ujpest doza Posted August 11, 2006 Share Posted August 11, 2006 To answer your earlier question, I am still wondering why Chopra got more opportunities than Luque, yet Luque was retained and Chopra was not. Chopra was offered a new contract but declined the offer and moved. Luque is under contract. Does that answer your question??? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashley17 Posted August 11, 2006 Share Posted August 11, 2006 I would say it was obvious he was dropped so he's not cup-tied if sold. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ohmelads Posted August 11, 2006 Share Posted August 11, 2006 It's about time Roeder pulled his finger from his arse and decided to get rid of Luque if this is the case I agree. If Roeder has absolutely no faith in him he must get rid now. The guy's on massive wages and his value is declining rapidly, he must make a decision. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio Posted August 11, 2006 Share Posted August 11, 2006 It's about time Roeder pulled his finger from his arse and decided to get rid of Luque if this is the case Getting rid of him is easier said than done, we've got to find a mug to take him off us first. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ohmelads Posted August 11, 2006 Share Posted August 11, 2006 It's about time Roeder pulled his finger from his arse and decided to get rid of Luque if this is the case Getting rid of him is easier said than done, we've got to find a mug to take him off us first. All depends on our asking price. For 2M we'd have a lot of Spanish clubs interested. Wages may be a problem but I think we'd easily find a buyer. Maybe we could get 3 or 4M. Just depends how desperately Roeder wants rid. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Kenton Magpie Posted August 11, 2006 Share Posted August 11, 2006 It's about time Roeder pulled his finger from his arse and decided to get rid of Luque if this is the case Getting rid of him is easier said than done, we've got to find a mug to take him off us first. He my have no choice if a club that doesnt appeal to him comes along, either that or it's regular visits to Kingston park every other week. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keefaz Posted August 11, 2006 Share Posted August 11, 2006 Surely, the reason he didn't play against the Latvians is because Roeder doesn't want him cup-tied. The fella's off. Take it or leave it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ohmelads Posted August 11, 2006 Share Posted August 11, 2006 Personally I think he's made it clear Luque is not, and will never be, in his plans. If we're forced into playing Luque this season, I expect to see a disinterested player. Luque has been given his chance in pre-season, two games and he's responded with two goals and worked hard, but he's been dropped. I think it's the end for him. Everyone knows my view on Luque, but I actually hope he is sold. If he stays we'll be left in a situation which isn't beneficial for the player, the manager or the club. We had that with Robert and it was a massive distraction. The question is, will Shepherd sanction yet another massive loss? My gut feeling is Luque will stay and Boumsong will go. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody Posted August 11, 2006 Share Posted August 11, 2006 I dont actually think that Luque was dropped because he'd be cup-tied. The MAIN reason was because Roeder wanted to play a five man midfield. Then, ofource, Roeder rather played Ameobi, which is definately going to stay, rather than Luque. I expect to see Luque on the pitch against Wigan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Narttu Posted August 11, 2006 Share Posted August 11, 2006 I think Luque didnt play because Ameobi suits better with 5 man midfield. And I seriously hope, and think we are going with 4-5-1 this season. If we play 442, we would need to buy 2 strikers in August, that will cost a lot of money. And speaking about heartless performance, I dont actually care how many miles player runs as long as he scores. Luque is starting to show his true colors, and he shouldnt be dropped. It annoys me a lot when some ppl here say he is gutless or something like that. I would take Ronaldo here if he would score week in week out. Chopra played at the end of last season more tha Luque, and he was total crap in every game. fact. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raconteur Posted August 12, 2006 Share Posted August 12, 2006 I think Luque didnt play because Ameobi suits better with 5 man midfield. And I seriously hope, and think we are going with 4-5-1 this season. If we play 442, we would need to buy 2 strikers in August, that will cost a lot of money. And speaking about heartless performance, I dont actually care how many miles player runs as long as he scores. Luque is starting to show his true colors, and he shouldnt be dropped. It annoys me a lot when some ppl here say he is gutless or something like that. I would take Ronaldo here if he would score week in week out. Chopra played at the end of last season more tha Luque, and he was total crap in every game. fact. You'd best delete that before Wullie sees it Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Begbie Posted August 12, 2006 Share Posted August 12, 2006 To be fair, I cant see Luque in a 4-4-2 formation. He doesnt suit our strikers, and cant see which striker he would suit? He doesnt have pace, he isnt a player that would win the ball in the air. I think he would be better to play in a role just behind the strikers and infront of the midfield. Maybe a role simular to the one that Kaka has in Ac Milan, Or get a free role on the left side like Ronaldinho. But in the end I think Luque was a waste of 9M I hope that Luque can be a great player for us, but I just cant see him doing that in the premiership.