Syrette Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 I think he means Souness replacing Robert with Luque... Well aye, but it's just such an incredible thing to say. I know not everybody rated Robert but he produced for this club. He had his problems with Souness, but even when that **** was manager Robert changed the way we played when he was eventually selected. Some people have bloody short memories. Robert scored and created more goals than the rest of the midfield combined, comparing his contribution with that of Luque is one of the most ridiculous things I've read. Agree totally. I think most people who continue to defend Luque are basing their opinions on snippets they've seen on tv of his time in La Liga rather than on his contributions in black & white. He's looked a poor player almost from day 1. I know he's had a bad injury and he's still settling in etc etc but he's produced virtually nothing when he's had his (limited) chances. Time to bite the bullet and take another big loss on another failure I'm afraid. Wish it had worked out. It hasn't. There's nothing to suggest it will happen. Sell him on for as much as we can as soon as we find someone to fill his shoes. I suggest we could get someone from the Championship to replace Luque's contribution. Agreed Not too disimilar to us replacing Speed with Butt tbh or when we replaced Sir Les with a succession of expensive flops !!!!!!!!!!! Tomasson etc were expensive? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpal78 Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 alpal and SLK are like a couple of blind men where Luque is concerned tbh. If I am blind, then you must be too since we both agree that Luque was poor yesterday. The difference is I acknowledge that he has never played as an out and out striker and take that as a mitigating circumstance instead of joining the Luque bashing bandwagon. I disagreed with Slugsy because he claims that Luque never had a decent game ever. Having attended the Lillestrom, PSV and Wigan games, I feel more than qualified to say that he had a decent game if not MOM against Lillestrom, did reasonably well against PSV and was no worse than anyone else against Wigan despite playing for only 15 minutes. You should learn to respect differences of opinion instead of calling names to those who disagree with you tbh. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 I think he means Souness replacing Robert with Luque... Well aye, but it's just such an incredible thing to say. I know not everybody rated Robert but he produced for this club. He had his problems with Souness, but even when that twat was manager Robert changed the way we played when he was eventually selected. Some people have bloody short memories. Robert scored and created more goals than the rest of the midfield combined, comparing his contribution with that of Luque is one of the most ridiculous things I've read. Agree totally. I think most people who continue to defend Luque are basing their opinions on snippets they've seen on tv of his time in La Liga rather than on his contributions in black & white. He's looked a poor player almost from day 1. I know he's had a bad injury and he's still settling in etc etc but he's produced virtually nothing when he's had his (limited) chances. Time to bite the bullet and take another big loss on another failure I'm afraid. Wish it had worked out. It hasn't. There's nothing to suggest it will happen. Sell him on for as much as we can as soon as we find someone to fill his shoes. I suggest we could get someone from the Championship to replace Luque's contribution. I said nothing about end-product/contribution, you pair of tarts. If you'd bothered to read the rest of my post, I was merely comparing the fact that Souness thought Robert was useless (which he obviously fucking wasn't, loved the bloke when he was here and he was a massive player for us) and replaced him with exactly the same type of footballer: only a worse version, for the same price that we paid for Robert originally - while selling the Frenchman on for next to nothing. I cannot believe that you've taken my post completely out of context and thought I was trying to defend Luque by comparing him with Robert. The biggest laugh for me is that Souness let a £9.5m player go for near nowt and then brought in quite probably the nearest thing to him for the same fucking price. What a fucking joke that Magnum PI c*nt is. I really don't know how you can take that to be defending Souness/Luque, it's completely the opposite. Souness sold a quality player for whom we paid £9.5m for nowt and then bought Luque, a player in the same mould of Robert style-wise, for £9.5m - and Luque has never looked like being the player Robert was for us. That's why it was a laugh... and that's why I called Souness a c*nt for it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToonMonty Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 I disagreed with Slugsy because he claims that Luque never had a decent game ever. Having attended the Lillestrom, PSV and Wigan games, I feel more than qualified to say that he had a decent game if