Ronaldo Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 Thing is, before the Liverpool game a hell of a lot on this forum (if not a clear majority) we're calling him a very good defender. A few bad games doesn't equal a bad a player, especially not in his first season in a new country. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thespence Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 Thing is, before the Liverpool game a hell of a lot on this forum (if not a clear majority) we're calling him a very good defender. I know it was fucking ridicules. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 Ridicules what? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heron Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 Woodgate has always been far more injury prone and Coloccini has that little bit more class. Although Woodgate provides more of a physical presence than Fab'. They both have their pro's and con's but in our current and even previous back four (the one with Woodgate in) I rekcon Fab' would've probably been the better option... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LesPaul Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 Woodgate has always been far more injury prone and Coloccini has that little bit more class. Although Woodgate provides more of a physical presence than Fab'. They both have their pro's and con's but in our current and even previous back four (the one with Woodgate in) I rekcon Fab' would've probably been the better option... I think Woodgate is a better Taylor and I think a Taylor-Colo type partnership works very well Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heron Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 Woodgate has always been far more injury prone and Coloccini has that little bit more class. Although Woodgate provides more of a physical presence than Fab'. They both have their pro's and con's but in our current and even previous back four (the one with Woodgate in) I rekcon Fab' would've probably been the better option... I think Woodgate is a better Taylor and I think a Taylor-Colo type partnership works very well Yeah, I reckon Woodgate and Fabricio would have been quality... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LesPaul Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 Woodgate has always been far more injury prone and Coloccini has that little bit more class. Although Woodgate provides more of a physical presence than Fab'. They both have their pro's and con's but in our current and even previous back four (the one with Woodgate in) I rekcon Fab' would've probably been the better option... I think Woodgate is a better Taylor and I think a Taylor-Colo type partnership works very well Yeah, I reckon Woodgate and Fabricio would have been quality... providing Woodgate was fit all the time Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heron Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 Woodgate has always been far more injury prone and Coloccini has that little bit more class. Although Woodgate provides more of a physical presence than Fab'. They both have their pro's and con's but in our current and even previous back four (the one with Woodgate in) I rekcon Fab' would've probably been the better option... I think Woodgate is a better Taylor and I think a Taylor-Colo type partnership works very well Yeah, I reckon Woodgate and Fabricio would have been quality... providing Woodgate was fit all the time Aye. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skeletor Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 Woodgate was a collosus. I often wonder if he had a perfect fitness level whether we'd have been able to get him when we did. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keefaz Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 What's going on in here? Woodgate was nothing like Taylor, and absolutely miles above Colocinni, man. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Liam Liam O Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 What's going on in here? Woodgate was nothing like Taylor, and absolutely miles above Colocinni, man. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 Woodgate played behind Speed and Dyer, mate. The only thing he has/had on Coloccini is strength and perhaps heading ability. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 Woodgate played behind Speed and Dyer, mate. The only thing he has/had on Coloccini is strength and perhaps heading ability. I like Colo at the moment, but that's bollocks. He was one of the top defenders in Europe, excellent anticipation, tackling, everything really. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 That's why he ended up at Boro. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Liam Liam O Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 That's why he ended up at Boro. That's why Colo ended up in the Championship. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northern Monkey Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 Woodgate is by a country mile the better player. But Colo is far, far less injury prone. I'd rather have an average but available player than a gifted one out of the team. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 That's why he ended up at Boro. That's why Colo ended up in the Championship. Woodgate was the better player, as I said. I also never said that Colo was one of europe's top defenders, which is the point about Woodgate that I was responding to. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr.Spaceman Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 Woodgate is the better player by a long shot, but Colo plays far more often. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 I'm not claiming to be an authority on European football BTW, all I'm saying is that of all the football I watched during the time he played for us, Woodgate stood out as being brilliant. And yes, he ended up at Boro, but if he'd been fit he would have probably ended up at Man Utd. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 He was brilliant, not disputing it for a second. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Stephen927 Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 Woodgate when fit was absolutely quality, still is. Just he's rarely fit for any worthwhile time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmonkey Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 That's why he ended up at Boro. More to the point, that's why Real Madrid splashed out £13m on a crock. Clearly very highly rated. Had he not been so injury prone, the fee could easily have been three times as much. Woodgate during his time here, when fit, was a better pure defender than Rio Ferdinand. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 Disagree with that, Ferdinand is probably the most naturally talented defender i've ever seen. Though i'm sure some will disagree because of his poor recent form. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cubaricho Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 Would take Colo over Woodgate every day of the week. Colo has a bit more class about him and is fit far more often. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 Would take Colo over Woodgate every day of the week. Colo has a bit more class about him and is fit far more often. Despite the fact I rate Woodgate higher, I am still much happier to have the Argie here. He came with a reputation of being virtually unbreakable and so far he's lived up to it. I reckon he will be ok in the premier provided we can upgrade the midfield by then. Selling Woodgate for £13m was the best piece of business Fat Fred ever did. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now