Guest SLK Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 Clearly our team was struggling after the 65th minute and we started to get tired and lose position...Rossi wasn't as effective as first half and Zoggy wasn't doing anything... Why didn't Roeder freshened things up a bit earlier rather than leaving it till the 84th minute to do a substitution...I had no problem with Milner coming on for Solano as the latter was getting tired but that should have been done earlier... Why Luque wasn't even tried at all is beyond me ? I mean the whole striking force is out injured and you have a 19 year old who did ok the first half but started to struggle in the 2nd half...Why not replace him with half an hour to go and see if Luque can resurrect his carrier...It is not like we have many options anyway...Why not try something different, something that will make Charlton think about and try to change their style of play...We were very predictable in the 2nd half... What has Roeder against Luque ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 What has Roeder against Luque ? He's seen absolutely nothing that suggests that Luque could come on and turn a game. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Syrette Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 He doesn't like Spainairds. Luque let his dog go toilet in Glenn's garden. Something like that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest smoggeordie Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 What has Roeder against Luque ? He's seen absolutely nothing that suggests that Luque could come on and turn a game. Except goals against Sunderland, PSV and Villerreal in brief appearences against them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SLK Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 What has Roeder against Luque ? He's seen absolutely nothing that suggests that Luque could come on and turn a game. That's absolutely BULLSHIT you know...What a lame execuse... FFS we don't have that luxury to not try a 10 milion pound signing...WE ARE NOT GOING TO CREATE LESS CHANCES THAN WE ARE CREATING NOW IF LUQUE PLAYS....It's not like we are winning games by the way..hellooooooooo Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Moe-Ali Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 Fuck that, Luque should have been on today. Roeder is a dick. Bringing milner on in the 83rd was a large mistake. Luque for Duff in the 70th would be the right sub. FUCK OFF GLEN. WE'RE NOT GOING DOWN WITH YOU! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 What has Roeder against Luque ? He's seen absolutely nothing that suggests that Luque could come on and turn a game. Except goals against Sunderland, PSV and Villerreal in brief appearences against them. a) He scored the Sunderland goal when we were crusing at 3-1 b) the PSV goal was a penalty c) he didn't score against Villareal but did lose his marker who went on and headered the ball into the net to make it 1-3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pokerprince2004 Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 What has Roeder against Luque ? He's seen absolutely nothing that suggests that Luque could come on and turn a game. Whereas the dross on the pitch are capable? He must be half decent if the Depor fans still worship him...just give him a run of games Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest smoggeordie Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 What has Roeder against Luque ? He's seen absolutely nothing that suggests that Luque could come on and turn a game. Except goals against Sunderland, PSV and Villerreal in brief appearences against them. a) He scored the Sunderland goal when we were crusing at 3-1 b) the PSV goal was a penalty c) he didn't score against Villareal but did lose his marker who went on and headered the ball into the net to make it 1-3 Oh aye, forgot about ©. IMO he actually looked impressive in those 2 pre season friendlies. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnypd Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 i am not a luque apologist but i think he should've came on. he also provided a bit of class against lillestrom when we were struggling to make chances. not unlike today. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clay Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 What has Roeder against Luque ? He's seen absolutely nothing that suggests that Luque could come on and turn a game. Except goals against Sunderland, PSV and Villerreal in brief appearences against them. a) He scored the Sunderland goal when we were crusing at 3-1 b) the PSV goal was a penalty c) he didn't score against Villareal but did lose his marker who went on and headered the ball into the net to make it 1-3 Yep, he did all those things and yes they all count for something, ffs at least give him a try imo... he's a professional footballer... leaving him on the sidelines for so long is bound to inject some kind of passion in him to prove people wrong, if i was him and after all this i got played i'd try everything to prove the manager wrong.. i'm suprised roader hasn't even used him as one of his fucking 2 min subtitutions.. it's a disgrace he wasn't a bad player.. but coming here, jesus wept, he may aswell of wrote off his career altogether! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elephant Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 Hope he gets out from here in Jan, nobody deserves to be treated like that. Trapped in shite club with no direction. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SLK Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 What has Roeder against Luque ? He's seen absolutely nothing that suggests that Luque could come on and turn a game. Except goals against Sunderland, PSV and Villerreal in brief appearences against them. a) He scored the Sunderland goal when we were crusing at 3-1 b) the PSV goal was a penalty c) he didn't score against Villareal but did lose his marker who went on and headered the ball into the net to make it 1-3 I don't understand your logic mate...I mean WE ARE NOT SCORING GOALS WITH THE CURRENT PLAYERS...FOR CRYING OUT LOUD WHAT HAVE WE GOT TO LOSE IF WE TRIED LUQUE FOR 30 F***ING MINUTES ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slashvex Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 He played in the reserves once and scored 2 30 yarders, we all know Luque was a good player for Depor, he isn't gonna become that player again unless we play him Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BottledDog Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 After he embarrassed himself the last time he sent Luque out to warm up, maybe the beaky twat has developed some sort of phobia. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beren Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 Agree with J-Hall to a degree. For all we know, Luque could very well be playing like an -actual- 5-year old girl,... for all we know. That being said, Roeder should inform the fans what is going on with Luque and why a £9m is on the bench regardless of circumstance. He doesn't necessarily have to berate him publicly, but a tactful explanation would do. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alberto2005 Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 the answer to your topic thread is.... Luque isn't that bad, Roeder is. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
M4 Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 In pre season it really looked like Luque was going to be a part of things this season. That finally Roeder was going to put his talent to use. But no, he's gone back to treating him like a piece of shite. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnypd Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 Agree with J-Hall to a degree. For all we know, Luque could very well be playing like an -actual- 5-year old girl,... for all we know. not really. he scored two good goals for the reserves when most players in his position would've put in minimal effort and just gone through the motions. and then he scored for catalunya. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 Before we jump on Roeder, oh too late! We don't have a clue what happens in training and behind the scenes! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Kenton Magpie Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 YES! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 1nol Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 What we do know is that we have very few options and still there's no Luque. What was the worst that could happen by putting him on for half an hour today? Why have him on the bench? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beren Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 Agree with J-Hall to a degree. For all we know, Luque could very well be playing like an -actual- 5-year old girl,... for all we know. not really. he scored two good goals for the reserves when most players in his position would've put in minimal effort and just gone through the motions. and then he scored for catalunya. Fair point! blueyes.gif That was 3 weeks ago, though. There may be other extenuating circumstances however. Roeder's silence is more worrying to me - hoping no one would notice?! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superior Acuña Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 I'm not his biggest fan by a longshot, but i think when weve got one fit striker, playing a midfielder upfront and are creating nothing, and need a goal he should be given a chance. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted October 28, 2006 Share Posted October 28, 2006 Why make him warm up for 20 mins if you're not going to at least give him a go? He couldn't exactly make things worse. 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