not MOM against Lillestrom, did reasonably well against PSV and was no worse than anyone else against Wigan despite playing for only 15 minutes. Are you talking Lillestrom at home? Due to holidays I didn't see Lillestrom away, PSV, Villareal and Ventspils away so I can't comment on them but Lillestrom at home Luque did not play well. He took his goal very well and then a minute or two later showed a great bit of skill but massively over hit the cross ala Shola of a couple of years ago and that was it. Granted the goal got us the draw etc but his performance over all was poor. For me the biggest problem with Luque is his movement occasionally on the ball he looks quite skillful but his movement especially last night is woeful. People have been arguing over Duff from last night but he put plenty of low crosses between the penaly spot and and the six yard box that Owen, Shola, Shearer would've scored from. Luque takes a static position in the box then nevers moves making him easy to mark. Even his header that went over the bar was from a standing jump if he'd arriving on time the extra momentum would've allowed him to get above the ball and control the header. The usual he's not a forward doesn't absolve him of this either because he is an attacking player and should know that movement and anticipation in the box are the key requisites to goal scoring. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elliottman Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 havent read this thread but thought id share my opinion. I really wanted Luque to succeed. i really did but last nights performance told me he never will. If you cant put in a decent performance against a team like that, then you are destined to fail. I dont know whether he cant adapt, isnt interested, unfit or what, but he needs to go. Doesnt look like he will before the window closes, but im sure come January he will be away. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
midds Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 AAAAHHHH right. Gotcha. Tart? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobby Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 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 http://www.nufc-finances.org.uk/players.htm 9.5 million actually Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 AAAAHHHH right. Gotcha. Tart? Was the least offensive/most comedic insult I could muster. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tachikoma Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 For me the biggest problem with Luque is his movement occasionally on the ball he looks quite skillful but his movement especially last night is woeful. People have been arguing over Duff from last night but he put plenty of low crosses between the penaly spot and and the six yard box that Owen, Shola, Shearer would've scored from. Luque takes a static position in the box then nevers moves making him easy to mark. Even his header that went over the bar was from a standing jump if he'd arriving on time the extra momentum would've allowed him to get above the ball and control the header. Luque looked a fish out of water, end of story. Yes, his control/passes were shitty for a player of his (former) reputation, but I think, he realises it too, judging by his body language anyway. havent read this thread but thought id share my opinion. I really wanted Luque to succeed. i really did but last nights performance told me he never will. If you cant put in a decent performance against a team like that, then you are destined to fail. I dont know whether he cant adapt, isnt interested, unfit or what, but he needs to go. Doesnt look like he will before the window closes, but im sure come January he will be away. This one's a little knee-jerk :/ as poor as the opposition was, they were rather well organised at the back and didn't leave much room in the box for a lone striker to exploit. Frankly I don't think Luque will succeed either, but he should be given a chance to play his normal game for a few matches (as in a 4-4-2 with someone else leading the line), and I wish Roeder would show him half the faith he has shown in Shola. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parky Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 It seems to have escaped everyone's attention and as much I hate to be the bringer of even worse news....Nocluque has never played in a 442 in his life. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ohmelads Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 It seems to have escaped everyone's attention and as much I hate to be the bringer of even worse news....Nocluque has never played in a 442 in his life. Nocluque? That's got to be the worst I've ever heard Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parky Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 At your service. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tachikoma Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 Mallorca, partnering Eto'O. