Hargreaves - one signing too many?

Feedingseagulls · 11th December 2007, 20:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by WesBrownIsAGod

FSG - fucking spoofing Geebag.

All 3 United · 12th December 2007, 14:22

Hargreaves is essential if we want to win the head to head battles with teams like Arsenal, Chelsea and Liverpool, he will also be invaluable in the latter stages of the CL. Before you all jump on my back I am aware we beat Liverpool home and away last year but the away game was well... A little lucky but we lost to Arsenal home and away and we drew home and away with Chelsea (the away game meaning nothing in the end). When we came up against a decent team in the semi's of the CL, AC Milan took us to pieces mainly due to the fact we had a make shift defense but also because there was no cover for them. Somebody like Hargreaves would have made life more difficult for Kaka.

Ekeke · 12th December 2007, 14:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by All 3 United

Hargreaves is essential if we want to win the head to head battles with teams like Arsenal, Chelsea and Liverpool, he will also be invaluable in the latter stages of the CL. Before you all jump on my back I am aware we beat Liverpool home and away last year but the away game was well... A little lucky but we lost to Arsenal home and away and we drew home and away with Chelsea (the away game meaning nothing in the end). When we came up against a decent team in the semi's of the CL, AC Milan took us to pieces mainly due to the fact we had a make shift defense but also because there was no cover for them. Somebody like Hargreaves would have made life more difficult for Kaka.

...As well as his team mates who would like to play some football.

buildabonfire · 12th December 2007, 14:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by R0N4LD0

i don't know how to use whom and who, and i don't want to know.

you should want to know...

'who' is subject, 'whom' object - a really simple one.

R0N4LD0 · 12th December 2007, 14:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Feedingseagulls

Well I suggest you read the reference you quoted a bit more carefully - look at the usage notes for all but the first entry, you'll see the usage of infer to mean imply is deemed erroneous.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/infer

The first usage note which appear to support your position in fact does not do so. I quote:

The highlighted sentence does not in any way necessarily mean that 'the next speaker' simply 'implied' that 'the proposal was made solely to embarrass the government' - instead, 'the next speaker' deduced from what had been said earlier (ie inferred) that the proposal was made with that intention. The latter is true to the actual text, the former interpretation relies on someone having made a mistake.

Here we have a classic example where someone's inability to understand the linguistic distinction leads to them reinterpreting a text to produce a false result. It's this type of mistake that makes correcting this error necessary.

mr. seagull, i get your point, i got it the first time, and i surely agree with you that many errors occur due to stupidity, and that the more specific you get with the meaning of a word the better you will receive communication, and conversely, the better you will communicate.

however, you are surely beating the point into the ground, and preaching to the choir.

Quote:

Originally Posted by buildabonfire

you should want to know...

'who' is subject, 'whom' object - a really simple one.

hey, that IS easy! how come no one ever explained it that way?

being a horrid, filthy, undereducated yank, we just use 'who' for both cases.

Julian Denny · 12th December 2007, 15:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by All 3 United

Hargreaves is essential if we want to win the head to head battles with teams like Arsenal, Chelsea and Liverpool, he will also be invaluable in the latter stages of the CL. Before you all jump on my back I am aware we beat Liverpool home and away last year but the away game was well... A little lucky but we lost to Arsenal home and away and we drew home and away with Chelsea (the away game meaning nothing in the end). When we came up against a decent team in the semi's of the CL, AC Milan took us to pieces mainly due to the fact we had a make shift defense but also because there was no cover for them. Somebody like Hargreaves would have made life more difficult for Kaka.

I agree and that's why we've got him. As matter of interest what line up, including OH, would you have in those games ?

red2deadboy · 12th December 2007, 15:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by R0N4LD0

mr. seagull, i get your point, i got it the first time, and i surely agree with you that many errors occur due to stupidity, and that the more specific you get with the meaning of a word the better you will receive communication, and conversely, the better you will communicate.

however, you are surely beating the point into the ground, and preaching to the choir.

hey, that IS easy! how come no one ever explained it that way?

being a horrid, filthy, undereducated yank, we just use 'who' for both cases.

It is the price of independents and liberty I guess, maybe we should have kept you all under the realm young yankies.

giggs-beckham · 12th December 2007, 15:28

Have to admit that anderson and carrick looked much better than anderson with hargreaves does. carrick and anderson can win the ball very well and carrick has that passing range.

