Tuesday, 9 November 2010
Stoke v Birmingham
Tottenham v Sunderland

Wednesday, 10 November 2010
Aston Villa v Blackpool
Chelsea v Fulham
Newcastle v Blackburn
West Ham v West Brom
Wigan v Liverpool
Everton v Bolton
Man City v Man Utd
Wolverhampton v Arsenal

Just when you thought the drama was over for a while, there is MORE football (watch it, it's moving!!)

I can't see why everyone shouldn't play on wednesday and have a full night of fixtures but there you go.

Tottenham were HUMILIATED at "that team you wish would just fuck off" with Gallas looking a total and utter buffoon. After the game Jamie Redknapp criticised Harry Redknapp for fielding a weakened side after their Champions League encounter with Inter 4 days before and not taking the League seriously (DID HE FUCK.) But 'Arry can't afford to slip up in this one, even Liverpoulsen are on the same points as the mighty BaleFC FFS

Chelsea's wheels might be coming off but of course they then get given a home tie vs an average team that will finish mid-table. In all seriousness though it is worrying that whenever Drogba isn't playing, Chelsea look one-dimensional and pretty lacklustre. For all their riches their bench is pretty shit. ooooh they need to get back into the game so they bring on Daniel Sturridge...so what?

Newcastle will be hoping to get back into the title race at home, their former messiah Sam Allardyce could prevent that though. If Newcastle fail to win then there will be question marks over Chris Hughton's future. Rescuing Newcastle from a relegated mess, beating Sunderland 5-1 and Villa 6-0 and then winning at the Emirates just isn't good enough at a truly top club like Newcastle.

Liverpool have turned a corner are driving down the facking freeway! So expect us to lose at Wigan.

And then of course, the big one, the two giants of Manchester come face to face. City will field a team consisting of Yaya Toure, Tevez, Silva, Johnson, Milner. United will field a team consisting of Fletcher, Obertan, Park and Carrick yet United will somehow win. It's a shame Wayne Rooney will be missing for this one but he's currently starring in American Boot Camp and filming Wayne Rooney's Chav Striker with some black man.

1) Chelsea were missing more than just Drogba
2) Sturridge is, along with Carrol, the future of England's strikeforce
3) Man Utd will play a stronger side vs. City than they did against Wolves
4) Fletcher is better than any of Liverpool's CMs
5) Despite taking it far more seriously than it warrants, I'm glad you have done a proper preview

Boneyskank wrote:2) Sturridge is, along with Carrol, the future of England's strikeforce

Really? He's reminding me of Carlton Cole at the same age in that it's kind of assumed he'll come good, but he doesn't actually do the important things like play well or score goals. Like Cole, I suspect he'll have to go to a smaller club and play regularly for a while before he can think about England..(though the dearth of options puts him higher up the pecking order than he really should be considering how little he plays!)

I'm pretty sure Wayne Rooney is the future of England's strikeforce.

What are Sturridge's strengths?

Sturridge is average at best. If he is the future of England then there will be many more years of misery and failure.

Hlebagone wrote:What are Sturridge's strengths?

Tall, quick, reasonably strong, good touch/dribbling ability, decent finisher. If he was a bit cheaper and a bit blacker, Arsene would be all over him like a pigeon on a chip.

Luis wrote:Sturridge is average at best. If he is the future of England then there will be many more years of misery and failure.

1) I said he was the future of England's strikeforce along with another player, not the future of England per se.

2) There will be many more years of misery and failure regardless, because of the way we train players, the way we hype players, and the way we destroy players.

3) Name for me five better English strikers under the age of 23. On an absolute scale he may not be much better than average, but relative to the competition (for places as an England striker over the next 5-10 years) he's pretty fucking good.

Boneyskank wrote:

Luis wrote:Sturridge is average at best. If he is the future of England then there will be many more years of misery and failure.

1) I said he was the future of England's strikeforce along with another player, not the future of England per se.

2) There will be many more years of misery and failure regardless, because of the way we train players, the way we hype players, and the way we destroy players.

3) Name for me five better English strikers under the age of 23. On an absolute scale he may not be much better than average, but relative to the competition (for places as an England striker over the next 5-10 years) he's pretty fucking good.

England will often play with one striker so for me, midfield talent will be far more important over the next 5 years. And we have plenty of talent in Wilshere, Rodwell, Shelvey, Albrighton to name a few.

I'd say Delfounso and Caroll are far more exciting prospects but other than them you're right, there aren't many young English strikers to get excited about. Rooney still has a long career ahead of him and Defoe and Bent still have enough to be considered in 4 years time for the World Cup.

Defoe has never done anything worthy of mention in an England shirt, and he's now 28.