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parky Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 He was never a striker. For the short period he played (more or less upfront) at Depor he was the 99th best striker in Europe. He is more rotating forward type. Or perhaps a divider in the classic Dutch mould like a Sneidjer. He doesn't really have the attributes to be a front man in the PL imo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 He was never a striker. For the short period he played (more or less upfront) at Depor he was the 99th best striker in Europe. He is more rotating forward type. Or perhaps a divider in the classic Dutch mould like a Sneidjer. He doesn't really have the attributes to be a front man in the PL imo. He doesn't have the attributes to be a man in the PL would be more accurate. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 He was never a striker. For the short period he played (more or less upfront) at Depor he was the 99th best striker in Europe. He is more rotating forward type. Or perhaps a divider in the classic Dutch mould like a Sneidjer. He doesn't really have the attributes to be a front man in the PL imo. He doesn't have the attributes to be a man in the PL would be more accurate. Apology accepted. :wink: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 He was never a striker. For the short period he played (more or less upfront) at Depor he was the 99th best striker in Europe. He is more rotating forward type. Or perhaps a divider in the classic Dutch mould like a Sneidjer. He doesn't really have the attributes to be a front man in the PL imo. He doesn't have the attributes to be a man in the PL would be more accurate. Apology accepted. Eh? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 Just messing about, it's a quiet Friday night in - arguing with another forum member seems like a good way to kill the time: for the bloke that's always asking people to respond to his points instead of ducking them you've done a cracking job of completely ignoring my response to this: Quote The biggest laugh for me is that Souness let a £9.5m player go for near nowt and then brought in quite probably the nearest thing to him for the same fucking price. What a fucking joke that Magnum PI c*nt is Eh? What the hell are you on about here? In "one of the most ridiculous things I've read" (:wink:) you later argued with something that wasn't there - after someone else took the responsibility of explaining to you what they thought my post meant and you took that as Gospel because you couldn't be arsed to wait for my explanation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads Posted August 26, 2006 Share Posted August 26, 2006 Just messing about, it's a quiet Friday night in - arguing with another forum member seems like a good way to kill the time: for the bloke that's always asking people to respond to his points instead of ducking them you've done a cracking job of completely ignoring my response to this: Quote The biggest laugh for me is that Souness let a £9.5m player go for near nowt and then brought in quite probably the nearest thing to him for the same fucking price. What a fucking joke that Magnum PI c*nt is Eh? What the hell are you on about here? In "one of the most ridiculous things I've read" (:wink:) you later argued with something that wasn't there - after someone else took the responsibility of explaining to you what they thought my post meant and you took that as Gospel because you couldn't be arsed to wait for my explanation. What are you on about, ducking questions? You said that Souness let a player ( Robert ) go for near nowt and then brought in quite probably the nearest thing to him ( Luque ). I think that's bollocks. If you think it's bollocks too then why are you making out that the two players are similar. " The nearest thing to him for the same price " means what exactly? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted August 26, 2006 Share Posted August 26, 2006 Just messing about, it's a quiet Friday night in - arguing with another forum member seems like a good way to kill the time: for the bloke that's always asking people to respond to his points instead of ducking them you've done a cracking job of completely ignoring my response to this: Quote The biggest laugh for me is that Souness let a £9.5m player go for near nowt and then brought in quite probably the nearest thing to him for the same fucking price. What a fucking joke that Magnum PI c*nt is Eh? What the hell are you on about here? In "one of the most ridiculous things I've read" (:wink:) you later argued with something that wasn't there - after someone else took the responsibility of explaining to you what they thought my post meant and you took that as Gospel because you couldn't be arsed to wait for my explanation. What are you on about, ducking questions? You said that Souness let a player ( Robert ) go for near nowt and then brought in quite probably the nearest thing to him ( Luque ). I think that's bollocks. If you think it's bollocks too then why are you making out that the two players are similar. " The nearest thing to him for the same price " means what exactly? Already explained this, like... I was talking about style of play, in that