Instant Karma · 12th December 2007, 15:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Julian Denny

I agree and that's why we've got him. As matter of interest what line up, including OH, would you have in those games ?

-----------Saha

--Tevez---Rooney--Ronaldo

------Scholes---Hargo

-Evra---Rio----Vida---Neville

-----------VDS

Bench: PIG, Carrick, Giggs, OShea, Nani, Anderson, Brown

Julian Denny · 12th December 2007, 15:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Instant Karma

-----------Saha

--Tevez---Rooney--Ronaldo

------Scholes---Hargo

-Evra---Rio----Vida---Neville

-----------VDS

Bench: PIG, Carrick, Giggs, OShea, Nani, Anderson, Brown

How is the midfield strengthened by bringing in OH and dropping Carrick ?

buildabonfire · 12th December 2007, 15:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Instant Karma

-----------Saha

--Tevez---Rooney--Ronaldo

------Scholes---Hargo

-Evra---Rio----Vida---Neville

-----------VDS

Bench: PIG, Carrick, Giggs, OShea, Nani, Anderson, Brown

You'd play Saha in goal? Krazy!

peterstorey · 12th December 2007, 15:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Julian Denny

How is the midfield strengthened by bringing in OH and dropping Carrick ?

It isn't.

Instant Karma · 12th December 2007, 16:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Julian Denny

How is the midfield strengthened by bringing in OH and dropping Carrick ?

Scholes, Evra, Neville will have more freedom to attack. We were generally poor against the top teams because the attacking players are always isolated. Ronaldo/Rooney/Giggs cant do much when they have 2 or 3 top class opposition players breathing down their necks and they get no support from our midfield.

Also -

http://redcafe.net/showpost.php?p=3968709&postcount=196

CnutOfAllCnuts · 12th December 2007, 16:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by peterstorey

It isn't.

Troll

peterstorey · 12th December 2007, 16:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by CnutOfAllCnuts

Troll

Would you care to explain how substituting Hargreaves for Carrick strengthens the midfield then? Or are you just going to post your usual shite?

CnutOfAllCnuts · 12th December 2007, 16:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by peterstorey

Would you care top explain how substituting Hargreaves for Carrick strengthens the midfield then? Or are you just going to post your usual shite?

You are a troll.

I don't know whether Hargreaves > Carrick for us. I suspect he might be, because he offers more mobility to our midfield, but we lose some passing ability.

Too early to say.

However, that's irrelevant to me calling you a troll.

peterstorey · 12th December 2007, 16:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by CnutOfAllCnuts

You are a troll.

I don't know whether Hargreaves > Carrick for us. I suspect he might be, because he offers more mobility to our midfield, but we lose some passing ability.

Too early to say.

However, that's irrelevant to me calling you a troll.

So it's swings and roundabouts and unlikely to strengthen one would suggest. And you're calling me a troll is irrelevant to this thread.

CnutOfAllCnuts · 12th December 2007, 16:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by peterstorey

So it's swings and roundabouts and unlikely to strengthen one would suggest. And you're calling me a troll is irrelevant to this thread.

Hargreaves has played about 5 minutes for us.

Did you make similar rash judgement on, say, Robert Pires?

Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber · 12th December 2007, 16:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by DA2

Much as I think some of his rows and rambles are ridiculous, I have a lot of time for the guy, his penchant for random abuse is highly admirable..... hes got a real flair for it. He doesnt use the normal insults but uses ones like "buffoon", "cretin" and other such classic old fashioned barbs.

All the rest of us could learn a lot from him with our over-reliance on words like "fuck", "spastic" "and "cunt" - fairly bland and predictable really when you think about it.

Chiefy...... a toast dear buffoons and cretins of the Caf!!

Interesting! I have been missed on here for some notorious and infamous reasons. This is pleasing. Slim Shady is a good teacher, that's for sure.

Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber · 12th December 2007, 16:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by lem8sh

Makalele is ten times the midfielder hargreaves is. Superior in everything apart from stamina perhaps,better passer, tackler and def better reader of the game. He's getting old now but hargreaves and makalele at his age is uncomparable.

