Why is it that everyone who defends Hargreaves has to act such an obnoxious insufferable twat about it?
I mean, fecking hell. Are you all secretly the same person?
I mean, fecking hell. Are you all secretly the same person?
Hargreaves vs. Carrick, Feadingseagulls vs. Noodle, Chief (Bayern Fan!) vs. Logic
- Thread starter anything about now
- Start date
- Status
Eggzackerly.
Meanwhile Hargreaves remains the whipping boy de jour, allowing loads of caftards to take the piss out of him with pithy asides, whilst simultaneously winding the Chief up into a frothing, multi-quote frenzy.
But he'll come good. The signs are already there.
On that note, I'm bailing from this spackerfest. And for good this time.
I hope...
Because we have to deal with Ihni binni dimi diniwiny anitaime like you that are obviously to stupid to know that if I had edited a post it would say so, so qualifies as an utter Ihni binni dimi diniwiny anitaime by default.
Stating someone has changed a post, which they clearly had not, to reinforce their arguement puts you in the "obnoxious insufferable twat" camp, not I, you Ihni binni dimi diniwiny anitaime.
That wouldn't be Noods blatantly misrepresenting what someone else said AGAIN would it?
It must have been a joke - Plech will tell you!
Then Noods and Plech will accuse you of lying etc. etc.
To be fair, blatantly average players have won trophies for their respective teams. Achievememt in team sports is not always a good indicator for individual pedigree.
feck sake. I obviously wasn't being entirely serious when I said that.
This is exactly what I mean. I dissagree with people on here all the time, sometimes even argue with them, but it rarely, if ever comes down to anything more than differing opinion.
You lot though, it's like you all think rating Hargreaves puts you on some cloud of superiority, allowing you to float about judging everyone, and throwing stupid accusations about. None of you are capable of either having a sense of humour, or engaging in sensible debate. You're all a bunch of genuine bellends.
Also, great rant this, except that it's not actually possible to tell if someone has edited a post. "An utter Ihni binni dimi diniwiny anitaime by default"
To true. So how about winning man of the tournament (English) during the world cup.
Have you ever heard of midfield players being average and wininng back to back league titles and a ECL, whilst picking up MOM awards?
I'm not saying the mans Zidane but a lot of what I read in this thread is utter bollox. He has a proven pedigree, I stand by that.
FFS will you stop stalking me and acting like a Ihni binni dimi diniwiny anitaime. You were wrong, admit it and move on. And don't give me the "i wasn't being serious" line, its the sign of the mother of all mongness.
Veron had a proven pedigree, so did Kleberson, as did Barthez (although I still think he was good for us, many don't)....
This is a stupid argument in fairness.
We had an absolutely woeful world cup, and despite this, Rio was the standout player, probably followed by Ashley Cole. Hargreaves played two games in which he played reasonably well, nothing more.
I'm not trying to take sides, but Carrick is simply a much better player and that's not really me trying to attack Hargreaves because i think he's had a few fantastic games amongst some mediocre and poor ones. It'd be better to judge him at the end of next year and not this one because at the moment, Carrick walks it.
He won MOTM during back to back league titles, eh?
feck me, £18 million was a bargain!
feck me, £18 million was a bargain!
I agree with Veron, but the difference is in the style of play, the German league is similar to ours. The others are not. Some players cannot adapt to the pace of our game, Hargreaves should not have that prolem. I have no idea why Kleberson failed, but his game went rapidly down hill for some reason.
Nicky Butt, for one
Protecting the back four is NOT the job of a DEFENSIVE midfielder?
Interesting.
I totally agree with your second paragraph, he needs time before we judge him. IMO he will turn out to be an excellent addition to the squad, but thats just my opinion. I take issue that he's being written off after a handful of games as being shite when he is clearly not, and has proved it.
Jesper Blomqvist
I know.
It's total madness.
Apparently, according to the Chief, their job isn't to help stop conceding goals, neither is it to help score goals. Which kind of begs the question, what is their job ?
Nicky Butt was not a first choice midfield player, Hargreaves was. Slight difference but a good example of an average player picking up accolades as someone stated earlier.
To quote NoodsI know.
It's total madness.
Apparently, according to the Chief, their job isn't to help stop conceding goals, neither is it to help score goals. Which kind of begs the question, what is their job ?
'Pointless'
I think the main peeve is that we all expected Hargreaves to just come in and do his job effectively without struggling to adapt to the English pace. He was bought for a large fee and arrived with a large pedigree. However, bar the City (A) & Liverpool match he hasn't really played well - no matter how much some of you like to pretend he has. You could even say he's been detrimental to the team in some games, I'd agree.
He's not going to contribute anything going forward as he passes it sideways or backwards. I don't buy this shit that he gives it to our more creative players - why not just play a more creative player who is capable of defending, such as Fletcher, Carrick or Anderson?
I think we'll get a much better measure of his value to the team in the latter stages of the Champions League, providing he plays.
