Nice Selection Problem

Absolutely mental, so you're suggesting we sit off a team that just put 4 past a decent Derby side, who's team contains probably one of the best strikers in the league?

That'll definitely work, I bet they've been practising that in training all week.

 

OLM has already conceded that people over 30 are more likely to be injured, so give it up.

 

Because of the liklihood of injury. It increases year on year. Obviously there will be individual players who are an exception - in the Australian Rules league here there's a bloke running around who is 38. That doesn't mean all 30 year olds should be offered 8 year deals.

30-33 is that age range where players' bodies can really catch up with them coming back from the off-season. The drop off can be sharp.

 

But what is it based on exactly? Why 30 and not 32 or 28? It's down to individual players, the magic number of 30 that fans look at and think "over the hill" has been intensified because of transfer deadlines and players being world class at 18 like Pogba. People look at those players and think "great, he's this good at 18, imagine how good he'll be at 25." If you sign a player that's over 30, for some reason people instantly think "he's over the hill and probably not worth the money." I'd love to see fan's reaction when we signed Kevin Kilbane. Weird how times change, when we signed Kilbane we had agreed a fee for Steve Finnan and were in advanced talks with Luis Boa Morte.

 

Might want to check my follow up post.

 

So why is a 29 year old less susceptible to injury than a 32 year old?

 

Because the older you get the more susceptible you are to injury as your body wears down, really not sure how that's a serious question from you.

 

Would you rather have a 26 year old Michael Dawson or a 32 year old Michael Dawson? According to you there wouldn't be any difference and if anything you'd rather the 32 year old.

 

Yes that tends to happen noticeably around 60-70 years old and over a period of 20 odd years, not between the ages of 29 and 31. Old is relative. I play football twice a week for 90 minutes and I've yet to suffer more injuries than I did when I was 16. I can see your point but it simply cannot be applied as a rule of thumb because every footballer is different. Each player should be judged on their merits rather than a made up idea that makes no sense.

Age is relative, 30 isn't old really, most footballers retire between 36 and 40, six years is a long time, look what we've done in less time.

 

Thank you. Now we can drop it.

 

Well yeah, the Dawson we have now has a wealth of experience. The younger Dawson might not have turned out as good had he signed for us at 26. He has an injury now, but look at some of the other players we've signed over 30 that have been fine. Deano for one, Koren another.

 

That's not me agreeing with you, just acknowledging your point. Just so you know.

 

You acknowledging where I'm coming from was all that was needed.

 

That's as stupid as you're making out my comment to be. That seems to imply you'd rather we sign James Chester once he hits 30 because he doesn't have enough experience before then.

 

Is this a point scoring exercise ?
You highlighted the first few words in one of Sterling's sentences, yet neglected to acknowledge/comment on the last part of the same sentence.
Where's your rebuttal to that observation ?

 

Hey guys all ****'s day was last Friday, bit of a stupid argument this.

 

I suspect you will get your wish in the summer.