Germany vs England Friendly

Andersonisgod

gosplan wrote: »

Yes, 8 pages and we're not getting it. What's wrong with us, eh?

I don't know. I've laid out time and time again my argument yet all I get is people going off on tangents about something completely different. Ordinarily I'd look at myself first and ask, "could I have explained it better?" But the answer on this occasion is no, I've explained it multiple times, in different ways but people don't want to accept that and instead they've been content to lie about the things I'm saying. I hold my head high, my conduct here has been exemplary.

Andersonisgod

gosplan wrote: »

Didn't you say minimal pace?

Didn't you use that comparison to validate that claim?

Pretty sure I didn't say Suarez didn't really have pace or go to Barca fan sites.

Yes, minimal pace for a top flight footballer (particularly a forward) and his own quote validates the view this his pace, in his own mind, isn't particularly strong. Then you came along and twisted that into "he must equally have a deficient left foot and love of the game so" well of course compared to probably the best left foot ever to play football your weaker foot is going to look deficient. You tried to spin my article, I spun it right back. That's what happened.

Andersonisgod

gosplan wrote: »

So you keep telling us at every available opportunity.

Pretty sure Donald Trump watches a lot of politics and comments on it too.

I'm tired of talking about myself. The evidence of the football I watch is plastered all over Boards. What do you watch? How many games each week? What journalists do you regularly read? Do you take part in any football activities yourself? What do you know?

Harry Palmr

Thank goodness there is a game against the Dutch tomorrow, maybe we can all move on!

That_Guy

Andersonisgod wrote: »

I'm tired of talking about myself. The evidence of the football I watch is plastered all over Boards. What do you watch? How many games each week? What journalists do you regularly read? Do you take part in any football activities yourself? What do you know?

A "real football fan" doesn't need to justify how many games they watch on a weekly basis. Such a condescending post.

As for journalists, who needs to rely on others to tell you what to think? I listen to plenty of podcasts and I've often found myself wanting to have an imaginary discussion about certain points people bring up. Yes, it's as mad as it sounds.

Just because you watch more football than most and use fancy BS terms does not make you any way better than anybody else despite what you may tell yourself.

I go to live games every week but you've often criticised the League of Ireland. So does that make me less a fan of football because the standard isn't supposedly up to your high demands?

gosplan

Andersonisgod wrote: »

Yes, minimal pace for a top flight footballer (particularly a forward) and his own quote validates the view this his pace, in his own mind, isn't particularly strong. Then you came along and twisted that into "he must equally have a deficient left foot and love of the game so" well of course compared to probably the best left foot ever to play football your weaker foot is going to look deficient. You tried to spin my article, I spun it right back. That's what happened.

Just applying the same logic buddy. So what you're now saying is the comparison to Neymar doesn't say minimal pace, it just says 'could be faster'.

You made the claim that his pace is minimal (can we say negligible instead).

Not sure why you included the quote then as it says exactly the same thing about his pace as it does say his joy for the game.

Ah lads it's slowing up, serious lack of honesty of effort on show here.

gosplan

Andersonisgod wrote: »

I'm tired of talking about myself. The evidence of the football I watch is plastered all over Boards. What do you watch? How many games each week? What journalists do you regularly read? Do you take part in any football activities yourself? What do you know?

Then stop making it about yourself.

It's OK, we don't need your 'credentials' all the time.

user2011

Fractured ankle for Butland,

https://uk.sports.yahoo.com/news/breaking-news-butland-set-miss-201000880.html

Andersonisgod

That_Guy wrote: »

A "real football fan" doesn't need to justify how many games they watch on a weekly basis. Such a condescending post.

As for journalists, who needs to rely on others to tell you what to think? I listen to plenty of podcasts and I've often found myself wanting to have an imaginary discussion about certain points people bring up. Yes, it's as mad as it sounds.

Just because you watch more football than most and use fancy BS terms does not make you any way better than anybody else despite what you may tell yourself.

I go to live games every week but you've often criticised the League of Ireland. So does that make me less a fan of football because the standard isn't supposedly up to your high demands?

So what you are really saying there is very few games. How many of those very few are English games? Is it split only between Ireland and England? No Spanish games? No German games? No Italian games? Champions League? Probably, do you bother with the Europa League?

I don't think sports journalists are generally cult leaders. I'd say the good ones should give you a greater view of the game and knowledge in specific areas. I have no problem admitting that compared to 8 years ago I can analyse far better the things transpiring on the pitch each moment and that's in no small part to some excellent sports journalists.

