Liverpool FC Forum

7_Kewell wrote:

kopite_1232002 wrote:

7_Kewell wrote:

kopite_1232002 wrote:kewell vs stu

kewell i think ur off your barnet

i hardly post on this site but ull see me browsing everyday without fail. but this post im stepping in to put my say in

first ov all robbie fowler is not a spent force. he hasnt lost his ability, robbie fowler is a confidance player and the lad has been on, first by liverpool, never wanted to join leeds and when leeds need money cashed in to a 2nd rate prem leauge team.
one ov the most under estimated english players, and im just just saying that cos the man was my god and idol and still is. im saying it because he was,

how can you say he lost his pace. as far as i can remember he has never had pace
the man is a finisher not a athleate, who would you rather have one on one 8 yards out with the keeper?
cisse kewell crouch moro or fowler ill tell you who robbie all day long lad.
sabre talked about the likes ov cisse retiring at the age ov 30 cos ov lack ov pace true. cisse ambition is to beat a player run like a train and blast the ball as hard as he can at the keeper. gets to 30 and he wont be able to beat him self off.
robbie fowler at the age ov 50 would still be able to put the ball in the back ov the net from inside the box. the man doesnt need to look at the goal he knows were it is, and you say he is past it.
hatrick all quality goals and then a 14ft belter across the keeper against no other than man u,

the reason y he cant get a contract at millwall or any other club is simpy because they cant afford his wages. and see as a gamble wiv injurys, you give robbie a run ov games and he will score goals without a shadow ov a doubt, all he needs is service
iv he came back to liverpool pulled on that red shirt on kop singin his name, getting decent service are you telling me he wouldnt score 30 goals a season in all comps am tellin you mate ud be a silly man iv u dint.


ps sorry bout the spelling and grammer abit ov a mong

fowler would score 30 goals a season...

maby not 30 but iv he played the majority ov the games in the season he would score more goals than what are strikers are scoring now. the man is a born finisher

yes he is, i don't disagree there.  But i personally think he'll retire within 12 months because he is unable to play at the top level anymore.

iv robbie was givin the chance to play for liverpool again im sure he would bend overbackwords with work rate. but look at it from robbies point ov veiw, plays for city 3rd choice striker, on the bench, that,

the man has still got it proved that the last few games he is still top qualiy.

said it before and ill say it again the man is a confidance player, what confidance is he ment to get when ye score the goals and find yourself on the bench,

someone needs to take the gamble sign robbie and give him a decent run but he needs service. citys style ov play doesnt suit robbie its all balls over the top and run ons, he is a finisher not a athleat

7_Kewell wrote:

stu_the_red wrote:Of course Carragher's improved slightly. The main difference is he's playing in a side that suits him.

What part of playing in the wrong system don't you understand? You are truely unbelievable.

Right let me explain it for you in thicko terms...

You have striker who is world class in the 18 yard box. He is world class at reading the flight of the ball and beating defenders to it, he's world class at being in the right place to bury a chance should it arise. He's excellent at heading a ball when crosses are put in, he's got a fantastic finish in many different ways when the ball is in and around that 18 yard box.
He has a good touch, links up with other players superbly who run beyond him and has good vision and awareness of team mates. He has a decent shot from outside the box, has very average pace and isn't really the strongest of players.

This striker will obviously prosper in a team which puts crosses into the box and has people running behind him creating cut backs, passes and crosses for headers, you'd see the best out of him, because thats what he does best. He scores goals from these positions.

If you ask this lad to play in a side (LIKE CITY) who rely on there strikers to have pace (Cole and Vassell), defend deep and rarely put crosses into the box, then you aren't going to see the best of this striker. The striker will be asked to play with his back to goal and win flick ons, being 5'9 he's going to struggle. Also if he's asked to use his "pace" against the likes of Toure, Campbell, Ferdinand, Silvestre, Gallas, what do you think the outcome will be?

Do you know that if you play a player to there weaknesses it drastically effects there performance? That may be to much for someone to take in, but it works the other way round. You see when you play players to their strengths, you get the impression they are better than they actually are, IE Carragher, Lampard, Terry.

