Alex

Ferdinand's game was all about pace and power. And neither were immobile at by any stretch of the imagination at that time.

Correctomundo

Think it was Pav, Barton, Beresford, Peacock, Albert, Beardsley, Lee, Batty, Ginola, Sir Les and Shearer.

We don't sign players that are genuine hot property so it's a moot point.

That's just too zany that, Dave

Clive Rice tribute: http://www.espncricinfo.com/southafrica/content/story/903871.html

It was an example to illustrate the point. I wasn't basing it purely on that game. We came 2nd that year and used a variety of formations which included Shearer and Ferdinand (even 3-5-2 and 4-3-3) so that backs up my point too. No one is suggesting the game hasn't changed, it's a case of my challenging the notions that Shearer and Ferdinand were immobile, that they couldn't be effective together now and that you'd need to play with wingers for them to be effective when, as I've pointed out, that wasn't even the case back then.

Or cunts, as I like to call them.

Is a curry tache like a Dirty Sanchez?

But if he hadn't been suspended we'd have stayed up easier. But then Carver might be manager. Swings and roundabouts...

I agree to an extent but he didn't play as an out and out winger. In any case it refutes the claim you need to be set up that way for those strikers to be effective because we often weren't. Classic case in point the 5-0 v Man Utd.

Ferdinand had loads of pace, man. And Shearer had enough so that defenders couldn't get back at him if they were the wrong side of him. To suggest they were immobile when they played together for us is fucking ridiculous.

We didn't play with two wingers all the time when they played. We often played with one (Ginola) and either Asprilla or (more usually) Beardsley was preferred to Keith Gillespie. When Gillespie did come off the bench he often replaced Ginola.

Neither of those were lumbering target men though, not when they played together for us anyway.

Clive Rice has died. One of the best all-rounders ever. RIP.

Tbh, I'd attach more value to the opinions about players he hasn't seen

Aye. Love their psychedelic Amorphous Androgynous shit as well.

:lol: CT's 'views' summed up right there.

I don't think Carver had anything to do with getting the team 'over the line'. In the end I think it was done inspite of rather than because of him. And I think he made the comment about being the best coach because his ego is inversely proportional to his talent.

Same happened to me recently with Paddington.

Following on from MF's post

I think the bigger picture is that, if we rate him and want him, £8m is a snip for a (relatively, at least) proven PL goal scorer.