I don't remember saying I'm better than you but we've had 8 pages of people having a go at me personally, I grew tired of having to defend myself constantly so now I want to know about the people doing the attacking, starting with you. What gives you the right to judge me? To steal a Game of Thrones quote, by what right does the wolf judge the lion?

I don't particularly enjoy LOI so I don't go. I don't remember ever saying those who do go are lesser fans because of it though. I do a lot of work with football locally, do you?

Andersonisgod

gosplan wrote: »

Then stop making it about yourself.

It's OK, we don't need your 'credentials' all the time.

You made it about me. Don't tell me to stop talking about myself when you personally(!) insult me. Of course I will defend myself and that requires speaking in the first person.

Perhaps if you were less concerned with me and more concerned about speaking about the actual (basic) points which I've made this wouldn't have devolved to what it did. But you came on here and made it personal, so I will respond. Do you want to see your own quotes for proof?

astonaidan

gosplan wrote: »

Well you didn't measure it. He just has 'minimal' pace ergo he must also have a 'minimal' left foot.

Do you see how much if the spectrum you miss by comparing players to Barca forwards only?

You get the same comparing Kane to Suarez and judging Kane by this gap.

This all started by people saying Kane isn't all about athleticism but you just wouldn't listen. You're showing yourself to have very little knowledge outside Barca.

So if you want to continue this discussion, respectfully I think you should make the effort to not involve any Barca players in a conversation that has nothing to do with them. It would really serve you well tbh.

He regularly shows he has very little knowledge about Barcelona tbh, comparing Suarez to Neymar to prove he is slow is like comparing Benzema to Ronaldo to make him slow. Its idiot logic

gosplan

Andersonisgod wrote: »

You made it about me. Don't tell me to stop talking about myself when you personally(!) insult me. Of course I will defend myself and that requires speaking in the first person.

Perhaps if you were less concerned with me and more concerned about speaking about the actual (basic) points which I've made this wouldn't have devolved to what it did. But you came on here and made it personal, so I will respond. Do you want to see your own quotes for proof?

Please do.

If I've personally insulted you in any way, I apologise and will happily take a card.

BTW if you could reiterate your basic points without including anything about Barca, I'm sure people would be happy to discuss with you.

astonaidan

Whats funny is Ive had countless conversations with people on boards about everything and they usually tie up quickly and happily with loads of people but one. Its hilarious to see one attention seeking individual take up so many threads and it always ends the same with him accusing people of attacking him when they are attacking what he said and he gets proven wrong but then spends the next ten pages crying about how you are wrong about everything and know nothing, then the next ten pages calling you a heathen and saying how much books he reads then the next ten saying your attacking him, then he will slink of for a few days and the cycle will start all over again, its hilarious tbh

Pro. F

Andersonisgod wrote: »

Point out where I said Suarez doesn't have good workrate.

This is the 5th or 6th time on this thread I've asked someone to show me a quote that they claim I've said. So far not a single person has shown me a quote. Instead people have simply made shít up. If that's what it takes to make you feel good, go ahead, I'll be the martyr.

I did not say that you said Suarez doesn't have a good work-rate. I said you are ignoring his phenominal work-rate. That is quite different.

Andersonisgod wrote: »

I'd hardly say Suarez has phenomenal strength. By that logic you are saying Suarez is as strong as Drogba, or Duncan Ferguson. Is that what you are saying?

Suarez - like Messi and Aguero for examples - has a different kind of strength to the big lads like Drogba. He has the ability to keep his balance and twist and turn while running at pace and being jostled. That is a function of core strength and fitness. We could call it 'balance' rather than 'strength' if we need to differentiate the two types of strength we're talking about. Suarez has phenominal balance.

Andersonisgod wrote: »

How do you know Kane isn't as physically strong as those? Have you been privy to some kind of footballer strongmen competition that nobody else has seen?

I get my information from watching them playing football. It's kind of a good test of athletic ability. I was under the impression you were drawing your conclusions about these players' athletic abilities from watching them play as well.

Andersonisgod wrote: »

Haha Suarez says he lacks pace, Boards.ie poster presses on anyway but Boards.ie poster is wrong and he knows it. I've got my quote.