Fowlers strengths are finishing, reading the flight of the ball better than a defender allowing him to get to the ball first inside the box, his technical ability and his awareness of whats around him. If there's nothing around him, no chances for him to convert, no crosses for him to get on the end of and no runners for him to link up with, what do you expect him to do?

Adapt by gaining Cisse like pace and Adriano like strength?

I'm not being funny lad, you simply don't understand football, you may like the game alot, you maybe really passionate about it, but you don't understand it.

so Fowler is a poacher......(surprise surprise) ...but hang on!!! so is Andy Cole!  What? Cole has pace?!?!? Have you EVER seen him play??   

Stu, Cole is the same type of player as Fowler....a poacher who was deadly in the 18 yard box.....if you honesty think Vassell and Cole are similar, you're the one who hasn't a clue.

Cole has more pace and more strength than Fowler, he is better with his back to goal. Always has been and always will be.

Fowler and Cole are and always have been completely different. I'm not being funny with you lad, everyone here knows i have an understanding of football, infact i have a very detailed and good understanding of the game. You're proving in this thread you don't. Every comment you are making is a smug attempt to get back up because you're hoping some other fool out there will come to the front.

Again, over 10 Hours later i ask you to give me YOUR REASON'S why Fowler wouldn't score goals in this Liverpool side. Yet, all you can come up with is "some managers in other leagues don't want him and can't afford his wages so that proves me right". The entire content of your arguement has been based around that, which shows your knowledge... or rather lack of knowledge on the matter.

7_Kewell wrote:

stu_the_red wrote:Of course Carragher's improved slightly. The main difference is he's playing in a side that suits him.

What part of playing in the wrong system don't you understand? You are truely unbelievable.

Right let me explain it for you in thicko terms...

You have striker who is world class in the 18 yard box. He is world class at reading the flight of the ball and beating defenders to it, he's world class at being in the right place to bury a chance should it arise. He's excellent at heading a ball when crosses are put in, he's got a fantastic finish in many different ways when the ball is in and around that 18 yard box.
He has a good touch, links up with other players superbly who run beyond him and has good vision and awareness of team mates. He has a decent shot from outside the box, has very average pace and isn't really the strongest of players.

This striker will obviously prosper in a team which puts crosses into the box and has people running behind him creating cut backs, passes and crosses for headers, you'd see the best out of him, because thats what he does best. He scores goals from these positions.

If you ask this lad to play in a side (LIKE CITY) who rely on there strikers to have pace (Cole and Vassell), defend deep and rarely put crosses into the box, then you aren't going to see the best of this striker. The striker will be asked to play with his back to goal and win flick ons, being 5'9 he's going to struggle. Also if he's asked to use his "pace" against the likes of Toure, Campbell, Ferdinand, Silvestre, Gallas, what do you think the outcome will be?

Do you know that if you play a player to there weaknesses it drastically effects there performance? That may be to much for someone to take in, but it works the other way round. You see when you play players to their strengths, you get the impression they are better than they actually are, IE Carragher, Lampard, Terry.

Fowlers strengths are finishing, reading the flight of the ball better than a defender allowing him to get to the ball first inside the box, his technical ability and his awareness of whats around him. If there's nothing around him, no chances for him to convert, no crosses for him to get on the end of and no runners for him to link up with, what do you expect him to do?

Adapt by gaining Cisse like pace and Adriano like strength?

I'm not being funny lad, you simply don't understand football, you may like the game alot, you maybe really passionate about it, but you don't understand it.

so Fowler is a poacher......(surprise surprise) ...but hang on!!! so is Andy Cole!  What? Cole has pace?!?!? Have you EVER seen him play??   

Stu, Cole is the same type of player as Fowler....a poacher who was deadly in the 18 yard box.....if you honesty think Vassell and Cole are similar, you're the one who hasn't a clue.

stu_the_red wrote:

7_Kewell wrote:

stu_the_red wrote:Of course Carragher's improved slightly. The main difference is he's playing in a side that suits him.

What part of playing in the wrong system don't you understand? You are truely unbelievable.

Right let me explain it for you in thicko terms...