You either clearly don't have a concept of football when you watch it, or are a poor liar or have a personal vendetta against Hargreaves. Or maybe a combination of all of them. Because anyone who actually watches football and understand what they are watching while viewing football games can see Makelele can't pass a ball to save his life. Can't tackle either. Isn't that pacey and has no notable footballing talent. He is just excellent at game reading and interception. Nothing else. The only two skills he possesses. Pretty much being shit at all else. He is the true mascot of a limited player. The poster child of limited ability in a top professional footballer. The antithesis of what a real defensive midfielder is about. The false midfielder, who is actually a third center back or an a old style sweeper placed in front of the defence in the catenaccio. But is wrongly tagged "Defensive midfielder" yet they contribute nothing to actual midfield or attacking play. For anyone to dare suggest Hargreaves is more limited than he or as limited is an offence worthy of a shooting. If shooting was allowed for such things. Seriously...

Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber · 12th December 2007, 16:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by John the Writer

You make a strong point. The fact you speak like a 1930s cad only serves to reinforce said strong point.

I'm glad you saw my point.

I apologize though that I put it across so rudely...I'm shit at diplomacy

Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber · 12th December 2007, 16:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sultan

Hey Ruben

How's it going?

He'll come back saying it's his brother...

No he wont. For you won't believe it no matter how many times either of them tells you. So believe what you want. The chief cares little. It makes no difference to him.

Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber · 12th December 2007, 16:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by giggs-beckham

Have to admit that anderson and carrick looked much better than anderson with hargreaves does.....

Vs a mere Derby. They got us no where vs a Bolton for example...

Rowem · 12th December 2007, 16:44

I am going to go out on a limb here and make a slightly bold statement, but one that I do believe has rather alot of truth in it:

The majority of people who are slagging off Hargreaves fit into one of the following categories:

- Under 15 years old.
- Live in a country where there is not a decent footballing league
- Never seen a live football match of any high standard
- Started following football within the last 2 years

peterstorey · 12th December 2007, 16:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rowem

I am going to go out on a limb here and make a slightly bold statement, but one that I do believe has rather alot of truth in it:

The majority of people who are slagging off Hargreaves fit into one of the following categories:

- Under 15 years old.
- Live in a country where there is not a decent footballing league
- Never seen a live football match of any high standard
- Started following football within the last 2 years

The opposite is probably true - most of the people who have queried his effectiveness are people who've seen a bit of Bayern Munich I'd suggest

peterstorey · 12th December 2007, 16:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by CnutOfAllCnuts

Hargreaves has played about 5 minutes for us.

Did you make similar rash judgement on, say, Robert Pires?

But Hargreaves has been around for years and his capabilities are pretty exposed. As for Pires he was clearly a special talent when he played for OM, the question was would he be able to produce that in the PL.

Rowem · 12th December 2007, 16:58

You're an Arsenal fan so you don't count for a start.

Plus, you're just plain wrong imo.

12th December 2007, 14:22	#242 (permalink)
All 3 United Reserve Team Player Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Manchester Posts: 1,538	Hargreaves is essential if we want to win the head to head battles with teams like Arsenal, Chelsea and Liverpool, he will also be invaluable in the latter stages of the CL. Before you all jump on my back I am aware we beat Liverpool home and away last year but the away game was well... A little lucky but we lost to Arsenal home and away and we drew home and away with Chelsea (the away game meaning nothing in the end). When we came up against a decent team in the semi's of the CL, AC Milan took us to pieces mainly due to the fact we had a make shift defense but also because there was no cover for them. Somebody like Hargreaves would have made life more difficult for Kaka.

12th December 2007, 15:28	#248 (permalink)
giggs-beckham Reserve Team Player Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 3,108	Have to admit that anderson and carrick looked much better than anderson with hargreaves does. carrick and anderson can win the ball very well and carrick has that passing range.

12th December 2007, 16:44	#264 (permalink)
Rowem Reserve Team Player Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 2,377	I am going to go out on a limb here and make a slightly bold statement, but one that I do believe has rather alot of truth in it: The majority of people who are slagging off Hargreaves fit into one of the following categories: - Under 15 years old. - Live in a country where there is not a decent footballing league - Never seen a live football match of any high standard - Started following football within the last 2 years

12th December 2007, 16:58	#267 (permalink)
Rowem Reserve Team Player Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 2,377	You're an Arsenal fan so you don't count for a start. Plus, you're just plain wrong imo.