Suarez did not say that he lacks pace in the link you provided. Suarez's exact quote was: "I'd love to have Messi's left foot, which is one-of-a-kind in the world, remarkable, and the pace and happiness of Neymar." To hold that up as evidence supporting your claim that Suarez has minimal pace is ridiculous.

Andersonisgod

gosplan wrote: »

Please do.

If I've personally insulted you in any way, I apologise and will happily take a card.

BTW if you could reiterate your basic points without including anything about Barca, I'm sure people would be happy to discuss with you.

Substitute Suarez with Soldado. Doesn't make a difference. As I've already explained, I could have used any number of players in that example for my point to work. I used Suarez to make my post more relatable. Because the example was of a prototypical technique based player. His actual abilities don't matter as long as he's playing top level football.

"It's all a bit playing FIFA with Barca tbh. I think your missing an awful lot."- dig.

"Like I said, when you base your arguments in about 20 players and the most successful club team of all time, your opinion is more or less worthless 95% of the time."- dig.

"Your starting point is bullsh1t and useless to proper debate. You've picked two of the most intelligent strikers and make like everyone her is saying Kane is better or something."- dig and completely wrong interpretation of my original point.

"People are curious about you because it's fairly obvious that Guardolia's Barca came in your teenage years or so. You don't know as much as you think and truths change over time, very few are absolute. You'll figure that out in a decade or so."- quite a personal dig.

"Also AIG ...

'England are basically the opposite of the football I enjoy, athleticism first blah blah blah ... My favourite player ever is Drogba'

Doesn't make much sense to me." -dig.

"Otherwise you are useless in 95% of arguments." - personal dig.

"But you're being hugely elitist. In your posting style, opinion of your own knowledge and opinion of world football." - personal dig.


Every quote, except 1, shifts the focus of the discussion onto me, the poster, rather than my argument. Yet you have the gumption to later accuse me of making this thread about me? Such nerve, such high hypocrisy.

Andersonisgod

Pro. F wrote: »

I did not say that you said Suarez doesn't have a good work-rate. I said you are ignoring his phenominal work-rate. That is quite different.



Suarez - like Messi and Aguero for examples - has a different kind of strength to the big lads like Drogba. He has the ability to keep his balance and twist and turn while running at pace and being jostled. That is a function of core strength and fitness. We could call it 'balance' rather than 'strength' if we need to differentiate the two types of strength we're talking about. Suarez has phenominal balance.



I get my information from watching them playing football. It's kind of a good test of athletic ability. I was under the impression you were drawing your conclusions about these players' athletic abilities from watching them play as well.



Suarez did not say that he lacks pace in the link you provided. Suarez's exact quote was: "I'd love to have Messi's left foot, which is one-of-a-kind in the world, remarkable, and the pace and happiness of Neymar." To hold that up as evidence supporting your claim that Suarez has minimal pace is ridiculous.

I'm not being funny but I've moved on from this argument. At no stage have I been talking about Suarez's balance or stamina. As previously stated, Suarez could be replaced with any number of top flight forwards and my argument still works because it's not a point made on the merits of Suarez's abilities, it's simply using him as an example of a player that is different to Kane. Why you're talking about Suarez and his physical capacities I don't know but it literally had zero to do with my actual point and I have better things to do than argue about things that (a) I don't even disagree with (he has got tremendous balance and stamina, so what? In relation to my original point it's meaningless) and (b) for some reason we are talking about his pace when we shouldn't be and people apparently think he's rapid, which literally nobody else thinks.

So please go back and read my original posts and spot where you went wrong.

gosplan

Andersonisgod wrote: »

Substitute Suarez with Soldado. Doesn't make a difference. As I've already explained, I could have used any number of players in that example for my point to work. I used Suarez to make my post more relatable. Because the example was of a prototypical technique based player. His actual abilities don't matter as long as he's playing top level football.

"It's all a bit playing FIFA with Barca tbh. I think your missing an awful lot."- dig.

"Like I said, when you base your arguments in about 20 players and the most successful club team of all time, your opinion is more or less worthless 95% of the time."- dig.

"Your starting point is bullsh1t and useless to proper debate. You've picked two of the most intelligent strikers and make like everyone her is saying Kane is better or something."- dig and completely wrong interpretation of my original point.

"People are curious about you because it's fairly obvious that Guardolia's Barca came in your teenage years or so. You don't know as much as you think and truths change over time, very few are absolute. You'll figure that out in a decade or so."- quite a personal dig.