Anyway I'm drunk and can't be fecked to write anymore so I'll end it with a quote from Plech; "he's Owen fecking Hargreaves"
He's not going to contribute anything going forward as he passes it sideways or backwards. I don't buy this shit that he gives it to our more creative players - why not just play a more creative player who is capable of defending, such as Fletcher, Carrick or Anderson?
I think we'll get a much better measure of his value to the team in the latter stages of the Champions League, providing he plays.
Anyway I'm drunk and can't be fecked to write anymore so I'll end it with a quote from Plech; "he's Owen fecking Hargreaves"
Not pointless to the teams utilised this type of player. They are all winners. Type in "defensive midfielder" into google and you'll find the Wiki link and you will find this:
Accomplished defensive midfielders playing today include Claude Makelele, Gennaro Gattuso, Javier Mascherano and Owen Hargreaves.
Not bad players I would argue and within winning teams, hardly pointless.
Hargreaves is a similar player to Mascherano. They do the same thing. In my opinion having an out and out defensive midfielder is a valuable asset to the squad.
18 million? hmmmm we'll see. IF we get Barca in the semis he'll play and we'll see. He would be worth 18 million if he can do a job away in the Nou Camp.
18 million? hmmmm we'll see. IF we get Barca in the semis he'll play and we'll see. He would be worth 18 million if he can do a job away in the Nou Camp.
It also says this
But according to the Chief, his job isn't to help the back 4 and try and prevent us from conceding a goal, so Wiki must be wrong.
Last time I looked Im not the chief, I cannot legislate what he says. I don't agree with him, hows that?It also says this
But according to the Chief, his job isn't to help the back 4 and try and prevent us from conceding a goal, so Wiki must be wrong.
We won the treble without a DM. Last year we won the Premiership, cheated out of the FA Cup, and reached the Champions league Semi's without a DM.
Watching the likes of Hargreaves, Makelele, and Mascherano bores the life out of me.
That is good.
But I'm still at a loss as to how, in the Chiefs eyes, Hargreaves isn't their to help protect the back 4 and to try and prevent us from conceding a goal.
Nah, I said you were lying, dishonest, hypocritical by your own (notably stupid) logic - which is to conflate being wrong with lying, dishonesty, hypocrisy etc.
Entertainment above winning is an interseting view point. Can't say I agree or disagree, UTD embodies beautiful football but there has to be a goal rather than a spectacle. We need to adopt both, thats why he is at UTD.
He is everything I never wanted to see at United. I don't particularly care if he's the best at what he does in the World.
His inclusion is not something I look forward to watching at OT. I was bought up on 4-4-2 or 4-4-1-1. With 2 wingers hugging the touchline.
Rest assured, he's not.
Hehehe... can't be arsed to read through the thread, but can't we all be friends? I mean, we're top of the league and have a good shot at winning the Champions League.
We have a young talented team with great potential and some of the best players in the game.
Lighten up people, you make it sound like we're struggling against relegation and we should find players to blame.
We have a young talented team with great potential and some of the best players in the game.
Lighten up people, you make it sound like we're struggling against relegation and we should find players to blame.
Sometimes we have to move with the times, I didn'nt like it when BT scrapped the old telephone boxes at the time but, they did. Luckily for me the phones still work. We need to have different game plans for different games if this means deploying a defensive midfielder I'm all for it if we win. Its when we play uninteresting football and lose that I take umbridge. Only time will tell it would seem. Imagine if we win the league and the ECL this year by playing these tactics, will we all be on this site bemoaning the demise of 4-4-2, I think not.
Regardless of the stats, against Pompey, Hargreaves was shit. This is just a fact. I was there and saw it with my own eyes. Not to say that some of the others weren't also shit. But OH was shit personified. He looked injured to me.
Actually you arsehole - you're the one who should be looking at 'what you're doing'!
Every point I've made is backed up with evidence - you just consistently lie.
As a mod/admin you're a complete disgrace.
You have entirely failed to produce a shred of evidence for your claims about myself - you simply retreat to your position of privilege.
As an example of intellectual dishonesty you stand supreme.
I've got to be honest, I only managed to see the second half (and that was from inside the Madejski Stadium) and highlights of that match, so am in no position to judge.
But why do you say he played so badly ?
What's wrong with a player that's good defensively? It's not like he's got nothing to contribute with going forward.
It seems reasonable to me that if we play a line-up with Ronaldo, Nani, Rooney and Tevez someone has to take defensive responsibilities in order to compensate for two wingers who's clearly (well at least I think so) not that good at helping out defensively.
Oh, and I think Anderson-Hargreaves has been our best midfield partnership this season, but a Carrick in form might certainly change that.
Carrick is certainly better at passing and going forward.
Then again, I've been extremely impressed with the way Hargreaves have stopped attacking players, especially quick ones.
Meh... we all (though some of us deny it) thought Evra and Vidic seemed dodgy players at first, but they both proved us wrong.
Give the guy some time, after all Mr. Sultan, patience is a virtue.
- Status