the importance of park

Originally Posted by hollowman

agreed. makes perfect sense too. i cant believe we are agreeing with each other.

tevez is just park playing further up the pitch.

im going to keep an eye on you from now on dunk. didnt know you were such a football sage.

Originally Posted by hollowman

agreed. makes perfect sense too. i cant believe we are agreeing with each other.

tevez is just park playing further up the pitch.

im going to keep an eye on you from now on dunk. didnt know you were such a football sage.

You know when it' easy to tell you're £#%&!ed, sarcasm becomes your weapon of choice, as you aren't intelligent enough to do anything else.

The difference between us is I can see, understand and appreciate what both players bring to the team, the job they are there to do and what they are capable of. Players, incidentally, I was watching and wanted United to sign before they ever arrived at Old Trafford.

Tevez is more creative than Park, hence he's a striker, Park is better defensively and joining in with open interplay, hence he is a midfielder. No mess, no fuss, wins the ball, passes it, finds space. Everything you want from a player. Nearly scored twice tonight too. He will start having some luck in front of goal and get 3 or 4 in quick succession as he did in 2006 before he got injured.

I think both are superb and am delighted to have them at OT.

You, are a #@&%!.

A massive cheesy one at that.

Originally Posted by dunk

you know when it' easy to tell you're £#%&!ed, sarcasm becomes your weapon of choice, as you aren't intelligent enough to do anything else.

The difference between us is i can see, understand and appreciate what both players bring to the team, the job they are there to do and what they are capable of. Players, incidentally, i was watching and wanted united to sign before they ever arrived at old trafford.

Tevez is more creative than park, hence he's a striker, park is better defensively and joining in with open interplay, hence he is a midfielder. No mess, no fuss, wins the ball, passes it, finds space. Everything you want from a player. Nearly scored twice tonight too. He will start having some luck in front of goal and get 3 or 4 in quick succession as he did in 2006 before he got injured.

I think both are superb and am delighted to have them at ot.

You, are a #@&%!.

A massive cheesy one at that.

1-1

Originally Posted by Camel

Originally Posted by Camel

1-1

Enjoying this?

Originally Posted by dunk

You know when it' easy to tell you're £#%&!ed, sarcasm becomes your weapon of choice, as you aren't intelligent enough to do anything else.

how about i just know when im wrong and and just surrender straight away.

all i said was that you made perfect sense and if you didnt only then would you think im being sarcastic.

The difference between us is I can see, understand and appreciate what both players bring to the team, the job they are there to do and what they are capable of. Players, incidentally, I was watching and wanted United to sign before they ever arrived at Old Trafford.

you werent the only one wishing we would sign park. had him earmarked to replace giggs before he played so well against milan and was so made up when we opened up our warchest and spend £3.5m on him.

Tevez is more creative than Park, hence he's a striker, Park is better defensively and joining in with open interplay, hence he is a midfielder. No mess, no fuss, wins the ball, passes it, finds space. Everything you want from a player. Nearly scored twice tonight too. He will start having some luck in front of goal and get 3 or 4 in quick succession as he did in 2006 before he got injured.

why are you telling me this. i agree with you.
and i agree with your original statement.

.

Tevez is the center forward version of Park.

i know when im wrong and we are on the same side.

park is a central midfielder that we use on the wing. he'd be box to box too if we ever played him there. his intelligence is as good as teddy's used to be, his selfless running is a credit to our attacking play and his graft is a dream for the likes of carrick. his stats infront of goal arn't impressive but then again, we dont rely on him to win us games.

he's a very important cog.

Originally Posted by wonky no

park is a central midfielder that we use on the wing. he'd be box to box too if we ever played him there. his intelligence is as good as teddy's used to be, his selfless running is a credit to our attacking play and his graft is a dream for the likes of carrick. his stats infront of goal arn't impressive but then again, we dont rely on him to win us games.

he's a very important cog.

can you define box to box.
what does that mean?

Originally Posted by hollowman

can you define box to box.
what does that mean?

defending-creating-defending-creating-defending -creating

Originally Posted by wonky no

defending-creating-defending-creating-defending -creating

agreed.

park has a hand in most of the goals we scored. not like....erm.... none.

Originally Posted by hollowman

i know when im wrong and we are on the same side.

Good, I'm glad we got that one out of the way, 1 down 2 to go.

Now, do you want to tackle - 'Anderson and why he has a lot more to do to prove he is a worthy squad player, let alone a £20m 1st team midfielder', or , 'Dimitar Berbatov and why he is better than Zlatan and is our No.2 Striker behind Wayne Rooney', next?

Originally Posted by dunk

Good, I'm glad we got that one out of the way, 1 down 2 to go.

Now, do you want to tackle - 'Anderson and why he has a lot more to do to prove he is a worthy squad player, let alone a £20m 1st team midfielder', or , 'Dimitar Berbatov and why he is better than Zlatan and is our No.2 Striker behind Wayne Rooney', next?

nope. im too busy tonight.

coining this phrase.

Tevez is the center forward version of Park.

do you think park would play like tevez if deployed upfront ?

before you go 'mental' im just using your phrase mate.