"Also AIG ...

'England are basically the opposite of the football I enjoy, athleticism first blah blah blah ... My favourite player ever is Drogba'

Doesn't make much sense to me." -dig.

"Otherwise you are useless in 95% of arguments." - personal dig.

"But you're being hugely elitist. In your posting style, opinion of your own knowledge and opinion of world football." - personal dig.


Every quote, except 1, shifts the focus of the discussion onto me, the poster, rather than my argument. Yet you have the gumption to later accuse me of making this thread about me? Such nerve, such high hypocrisy.

No 4 is out of order. Apologies.

The rest are based on you constantly bringing things back to Barca and silly stuff you posted like saying Kane is the opposite to the player you enjoy because he's about athleticism but your all time fav player is Drogba. I mean how can you say that makes sense?

To be honest AIG, you asked what I know. One thing is that I don't know everything. If this many people disagreed with what I was posting, if I was regularly nominated as most biased poster, if I was regularly in long protracted arguments with many people, I think I would look at my opinions and where they may be wrong rather than posting details of how much football I watch.

But apologies again if I have insulted you.

Can you please again restate your original assertion and we can try again to have a rational discussion.

gosplan

I'm guessing the original point is

I don't really like Kane, I prefer technical players to athletic ones.

Is that about right?

Andersonisgod

gosplan wrote: »

No 4 is out of order. Apologies.

The rest are based on you constantly bringing things back to Barca and silly stuff you posted like saying Kane is the opposite to the player you enjoy because he's about athleticism but your all time fav player is Drogba. I mean how can you say that makes sense?

To be honest AIG, you asked what I know. One thing is that I don't know everything. If this many people disagreed with what I was posting, if I was regularly nominated as most biased poster, if I was regularly in long protracted arguments with many people, I think I would look at my opinions and where they may be wrong rather than posting details of how much football I watch.

But apologies again if I have insulted you.

Can you please again restate your original assertion and we can try again to have a rational discussion.

Public opinion is not a concern for me. Think about anot example you used, Donald Trump, he's very popular with many American voters yet would you say his policies are correct? People can be wrong.

My issue is that you claimed I've made this thread about myself but the times I've had to speak about myself has been in response to other posters talking about me. I have no desire to talk about myself unnecessarily.

I've tried numerous times to explain my original point. It's a basic point. Kane relies more on athletic ability than technical ability. Am I saying he doesn't have technical ability? No, I'm not.

I then used Suarez as an example of a player who relies more on technical ability than physical? Could I use a different player as an example? Absolutely, insert any striker you think relies more on technical ability than physical. Does that mean I think Suarez has no physical abilities? Absolutely not.

At heart, this is my basic point. Somehow that spun out if control into 12 pages of utter madness.

Andersonisgod

gosplan wrote: »

I'm guessing the original point is

I don't really like Kane, I prefer technical players to athletic ones.

Is that about right?

It's along those lines. As stated above its that Kane is a player who relies on physical prowess more than technical (that's not to say he has no technical skills, just that the physical ones take precedence) and I said that in my view ultimately I think more technical players will prosper at the very highest level (champions league, world cup ect.) more often than not.

Maybe I'm being presumptuous but those are hardly earth-shattering opinions that warrant so much derision.

Pro. F

Andersonisgod wrote: »

At no stage have I been talking about Suarez's balance or stamina. As previously stated, Suarez could be replaced with any number of top flight forwards and my argument still works because it's not a point made on the merits of Suarez's abilities, it's simply using him as an example of a player that is different to Kane. Why you're talking about Suarez and his physical capacities I don't know but it literally had zero to do with my actual point and I have better things to do than argue about things that (a) I don't even disagree with (he has got tremendous balance and stamina, so what? In relation to my original point it's meaningless) and (b) for some reason we are talking about his pace when we shouldn't be and people apparently think he's rapid, which literally nobody else thinks.

Of course you haven't been talking about Suarez's balance and stamina - as I say, you have been ignoring them. Because, to acknowledge that Suarez has great balance and stamina would have invalidated a fundamental aspect of your original argument, namely, that Suarez is unremarkable in terms of athleticism. The truth is, Suarez is one of the most athletically gifted strikers in world football.

