I challenge you, please find them and quote them.I agree - Sometimes BGs views are a wee bit ''doo-lally'' but he has some interesting and clever ones as well
I challenge you, please find them and quote them.I agree - Sometimes BGs views are a wee bit ''doo-lally'' but he has some interesting and clever ones as well
Can we a have a free Stat Brother day also ? That's not asking to much is it ?
I would suggest that comparatively Ken Whitfield, Norman Gall, John Napier Graham Cross and Steve Foster were as effective for us as Lewis Dunk.
Mark Lawrenson!?
By a long shot.
ML was one of the finest defenders in the world and it was a great shame he opted to play for Ireland because England would have been so much better with him in the side. Sadly there isn’t much footage of him both defending and foraging Bambi like across the half way line with the ball at his feet so that the current crop of fans could see him in the stripes, and understand why he was so much betee than Dunk.
Dunk is good, Lawrenson was exceptional.
I would suggest that comparatively Ken Whitfield, Norman Gall, John Napier Graham Cross and Steve Foster were as effective for us as Lewis Dunk.
It's just so difficult to compare across the generations. Football was a different sport even in the times of Mark Lawrenson as defenders could get away with very poor challenges. My view is that players are so much fitter and technically superior these days that the older players simply wouldn't look as good if playing in the modern Premier League.
BG says that many posters here have blue and white tinted specs, and that Dunk isn't as good as many here think. That's definitely fair comment.He isn't wrong. Nor are you.
If we sell Dunk, and buy Moore, this summer, there will be a significant difference in their fees. To say there won't be is simply wrong. You can claim that opinions can't be wrong, but we all know that's bollox.I do not think that if the fee Reading want for Moore and the fact that Mawson, who is better than Dunk, is going for £20m that there would be much difference in their respective fees
BG says that many posters here have blue and white tinted specs, and that Dunk isn't as good as many here think. That's definitely fair comment.
However, he also said this:
If we sell Dunk, and buy Moore, this summer, there will be a significant difference in their fees. To say there won't be is simply wrong. You can claim that opinions can't be wrong, but we all know that's bollox.
BG says that many posters here have blue and white tinted specs, and that Dunk isn't as good as many here think. That's definitely fair comment.
However, he also said this:
If we sell Dunk, and buy Moore, this summer, there will be a significant difference in their fees. To say there won't be is simply wrong. You can claim that opinions can't be wrong, but we all know that's bollox.
I don't know the exact value Spurs place on Kane, and I don't know exactly what value we place on Murray, but it's still fair to say we'd sell Murray for less than Spurs would sell Kane. Anyone saying otherwise is simply wrong. Do you agree?Do we? You obviously know what value both our club and others place on both players either buying or selling.
Yeah, and I think some of the outrage on this thread is based on the post from BG I quoted, not simply on him saying he thinks LD is decent, but not amazing. IMO those disagreeing with BG here aren't against every single word he's said, but there's the odd thing that has stood out as being passed just a valid opinion.I was only really commentating on BG's assessment of LD as a player. Transfer fees are different as they are set by supply and demand and it is fair to say that the demand for a Premier League defender like Dunk will be a fair bit higher than for a Championship one like Moore, regardless of BG's opinion ie I agree with you on that one.
I challenge you, please find them and quote them.
So we're in agreement that some things aren't just opinion, and that you can say someone is wrong if they think Murray is worth more than Kane. Now it's just a case of whether your opinion on the value of Dunk and Moore is far out enough for us all to agree you're wrongYes because there is a vast difference in class and ability
It's just so difficult to compare across the generations. Football was a different sport even in the times of Mark Lawrenson as defenders could get away with very poor challenges. My view is that players are so much fitter and technically superior these days that the older players simply wouldn't look as good if playing in the modern Premier League.
Just one will do. If I read something clever from BG, I'd remember it. Hell I'd print it out and frame it!LOL LOL - He has over 65 thousand posts
I have no intention of going through and looking for the ones I agree with
posted by Triggaar
I don't know the exact value Spurs place on Kane, and I don't know exactly what value we place on Murray, but it's still fair to say we'd sell Murray for less than Spurs would sell Kane. Anyone saying otherwise is simply wrong. Do you agree?
Yes because there is a vast difference in class and ability but does that gulf exist between Dunk and Moore. I based my view on the price Fulham are paying for Mawson who I consider to be better o before Dunk had had a Dunk and nearer to an England call up, but others disagree, that is their prerogative.
Just one will do. If I read something clever from BG, I'd remember it. Hell I'd print it out and frame it!
Sorry BG, I'm sure you feel similarly about me.