Your viewpoint is PRECISELY why Capello flopped and England choke Terry is better than that donkey Ferdinand, who I have always thought was severely over-rated, his days are over with Vidic, Jones and Smalling at CB. Cahill/Lescott and Jones/Smalling for me. Lampard and Gerrard, while on paper should be a partnership made in heaven, has been shown time and time again to fail miserably, they simply do not complement one another. Wilshere with Parker any day of the week for me! Rooney, I agree totally, but your attitute "and someone else up front" selection policy is the MAJOR ISSUE. Heskey, Vassell, Bent, Zamora, Boothroyd, Defoe, Crouch are ALL FAILURES, parasitising 90 minutes in an England shirt! Graham or Holt deserve their shot, they have shown hard graft, and have a proven record in assists and giving 110% effort.
I agree that he is the best of those listed, and of those tested recently, I would prefer him if it wasn't Holt or Graham
I was kidding. Your assertion that Terry is a better player than Rio is off the mark in my opinion. Rio is a very gifted footballer, Terry is a blocker in the Jamie Carragher mould which is why he gets shown up at major championships. His performance against Germany in the last World Cup was embarrassingly ****e. He was outthought, outrun and outplayed by Klose. English football has never come to terms with gifted players, we want grafters who will sweat which is why the likes of Hoddle, Beardsley and Le Tissier didn't win as many caps as they should have done but Emile Heskey has 60+ caps. All that said, Rio is knackered.
Same could be said for Barry I wasn't targeting you, just the general viewpoint that is widely held by most, and that is the major concern
Comas was a right WUM but you always get one.Most other United fans have been pretty good and given us the credit we were due.They probably follow SAF's line that they were a trifle fortunate to get all the points on the day.In a way although obviously I wanted to see my team win at least it keeps the title race open andI really don't want to see City win it.Another step down the road to buying everything.
Man Utd normaly have more possession against 95% of teams. Only Barcelona are better and maybe Real Madrid.
We haven't had more possession than our opponents in the last five matches. You should watch us more closely in future. Our speciality is using the possession most effectively - we get the ball and get it to players in a dangerous position. We typically have less possession but create more clear cut chances with it, and the Norwich game was no exception.
does 'world class' actually watch the matches? makes you wonder... i think norwich edged possession on sunday (admittedly i've only seen the bbc stats and they are rather unreliable). the match probably should have been a draw - certainly norwich deserved at least a point but manchester united are the masters of winning games at the death. we did it plenty of times last season and we got labelled 'lucky' by fans of other clubs. its got nothing to do with luck and its no coincidence that the same teams always seem to be the ones who get that late winner
not quite true, on average this season, arsenal, man city, swansea and chelsea have all had more possession than you. Despite what i said above, on average Man U get 56% of possession, which was the case at Norwich too (never trust the BBC stats, use opta)
The only stat worth bothering about is goals scored, all the rest mean jack ****, unless you are a dipper or Arsenal fan. I do recall Barca had 69% possession against UTD a few years ago and still lost, so remember stats mean ****, goals mean win!!!
you haven't put it very eloquently but you are correct! gave you a scare though didn't we... i'm just glad we won't have to wait another 7 years to play united again