Andersonisgod

Pro. F wrote: »

Of course you haven't been talking about Suarez's balance and stamina - as I say, you have been ignoring them. Because, to acknowledge that Suarez has great balance and stamina would have invalidated a fundamental aspect of your original argument, namely, that Suarez is unremarkable in terms of athleticism. The truth is, Suarez is one of the most athletically gifted strikers in world football.

I can't be any clearer about this. Legitimately I can't. You are jumping to total extremes. You see me say "Suarez relies more on technical ability than physical" and you've jumped to the conclusion that Andersonisgod thinks Suarez is a decrepit 90 year old man. That's not what I'm saying now, that's not what I've been saying at any stage. His technical ability takes precedence for sure, that absolutely doesn't mean he has no physical capacities. Same as saying Messi places precedence on technical ability, doesn't mean he has no balance or burst of pace. Same as saying Cazorla places precedence on technical ability, doesn't mean he has no balance or stamina. Are you seeing what I'm saying now? Not everything needs to be taken to an extreme degree.

chopperbyrne

Pro. F wrote: »

Of course you haven't been talking about Suarez's balance and stamina - as I say, you have been ignoring them. Because, to acknowledge that Suarez has great balance and stamina would have invalidated a fundamental aspect of your original argument, namely, that Suarez is unremarkable in terms of athleticism. The truth is, Suarez is one of the most athletically gifted strikers in world football.

AIG please don't respond to this.

Let's just move past this and stop derailing match threads for pages on end.

Arghus

So how about that Germany v England game eh?

gosplan

Andersonisgod wrote: »

It's along those lines. As stated above its that Kane is a player who relies on physical prowess more than technical (that's not to say he has no technical skills, just that the physical ones take precedence) and I said that in my view ultimately I think more technical players will prosper at the very highest level (champions league, world cup ect.) more often than not.

Maybe I'm being presumptuous but those are hardly earth-shattering opinions that warrant so much derision.

Grand. Firstly, any talk of Kane has to involve a pinch of salt as he's young and relatively new.

I'd say you're selling him a bit short though. He's technically very good and not that fast.

When we talk about physical players, I think Welbeck.

Kane's more of an all-rounder for me which includes terrific movement and finishing.

Traditional big men up top very rarely achieve Kane's scoring record.

Andersonisgod

chopperbyrne wrote: »

AIG please don't respond to this.

Let's just move past this and stop derailing match threads for pages on end.

I don't think it's fair to blame solely me for this mess. 1 or 2 people interpreted my original point incorrectly, others jumped on with that interpretation, I then had to defend my point.

My original point isn't even that unreasonable! Certainly not enough to result in the mess that occurred afterwards. I'll take a portion of the blame for responding to the lies that were being told about me but, IMO, there are a few posters who simply want to find an excuse to argue with me and, by incorrectly taking up my original point, that's what they did here.

Pro. F

Andersonisgod wrote: »

I can't be any clearer about this. Legitimately I can't. You are jumping to total extremes. You see me say "Suarez relies more on technical ability than physical" and you've jumped to the conclusion that Andersonisgod thinks Suarez is a decrepit 90 year old man. That's not what I'm saying now, that's not what I've been saying at any stage. His technical ability takes precedence for sure, that absolutely doesn't mean he has no physical capacities. Same as saying Messi places precedence on technical ability, doesn't mean he has no balance or burst of pace. Same as saying Cazorla places precedence on technical ability, doesn't mean he has no balance or stamina. Are you seeing what I'm saying now? Not everything needs to be taken to an extreme degree.

You made out that Suarez is unremarkable in terms of athleticism. Here is the post where you did it:

Andersonisgod wrote: »

Haha do you really think so? I'll use a world class forward as a comparison since that's the class that most see Kane in now. If Kane had the same physical capacities as Luis Suarez do you think he'd be playing at Spurs? Do you think he'd be in the Premier League? Suarez is a guy with minimal pace, he's not particularly tall or incredibly strong. What he's got going for him is remarkable technical skills and he's surely one of the most clever footballers I've ever seen. He's an example of footballing ability taking precedence over athletic ability.

By the way I'm not even saying that being more athlete than footballer is a bad thing. My favourite player is Drogba, incredibly skilled but definitely someone whose athleticism was key for.

You did not make out that Suarez is physically decrepit, only unremarkable. That was extremely misleading. To describe Suarez as anything less than a phenomenally athletically gifted striker is to talk nonsense.

