Matty can be critisised for being a bit hesitant sometimes but he's a good all-round footballer as well as a striker.. I for one want him back but I fear the injections are as said already, delaying the obvious..
Why? I don't have the time to sit on here making numerous posts, never mind researching them. It was a general point that I accepted, and it does not affect my view that his record, at this time last year, was very poor. If the penalties point strokes your sense of self-importance then crack-on. ffs what a ****er.
I think the management know this is a major risk, but I don't think they really have anywhere else to go. Decent strikers are not readily available, and they don't come cheap. So whilst big Nick warms up alone still longing for Lederhosen, and Simmo & McLean are not necessarily guaranteed to bang in the amount of goals required for a promotion push, then you can't really have a player like Fryatt missing all season. Not when you could drug him up to the eyeballs and cross your fingers. It's a short term gamble, and I worry for Fryatt's long-term fitness as a result. But I don't know what else they can do. A dilemma.
I think the point re the penalties was that Abu Hamza wouldn't have a problem counting them even if someone had tied his shoelaces tightly.
Why not, instead of posting sarcastic ****e, you just post what penalties were involved? I recall him scoring one and missing one, but memory can be imperfect so I generalised. The point remains that he was not as prolific as the 16 would have us believe - the player expressed his own disappointment at his season's tally and I shared that disappointment, as did so many on all boards until the season was a done deal. This belief that he is our saviour in waiting and will eclipse Simpson, et al is simply bollocks - academic bollocks judging from his latest prognosois.
You don't need to convince me, but the penalty thing is nonsense. I don't know where that idea came from, I've seen someone else post it before and fall flat on their face. We only get 2 or 3 penalties a season and he missed one of them. I agree about the finishing though as most on here already know. He was flattered by a lot of goalkeeping errors where he's put it right next to the keepers leg and somehow it goes past them. There's still a few of them being played on the pre-match reel at the KC, we'd be furious if our keeper conceded them.
Party, regards your Sig, it made me laugh the other day and made me think of you when someone at work was singing 'id rather be a hammer than a snail'
I couldn't remember either, nor could I be arsed to check, but having watched the games I knew it was barely any, hence my post. If you make inaccurate posts, don't be surprised if someone points it out to you. The rest of your post doesn't warrant a response.
There's no doubt Fryatt will add serious competition for the striker position but he shouldn't be guaranteed a place in the team and I don't think he will
He's not as unprolific as someone going 'what about all the penalties' when there's only been 1 or 2 goals from them would have us believe either.
I qualified my post by accepting I could not remember how many penalties - I included the penalties in with the 'soft' goals that really should have been saved - I di not quantify them. Feel free to excercise your importance over trivia. If you are going to quote me then get it right: 'I have no doubt folk will come back with the goals he scored, but many where poor quality and from the spot (how many penalties he scored I admit I can't recall!) Don't let the truth get in the way of your petty point, but for the record I did not write what you say I wrote.
For the record, single apostrophes mean it's a paraphrase. If I were making a direct quote it would be quotation marks or the quote function on the site. The implication in what you'd written was that there would be loads less goals by eliminating them, when that simply isn't the case.
If that's what I was doing I wouldn't be on here right now. Oh wait, you meant that as an adjective not a verb.
I think the gist of it was clear enough, but if you have nothing better to do then tyour pedantic straights must nowe be satisfied. What a boring twat you are - it was meant as a well intended comment that two mods wish to be pernickety about - ****ing grow up.
Bollocks it was. But just to be pedantic, not that it's relevent to how we're supposed to post only one of us is a mod.
It seems that you're no better at counting moderators, than you are penalties. You seem rather too eager to dish out insults for no good reason, my response was not nearly as obnoxious as you seem to think it was, you maybe need to chill a bit.
Thought u said you were getting plenty Bob?? Sounds like a frustrated man to me. Whats an adjective anyway.