You have striker who is world class in the 18 yard box. He is world class at reading the flight of the ball and beating defenders to it, he's world class at being in the right place to bury a chance should it arise. He's excellent at heading a ball when crosses are put in, he's got a fantastic finish in many different ways when the ball is in and around that 18 yard box.
He has a good touch, links up with other players superbly who run beyond him and has good vision and awareness of team mates. He has a decent shot from outside the box, has very average pace and isn't really the strongest of players.

This striker will obviously prosper in a team which puts crosses into the box and has people running behind him creating cut backs, passes and crosses for headers, you'd see the best out of him, because thats what he does best. He scores goals from these positions.

If you ask this lad to play in a side (LIKE CITY) who rely on there strikers to have pace (Cole and Vassell), defend deep and rarely put crosses into the box, then you aren't going to see the best of this striker. The striker will be asked to play with his back to goal and win flick ons, being 5'9 he's going to struggle. Also if he's asked to use his "pace" against the likes of Toure, Campbell, Ferdinand, Silvestre, Gallas, what do you think the outcome will be?

Do you know that if you play a player to there weaknesses it drastically effects there performance? That may be to much for someone to take in, but it works the other way round. You see when you play players to their strengths, you get the impression they are better than they actually are, IE Carragher, Lampard, Terry.

Fowlers strengths are finishing, reading the flight of the ball better than a defender allowing him to get to the ball first inside the box, his technical ability and his awareness of whats around him. If there's nothing around him, no chances for him to convert, no crosses for him to get on the end of and no runners for him to link up with, what do you expect him to do?

Adapt by gaining Cisse like pace and Adriano like strength?

I'm not being funny lad, you simply don't understand football, you may like the game alot, you maybe really passionate about it, but you don't understand it.

so Fowler is a poacher......(surprise surprise) ...but hang on!!! so is Andy Cole!  What? Cole has pace?!?!? Have you EVER seen him play??   

Stu, Cole is the same type of player as Fowler....a poacher who was deadly in the 18 yard box.....if you honesty think Vassell and Cole are similar, you're the one who hasn't a clue.

Cole has more pace and more strength than Fowler, he is better with his back to goal. Always has been and always will be.

Fowler and Cole are and always have been completely different. I'm not being funny with you lad, everyone here knows i have an understanding of football, infact i have a very detailed and good understanding of the game. You're proving in this thread you don't. Every comment you are making is a smug attempt to get back up because you're hoping some other fool out there will come to the front.

Again, over 10 Hours later i ask you to give me YOUR REASON'S why Fowler wouldn't score goals in this Liverpool side. Yet, all you can come up with is "some managers in other leagues don't want him and can't afford his wages so that proves me right". The entire content of your arguement has been based around that, which shows your knowledge... or rather lack of knowledge on the matter.

Stu, i've list me reasons, here they are again.

Fowler is unfit, uninterested and unable to play at a consistent high level of football....by this i mean 40 matches a season.  This view (which is my own) appears to be backed up by the fact that City won't give him a contract and they can't offload him anywhere else.  Please read this and write it down, I can't be arsed to post it again...and again...and again.

you may not agree with this, but thats my opinion and if Fowler is so great, why don't you tell me why no one in the Premierleague wants him?  Could it have anything to do with the fact you won't admit you're wrong! 

7_Kewell wrote:

kopite_1232002 wrote:

7_Kewell wrote:

kopite_1232002 wrote:kewell vs stu

kewell i think ur off your barnet

i hardly post on this site but ull see me browsing everyday without fail. but this post im stepping in to put my say in

first ov all robbie fowler is not a spent force. he hasnt lost his ability, robbie fowler is a confidance player and the lad has been on, first by liverpool, never wanted to join leeds and when leeds need money cashed in to a 2nd rate prem leauge team.
one ov the most under estimated english players, and im just just saying that cos the man was my god and idol and still is. im saying it because he was,

how can you say he lost his pace. as far as i can remember he has never had pace
the man is a finisher not a athleate, who would you rather have one on one 8 yards out with the keeper?
cisse kewell crouch moro or fowler ill tell you who robbie all day long lad.
sabre talked about the likes ov cisse retiring at the age ov 30 cos ov lack ov pace true. cisse ambition is to beat a player run like a train and blast the ball as hard as he can at the keeper. gets to 30 and he wont be able to beat him self off.
robbie fowler at the age ov 50 would still be able to put the ball in the back ov the net from inside the box. the man doesnt need to look at the goal he knows were it is, and you say he is past it.
hatrick all quality goals and then a 14ft belter across the keeper against no other than man u,

