Who other than gent?People were saying the same thing about Walcott not so long ago.
Who other than gent?People were saying the same thing about Walcott not so long ago.
Who other than gent?

He was playing like he was never going to make it at Arsenal, so people were saying he would never make it at Arsenal. Am I missing something here?Most of the critiscm was over the TOP stating that Ramsey was in fact a 'rubbish player' or 'League 1 standard'.
Anyone who said Ramsey was playing **** and didn't look like becoming a top player hasn't been proven wrong. He was playing **** and didn't look like becoming a top player.
Anyone who said Ramsey was playing **** and didn't look like becoming a top player hasn't been proven wrong. He was playing **** and didn't look like becoming a top player.
He was not playing like ****, and he always looked like he would become a top player. You just couldn't see it.
He was abysmal and looked destined to be a pub team player. How you can say he didn't look crap is beyond me.
He was abysmal and looked destined to be a pub team player. How you can say he didn't look crap is beyond me.
The point is that Ramsey never looked like becoming a good player, so they were justified in saying it. The only reason it's being brought up now is because of one or two angry fans who took the criticism personally. They want to lord Ramsey's good form over everyone else like some kind of trophy for their "criticism is always wrong" agenda. The criticism wasn't wrong, he looked like failing at Arsenal, and he surprised nearly everyone by getting better. If it was a surprise, then obviously the critics were being realistic.So the people who said Ramsey wouldn't ever become a good player, and wouldn't be good enough for Arsenal haven't been proved wrong?
Who other than gent?
There were a fair few people saying that 'He's got no football brain' 'no end product' 'all he has is pace' 'Not good enough for Arsenal' etc.The point is that Ramsey never looked like becoming a good player, so they were justified in saying it. The only reason it's being brought up now is because of one or two angry fans who took the criticism personally. They want to lord Ramsey's good form over everyone else like some kind of trophy for their "criticism is always wrong" agenda. The criticism wasn't wrong, he looked like failing at Arsenal, and he surprised nearly everyone by getting better. If it was a surprise, then obviously the critics were being realistic.
He always looked like being a good player, he never looked like ****. You were wrong, and there were enough people supporting Ramsey to make your insistence that you were correct, illogical.
Now stop being a child, admit you were wrong, and move on.
He always looked like being a good player, he never looked like ****. You were wrong, and there were enough people supporting Ramsey to make your insistence that you were correct, illogical.
Now stop being a child, admit you were wrong, and move on.
Agreed, He had some terrible performances but you could always still he see he had ALOT of natural ability. Also he had a few very good performances that went completely overlooked.
He wasn't the only one who was dreadful against BradfordBradford last season he was beyond dreadful.
Deluded moron.He always looked like being a good player, he never looked like ****.
I wasn't wrong. You seem to be grouping everyone you despise into one foul entity again. Take your pills and have a lie down.Now stop being a child, admit you were wrong
He wasn't the only one who was dreadful against Bradford
Deluded moron.
I wasn't wrong. You seem to be grouping everyone you despise into one foul entity again. Take your pills and have a lie down.