You can talk about Kane's physical abilities taking presidence over his skill and Suarez's technical skills taking presidence over his physical ones. But it is bollocks. Suarez is more athletically gifted and more skilled than Kane. And, like the majority of top level strikers, their skills and their athletic abilities are both essential to their overall ability.

Andersonisgod

gosplan wrote: »

Grand. Firstly, any talk of Kane has to involve a pinch of salt as he's young and relatively new.

I'd say you're selling him a bit short though. He's technically very good and not that fast.

When we talk about physical players, I think Welbeck.

Kane's more of an all-rounder for me which includes terrific movement and finishing.

Traditional big men up top very rarely achieve Kane's scoring record.

That's fair enough. I can accept that as a reasonable argument.

The sample size for Kane is relatively small. While I think he's got some technical skills (his finish the other night was very good) I think it's his presence and speed that unsettle defences and allow him to play as a lone striker that are his more important attributes.

I'm not discounting that his movement and finishing are good, I just think his size and speed are more important assets to his game.

Bobby Baccala

astonaidan wrote: »

Whats funny is Ive had countless conversations with people on boards about everything and they usually tie up quickly and happily with loads of people but one. Its hilarious to see one attention seeking individual take up so many threads and it always ends the same with him accusing people of attacking him when they are attacking what he said and he gets proven wrong but then spends the next ten pages crying about how you are wrong about everything and know nothing, then the next ten pages calling you a heathen and saying how much books he reads then the next ten saying your attacking him, then he will slink of for a few days and the cycle will start all over again, its hilarious tbh

Although I do agree with what you're saying, I think your obsession with arguing with AIG and constantly throwing smart remarks his way does nothing but make the situation worse. It's evident across a lot of threads on this forum. Slightly OTT in my opinion.

That_Guy

Andersonisgod wrote: »

So what you are really saying there is very few games. How many of those very few are English games? Is it split only between Ireland and England? No Spanish games? No German games? No Italian games? Champions League? Probably, do you bother with the Europa League?

Em... What?

I don't think sports journalists are generally cult leaders. I'd say the good ones should give you a greater view of the game and knowledge in specific areas. I have no problem admitting that compared to 8 years ago I can analyse far better the things transpiring on the pitch each moment and that's in no small part to some excellent sports journalists.

To be honest, how much more knowledge do you need other than, "by god, he kicked that ball very well into the back of the opposition net?"

But more power to you if you really want to get to the semantics of the sport.

I don't remember saying I'm better than you but we've had 8 pages of people having a go at me personally, I grew tired of having to defend myself constantly so now I want to know about the people doing the attacking, starting with you. What gives you the right to judge me? To steal a Game of Thrones quote, by what right does the wolf judge the lion?

I never said I was judging you. For somebody who claims that posters put words into your mouth, you're fairly good at doing it yourself. I called you out on your condescending tone. And to be honest, it's not just in this thread that you come across as a sanctimonious know it all.

If you watch lots of football that's great. Hell, I watch an appalling amount of MMA but I don't judge people for not watching as much as me. Your posts reek of that undertone.

I don't particularly enjoy LOI so I don't go. I don't remember ever saying those who do go are lesser fans because of it though. I do a lot of work with football locally, do you?

Fair enough. You don't like it. Your choice.

I don't do any work with local football. Does that make me less of a fan in your eyes?

astonaidan

P4DDY2K11 wrote: »

Although I do agree with what you're saying, I think your obsession with arguing with AIG and constantly throwing smart remarks his way does nothing but make the situation worse. It's evident across a lot of threads on this forum. Slightly OTT in my opinion.

I never actually argue with him, hes been on my ignore list for a long time, my comments are always based on what others say, and I find it hilarious to watch it every week. Regarding making anything worse, I dont think its possible tbh, every thread I go on Im not allowed to have a opinion that differs to his at all, this has been proven countless times in these threads, once you go against Barca/Pep/Bayern you immediately know nothing. Check the threads that I only go on and see how I act

gosplan

Andersonisgod wrote: »

That's fair enough. I can accept that as a reasonable argument.

The sample size for Kane is relatively small. While I think he's got some technical skills (his finish the other night was very good) I think it's his presence and speed that unsettle defences and allow him to play as a lone striker that are his more important attributes.

I'm not discounting that his movement and finishing are good, I just think his size and speed are more important assets to his game.

See. We both work to change the tone and everything changes.

I still think you're selling him a bit short. He's not fast.

Diabhal Beag

Good to see a serious discussion end in a beautiful romance.