the reason y he cant get a contract at millwall or any other club is simpy because they cant afford his wages. and see as a gamble wiv injurys, you give robbie a run ov games and he will score goals without a shadow ov a doubt, all he needs is service
iv he came back to liverpool pulled on that red shirt on kop singin his name, getting decent service are you telling me he wouldnt score 30 goals a season in all comps am tellin you mate ud be a silly man iv u dint.


ps sorry bout the spelling and grammer abit ov a mong

fowler would score 30 goals a season...

maby not 30 but iv he played the majority ov the games in the season he would score more goals than what are strikers are scoring now. the man is a born finisher

yes he is, i don't disagree there.  But i personally think he'll retire within 12 months because he is unable to play at the top level anymore.

fowler4ever wrote:new to the board and will probably get slatted for my comments, but who dares wins,

I personally think fowler would do well in the liverpool side we have today and its not just mushy , yes he has lost pace but as stu has pointed out he never really had pace, just a gift for being in the right place at the right time, yes a gift, you cant teach players to read the game they have either got it or the haven't look at shearer as much as I hate to say, the guy just keeps on scoring he has that knack of being just one step ahead, feeding of defenders/errors and the slightest wiff of a chance at goal in and around the box and fowler is superb at nicking in and poaching a goal or three, something we lack at the moment, it great to see gerrard, alonso, garcia and kewell scoring from the mid aswell as the crouch, morientes and cisse and as rafas says every game it different and he looks to use the players he thinks suit that game, always looking for different dimesions and things he can tweak did he not buy crouch for what he can give the team not for his natural finishing ability, and I think fowler could add the extra dimension we sometimes lack, you cant garantee strikers or fowler will score but give him the chance to don the red shirt again and I wouldnt put it past him scoring more than a few important goals and shock some people along the way, it only my opinion but i would love to see him back,
I will sit back and wait for the abuse

Good post, you just need to breathe (IE use a fullstop) and break it up a bit more by using smaller paragraphs and you'll be sorted.

stu_the_red wrote:

7_Kewell wrote:

stu_the_red wrote:

7_Kewell wrote:

stu_the_red wrote:Of course Carragher's improved slightly. The main difference is he's playing in a side that suits him.

What part of playing in the wrong system don't you understand? You are truely unbelievable.

Right let me explain it for you in thicko terms...

You have striker who is world class in the 18 yard box. He is world class at reading the flight of the ball and beating defenders to it, he's world class at being in the right place to bury a chance should it arise. He's excellent at heading a ball when crosses are put in, he's got a fantastic finish in many different ways when the ball is in and around that 18 yard box.
He has a good touch, links up with other players superbly who run beyond him and has good vision and awareness of team mates. He has a decent shot from outside the box, has very average pace and isn't really the strongest of players.

This striker will obviously prosper in a team which puts crosses into the box and has people running behind him creating cut backs, passes and crosses for headers, you'd see the best out of him, because thats what he does best. He scores goals from these positions.

If you ask this lad to play in a side (LIKE CITY) who rely on there strikers to have pace (Cole and Vassell), defend deep and rarely put crosses into the box, then you aren't going to see the best of this striker. The striker will be asked to play with his back to goal and win flick ons, being 5'9 he's going to struggle. Also if he's asked to use his "pace" against the likes of Toure, Campbell, Ferdinand, Silvestre, Gallas, what do you think the outcome will be?

Do you know that if you play a player to there weaknesses it drastically effects there performance? That may be to much for someone to take in, but it works the other way round. You see when you play players to their strengths, you get the impression they are better than they actually are, IE Carragher, Lampard, Terry.

Fowlers strengths are finishing, reading the flight of the ball better than a defender allowing him to get to the ball first inside the box, his technical ability and his awareness of whats around him. If there's nothing around him, no chances for him to convert, no crosses for him to get on the end of and no runners for him to link up with, what do you expect him to do?

Adapt by gaining Cisse like pace and Adriano like strength?

I'm not being funny lad, you simply don't understand football, you may like the game alot, you maybe really passionate about it, but you don't understand it.

so Fowler is a poacher......(surprise surprise) ...but hang on!!! so is Andy Cole!  What? Cole has pace?!?!? Have you EVER seen him play??   

Stu, Cole is the same type of player as Fowler....a poacher who was deadly in the 18 yard box.....if you honesty think Vassell and Cole are similar, you're the one who hasn't a clue.

Cole has more pace and more strength than Fowler, he is better with his back to goal. Always has been and always will be.

Fowler and Cole are and always have been completely different. I'm not being funny with you lad, everyone here knows i have an understanding of football, infact i have a very detailed and good understanding of the game. You're proving in this thread you don't. Every comment you are making is a smug attempt to get back up because you're hoping some other fool out there will come to the front.

Again, over 10 Hours later i ask you to give me YOUR REASON'S why Fowler wouldn't score goals in this Liverpool side. Yet, all you can come up with is "some managers in other leagues don't want him and can't afford his wages so that proves me right". The entire content of your arguement has been based around that, which shows your knowledge... or rather lack of knowledge on the matter.

Stu, i've list me reasons, here they are again.

Fowler is unfit, uninterested and unable to play at a consistent high level of football....by this i mean 40 matches a season.  This view (which is my own) appears to be backed up by the fact that City won't give him a contract and they can't offload him anywhere else.  Please read this and write it down, I can't be arsed to post it again...and again...and again.

you may not agree with this, but thats my opinion and if Fowler is so great, why don't you tell me why no one in the Premierleague wants him?  Could it have anything to do with the fact you won't admit you're wrong! 

Fowler's unfit? Yeah, probably go along with that. Something that can change though. Uninterested? So are you calling the lad a liar? Do you know him personally? Has he said he can't be bothered anymore to you himself?

Why didn't ANYONE want Crouch untill he was forced upon Southampton when Beattie left? He'd had 5 other clubs where he didn't get a look in, now he's at the best in the country and is first choice.

Again you come back with other peoples opinions. The old "well if they don't want him he must be rubbish" arguement, not one that washes with me lad i've told you.

I go on what i see, not what other people think. I don't give a toss what anyone else thinks because i know my football and i know what i see. You however are instant that because "no-one" wants him he's rubbish, all i can say to that is thats the worst arguement there ever could be. In all of the posts i've made i've asked a string of questions and made a string of points, loads of different ones and thats the only arguement you can come up with. Everyone who reads this can see you can't argue a point to save your life, everyone can see you're saying "he's not good enough coz some rubbish managers don't think so".

As i said, you don't understand football in the slightest.

thats right Stu, they are all rubbish and haven't a clue, whereas you know everything 

Fowler hasn't been 'class' for years, i can't see that changing anytime soon.  You can make an many excuses as you want, Fowler will never be 'class' again and thats the best point i can illustraite.

7_Kewell wrote:

stu_the_red wrote:

7_Kewell wrote:

stu_the_red wrote:

7_Kewell wrote:

stu_the_red wrote:Of course Carragher's improved slightly. The main difference is he's playing in a side that suits him.

What part of playing in the wrong system don't you understand? You are truely unbelievable.

Right let me explain it for you in thicko terms...

You have striker who is world class in the 18 yard box. He is world class at reading the flight of the ball and beating defenders to it, he's world class at being in the right place to bury a chance should it arise. He's excellent at heading a ball when crosses are put in, he's got a fantastic finish in many different ways when the ball is in and around that 18 yard box.
He has a good touch, links up with other players superbly who run beyond him and has good vision and awareness of team mates. He has a decent shot from outside the box, has very average pace and isn't really the strongest of players.

This striker will obviously prosper in a team which puts crosses into the box and has people running behind him creating cut backs, passes and crosses for headers, you'd see the best out of him, because thats what he does best. He scores goals from these positions.

If you ask this lad to play in a side (LIKE CITY) who rely on there strikers to have pace (Cole and Vassell), defend deep and rarely put crosses into the box, then you aren't going to see the best of this striker. The striker will be asked to play with his back to goal and win flick ons, being 5'9 he's going to struggle. Also if he's asked to use his "pace" against the likes of Toure, Campbell, Ferdinand, Silvestre, Gallas, what do you think the outcome will be?

Do you know that if you play a player to there weaknesses it drastically effects there performance? That may be to much for someone to take in, but it works the other way round. You see when you play players to their strengths, you get the impression they are better than they actually are, IE Carragher, Lampard, Terry.

Fowlers strengths are finishing, reading the flight of the ball better than a defender allowing him to get to the ball first inside the box, his technical ability and his awareness of whats around him. If there's nothing around him, no chances for him to convert, no crosses for him to get on the end of and no runners for him to link up with, what do you expect him to do?

Adapt by gaining Cisse like pace and Adriano like strength?

I'm not being funny lad, you simply don't understand football, you may like the game alot, you maybe really passionate about it, but you don't understand it.

so Fowler is a poacher......(surprise surprise) ...but hang on!!! so is Andy Cole!  What? Cole has pace?!?!? Have you EVER seen him play??   

Stu, Cole is the same type of player as Fowler....a poacher who was deadly in the 18 yard box.....if you honesty think Vassell and Cole are similar, you're the one who hasn't a clue.

Cole has more pace and more strength than Fowler, he is better with his back to goal. Always has been and always will be.

Fowler and Cole are and always have been completely different. I'm not being funny with you lad, everyone here knows i have an understanding of football, infact i have a very detailed and good understanding of the game. You're proving in this thread you don't. Every comment you are making is a smug attempt to get back up because you're hoping some other fool out there will come to the front.

Again, over 10 Hours later i ask you to give me YOUR REASON'S why Fowler wouldn't score goals in this Liverpool side. Yet, all you can come up with is "some managers in other leagues don't want him and can't afford his wages so that proves me right". The entire content of your arguement has been based around that, which shows your knowledge... or rather lack of knowledge on the matter.

Stu, i've list me reasons, here they are again.

Fowler is unfit, uninterested and unable to play at a consistent high level of football....by this i mean 40 matches a season.  This view (which is my own) appears to be backed up by the fact that City won't give him a contract and they can't offload him anywhere else.  Please read this and write it down, I can't be arsed to post it again...and again...and again.

you may not agree with this, but thats my opinion and if Fowler is so great, why don't you tell me why no one in the Premierleague wants him?  Could it have anything to do with the fact you won't admit you're wrong! 

Fowler's unfit? Yeah, probably go along with that. Something that can change though. Uninterested? So are you calling the lad a liar? Do you know him personally? Has he said he can't be bothered anymore to you himself?

Why didn't ANYONE want Crouch untill he was forced upon Southampton when Beattie left? He'd had 5 other clubs where he didn't get a look in, now he's at the best in the country and is first choice.

Again you come back with other peoples opinions. The old "well if they don't want him he must be rubbish" arguement, not one that washes with me lad i've told you.

I go on what i see, not what other people think. I don't give a toss what anyone else thinks because i know my football and i know what i see. You however are instant that because "no-one" wants him he's rubbish, all i can say to that is thats the worst arguement there ever could be. In all of the posts i've made i've asked a string of questions and made a string of points, loads of different ones and thats the only arguement you can come up with. Everyone who reads this can see you can't argue a point to save your life, everyone can see you're saying "he's not good enough coz some rubbish managers don't think so".

As i said, you don't understand football in the slightest.

thats right Stu, they are all rubbish and haven't a clue, whereas you know everything 

Fowler hasn't been 'class' for years, i can't see that changing anytime soon.  You can make an many excuses as you want, Fowler will never be 'class' again and thats the best point i can illustraite.

Yes thats it lad, you've made your point so well, you've answered every question i've thrown at you and made me look totally silly with your top class objections and by using your first class footballing knowledge and wonderful "he thinks its true so it must be, because he's a proffessional" arguement.

Proffessional's are never wrong and people like myself don't know anything. If Sven or Rafa made a decision (or Stuart Pearce or Nigel Worthington) who is anyone outside the game to question them?

You've completely won this arguement and your points have made mine looks silly. Well done.