lcfc81 Posted 9 November 2008 Posted 9 November 2008 Wow Howard has got good ratings for once At one point he knocked the ball one way round the defender ran the other got to the line and put in a cross! Lloyd Dyer style. Quality.
Thracian Posted 9 November 2008 Posted 9 November 2008 Playing the ball five yards to someone else in your own half does not even count as a hand in a goal, blinkered cretin. No idea where you get your definition of five yards, I'm sure, but it doesn't matter. Of course it counts just as sometimes television pundits refer to a goalkeeper's throw-out as being the start of a move.
Hullfox Posted 9 November 2008 Posted 9 November 2008 No idea where you get your definition of five yards, I'm sure, but it doesn't matter. Of course it counts just as sometimes television pundits refer to a goalkeeper's throw-out as being the start of a move. Not questionning his definition of blinkered cretin I see
Thracian Posted 9 November 2008 Posted 9 November 2008 Not questionning his definition of blinkered cretin I see I know Abrasive of old. He knows far more names than me.
Manwell Pablo Posted 9 November 2008 Posted 9 November 2008 Yet again Thracian sees another 'assist' for King in his King-tinted-glasses. King didn't have any part in the first goal. King played it out to Oakley on the wing, you passed it up the line to Fryatt, who in turn crossed it for Dyer to score. It's Fryatt's assist. I'm well aware of that and never suggested otherwise. I said King had a hand in the goal. Just as I credited other people with their parts in goals and said full-back Cox had a hand in one of the Academy goals.Someone has to start the moves and despite the supplier of the final pass getting all the credit for an assist, goals wouldn't happen but for all the other contributions. You are quite wrong. He did play a part and I didn't call it an assist. He did. He played the ball to Oakley (who nearly knocked it out of play), who passed it to Fryatt.Not a direct assist, but he did have a part to play in the goal. What a pointless discussion. EDIT: I didn't relise this discussion had rolled onto the third page, 15 posts disussing wheather or not Andy King is a fantastic footballer based on him rolling a ball 10 yards inside to a team mate, no wonder I don't come on here much anymore.
Thracian Posted 9 November 2008 Posted 9 November 2008 What a pointless discussion. EDIT: I didn't relise this discussion had rolled onto the third page, 15 posts disussing wheather or not Andy King is a fantastic footballer based on him rolling a ball 10 yards inside to a team mate, no wonder I don't come on here much anymore. Bloody hell, the efforts one has to make to get you out of your comfort zone. Besides, I thought you didn't come on here cos you'd got a new job and had to keep your head down!
Koke Posted 9 November 2008 Posted 9 November 2008 I think that Dyer goal should be 100% credit to Fryatt. He got the ball from Oakley, he skinned their defender and took two other defenders with him to the by line, fooled one of them twice and eventually crossed it for Dyer.
Anish Posted 9 November 2008 Posted 9 November 2008 Marvelous! I can see I have met my intellectual superior and will crawl back to my pit to lick my wounds and whatever else comes to hand. Thankfully I'll not have to read such trite gibberish from you again. Double idiot with knobs on. Trite gibberish is all you ever post, it's a shame you can't see it when it's coming from your own keyboard.
davieG Posted 9 November 2008 Posted 9 November 2008 I think that Dyer goal should be 100% credit to Fryatt.He got the ball from Oakley, he skinned their defender and took two other defenders with him to the by line, fooled one of them twice and eventually crossed it for Dyer. good job their roles weren't reversed - Fryatt would have missed
ASH17LCFC Posted 9 November 2008 Posted 9 November 2008 These ratings are laughable, Oakley was great and the best he's ever played for us ?! We were playing Stevenage ffs. What about last season when he went missing in nearly every game ? Maybe he's finally found his level hey. King was ok yesterday and scored a good goal but wasn't no more then a 7. Howard and 9 ?!! You must be kidding, i swear people on this forum are so deculded its unreal. Stevenage took their chances early on we would have lossed.
Salieri Posted 9 November 2008 Posted 9 November 2008 These ratings are laughable, Oakley was great and the best he's ever played for us ?! We were playing Stevenage ffs. What about last season when he went missing in nearly every game ? Maybe he's finally found his level hey.King was ok yesterday and scored a good goal but wasn't no more then a 7. Howard and 9 ?!! You must be kidding, i swear people on this forum are so deculded its unreal. Stevenage took their chances early on we would have lossed. Not really relevant is it when the ratings are based on one particular game?! The fact it was "only" Stevenage doesnt carry too much weight either. Often its harder to perform well technically against so called "inferior" sides. Agreed Howard didnt deserve a 9 but i think you'll find the majority of ppl on here didnt give him such a high mark. Stevenage did have one very good chance early on but even if they had scored it, how you can say we would have definitely lossed (?!) is beyond me!
Corky Posted 9 November 2008 Posted 9 November 2008 These ratings are laughable, Oakley was great and the best he's ever played for us ?! We were playing Stevenage ffs. What about last season when he went missing in nearly every game ? Maybe he's finally found his level hey.King was ok yesterday and scored a good goal but wasn't no more then a 7. Howard and 9 ?!! You must be kidding, i swear people on this forum are so deculded its unreal. Stevenage took their chances early on we would have lossed. And you know that for certain do you? After their great chance was missed we upped the tempo and took control, it was the wake-up call we needed. Why is last season relevant to the game yesterday? Oakley DID have his best game for us. And I'm not "deculded", I'm not the one who wants our manager to go after three months in charge
Jimmy Posted 10 November 2008 Posted 10 November 2008 These ratings are laughable, Oakley was great and the best he's ever played for us ?! We were playing Stevenage ffs. What about last season when he went missing in nearly every game ? Maybe he's finally found his level hey.King was ok yesterday and scored a good goal but wasn't no more then a 7. Howard and 9 ?!! You must be kidding, i swear people on this forum are so deculded its unreal. Stevenage took their chances early on we would have lossed. and if my auntie had balls she'd be my uncle ... you can only beat the team in front of you, the players played well in THIS game and were rated accordingly, I don't know about anyone else but I'm not rating based on last season...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.