Originally Posted by hollowman

agreed.

park has a hand in most of the goals we scored. not like....erm.... none.

true, because their are only two people who create a goal, the passer and the scorer. i stand corrected.

Park has proven in the past that he is capable of creating and scoring goals. In his first season, I believe he had numerous assists (I'm not sure if he was top of the list, but he wasn't far off).

I'm not sure someone who constantly bleats on about Anderson should be slagging off other players for their lack of goals and assists. Especially players who have shown they are capable in the past, when Anderson has shown next to nothing.

Originally Posted by wiganste

Enjoying this?

it's like a text version of 8 mile

Originally Posted by Coracao

Park has proven in the past that he is capable of creating and scoring goals. In his first season, I believe he had numerous assists (I'm not sure if he was top of the list, but he wasn't far off).

.

judging his ability to create goals on his first season and not the current one.
good point and makes your the rest of your post NOT hypocritical.

I'm not sure someone who constantly bleats on about Anderson should be slagging off other players for their lack of goals and assists. Especially players who have shown they are capable in the past, when Anderson has shown next to nothing.

im agreeing with you by the way. just getting my head round all these profound knowledge and reasoned logic being dished out.

Originally Posted by hollowman

judging his ability to create goals on his first season and not the current one.
good point and makes your the rest of your post NOT hypocritical.




im agreeing with you by the way. just getting my head round all these profound knowledge and reasoned logic being dished out.

I'm afraid your posts are making little sense once again.

Originally Posted by hollowman

nope. im too busy tonight.

coining this phrase.



do you think park would play like tevez if deployed upfront ?

before you go 'mental' im just using your phrase mate.

No, 'cos he's not a striker you simple £#%&!er.

Tevez works like a trojan, harasses CB's and FB's for the ball, never giving them a minutes peace, starting centrally, up against the defence, he wanders into wide and deep positions to collect the ball and puts strain on defences by running at them with varying degree's of success. His touch sometimes lets him down and his selection and delivery of final pass are suspect at times. He interchanges well with the players around him, using his strength to hold the ball up. His finishing is erratic and is mostly of the 'leather it and hope' variety, hence he misses his fair share of chances. He has performed very well for United gets his fair share of goals as a striker, but it is fair to say that he hasn't reached the heights and performances he did earlier in his career. And I for one hope we sign him permanently in order for him to have chance to find his true best form and improve and mature as a player.

Park works like a trojan, harasses CB', FB's, CM's and wide players for the ball, never giving them a minutes peace, starts in wide positions to collect the ball and puts strain on defences by running at them with varying degree's of success, he also adept at picking up space centrally and in the oppositions penalty area. His touch sometimes lets him down and his selection and delivery of final pass are suspect at times. He interchanges well with the players around him, using his tricky footwork to engineer space and link up with his team mates. His finishing is erratic and is mostly of the 'leather it and hope' variety, hence he misses his fair share of chances, as he tends to get a touch anxious and scuffs the ball, meaning his goal return is not what it should be, but that is not his primary function. He can operate on either side of the pitch ad the extra work he puts in enables other players to concentrate on the more creative side of the game.

Fair descriptions?

Originally Posted by Coracao

I'm afraid your posts are making little sense once again.

you say -

park has proved he can create goals in his first season meaning it would be wrong to criticise him for it now.

im saying -

i agree and your post about anderson showing next to nothing is spot on because if you judged him on his first season (like you did park) you would see he has proved NOTHING and was completely useless in terms of assists.

we are in agreement here mate.

Originally Posted by dunk

No, 'cos he's not a striker you simple £#%&!er


Fair descriptions?.

they are ok. but i prefer your first which hit the nail on the head.

Originally Posted by football sage dunk

Tevez is the center forward version of Park.

regarding this description of park.

Park works like a trojan, harasses CB', FB's, CM's and wide players for the ball, never giving them a minutes peace, starts in wide positions to collect the ball and puts strain on defences by running at them with varying degree's of success, he also adept at picking up space centrally and in the oppositions penalty area. His touch sometimes lets him down and his selection and delivery of final pass are suspect at times. He interchanges well with the players around him, using his tricky footwork to engineer space and link up with his team mates. His finishing is erratic and is mostly of the 'leather it and hope' variety, hence he misses his fair share of chances, as he tends to get a touch anxious and scuffs the ball, meaning his goal return is not what it should be, but that is not his primary function. He can operate on either side of the pitch ad the extra work he puts in enables other players to concentrate on the more creative side of the game.

i agree 100%
its all that that gives me the confidence to stick my neck out and say he is one of the best in his position in europe.

Originally Posted by hollowman

you say -

park has proved he can create goals in his first season meaning it would be wrong to criticise him for it now.

im saying -

i agree and your post about anderson showing next to nothing is spot on because if you judged him on his first season (like you did park) you would see he has proved NOTHING and was completely useless in terms of assists.

we are in agreement here mate.

Correct. Anderson didn't prove anything in terms of assists. Decent passing at times, but nothing really incisive. He may have got 1 assist, I think that was about it.