Let me elucidate. My point was that the way we have set up in the last dozen games or so, everything was down to Adel Taarabt. He was given the ball either because Harold told them to do so, the others didn't have the creativity to think of another option, the others didn't have the guts to try something themselves. We became a one man team. The trouble with that is that if the man the rest of the team regard as their messiah has a bad patch, someone else needs to step up to the plate. No one has. The one man team becomes totally impotent. Take Adel out of the team and therefore the equation and players have to look for others to pass to. That's why we scored. If he had played and he had recovered his form I believe we would have won more comfortably because he would have played Remy in to scoring opportunities on more than one occasion. However there is no denying that he has been poor in the last few games. That justified his being dropped. If he had been playing and had been poor again, do you believe that we would have scored at all? I don't. Having re-read the entire thread, I think your confusion and that of Queens (good morning to you) is that I have said something which surpisies you because it is very close to Queens own analysis. Swords you have taken "IF AT does not play......" out of the context in which it was written. Others have not. I think you will agree with my point if you replace the word 'play' with 'perform'. The only difference between Queens and me on this is that he claims now to have always been making the point that AT must go because we do not play as a team with him in it. I'm not sure others would agree that this is what he has been saying all along. My take on that is that he has shown that he is perfectly capable of playing as part of a team but that others hide when he is playing and have not taken responsibility themselves to win games. The result therefore is that we have been totally impotent.
Yorkshire, I have to say that that has got to be the most bizarre post I've ever read on this Site! So you're saying because Taarabt didn't play (taken out of the team) we scored. And yet you want him to play? No I don't. So why play him then! BTW, I disagree with the whole premise of your opening paragraph. He was utter sh*te in recent games. Couldn't hit a cows arse with a banjo. Other players around him played far better. But do you know what? I'm not getting dragged into this because I'll be blamed for slating him! Already on this thread I've been told that I must be chuffed because he didn't play even though I never said such a thing. You see, despite me not opening my mouth about him since the United game, somehow I'm still in the wrong. You guys come on here and without provocation, you start hailing him as the saviour and even go as far as to say that we were better without him but that's everyone else's fault not his. Queens had a go at him, I didn't. And if this is the kind of sh*te we have to listen to when he doesn't play, is it any wonder that some fans get sick and tired of hearing about him?
I think you've got your lines crossed swords. I understand fully what Yorkie is saying. And tend to agree with him on this one. It almost compliments my first post on this thread. ( #1-3? )
Could you please explain it to me then because it seems to me like he's saying that because Taarabt is so great and everything was going through him was the reason he was dropped and we went on to win. Crazy double psychology going on if that's the case. For me he was dropped because he can't pass the ball five yards, hit a shot on target, take a free kick, track his man, take a corner, make a tackle, run past people.............etc............etc.............etc. The lengths some will go to justify a player being too sh*te to get in the team. There you go, are you all happy now? You've dragged me into yet another Taarabt slug fest. Well I hope you're happy. And I hope this goes to prove that oftentimes its not the Taarabt doubters who start these things, its the blind, worshipping arse-lickers talking out of their behind that riles people up so much that they have to respond.
I didnt have a go at him did I? i didnt mean too and if thats the way it came across then I'm sorry. i was just stating that without him we HAVE to play as a team. i dont disagree with most of what Yorkie says except that facts are, we took him out of the team & scored 2 goals, away from home and won the game. That cannot be refuted so i struggle to understand the "we cannot do without him" arguement? I'm willing to listen to anyone who can explain? I simply statd he a good player but hinders us as much as he helps us. i believe the answer to the OP is yes. thats for the resons i stated earlier 7 until he does go, we wil never develop as a TEAM & will contiually be one dimensional. Still dont think he's the messiah that many make him out tio be, but nevermind, when we get relegated he'l be great in the championship again depite not being able to take a corner or a free kick or head the ball or........
Sorry mate you probably didn't. But if you did, you had every right. These guys have really gotten on my nerves tonight. We say nothing negative against him at all for weeks yet when they start their usual nonsense and we check them, its us that are in the wrong! Its no wonder people like you or I are turned off that player mate.
Sorry for not replying immediately Swords. I do have a life I'm afraid. Maybe you would care to explain how we played against League One Milton Keynes Dons without Adel and conceded four goals. Was that a great performance? How would you digest that performance into your argurments on this thread??? I didn't see the game myself and I know it wasn't streamed so I couldn't possible comment on it.
It was streamed. Pity you didn't get to see it. You're again missing the point. I was replying to Yorkshire who said that without Taarabt we have zero creativity. I said we'd just won 2-1 away without him on the field so we obviously do have other options. Now what has that got to do with MK Dons?
