₦airaland Forum

I have a simple solution to our striking problem Let's just start Ronaldo where he actually plays,as a striker.There is no point pretending he is a midfielder any longer.I saw some stats after the home game against Boro which showed that he spent more time in the box than Tevez.That is why he has few assists to his credit this season.I believe he has only one assist.

We should start Nani on the right and play Ronaldo and Rooney up front.Tevez and Saha should sit on the bench alongside Giggs when Scholes returns.

I first saw Ronaldo in 2002 in a TV program about youth prospects.He was described as a striker.He once said,when newly signed by Utd, that his favorite player was Henry.Well. . . .let him follow in Henry's footsteps and be converted to a more central role.He is excellent in the air and has an eye for goal.The perfect "little and large combination"-Ronaldo and Rooney.

This will solve our striking problem. . . . .automatically we have 4 strikers and Tevez can sit on the bench until he learns how to convert from 4 yards.

I enjoyed this comment from the Guardian blog:

Morning Gooners!

How's the head?

Must be sore, having been bashed about by big Sam's "neanderthal" team up in the chilly north.

So its 2 points dropped and the usual moans:

they obstructed our smooth passing
van persil was not playing
the ref did not protect our passing game.
The wind disrupted the flow of our passing game.
Adebayor is not so good
we missed the flamster and the gas boy.

Crikey, we are not even at squeaky bum stage yet.

It must be time soon for wenger to start a fight on the touchline??

So the task for your direct rivals is now simply to beat you. So much for your game in hand. Fear not though Van Persil will be back soon, to get injured again in the first tackle.

All said, I thought Newcastle played well and in fact the best thing that could have happened to them was to concede early. It kinda focus's the mind. In the 2nd half, I am sorry gooner's, you were thoroughly outplayed and arsenal displayed the championship credentials of a scared rabbit.

Maybe wenger's famed coaching could find time to teach Adebayor about the offside rule in 2 on 1 situations. (Rosicky seemed at pains to try and explain it to him)

Think arsenal were lucky to even get a point, if only Newcastle had better composure when it mattered, which is where an emre might have made a difference.

All said, thanks big sam for sticking it up them crowing gooners. How appropriate after a day of the guardian eulogising over saint wenger and his saintly angels that we get to see them in action in all their glory, been outmuscled and outplayed in midfield by Nicky Butt and co.

You gooners have a lot to learn.

How did one of you put it again??

"dont oil the moustache, while the fruit is still on the tree"

If you want to pretend that Dudu,Ade and Walcott are better strikers than Henry,that is your choice.At some point,the sheer mediocrity of this trio will be ultimately fatal to Arsenal's title ambitions

debosky:
Henry that is 'out indefinitely' with a back injury? We sure don't miss him, because even if he was here HE WOULDN'T BE PLAYING

He's scored 5 (including a dubious handball goal in the CL) Ade has scored 9. . .do the math

Gunner 1915

He is playing a deeper role with Barca.The fact that Ade or even Benjani have scored more goals doesn't mean they are better for a team than the likes of Ruud,Henry or Villa who have scored fewer.

This comes a day after NL Gooners were claiming that they don't really miss the departure of Henry.

McKren:
So different institutions within a Government can not make comments or come up with reports not popular with the Presidency or that was not made at the instance of the Presidency??

Stop being an idiot,the NIE is made at the instance of the President.To say that the resultant NIE is not popular with the Presidency is mere voodoo analysis.We don't know,watching CNN doesn't give anyone an insight into the inner motives of either the report's authors or the President.

Did Bush's staff call you up and tell you that Bush is not happy with the report?

How does international pressure equate to adverse consequence?

This is the problem with neocons like I-man, WAR is their DIPLOMACY.

International pressure to any sane person means diplomatic efforts to effect a resolution to a crisis. However, to neocons, international pressure means adverse consequence.

I-man, I know you lack the ability to reason lucidly, but I'll make this as simple as possible: international pressure is not equal to US bombs!

You rant like an slowpoke.How do you know that "international pressure" exclusively refers to any particular policy tool?Did diplomatic measures against Iran commence in 2003? There have been diplomatic measures to stop Iranian nuclear proliferation since the late 70s under Carter.What new international pressure did Iran begin facing in 2003 that it hadn't faced before?

It was only until the election of Sarkozy for France and Merkel for Germany that Iran started feeling any serious international pressure.The EU's main objective in applying pressure on Iran was to stop war ensuing between the US and Iran.

The real question is whether the Bush Administration's policies have forced a change of heart in Iran.The reports conclusions are consistent with the idea that the Administration's policies have forced a reappraisal of Iran's nuclear policy.That point was made here in the article you carefully avoided:


Iran says that a newly published US intelligence report proves that its intentions for its nuclear programme are benign. So does Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the United Nations watchdog, who has greeted the report as if it confirms what he has always maintained – that a resolution of the row with Iran is within reach. However, the offers no reassurance; on the contrary, it supports fears that Iran could soon have nuclear weapons. It argues that Iran has been deterred from pursuing them mainly by the fear of US military action, a fear that has now faded.


