats were always impressive but in actual game play he was hit and miss.

 

Put him in today's side and he'd struggle, or rather his flaws would be heightened.

 

He was very similar to Luque as Andy quite rightly points out, only Robert got a chance to show us what he was all about under a manager who gave him a starring role in a team that played some great football, in his natural position too.

 

IMO of course.

 

bluesleep.gif bluesleep.gif bluesleep.gif bluesleep.gif

[Mick]

So we've never seen Luque on the left? Cos i have, and he was shite.

 

He was on the left against Fulham and didn't look shite before he went off, Shearer and Owen should have both scored off balls delivered on a plate by Luque.

[Mick]

there is some complete tosh being written here, well thats my opinion anyways.

 

Luque and Robert are NOTHING like each other. Roberts game was based around his pace (which initially made him such a hit here) and his Crosses and Flair, the set pieces came later and put him in a league with Ginola and even above Solano IMO.

 

Luque doesnt have pace, certainly not half as much as Robert, isnt a dribbler of the ball like Robert was and has basically a completely different game. Sure Luque looks lethargic, obviously Robert was at times towards the end of his Newcastle career, but i would take a Robert on top of his game over Luque any day.

 

Robert undid himself though, under Souness we did actually see the most rounded Robert i think there has ever been, but alas it couldnt last, due to both idiot parties acting like childeren, it was best both went, and Robert has lost the plot further since leaving.

 

Robert was less interested and to an extend clueless tracking back, but anything going forward there was a different player involved.

 

Luque has just looked lost, although he tries hard all over the pitch, he just hasnt settled anywhere, he isnt lazy he just doesnt seem to know what he is doing, and often reverts to going deep, where we have seen the best of him.

 

Luque is more about power (whilst we havent seen it), strength and skill rather than pace, flair and dribbling. Luque does look better playing deeper though from what i have seen of him.

 

He does have a good cross on him though and he is left footed, he has played in a spanish league too so they do have a few things in common.

 

When you said Robert could dribble and to say he was only lethargic at points towards the end of his Newcastle career defies belief. He made a living out of cutting inside and losing the ball because of his lack of ability to take his man on. Robert made himself with a set-piece, too, against Man Utd... so to say they came later doesn't register with me, either. As for pace... he was relatively quick, but certainly nothing spectacular, I refuse to accept his game was BUILT around pace... it was built around long-shots, freekicks, corners and moments of individual magic.

 

You go on to say Luque is about strength... are you for real here? Have you seen him play for us? Skill? He's hardly Ronaldinho, to me he looks clunky in possession and doesn't have a natural flair for anything out of the ordinary: Luque made his name scoring powerful shots, as you mentioned, can't disagree there.

 

If Luque was played in Robert's position we'd see a lot more similarities in the way they play, it was proven to some extent in Luque's debut against Man Utd, he was like an identikit version of Larry, but it's never worked out for him since that injury and probably never will.

 

To say he's "NOTHING" like him is a bit of a stretch, and to call other people's opinions "tosh" is arseholic behaviour of the highest proportion. :wink:

 

We've established that Luque hasn't offered anything like what Robert has because he quite simply hasn't done the business/played the games, but this debate rages on - and I appreciate you for bringing it back in such an utterly moronic fashion

 

Let's break it down, though:

 

Luque/Robert's Similarities

 

Powerful shooting.

Good crossers of the ball.

Both fairly quick, but not spectacularly fast.

Good goalscoring records from the left-hand side.

Limited dribbling ability.

Both fairly workshy by traditional Geordie standards.

Set-piece takers.

Play the same position.

Cost the same amount of money.

Both not favoured by their managers (Souness/Roeder)

Both destined to have left for far less than we paid for them.

Both joined from a foreign county/league of origin in their home country.

Outcasts of their national teams while at NUFC.

Signed at very similar ages.

 

A few of these are fairly gash, but they're facts

 

You said "we need someone controversial in here and quick". bluebiggrin.gif

[Rich]

Exactly! TTM did a cracking job of reigniting the debate.