Was the cup game streamed? I was 8,000 miles away and tried to find a stream and couldn't get one. I thought the cup games couldn't be streamed. So, without Taarabt against a league one team at home, we didnt score for 85 odd minutes. Were we very creatuve then?
Are you that stupid? Where did I say that we aren't creative with him in the team? I'll say it one last time but I'm not sure it will register. Yorkshire said that we have zero creativity in the team without him. I said he was wrong as we scored twice yesterday with him not in the team. The question being is, do you agree that we have zero creativity in the team without him and if so, how the FU*K did we score twice and win yesterday? (I don't know about the Cup game being screened. I thought you were on about the Saints game)
Swords, You really are hard work. Do you realise Adel didn't play against MK Dons? I am not sure you understand that???? To answer your question, do I think there is zero creativity in the team without him? The answer is obviously, we have some other creativity so ZERO is an overstatement. Adel on his day is by far our most creative player. He had a bit of a mare against United but he has been one or our most consistent performers all season. I know that is hard for you to take but it is very much true. So, considering Adel didnt play yesterday and we won, how do you think we played when he didn't play previously, ie. against MK Dons? As I said I wasn't at the game. Maybe some of the people who were, would like to comment???? Were we very creative that day lads?
Why do you keep mentioning MK Dons? That was a Cup game full of reservists. With Taarabt in the team recently we didn't win since Chelsea. Harry rightly dropped him for being sh*t and we won. Coincidence? It probably is actually and I'm not saying we didn't win recently because he was in the team - but he contributed to it with his poor performances. Look, I was saying to Yorkshire that it was preposterous to say we have zero creativity in the team just 24 hours after we scored twice and won away from home. * I never said we had no creativity in the team with him in it. * I never said we're better with him out of the team. * In fact, I never even mentioned him or his performances at all! Yet you and COL wade in and act as if I was having a go at him when I wasn't. Thanks for dragging this down into the gutter yet again mate.
A reservist is a person who is a member of a military reserve force https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&r...yoC4BQ&usg=AFQjCNGnDPe1AuAmTJge31MeMLZxi7Dm9w no surprise we lost
i think we've gone slightly OT on this one. no one doubts that "One his day" At is our most creative player. problem is that his "days" are very few and far between and he is not our only creative player by any means. townsend can do that now so what else does AT ofer us. lie i said his free kicks, corners & heading is appaling. So what does he bring to the table? On a good day he can be a nightmare for defenders and use up other teams resources allowing one of our othe players o be freed up. On a bad day he is a definate hinderence to everything we do. The OP asks about the way forward. If we keep T then everything has to go through him & other teams can mark him out of the game. Makes life easy for them. If we sell/ get rid or what-ever, then we have to find a new, better system of playing that does not rely on 1 player. This is so obviously the way forward that it concerns me people cannot see it. yes, At could become a good prem player if he was in a team like Man Utd or Arsenal because those around him con do thier jobs as well as, if not better than him. These teams would not change thier style of play to suit him. he weould have to change his. Where we are right now does not allow us the luxury of forcing him to change. He a good player in the wrong team. As for the cup game against MK dons. I too did not see it but i would askif anyone of the players actually took it seriously? Conceding 4 goals against a team 2 divisions below us would suggest that no-one did. i dont know so I'd ask those who went? Dont think using that game as an example really hold much water TBH. For what its worth, i dont think At has been our most consistent performer all season either, but thats just my opinion, and thats all it is...an opinion.! he's definately a much improed player but not what we need right now. Gimme got it spot on with his first reply i think.
Swords, I am pissing myself laughing at that post. Earlier in this thread you said to Yorkie that one of his posts was the most bizarre (or words to that effect) you had ever seen on this site. I beleive you post above just beat it. Where did I wade in? I politely point out that without Adel we lost 2-4 against a league one side to counteract your argurment that we won yesterday. "Thanks for dragging this down to the gutter yet again mate". Even allowing for the fact that this statement came from you Swords, it is bizarre in the extreme. How have I dragged this down into the gutter? Because I raise a counter arguement to your's in a perfectly orderly fashion? You don't like being questioned do you? I think this thread is a really good example of your **** stirring Swords. You are deliberately looking to wind people up. Guess what, I'm not wound up.
You go fu*k yourself Finglas. I wasn't sh*t stirring at all. If I wanted to sh*t stir why did I not mention Taarabt once after the United game? I never mentioned him when everyone was slating him yet on you come here and say I'm winding people up? You're a fu*king half wit.