Sturridge already has considerably better touch and general technique, and link-up play, than Bent. As a lone striker, Bent would be utterly shit at international level.

I don't particularly rate Wilshere, at least not yet. Shelvey's promising but nowhere near ready. Rodwell and Tubblestone should have been in the team a year ago, or at least in the squad. Albrighton looks like an escaped mental patient, but he is pretty good. I wouldn't consider that 'plenty of talent'.

Basically, we're fucked, and for me Sturridge is one of the better prospects in a pretty lean bunch, so I stand by my comment above.

To rate Rodwell above Wilshere seems bizarre to me but I agree we don't have talent in abudance but these youngsters I've mentioned are really exciting options and if all of them can step up then we should manage ok, at least better than this current crop. Wilshere will become England's best midfielder since Gerrard and Lampard and will eclipse them IMO. He's totally different to the usual English midfielder, he has the touch of a Spaniard and his reading of the game is already top draw.

Boneyskank wrote:

Hlebagone wrote:What are Sturridge's strengths?

Tall, quick, reasonably strong, good touch/dribbling ability, decent finisher. If he was a bit cheaper and a bit blacker, Arsene would be all over him like a pigeon on a chip.

Seems to be a lot of 6 out of 10 attributes. He is young though, so if he can play regularly, i wont write him off. Carrol on the otherhand.

Luis wrote:Wilshere will become England's best midfielder since Gerrard and Lampard and will eclipse them IMO.

Given that neither of those players are midfielders, and both were better at the same age than Wilshere, I've no idea where you are getting this from.

He's totally different to the usual English midfielder, he has the touch of a Spaniard and his reading of the game is already top draw.

I think you're getting carried away. Rodwell is far more proven, despite playing for a considerably worse side.

Hlebagone wrote:

Boneyskank wrote:

Hlebagone wrote:What are Sturridge's strengths?

Tall, quick, reasonably strong, good touch/dribbling ability, decent finisher. If he was a bit cheaper and a bit blacker, Arsene would be all over him like a pigeon on a chip.

Seems to be a lot of 6 out of 10 attributes.

Same with Wilshere.

He is young though, so if he can play regularly, i wont write him off. Carrol on the otherhand.

Carrol is the better prospect at this stage, no argument there.

Boneyskank wrote:Sturridge is, along with Carrol, the future of England's strikeforce

would you care to backpeddle a little?

Boneyskank wrote:
for me Sturridge is one of the better prospects in a pretty lean bunch

Thanks

Luis wrote:To rate Rodwell above Wilshere seems bizarre to me but I agree we don't have talent in abudance but these youngsters I've mentioned are really exciting options and if all of them can step up then we should manage ok, at least better than this current crop. Wilshere will become England's best midfielder since Gerrard and Lampard and will eclipse them IMO. He's totally different to the usual English midfielder, he has the touch of a Spaniard and his reading of the game is already top draw.

What a surprise, Luis rating Arsenal player over Everton's... I really rate Wilshere and could see him being eventually a better player, but calling it "bizarre", when somebody prefers Rodwell

I don't know who will be better long term, but I can say Wilshere can be more important, because of his non-english style. Rodwell at the moment looks Gerrard-esque (in style at least), which I am not sure if I am happy about it; would prefer him improving in central midfield, instead his best games recently (before an injury) were when playing as AM. And with Cahill doing well this season, he can actually struggled to get minutes at that position as well...

Boneyskank wrote:

Luis wrote:Wilshere will become England's best midfielder since Gerrard and Lampard and will eclipse them IMO.

Given that neither of those players are midfielders, and both were better at the same age than Wilshere, I've no idea where you are getting this from.

He's totally different to the usual English midfielder, he has the touch of a Spaniard and his reading of the game is already top draw.

I think you're getting carried away. Rodwell is far more proven, despite playing for a considerably worse side.

Gerrard didn't play most of his career in midfield? Don't be silly Saints. Wilshere seems to be as good as they were back then to me. His touch is better and his skill is better. Gerrard was a better tackler and had a better physique perhaps.

Rodwell more proven? How so? He's had a few good games for Everton where he bursts forward and scores some good goals. Can't see him having more to his game than Wilshere.

stinger wrote:

Luis wrote:To rate Rodwell above Wilshere seems bizarre to me but I agree we don't have talent in abudance but these youngsters I've mentioned are really exciting options and if all of them can step up then we should manage ok, at least better than this current crop. Wilshere will become England's best midfielder since Gerrard and Lampard and will eclipse them IMO. He's totally different to the usual English midfielder, he has the touch of a Spaniard and his reading of the game is already top draw.

