Fair point.. replacing his goals and assists won't be easy.. However, take his 31 goals away, we still bagged 70.. still more than the likes of Arsenal. Could also add that we've bought in Lallana and Lambert, they're good for 15+ goals combined, so almost half replaced, and Lallana should be able to assist a few too.. BUT.. everyone and their grandma knows our defence was just slightly better than Brazils last season. We improve that, I don't think we need to bag 3/4 goals a game to win them... Time will tell I guess..
Time, indeed, will tell. We haven't signed any ****ing defenders yet...................................
That's far too simplistic IMO. Take away Suarez's goals and assists might leaving us with a decent total still but it also changes our approach and style UNLESS we can get another creative player in there to take his place. Obviously won't be as good (immediately) but a replacement all the same. Personally, I think the only way to replace a player of Suarez's calibre is to change the team ethic, approach and style to suit the players that remain or arrive.
And it was a sensible reply apart from the typo. Far too quickly are youngsters with talent rushed into being the next great thing - Wilshire, Ramsey, etc. etc. Now your lad is just one more on that conveyor. It's sad but its true. He's done nothing consistently, shown flashed here and there and also shown poor decision making. Sure that par for the course at his age but it detracts from his true value for a club who needs a similar type of player who has already gone past that stage. If you can't take your blinkers off and accept those truths then any conversation with you about him is going to be too based to even be worth the effort! He's certainly not the next Messi. He may be the next Rooney with al of the flaws contained in that bundle. He's goo but not yet that good. Now show me what is not sensible about that quick appraisal?
I've never said he's the next Rooney and certainly not the next Messi! I can't even recall being asked my opinion on the lad as a player on here. All I was responding to were comments about him coming over to the dark side and you just wanted to shut the convo down. As it is, I don't wear any blinkers when it comes to Ross. He's got bags of natural talent, he's quick, strong and is a good athlete. However, his decision making is often poor, he's often careless in possession and he doesn't work hard enough off the ball. But he's still only just 20 and he's missed over 18 months of his short career due to injury. He can be what he wants to be, there's no doubt about that, BUT he's nowhere near the finished article yet and needs another year or so to develop, before being talked about as a 'star'. If he keeps his feet on the ground and continues to work as he was done to press, then he'll get there, but there's never any guarantees in the game.
He's probably the last player that we should even be considering. As a squad we've been moved on from looking for "one for the future" players. They have to be good enough now to hit the ground running. But if you care to look back Tobes you'll find that I aslo said he'd never come to us!
There are loads of players better than Barkley that would be better value for money! And that's not even a dig at Everton, that's just a fact. Foredeckdave is right!!!!!!!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/28163286 Oh look, FIFA just completely made **** up as they went along for Suarez's ban, but completely ignored existing rules claiming nothing could be done when it came to Robben's diving
I noticed that earlier. We all accept that Suarez needed a punishment that would bite , but "can't watch school games", yet can "Attend amateur football games as long as it is not in a stadium"? Really, footballing authorities are just so amateurish. Who decides this stuff?
He can play computer games but can't visit children in hospital. ****ing embarrassing. Sort your story out FIFA you corrupt ****s.
I'd really like Barkley. Would have preferred we splashed the big cash on him instead of Lala! He's better, younger, and probably would have cost about the same. He's also more English...
Everton would only spunk the money on long term contracts for 33 year olds or loan signings. It would be irresponsible and cruel to feed their habit. Once they clean themselves up we can take Barkley off their hands and everyone wins.
* I was basing this on Lala having a Spanish Grandfather... but it turns out Barkley has a Nigerian Grandfather- so they're equally English... ... Although Lala has a foreign name... BTW... not bashing Lallana- think he is a good player and look forwards to watching him play- hope he does well- and I'll be cheering him on! (just not who I would have picked)
It all seems completely arbitrary. What is the point of most of those constraints other than punitiveness for its own sake? They should have just banned him from playing for club or country for a specified number of games, and fined him. Surely that's enough? The other things just look petty and small-minded, and are quite possibly illegal to boot.
Everton would want more than £25m. He'd cost £35m+ for anyone, and they wouldn't sell him to us for any money.
But this is all the PFAs "best guess" because FIFA won't say a ****ing word about what "football-related activity" even means, so just don't do anything because FIFA might suddenly decide signing an autograph or being seen drinking a Budweiser counts and then implement more arbitrary punishments #fascism
Oh and FIFA have just suspended Nigeria from international football because the government "interfered" by sacking members found guilty of stealing money