Luque is supposedly a left-winger, who doesn't fancy defending much and who has crossing and shooting as his two major strengths, sound familiar? Robert wasn't that great at dribbling and his first touch wasn't that great, which is also very similar to Luque. Despite what they have/haven't offered you're telling me that Robert and Luque aren't similar players when they're on the football pitch in how they play/try to play the game, respectively? I thought you'd be able to tell from the tone of my post and what I said about Souness that I didn't think it was a good move, but obviously not. Other similarities I could offer are that they both joined in August in the region of £10M, are foreign, are left-footed, both set-piece takers, play the same role on the pitch, joined from the leagues their country of origin and have become outcasts of their national teams. All that bollocks as well? My point was that Souness was daft enough to sell Robert for nothing and replace him with Luque for a bomb (which is exactly what happened), which has turned out to be like selling a Gibson and replacing him with an Epiphone copy of a Gibson: a poor version of what we already had, but nontheless an attempted replica, because the Scotsman knew how much Robert's style of play added to the team - but he'd be fucked if he was going to put up with Wor Laurent off the pitch... For whatever reason, Luque hasn't had anywhere near the same impact, some people will blame the injury he got, or him being played out of position and others will just say it's because he can't be arsed/doesn't have the bottle - or maybe he's just not that good (which history would apparently deny.) At the end of the day, though, he still plays the game like Robert did and it would be far more noticeable if we saw him on the left-flank (like he played against Man Utd that one time), but this isn't going to happen with Duff and N'Zogbia here - and I'd pick them ahead of him every time anyway. Despite his brilliance there were days when Robert was just as bad as Luque has been for us so far - surely that is undeniable, which does lend credence to the theory that Luque "might" improve if he's played in his correct position, Robert might have struggled just as much being played up-front, but probably not. But aye, still don't know how you read into that what you did after the rest of my post had explained my point. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpal78 Posted August 26, 2006 Share Posted August 26, 2006 Just messing about, it's a quiet Friday night in - arguing with another forum member seems like a good way to kill the time: for the bloke that's always asking people to respond to his points instead of ducking them you've done a cracking job of completely ignoring my response to this: Quote The biggest laugh for me is that Souness let a £9.5m player go for near nowt and then brought in quite probably the nearest thing to him for the same fucking price. What a fucking joke that Magnum PI c*nt is Eh? What the hell are you on about here? In "one of the most ridiculous things I've read" (:wink:) you later argued with something that wasn't there - after someone else took the responsibility of explaining to you what they thought my post meant and you took that as Gospel because you couldn't be arsed to wait for my explanation. What are you on about, ducking questions? You said that Souness let a player ( Robert ) go for near nowt and then brought in quite probably the nearest thing to him ( Luque ). I think that's bollocks. If you think it's bollocks too then why are you making out that the two players are similar. " The nearest thing to him for the same price " means what exactly? Already explained this, like... I was talking about style of play, in that Luque is supposedly a left-winger, who doesn't fancy defending much and who has crossing and shooting as his two major strengths, sound familiar? Robert wasn't that great at dribbling and his first touch wasn't that great, which is also very similar to Luque. Despite what they have/haven't offered you're telling me that Robert and Luque aren't similar players when they're on the football pitch in how they play/try to play the game, respectively? I thought you'd be able to tell from the tone of my post and what I said about Souness that I didn't think it was a good move, but obviously not. Other similarities I could offer are that they both joined in August in the region of £10M, are foreign, are left-footed, both set-piece takers, play the same role on the pitch, joined from the leagues their country of origin and have become outcasts of their national teams. All that bollocks as well? My point was that Souness was daft enough to sell Robert for nothing and replace him with Luque for a bomb (which is exactly what happened), which has turned out to be like selling a Gibson and replacing him with an Epiphone copy of a Gibson: a poor version of what we already had, but nontheless an attempted replica, because the Scotsman knew how much Robert's style of play added to the team - but he'd be fucked if he was going to put up with Wor Laurent off the pitch... For whatever