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/bronwen_maddox/article3001210.ece

Cougar:
@ justkunmi,
its not that easy. man utd will also face liverpool on the day chelsea visits the emirates. any of the teams could lose 3 points on the day. the turning point this season will be the festive period, feb-april and the team with less injured players will win the premiership. i still think chelsea is a threat and its not over yet.

Forget the game against Chelski,Arsenal still have to go to Portsmouth and Everton before the end of the year.Those games are just as tough as the home game against Chelski

toba1909:
Haba !!! So M'boro match ain't a sure 3pts for us? Abi Chelsea no be sure 3pts for us too?

Yes. . . .just like this game was a sure 3 points and you were supposed to end Allardyce's career

Cougar:
@ i-man,
trust me-newcastle could have woon the game if they had the belief. they played arsenal off the park and applied profound pressure.
its now an open secret that arsenal cannot function without fabregas, hleb and rvp. newcastle outpassed and outwitted arsenal for most parts of the game. what a relief! alan smith was awesome. he reminded me of the game he had against chelsea when he was at man utd. the chase is on.

Arsenal couldn't have had more than 2 or 3 goal attempts in the 2nd half.How many saves did Shay Givens make? It was one-sided for most of the 2nd half.Arsenal are now only 4 points ahead of Utd with even tougher fixtures ahead of them for the year.

They don't have a single game for the year which one can say is almost a certain 3 pointer.They still have to go to Everton and Pompey before the end of the year,in addition to games against Chelski and Spurs.Very interesting times for Gooners fans who think they have virtually wrapped up the title

medube:
And with 2 points dropped

They were talking like as if they will just turn up and pick 3 points.With the exception of their game against Reading,their last 6 games have been narrow slugfests .

folahann:
The draw still widens the gap a little bit

The famous "game in hand" has gone

Nerve:
And y did u remove my post:
leave it let them read!

Some Nigerians are so stupid. . .
Seun, let this not bring an end to Nairaland. . .
If this is reported to the right authorities, legal action can be taking against u and may be threatened. . .
In that case your forum will have to go down because the company hosting your forum can be contacted
Nothing can be done in such a sitiuation because, your dear forum has no moderators.
Man think, this is not right . . .

your name is Seun, but I doubt your a Nigerian . . .
Other countries try their possible best to promote their countries name. . .
But here in Nigeria, Some outsider searches for pictures showing the ugly side of Nigeria and puts them on a public forum where other Nationalities can see. . . .

This Topic should better be moved to the recycle Bin or necessary action will be taking. .

A proud advocate of ostrich mentality making his case. . . . . .even threatening legal action.

Danmasani:
First this topic is just stupid!
Then , because Moslems are 51% and Xtians 48%==== Nigeria is an Islamic state. Wow, I really wonder where common sense went in this argument

Nigerians are either Muslim or Christian?So there are no traditional worshippers and other religions beyond these 2

In Crouch's case,this season is essentially an exception in much the same way it has been for Gilberto and Carrick this season.It has been an exception to the norm.The norm being,in these 3 cases,starting regularly and doing the business for their respective clubs.

GVB is quite possibly the most expensive central midfielder ever signed by Arsenal.Denilson is only a teenager signed for £3m and nobody expected him to start yet.That he has featured infrequently is a bonus,one doesn't expect much from such.

GVB was a Dutch international signed at the age of 26,hardly a youngster.This is the problem with GVB.From start to finish,there was never a sustained period he held down a starting place.Had he been starting,and then subsequently lost his place,a la Gilberto,Crouch and Carrick,then one can excuse him.Despite his versatility,he couldn't hold down a starting place,whether at left-back,left midfield or central midfield.

One may or not be a failure while starting but you can never be a successful bench warmer.This is why I criticized the over the top eulogies for Soljskaer,if you can't hold down a starting place in your team,you are definitely not a success.I guess in Ole's case,he was signed for peanuts from Molde and not much was expected from him ab initio.Indeed,one could say he was actually signed to make up the numbers in attack.This is far from the case with GVB

are you then saying that things don't change in the course of a season?

At what point did things change for GVB? Was there ever a point when he was holding down a starting place in the team?Take the 2 examples you cited-Gilberto and Carrick-both were regulars for a considerable period until they lost their place.In their case,things did change.

Of course,so far,Gilberto and Carrick are both failures this season.Why else have both been moody? Is it because of their "successful" stint on the bench?

I guess its a question of,is the glass half full or half empty.GVB was signed in anticipation that he will start,he wasn't good enough to start.You are trying to distinguish between GVB not starting because there are better alternatives and not starting because he is not good enough.Its a bit like saying that Shevchenko is not starting because there are better alternatives,hence he is not a failure.

