What time is kick off? I’ll put it on the site tonight if it’s not on Sky or somewhere.
7.15 on Setanta.
2 for Voronin in last night’s friendly.
As Sky Sports News said it went a long to showing Liverpool supporters he’s well capable of being a big player for them.
Similarly, Newcastle’s 3-1 win at Hartlepool confirms that Allardyce is already working his magic according to the man from Sky. It was Michael Owen’s first goal for Newcastle in 577 days he breathlessly exclaimed.
Voronin’s been man of the match in his first two games which is encouraging for a fourth choice striker.
Only saw a small bit of the game but Voronin looked lively enough. Very impressive workrate from the whole team as well in closing Bremen down and pressing them really hard when they had the ball. That was only a 10 minute spell though but it would have been encouraging if I was a Liverpool fan.
therock67 wrote:
Very impressive workrate from the whole team as well in closing Bremen down and pressing them really hard when they had the ball.
Sure isn’t that what Liverpool base their whole game around and got to 2 Champions League finals in 3 years doing.
It is indeed. And if they keep it up they’ll get to another final.
I don’t disagree with you on much when it comes to soccer Bandage but work ethic is hugely important. And as I’ve said before some managers shy away from that because they think their team is too good for that - e.g. Alan Smith not playing for United against Milan. He was superb against Roma, and I hate the guy but that’s not the point. When you stop other teams from playing you’ve a great chance of winning. It won’t always work out that you’ll be hugely successful (Greece’s feat won’t be often repeated) but if you can combine it with creative play when you have the ball you’ll be doing very well.
What Gattuso and Ambrosini did for Milan was something Carrick and Fletcher could never match. In the final Liverpool matched Milan in this regard, it was just Milan’s superior use of the ball that won them the game.
Liverpool beat Barcelona because they just tore into them from the start. Barca are smashing with the ball but that’s useless if a) you keep losing it because you’re being hounded and http://www.thefreekick.com/board/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/cool.gif you can’t get it back from Liverpool because you’re happy just to sit there and let them have it. If you can’t bring that commitment to pressure into your team then you simply won’t win enough matches.
On the subject of Voronin. I would consider him a third choice striker behind Kuyt and Torres. Great player for what I have seen from him. In a toss up between Crouch and Voronin it’s a no brainer as far as I’m concerned.
Absolute nonsense Flano.
I’d go:
- Torres
- Crouch
- Kuyt
- Voronin
With no Bellamy they could lack pace whenever Torres isn’t playing but maybe Babel can play as an outside forward then.
A lot has been said about work rate in this thread and on that basis alone Kuyt deserves his place, his work rate is incredible in games, he continuously chases down opposition players. I don’t rate Crouch at all, he still can’t head the ball.
Agree with Rock there. Babel can apparently play as a striker so presumably he’s the contingency plan if Torres was out.
I will never, ever agree with you on the Alan Smith point. Work rate is important of course but you’re basing your argument about him on one game where the whole Roma team didn’t want to know and where several other ManU players were rampant (Carrick got 2 goals even). Smith runs around manically like’s he got a wasp stuck up his ass in the same manner in every game he plays - it wasn’t something special we witnessed that night. It will never make him a football player. Because he’s crap.
He was in form - he was excellent against Roma and the reason they didn’t want to know is because Smith upset them early on. Carrick and others capitalised on that but it was Smith that made the difference early doors.
I don’t think Smith is a great footballer and I don’t think he’s good enough for the top teams. I do think he’s better than the likes of Saha though and he did set an example against Roma that his team-mates didn’t follow against Milan. And I am basing my argument on one game because I’m only talking about one game. I’m not saying he should always play for United - I’m simply saying that without him they lacked intensity as I thought they would which is why I’d have played him in that particular match.
therock67 wrote:
He was in form - he was excellent against Roma and the reason they didn’t want to know is because Smith upset them early on. Carrick and others capitalised on that but it was Smith that made the difference early doors.
I don’t think Smith is a great footballer and I don’t think he’s good enough for the top teams. I do think he’s better than the likes of Saha though and he did set an example against Roma that his team-mates didn’t follow against Milan. And I am basing my argument on one game because I’m only talking about one game. I’m not saying he should always play for United - I’m simply saying that without him they lacked intensity as I thought they would which is why I’d have played him in that particular match.
I don’t think Smith solely set the tone for the display. Roma were simply rubbish from the first whistle. Ronaldo would have destroyed them, as he did, no matter what Smith was at. Similarly Giggs destroyed them as did Carrick and Fletcher. Roma’s immediate capitulation wasn’t merely something Smith facilated and then based on that his whole team followed. Roma came and gave up immediately and all the United players responded.
Why base your team selection for Milan based on one Smith performance? Surely it’d be wiser to take a wider view of things and take into account his other games where he’s more often than not been awful. I know a few accountants and they all say it’s very dangerous to take a sample size of 1, which is what you’re doing in this instance. Smith’s never been a key player for them and I don’t think he ever will be.