reason, Luque hasn't had anywhere near the same impact, some people will blame the injury he got, or him being played out of position and others will just say it's because he can't be arsed/doesn't have the bottle - or maybe he's just not that good (which history would apparently deny.) At the end of the day, though, he still plays the game like Robert did and it would be far more noticeable if we saw him on the left-flank (like he played against Man Utd that one time), but this isn't going to happen with Duff and N'Zogbia here - and I'd pick them ahead of him every time anyway. Despite his brilliance there were days when Robert was just as bad as Luque has been for us so far - surely that is undeniable, which does lend credence to the theory that Luque "might" improve if he's played in his correct position, Robert might have struggled just as much being played up-front, but probably not. But aye, still don't know how you read into that what you did after the rest of my post had explained my point. one of the few balanced post on Robert & Luque, not easy given the Luque bashing bandwagon that's currently in overdrive and the sheer number who could not stand Robert. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads Posted August 26, 2006 Share Posted August 26, 2006 Just messing about, it's a quiet Friday night in - arguing with another forum member seems like a good way to kill the time: for the bloke that's always asking people to respond to his points instead of ducking them you've done a cracking job of completely ignoring my response to this: Quote The biggest laugh for me is that Souness let a £9.5m player go for near nowt and then brought in quite probably the nearest thing to him for the same fucking price. What a fucking joke that Magnum PI c*nt is Eh? What the hell are you on about here? In "one of the most ridiculous things I've read" (:wink:) you later argued with something that wasn't there - after someone else took the responsibility of explaining to you what they thought my post meant and you took that as Gospel because you couldn't be arsed to wait for my explanation. What are you on about, ducking questions? You said that Souness let a player ( Robert ) go for near nowt and then brought in quite probably the nearest thing to him ( Luque ). I think that's bollocks. If you think it's bollocks too then why are you making out that the two players are similar. " The nearest thing to him for the same price " means what exactly? Already explained this, like... I was talking about style of play, in that Luque is supposedly a left-winger, who doesn't fancy defending much and who has crossing and shooting as his two major strengths, sound familiar? Robert wasn't that great at dribbling and his first touch wasn't that great, which is also very similar to Luque. Despite what they have/haven't offered you're telling me that Robert and Luque aren't similar players when they're on the football pitch in how they play/try to play the game, respectively? I thought you'd be able to tell from the tone of my post and what I said about Souness that I didn't think it was a good move, but obviously not. Other similarities I could offer are that they both joined in August in the region of £10M, are foreign, are left-footed, both set-piece takers, play the same role on the pitch, joined from the leagues their country of origin and have become outcasts of their national teams. All that bollocks as well? My point was that Souness was daft enough to sell Robert for nothing and replace him with Luque for a bomb (which is exactly what happened), which has turned out to be like selling a Gibson and replacing him with an Epiphone copy of a Gibson: a poor version of what we already had, but nontheless an attempted replica, because the Scotsman knew how much Robert's style of play added to the team - but he'd be fucked if he was going to put up with Wor Laurent off the pitch... For whatever reason, Luque hasn't had anywhere near the same impact, some people will blame the injury he got, or him being played out of position and others will just say it's because he can't be arsed/doesn't have the bottle - or maybe he's just not that good (which history would apparently deny.) At the end of the day, though, he still plays the game like Robert did and it would be far more noticeable if we saw him on the left-flank (like he played against Man Utd that one time), but this isn't going to happen with Duff and N'Zogbia here - and I'd pick them ahead of him every time anyway. Despite his brilliance there were days when Robert was just as bad as Luque has been for us so far - surely that is undeniable, which does lend credence to the theory that Luque "might" improve if he's played in his correct position, Robert might have struggled just as much being played up-front, but probably not. But aye, still don't know how you read into that what you did after the rest of my post had explained my point. There is no similarity between Laurent Robert and Luque. Also, when Souness signed Luque he said he had signed a 'proper' player for the left, which indicates he wasn't expecting Luque to be a hearltess heap