If we had scored a goal like their second we'd be drooling . but there still a way to go if they want to play it on the floor , but maybe, if they reach a compromise in style then thats no bad thing with the best fromm both worlds
Stoke COULD play football under Pulis, especially at home. I remember them passing man u off the park. But Pulis wanted them to play in a dour uncompromising way, especially away from home and eventually that became the norm - and ultimately cost him his job.
I will give Hughes credit, he's got them playing some football. Bet their fans can't believe whats happening after long ball Pullis. Their second goal was top class, always been impressed with Crouch's ability to play football. For a big lad, he's very good with the ball at his feet.
We spoke about Crouch on these boards when it looked like Bony deal was not going to happen due to his club insisting on more cash, the general consensus was "Yes!! Definitely!" I think every fan outside of the usual top six would love to have him in their team, I highly rate the guy and in my opinion was England's only consistent player over the last six or seven years. He scored more than one goal per two games for them and is on course to score over 100 goals in the Premier League. Bear in mind the guy didn't play for the likes of Man Utd, he was at Liverpool though and I don't care what those bin dippers say he was as much a reason they stayed in the Champions League as Gerrard was. He scored for them in that competition as well. Underrated player by the media and England management, he got goals with unfavourable teams his whole career and I do include a poor Liverpool propped up by two great players there! Outside of Gerrard he had a lack of quality supply but still did the business.
I hate that saying!(no offence) But he is ****e on the floor compared to 6'5" Ibrahimohic. What has height got to do with it?
Because the taller you are, the less co-ordination, speed and balance you tend to have. If you look at some of the truly great footballers, Maradona, Hagi, Pele, Messi they all fall into a certain morphological category. So when people say "He's a good footballer for a tall lad" there is some logic there! My favourite "big" footballer was the Czech centre forward, I think it was Koeller.
GOOD FEET FOR A BIG MAN??....you aint seen nowt!! step up Milford Haven's finest ....[video]http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4SJquH7UXHw&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D4SJquH7UXHw[/video]
No offence taken Swim. Always thought he had a good touch and brings players into play etc. Now talking about Ibrahimohic, that is one class player, to me he's just behind Messi & Ronaldo.
So therefore Ronaldo and Ibrahimovic must be better than Messi because they are naturally disadvantaged due to genetics?
Think their is a thread on the PL board asking that same question. That might be a thread for tomorrow night, now we have an international break.
If your theory about height is correct, then due to Zlatan's natural massive disadvantages at being 6'5", then he has had to overcome adversity never encountered by Messi or Ronaldo. Thefore using the mathematical height/skill co-efficient (just made up by me), then statistically he is However, using the mathematical bullshit detecting coefficient, it proves he is not and that the height thing is a crap cliche