@McKren

You are asking whether a US Govt report was "orchestrated" by the US Govt. I leave you to ponder that.

This is not the first time Israel will be critical of the US Govt.You are really clutching at straws.

Qouting "the Times" and telling me its a critic of President Bush is absolutely pointless because no matter how critical the Times is of Bush when it comes to foreign policy their priority will remain saving America's integrity at all cost.

This is pure drivel.The Times has long been critical of US foreign affairs whether its the My Lai massacre or the whole Vietnam debacle or Clinton's bombing of a factory in Sudan on account of its alleged use by Saddam and Al-Qaeda to produce chemical/biological weapons.

You engage in a lot of voodoo analysis,ascribing motives to people with the audacity of a witchdoctor.You not only know the motives of the NIE authors,you also know that of the Time's publishers.You effectively want to engage in a crass debate about inner motives. . . . .this is easy for you because motive is impossible to substantiate.You can dismiss opposing viewpoints by simply alluding to unverifiable motives.

Edu was signed the previous season.What was the purpose of then splashing out £8m for GVB when he had little chance of starting? When Carrick was signed,he started until the next season,when he lost his place.Carrick was a key player in winning the title last season.

GVB was never a key player.That is why he left for free at the end of the title winning season.Even when he was reshuffled to left-back,Mr £8.5m couldn't start ahead of an academy product-A.Cole.If Carrick can't start ahead of a newly emerged youngster from Utd's academy,then what would be the point of signing him?

This is the most apt response to that Guardian blog:

Sweet Jesus! That must be the most rubbish of all the blog entries so far, which is really saying something!

If Arsenal castoffs like Sidwell (has he even played this season?) and Stokes (party boy off the pitch, 2 goals in 18 months on the pitch) are supposed to be lighting up the league then the PL is worse than I thought!

debosky:
Van Bronkhorst was signed as a utility player/left back. . .he left because Ashley Cole emerged and held down the position pat, he was a goo enough player, but as with Silvinho, AC's performances kept him out of the team and he ultimately left for another side where he could play regularly.

Vieira left for less in the next year than he was bid for the previous, same with TH. . .but in both cases Wenger wanted to see if they could truly perform for one more season. He gave them both chances and cut his losses as soon as he could.

A player leaving because he could not get into the team due to better quality is not a failure, one who could not deliver when called upon is.

Did Arsene splash out £8.5m so that GVB can warm the bench and leave 2 years later for free?If you are signing someone for that amount,chances are you expect him to be good enough to win a starting shirt.GVB was a central midfielder at Rangers,the idea was that he will replace Petit but he was plagued by injuries.By the time he returned,Edu was now taking his place in the centre of midfield.

No matter how you try to spin it,an £8.5m signing who can't win a regular place is a failure.Neither he nor Wenger achieved the purpose of the transfer.

@Loyika

Has it occurred to you that other Nairalanders might have that search engine called "Google" and can easily look up articles they want to read on the net?What use is simply copying and pasting links?

Read this.Much better read:

http://www.metro.co.uk/weird/article.html?in_article_id=25475&in_page_id=2

and this:

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article142348.ece

and lastly:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/10/26/nsex126.xml&CMP=ILC-mostviewedbox

No be only Chelski Ronaldinho join.What about Boro?

Ronaldinho off to Boro

PS:Try and read some of the comments in the page.Some rumors that Kaka may be off to join Deby

HNIC:
Van Brockhorst too should be removed from the list.He wasn't a failure @ Arsenal

He was big failure.You forgot you signed him for £8m to plug the gap left by Petit's departure.How can you call a bench warmer a success?

How much did Barca pay to sign him a couple of years later?I think it was a free transfer

almondjoy:
Sorry, I do not read fellow-poster's posts anymore. I only read from original posters--WHO START THREADS ONLY. You should do the same to avoid any mix-ups or unnecessary interaction with cyber rif raffs.

Have a happy holiday season!

I think say na only me dey do am

McKren:
I-Man
you are also guilty of misinterpreting the report.

Where?Obviously,you have issues with grammar.There is a major difference between ascertaining the content of the NIE and determining its implication.The former is clear,it is the latter that you seem to have a problem with.

1. So why is Gorge Bush lobbying the world to get a strict sanction against Iran 4yrs laterHuh

To the ignorant,a case for sanction is puzzling.The case for sanction is based on Iran's NPT obligations,which obligations Iran has failed to fully comply with.These obligations exist independently of what Iran's nuclear program is intended for.

3. And why is a justification of Bush's foreign policy stating that Iran has halted its nuclear programme released at a time when America was at the vanguard of getting the UN to sanction Iran for developing nuclear programme.