What a surprise, Luis rating Arsenal player over Everton's... I really rate Wilshere and could see him being eventually a better player, but calling it "bizarre", when somebody prefers Rodwell

I don't know who will be better long term, but I can say Wilshere can be more important, because of his non-english style. Rodwell at the moment looks Gerrard-esque (in style at least), which I am not sure if I am happy about it; would prefer him improving in central midfield, instead his best games recently (before an injury) were when playing as AM. And with Cahill doing well this season, he can actually struggled to get minutes at that position as well...

I can't remember the last time I slated Everton on here so I don't know what you're implying. I find it bizarre because Wilshere clearly has so much more to his game and is trusted to start far more than Rodwell is trusted by Moyes.

Your second paragraph is why I think Wilshere will be better than Gerrard. Because he's unique, Rodwell is in the same mould which isn't a bad thing but we need more diversity in the England team.

Luis wrote:

stinger wrote:

Luis wrote:To rate Rodwell above Wilshere seems bizarre to me but I agree we don't have talent in abudance but these youngsters I've mentioned are really exciting options and if all of them can step up then we should manage ok, at least better than this current crop. Wilshere will become England's best midfielder since Gerrard and Lampard and will eclipse them IMO. He's totally different to the usual English midfielder, he has the touch of a Spaniard and his reading of the game is already top draw.

What a surprise, Luis rating Arsenal player over Everton's... I really rate Wilshere and could see him being eventually a better player, but calling it "bizarre", when somebody prefers Rodwell

I don't know who will be better long term, but I can say Wilshere can be more important, because of his non-english style. Rodwell at the moment looks Gerrard-esque (in style at least), which I am not sure if I am happy about it; would prefer him improving in central midfield, instead his best games recently (before an injury) were when playing as AM. And with Cahill doing well this season, he can actually struggled to get minutes at that position as well...

I can't remember the last time I slated Everton on here so I don't know what you're implying. I find it bizarre because Wilshere clearly has so much more to his game and is trusted to start far more than Rodwell is trusted by Moyes.

Your second paragraph is why I think Wilshere will be better than Gerrard. Because he's unique, Rodwell is in the same mould which isn't a bad thing but we need more diversity in the England team.

Yeah, it was probably too long for you. And no, it isn't clearly for me and probably I'm not the only one thinking that. I would also say that IMO getting ahead of Fellaini, Heitinga, Arteta, Cahill and Osman is more difficult than of Fabregas, Nasri (who can play out wide), Rosicky (can play out wide as well) Song, Diaby and Denilson, especially with all the injures Arsenal usually have to deal with.

I usually consider myself agreeing with majority of Saint's post about Arsenal players being overrated, but Wilshere is actually someone I really rate. But calling him much better prospect than Rodwell is no-no in my book, more important for future's England success - maybe, but not better as a player, especially not with a huge gap you are suggesting (using "bizarre").

Btw, your theory of Moyes not trusting Rodwell is truly bizarre, if he wouldn't rate him, he wouldn't suggest to Kenwright of payng him huge money for Everton's standards (probably around 40-50l), instead he would sell him, cashing easily 15-20m pounds.

Lots of derbies in the midweeks:

As well as the Manchester Derby we have:

The West London Derby (Chelsea vs Fulham)
The West Derby (Ham vs Brom)
The Two North West Not-Really-Derbies-Despite-Being-Quite-Close Derbies (Everton vs Bolton, Wigan vs Liverpool)
The Unevolved Midlanders Derby (Stoke vs Brum)
The 'Good in the 90s' Derby (Newcastle vs Blackburn)
The 'Good in the 1890s' Derby (Villa vs Blackpool*)
The 'Always in the Shadow of Their Neighbours' Derby (Spurs vs Sunderland)

and

Wolves vs Arsenal for which I've got nothing.


*yeah, I know, I was stretching for a gag and had to lie

Boneyskank wrote:

Luis wrote:Wilshere will become England's best midfielder since Gerrard and Lampard and will eclipse them IMO.

Given that neither of those players are midfielders, and both were better at the same age than Wilshere, I've no idea where you are getting this from.

You're going to need to backtrack here too, Jack Wilshere is 18 and on the fringes of the England and Arsenal team. I don't think Lampard was even close to the West Ham team at such an age, and he was in his mid twenties before his career properly took off.

I would also say that IMO getting ahead of Fellaini, Heitinga, Arteta, Cahill and Osman is more difficult than of Fabregas, Nasri (who can play out wide), Rosicky (can play out wide as well) Song, Diaby and Denilson, especially with all the injures Arsenal usually have to deal with.

Is getting ahead of Osman and Heitinga really that difficult? If Rodwell is going to be the real deal then I'd expect him to start over these 2. I rate Heitinga but only as a defender.