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tachikoma Posted August 12, 2006 Share Posted August 12, 2006 To be fair, I cant see Luque in a 4-4-2 formation. He doesnt suit our strikers, and cant see which striker he would suit? He doesnt have pace, he isnt a player that would win the ball in the air. I think he would be better to play in a role just behind the strikers and infront of the midfield. Maybe a role simular to the one that Kaka has in Ac Milan, Or get a free role on the left side like Ronaldinho. But in the end I think Luque was a waste of 9M I hope that Luque can be a great player for us, but I just cant see him doing that in the premiership.. Luque did play in a 4-4-2 at Mallorca, didn't he? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ujpest doza Posted August 12, 2006 Share Posted August 12, 2006 To be fair, I cant see Luque in a 4-4-2 formation. He doesnt suit our strikers, and cant see which striker he would suit? He doesnt have pace, he isnt a player that would win the ball in the air. I think he would be better to play in a role just behind the strikers and infront of the midfield. Maybe a role simular to the one that Kaka has in Ac Milan, Or get a free role on the left side like Ronaldinho. But in the end I think Luque was a waste of 9M I hope that Luque can be a great player for us, but I just cant see him doing that in the premiership.. £10.4M See the Accounts bluebigeek.gif Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads Posted August 12, 2006 Share Posted August 12, 2006 To be fair, I cant see Luque in a 4-4-2 formation. He doesnt suit our strikers, and cant see which striker he would suit? He doesnt have pace, he isnt a player that would win the ball in the air. I think he would be better to play in a role just behind the strikers and infront of the midfield. Maybe a role simular to the one that Kaka has in Ac Milan, Or get a free role on the left side like Ronaldinho. But in the end I think Luque was a waste of 9M I hope that Luque can be a great player for us, but I just cant see him doing that in the premiership.. £10.4M See the Accounts bluebigeek.gif Even worse then. What a shambles bringing in a useless fúcker like Luque for that much money to replace a player who created and scored more goals than the rest of our midfield combined. Robert had his critics for supposed laziness, but he had a desire to play for the club and his workrate puts Luque to shame. I fúcking hate souness. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leazes1986 Posted August 12, 2006 Share Posted August 12, 2006 We paid over the odds for Luque but he is not a shit player. It just hasnt worked out. Shouldn't compare him to Robert. Robert was a totally different type of player to Luque. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads Posted August 12, 2006 Share Posted August 12, 2006 We paid over the odds for Luque but he is not a shit player. It just hasnt worked out. Shouldn't compare him to Robert. Robert was a totally different type of player to Luque. Have to compare them I'm afraid. When Souness signed him he said, " we now have a proper player for the left ". On the basis of that comment I believe I'm justified in believing he was signed to replace Robert, so the comparison is valid imo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leazes1986 Posted August 12, 2006 Share Posted August 12, 2006 We paid over the odds for Luque but he is not a shit player. It just hasnt worked out. Shouldn't compare him to Robert. Robert was a totally different type of player to Luque. Have to compare them I'm afraid. When Souness signed him he said, " we now have a proper player for the left ". On the basis of that comment I believe I'm justified in believing he was signed to replace Robert, so the comparison is valid imo. But Souness is well gone now. Luque has shown what a good player he can be in Spain, so saying he is shite isn't true. If Souness said brought Emre in as a replacement for Bernard, would you still class Emre as a left back? Souness didn't have a clue. There's no point in judging our players on what Souness said or done with them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nufcmichael Posted August 12, 2006 Share Posted August 12, 2006 Luque should stay, if we sell him now, we'll need at least 2 new strikers, why not keep Luque at least until january and give him a chance. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leazes1986 Posted August 12, 2006 Share Posted August 12, 2006 Luque should stay, if we sell him now, we'll need at least 2 new strikers, why not keep Luque at least until january and give him a chance. It looks like he could be on his way with him not even coming on the other day. I would only be in favour of selling him if we are bringing 2 strikers in. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northern Monkey Posted August 12, 2006 Share Posted August 12, 2006 Surely, the reason he didn't play against the Latvians is because Roeder doesn't want him cup-tied. The fella's off. Take it or leave it. I'll take it. With a side order of "I told you so", and a good hearty laugh at the "he's world class, i followed him closely in Spain" idiots. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads Posted August 13, 2006 Share Posted August 13, 2006 Luque should stay, if we sell him now, we'll need at least 2 new strikers, why not keep Luque at least until january and give him a chance. It looks like he could be on his way with him not even coming on the other day. I would only be in favour of selling him if we are bringing 2 strikers in. There's no reason why we need new strikers on the basis of Luque leaving. He's can't be counted as a fully contributing member of the squad. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Fox Posted August 13, 2006 Share Posted August 13, 2006 We need new strikers simply on the basis that we do not have any. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest smoggeordie Posted August 13, 2006 Share Posted August 13, 2006 We need new strikers simply on the basis that we do not have any. And to think back 2 years ago when we had Shearer, Bellamy and Kluivert. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads Posted August 13, 2006 Share Posted August 13, 2006 We need new strikers simply on the basis that we do not have any. Agreed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts