ees complicated no?
New member
leave the lot that do f*** all and take young players who really want to play for england
That is called having your cake and eating it, old chap.
Er, because if we qualify, he could play for us in the group stages and help us.Leave him, what would be the point in taking him.
We normally get through the group stages, I think the knockout stages are more important.Leave him, if he can't play a part in what I think is the most important part of a competition which is getting out the group then there's no point.
This.The obvious answer is take him to the tournament. I can't believe people are saying anything different.
We know we're going to have to get through the group without him. Having an extra striker on the bench in those games isn't a MASSIVE deal. However, getting through and then not having our best player available would be. Clearly he has to go. The only circumstances I can think of where this wouldn't be the case is if we go into the tournament with two or three other strikes all carrying injuries.
But if we get through without him, it's unlikely that all of our strikers will have plaid well. It's more likely we'll be a bit shit, but get through because there are others even more shit than us, and we'll be desperate for a quality striker to come on.By the time he is able to play the team without him would of got through so deserve to play. f*** him
I disagree with it. It was silly and he deserved to be sent off, but it wasn't in any way dangerous, the guy was never going to get injured from it.it is hard to disagree with the three-game ban based on the actual incident
I disagree with it. It was silly and he deserved to be sent off, but it wasn't in any way dangerous, the guy was never going to get injured from it.
No way we should take him. Maybe next time he'll think next time before acting like a complete fool.