I usually consider myself agreeing with majority of Saint's post about Arsenal players being overrated, but Wilshere is actually someone I really rate. But calling him much better prospect than Rodwell is no-no in my book, more important for future's England success - maybe, but not better as a player, especially not with a huge gap you are suggesting (using "bizarre").

It's wrong for you to agree because Saints has had an anti-Arsenal agenda on this board since I can remember. Him saying that he doesn't quite rate Wilshere but advocates the inclusion of Rodwell in the England team "a year ago" just seems really strange to me and is founded on very little but bias.

Btw, your theory of Moyes not trusting Rodwell is truly bizarre, if he wouldn't rate him, he wouldn't suggest to Kenwright of payng him huge money for Everton's standards (probably around 40-50l), instead he would sell him, cashing easily 15-20m pounds.

Why doesn't he start then? There's been times this season where Moyes has played Heitinga in midfield over him and Everton have failed to win the game.

Glenns Gone Wild wrote:

Boneyskank wrote:Sturridge is, along with Carrol, the future of England's strikeforce

would you care to backpeddle a little?

Boneyskank wrote:
for me Sturridge is one of the better prospects in a pretty lean bunch

Thanks

You're a moron.

debaser wrote:Lots of derbies in the midweeks:

As well as the Manchester Derby we have:

The West London Derby (Chelsea vs Fulham)
The West Derby (Ham vs Brom)
The Two North West Not-Really-Derbies-Despite-Being-Quite-Close Derbies (Everton vs Bolton, Wigan vs Liverpool)
The Unevolved Midlanders Derby (Stoke vs Brum)
The 'Good in the 90s' Derby (Newcastle vs Blackburn)
The 'Good in the 1890s' Derby (Villa vs Blackpool*)
The 'Always in the Shadow of Their Neighbours' Derby (Spurs vs Sunderland)

and

Wolves vs Arsenal for which I've got nothing.


*yeah, I know, I was stretching for a gag and had to lie

Err, I'm going to have to pull you up there Debbie.

ALWAYS?

Really?

Perhaps if you were born in the 90's or if football didn't exist prior to the formation of the Premier League.

For the rest of us - we weren't living in the shadows of our "neighbours" (if you can really call them that given they're actually from South East London) until at least the late 80's.

Perspifics

Nice try though

Mmmm. Fish.

Luis wrote:Gerrard didn't play most of his career in midfield?

For England, he's been pretty shit as a midfielder. His best seasons have always come playing off a striker, in front of a midfield.

Don't be silly Saints.

It is telling that so far your only counterarguments to my assessment have been to label it 'bizarre', to call me 'silly' and to claim my view is based on 'bias'.

Wilshere seems to be as good as they were back then to me.

Somehow I think your view of players when you were, what, 10 years old(?) leave something to be desired. Particularly given the rate at which you change your mind about almost everything.

His touch is better and his skill is better. Gerrard was a better tackler and had a better physique perhaps.

Define 'his skill'.

Rodwell more proven? How so? He's had a few good games for Everton where he bursts forward and scores some good goals. Can't see him having more to his game than Wilshere.

Rodwell has played well in three distinct positions, Wilshere only in one. Rodwell has also been playing in the EPL for longer, indeed, he has over twice the number of appearances. More games+more positions = more proven.

Luis wrote:Why doesn't he start then? There's been times this season where Moyes has played Heitinga in midfield over him and Everton have failed to win the game.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/e/everton/8987157.stm

Might be the reason...

debaser wrote:Mmmm. Fish.

You got me

Luis wrote:

Why doesn't he start then? There's been times this season where Moyes has played Heitinga in midfield over him and Everton have failed to win the game.

Because for some reason Rodwell at the moment quite franly sucks as defensive or centre midfielder (forget about his injury), he's only useful (and he's really useful) as AM, but he has Cahill there, who's not only undroppable for Moyes even when playing poorly, but also playing extremely well at the moment.

But on EPL level he is definitely more proven that Wilshere. When Wilshere will play important role in scoring goals against MU or City (even playing as a sub) than we can talk about it.

Boneyskank wrote:

Glenns Gone Wild wrote:

Boneyskank wrote:Sturridge is, along with Carrol, the future of England's strikeforce

would you care to backpeddle a little?

Boneyskank wrote:
for me Sturridge is one of the better prospects in a pretty lean bunch

Thanks

You're a moron.

Boneyskank wrote:

It is telling that so far your only counterarguments to my assessment have been to label it 'bizarre', to call me 'silly'

If you don't like being mocked for making stupid, ill conceived and unjustifiable sweeping statements - then stop making them!

Sturridge is the future of England

Lampard at 18 was better than Wilshire at 18