On Match Of The Day Alan Shearer said he would take Lambert to Brazil but Robbie Savage said he would take Andy Carroll nothing wrong with having an opinion but he then said because Carroll offers something different. What I would like to know is how Carroll offers something different from Lambert. I think Le God's answer was about right when Savage said the same thing on Sky. Matt said Carroll does the same as Lambert only Lambert does it better. Can anyone think of anything that Carroll offers thats different to Lambert?
A Savage Question
- Thread starter SaintMarv
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
Carroll offers the absolute certainty of a red card at the WC. Lambert doesn't.
Every WC I've ever watched has demonstrated that officials from outside of England have no tolerance for the brute force methods employed by the likes of Carroll.
Every WC I've ever watched has demonstrated that officials from outside of England have no tolerance for the brute force methods employed by the likes of Carroll.
The spot is Lambert's...Carroll has to wrest it from him...and remember that he wasn't called up for the Denmark game. I don't read too much into the fact that Rickie didn't play....Roy knows what he can do....the important thing was that SRL was called up again.
Carroll is very much the old stlye CF, big, strong battering ram that offers an outlet to hoofball WHU.
Sir Rickie, of last season offers so much more, he's such an intelligent player, with two great feet. My only concern is that he no longer dominates defenders and does look to be slightly off the pace at times.
Still a great player for me.
Sir Rickie, of last season offers so much more, he's such an intelligent player, with two great feet. My only concern is that he no longer dominates defenders and does look to be slightly off the pace at times.
Still a great player for me.
Carroll offers slightly more height. Lambert is a complete footballer with a great brain, vision and link up play. The only reason to take Carroll is he is younger. Oh and he cost l'pool 40m a few years ago. Lambert only cost 1m.
Oh where are those "statos" when you need them? I am sure that one of you could give us some statistics on the subject to Persuade Roy. I don't know, percent of time spent grazing in the penalty area waiting for a lumpen hoof forward? Nose bag capacity? How many hands? Come on, help us out here someone!
Stuart Pearce on Talksport said something similar that made me nearly cry with laughter...."Andy Carroll offers you world class ariel power"
Yes he is good in the air granted but only if you play hoofball or play with wingers and England tend not to do either and world class...think not
Appart from his heading ability Carroll offers nothing that can come up to par with Rickie. He is an absolute donkey and his temperament under pressure isn't good.
No comparison between the two for me, it would have to be Rickie.
JRod v Rickie would be a far more difficult decision for me to make
Yes he is good in the air granted but only if you play hoofball or play with wingers and England tend not to do either and world class...think not
Appart from his heading ability Carroll offers nothing that can come up to par with Rickie. He is an absolute donkey and his temperament under pressure isn't good.
No comparison between the two for me, it would have to be Rickie.
JRod v Rickie would be a far more difficult decision for me to make
Andy Carroll has the distinction of representing the worst £40 million ever spent by Liverpool, followed by the worst £17 million ever spent by West Ham. Rickie Lambert represents the best £1 million spent by anybody, on anything, ever.
The discussion was do you take Rickie or JRod, Shearer said Rickie and Savage said...Carroll. Maybe he said it because he genuinely thinks Carroll is a better option or maybe he just loves being controversial. Either way, Savages opinions are insignificant.
Personally, I think Savage said it to be different. The talk had been of Rodriguez and/or Lambert, between Lineker and Shearer for the last 5 minutes, without a peep from Savage. I'm sure he said it just to be a show stopper. It slightly worked.
Shearer= world class striker talking about strikers
Savage= average midfielder better known for long blond hair than significant punditry. Maybe he got sent off as often as Carroll does now and therefore recognises a kindred spirit..
Savage= average midfielder better known for long blond hair than significant punditry. Maybe he got sent off as often as Carroll does now and therefore recognises a kindred spirit..
Watching Carroll he comes across as a thug and a bully. I'd take Lambert and J-Rod for their combining play.
And the look of disbelief on Lineker's face when Savage said that told a story in itself.
Vin
now we can close this thread
This opinion is going to be unpopular but I think that if you are choosing between Carroll/Lambert to be the option to play as your old fashioned target man, then I take Carroll. Lambert is an all round better player, but if that is the role that they are going to play then I think Carroll is better
But he's not considering Lambert as an old fashioned target man. He doesn't want an old fashioned target man. Besides, Lambert is not an old fashioned target player, in any case. He has never been that. Which is why the comparisons of the past with Grant Holt were so incorrect.