of shite. Also, I'd say that over half of the people on here who bang on about Luque claim he's a striker, or at least that he's not an out and out wide man but someone who 'performs' in a kind of left sided striker mode. Whatever that is....... No similarity at all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted August 26, 2006 Share Posted August 26, 2006 Just messing about, it's a quiet Friday night in - arguing with another forum member seems like a good way to kill the time: for the bloke that's always asking people to respond to his points instead of ducking them you've done a cracking job of completely ignoring my response to this: Quote The biggest laugh for me is that Souness let a £9.5m player go for near nowt and then brought in quite probably the nearest thing to him for the same fucking price. What a fucking joke that Magnum PI c*nt is Eh? What the hell are you on about here? In "one of the most ridiculous things I've read" (:wink:) you later argued with something that wasn't there - after someone else took the responsibility of explaining to you what they thought my post meant and you took that as Gospel because you couldn't be arsed to wait for my explanation. What are you on about, ducking questions? You said that Souness let a player ( Robert ) go for near nowt and then brought in quite probably the nearest thing to him ( Luque ). I think that's bollocks. If you think it's bollocks too then why are you making out that the two players are similar. " The nearest thing to him for the same price " means what exactly? Already explained this, like... I was talking about style of play, in that Luque is supposedly a left-winger, who doesn't fancy defending much and who has crossing and shooting as his two major strengths, sound familiar? Robert wasn't that great at dribbling and his first touch wasn't that great, which is also very similar to Luque. Despite what they have/haven't offered you're telling me that Robert and Luque aren't similar players when they're on the football pitch in how they play/try to play the game, respectively? I thought you'd be able to tell from the tone of my post and what I said about Souness that I didn't think it was a good move, but obviously not. Other similarities I could offer are that they both joined in August in the region of £10M, are foreign, are left-footed, both set-piece takers, play the same role on the pitch, joined from the leagues their country of origin and have become outcasts of their national teams. All that bollocks as well? My point was that Souness was daft enough to sell Robert for nothing and replace him with Luque for a bomb (which is exactly what happened), which has turned out to be like selling a Gibson and replacing him with an Epiphone copy of a Gibson: a poor version of what we already had, but nontheless an attempted replica, because the Scotsman knew how much Robert's style of play added to the team - but he'd be fucked if he was going to put up with Wor Laurent off the pitch... For whatever reason, Luque hasn't had anywhere near the same impact, some people will blame the injury he got, or him being played out of position and others will just say it's because he can't be arsed/doesn't have the bottle - or maybe he's just not that good (which history would apparently deny.) At the end of the day, though, he still plays the game like Robert did and it would be far more noticeable if we saw him on the left-flank (like he played against Man Utd that one time), but this isn't going to happen with Duff and N'Zogbia here - and I'd pick them ahead of him every time anyway. Despite his brilliance there were days when Robert was just as bad as Luque has been for us so far - surely that is undeniable, which does lend credence to the theory that Luque "might" improve if he's played in his correct position, Robert might have struggled just as much being played up-front, but probably not. But aye, still don't know how you read into that what you did after the rest of my post had explained my point. There is no similarity between Laurent Robert and Luque. Also, when Souness signed Luque he said he had signed a 'proper' player for the left, which indicates he wasn't expecting Luque to be a hearltess heap of shite. Also, I'd say that over half of the people on here who bang on about Luque claim he's a striker, or at least that he's not an out and out wide man but someone who 'performs' in a kind of left sided striker mode. Whatever that is....... No similarity at all. Right then, despite all of the similarities I just mentioned, most of them pure facts, in your eyes there are none... and Luque is a heartless piece of shite, where Robert wasn't? Dunno what planet you're on, mate, but I have to say it's always such a fucking pleasure debating with you, I like it so much that I'm off to bang my head against a brick wall to recreate the effect. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Knightrider Posted August 26, 2006 Share Posted August 26, 2006 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted August 26, 2006 Share Posted August 26, 2006 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts