Inchpractice wrote:ChVint22 wrote:Inchpractice wrote:ChVint22 wrote:Of course I can say it, and I did.
Well fine.
If you can say that then I can say that apart from the 30 odd goals a season that Henry scored he was shit.
Wow, I don't understand how you people don't get it. It was just an observation. I ain't saying they weren't big mistakes or they didn't cost us the game, all I'm saying was if you take away those two mistakes he did pretty well. Its pretty f***ing easy.
Yes it is.
It's not that we don't understand your statement, it's fairly simple. It's just that it's a non-statement, it doesn't make sense.
You're saying that the bits between the major cock-ups weren't bad, I get it.
What we're saying is that the observation is meaningless because as the thread says he's still 'not good enough' and those 'reasonable' bits that may have lasted a whole five minutes don't change anything.
Plus, as I pointed out there were still very dodgy moments on TOP of the two major cock-ups.
So when a player plays good for the majority of a game, but has some mental lapses that alot of young players do, then he suddenly isn't good enough? What about all those times you stuck up for Bendtner? How is Fabby any different? I ain't saying he is good enough, but should'nt we be giving him some more chances before we right him off as being shit? You can do it for some players but not for others? That doesn't make sense my friend. For a keeper he is young, I'm just trying to be fair like I am to all the other players most of the time. Nick still hasn't shown us that he can finish, which is the main job of a striker, but everybody still loves him. If a midfielder made two horrible mistakes in a game, nobody would be talking about it, but its magnified as a keeper and rightfully so, but give the kid a chance. The title should have a question mark at the end of it.