tinofbeans

I think Butt would be fine as long as he just has to sit in front of the back four, i.e. do what Smith is doing. After all, he looked a considerably better midfielder than Smith in the Premier League. fading mobility counts against him. his passing selection also concerns me. not that smith is quick btw. just a better user of the ball perhaps. one and 2 touch seems to work for him if he has runners working for him. I don't think he's any less mobile than Smith or any worse at using the ball. Better in fact. Smith's only looked like a midfielder who could do a job since we've gone down. he has been injured for a while, but i get your point. maybe the point is about balance then, i.e. butt works better deeper and doesn't get forward perhaps as well. moot point really as smith has as you say found his level in the championship. neither are premier league players any more in my opinion...

i just did not like the cutaway sequence when fatty and labia were all self congratulating after scoring against a reading side thats been shorn of its best players... makes my blood boil....

stands to reason that if we get good money for him, we'd rather urgently need to re-invest in a like for like replacement... the only problem with a campbell collocini rearguard is it has no pace at all.... and both are prone to errors. not that taylor wasn't btw...

I think Butt would be fine as long as he just has to sit in front of the back four, i.e. do what Smith is doing. After all, he looked a considerably better midfielder than Smith in the Premier League. fading mobility counts against him. his passing selection also concerns me. not that smith is quick btw. just a better user of the ball perhaps. one and 2 touch seems to work for him if he has runners working for him.

a fading force in the premiership, will be a massive boost to aid promotion, and for younger players to learn from. .

he's totally different. goes missing from certain matches, scores around 15 to 20 goals a season, creates nearly as many... oh wait.... ! no, i see your point Andrew. not really a flair player. just very effective.

http://www.acrossair.com/apps_acrossairbrowser.htm clever stuff

harper doesn't tend to command his defenders as well as most. he's also not as good as he used to be. i beleive that krul is (in terms of potential) a better short or medium term bet, but harper has a lot of experience. harper will probably be in until he gets injured, and then hopefully krul or forster can take their chance. thats just the way it is.... also no premiership side is going to take krul on as a first team goalie. he'd be put into the squad and used in cup games...

Enrique is a better defender imo, not that I see him staying long either. point taken. his use of the ball is often not quite good enough (for me at least). if he goes we are truly knackered...

you could tell who cared on saturday. smith, krul, carroll, maybe taylor. thats about it. i reckon shola should be outed and nile ranger given a couple of starts.

taylors good enough for the championship, but he's not as good as lescott. everton would suffer. as for us, he's probably our best defender in the current squad. that really doesn't say much though....

i'd definitely maim several people.

RIP

nearly there fish... this is what i see... 1 Chelsea 2 Manchester United 3 Liverpool 4 Arsenal 5 Manchester City 6 Aston Villa 7 Everton 8 Tottenham 9 Fulham 10 West Ham 11 Bolton 12 Sunderland 13 Wigan 14 Blackburn 15 Stoke 16 Burnley 17 Birmingham 18 Hull 19 Portsmouth 20 Wolves

agreed, bit rough round the edges, but a wonderfully instinctive keeper. better than harper in my opinion....

And watch Malbranque flourish with a decent DM next to him. It's not rocket science. exactly....

i'm thinking quite a few people have missed the point here. a decent defensive midfielder is critical in the top flight and one of the reasons we got relegated last year is because our one or 2 players that played there were consistently not good enough.... cana and cattermole are both examples of the modern defensive midfielder come good , because without them their sides would not have done as well as they had (look at boro with and without for example, marseille went v close to the championship in france with cana playing). both are on inflated fees and both are card happy, but i get the feeling bruce will only play one or t'other. both can get it down and pass, something our own nicky butt has never really been able to do. in short he's addressed the most glaringly obvious problem in his side.

thing with barnes and waddle is until england gave them security at the back with a sweeper they could never fully express their talents as they were instructed to mark their opposing full back. if either was given freedom, they'd have run riot.....

because of his energy. used as a wing back in a very lopsided formation.

my ipod touch blackscreened yesterday.... am replacing it... and getting the skysports thing....

doesn't work in a side that doesn't have good movement going forwards. also cannot create anything from his poor range of passing. if we get back what we paid for him i reckon we'd do ok... as long as its re-invested...

steven taylor and enrique were good defensively. especially when brunt changed flanks... colocinni was absolutely shit. r taylor is not good enough at championship level as i feared....

i think barton will have a jekyll and hyde game. prob score and get a red card...

agreed. this sale needs to be sorted asap. i fear for the worst otherwise.

http://www.techradar.com/news/portable-dev...e-iphone-623692 cheapish alternative