Here is a good explanation of it by a Bush critic-[url]http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1690696,00.html[/url]

If anything this report has made President Amadenajad an international political MARTYR

The report says Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003 but continues to engage in illegal nuclear proliferation in breach of its obligations.Iran's case was that it never had a weapons program.Its a bit like a report claiming that a man,who denys ever being a thief,has stopped stealing for a while but still engages in illegal acts which might facilitate future theft.Whether this is vindication is left for you to judge.

Why the report was released is a matter of speculation.Neither you nor I is a psychic,so speculating on the inner motives of the report's authors verges on voodoism.Its effectively voodoo analysis.

What is clear,is what the report states,that Iran has halted its program due to pressure,which pressure was applied in large measure by the Bush administration's policies.

You can't pick and choose which part of the report you want to believe.If Iran was compelled, by its perception of the costs of continuing, to halt the program,then those who are responsible for putting pressure on Iran will rightly claim that they were right in their polices.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/bronwen_maddox/article3001210.ece
Iran says that a newly published US intelligence report proves that its intentions for its nuclear programme are benign. So does Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the United Nations watchdog, who has greeted the report as if it confirms what he has always maintained – that a resolution of the row with Iran is within reach. However, the offers no reassurance; on the contrary, it supports fears that Iran could soon have nuclear weapons. It argues that Iran has been deterred from pursuing them mainly by the fear of US military action, a fear that has now faded.

Here is an excerpt from the Report:
[b]Our assessment that Iran halted the program in 2003 primarily in response to
international pressure indicates Tehran’s decisions are guided by a cost-benefit
approach [/b]rather than a rush to a weapon irrespective of the political, economic, and
military costs. This, in turn, suggests that some combination of threats of intensified
international scrutiny and pressures, along with opportunities for Iran to achieve its
security, prestige, and goals for regional influence in other ways, might—if perceived
by Iran’s leaders as credible—prompt Tehran to extend the current halt to its nuclear
weapons program. It is difficult to specify what such a combination might be

http://www.odni.gov/press_releases/20071203_release.pdf

@Richyblack

You can't start a thread about a report you are not even familiar with

chuckdee4:
Makalele was the best in that defensive midfielder role at the time (Offering nothing in attack like Vieira did), plus he was sold to Chelsea, we all know Chelsea were beiing conned ini the transfer market because of their deep pocket.
Nedved plays a different position so i won't compare.
Aside Makalele, is there any other player that plays Vieira's position that has gone for anything close to the £13m mark.

Admit it, it was a good piece of business (Aside the fact that we missed him), i wonder why u hate prof so much

That Makelele offered little in attack is the more reason why his deal is more spectacular.Emerson joined Juve,at 28 for about £15m,same role as a holding midfielder.

chuckdee4:
I-man, remember
- Djemba Djemba
- Kleberson (Sure that guy was Brazilian)

I was going to say Veron then i remembered u scammed Chelsea just like other clubs had

Every club has that.Wenger decided against bidding for Van Nistlerooy, claimning he will never recover from his knee problems,so much for his prescience,instead he went for Jeffers a.k.a fox in the box.Who can forget the likes of Davor Suker,Diawara,Cygan,Luzhny,Van Bronchorst,Silvinho,Wright,e.t.c

By the way AC Milan obviously scammed Chelsea when they sold them Schevchenko, heck they wouldn't even buy him back now for a nickle

Did Fiorentina scam Roma too?£22m for a 31 year old Batistuta

The guy was late for the test,he missed it by around 90mins.Its not like as if he completely avoided it.They just wanted to do him in because he is playing for the greatest club in England.

There was a Man City player that went through the same thing,he got a few weeks ban and a fine

How much Arsenal getting for their £16m investment on Reyes? I heard Athletico Madrid will pay Arsenal £8m Hopefully,in a couple of years,Dudu will leave for £4m

Cougar:
@ i-man,
to an average arsenal fan, arsene wenger is god. that barca paid 16 million for henry was even too astronomical. henry was 30 when he moved to barcelona. besides, ruud boy was sold for 11 million to real madrid despite his goal scoring prowess at man u. there was no way henry could have gone for more than 16 million so lets stop this wenger could have pawned him off at a higher rate.

I remember around May,I was telling Gooners that Barca were asking for Henry plus £10m for Etoo,when rumors were circulating that Arsenal were interested.They couldn't believe it.They were shocked by the £16m fee.They think Wenger can fix fees at whim.

In Ruud's case,he had lost his place in the starting line up to Louis "Van Basten" Saha for months and even lost his place with the national side to almighty Dirk Kuyt .This was why his fee came in quite low.

I-man
How bout Vieira, how much did he go for?, he was 30 when he left, how many midfielders his age would have gone for that price?

He left at 29 for £13m when Real offered £23m the previous season for him.What did he achieve for that extra season he stayed?He was below par in his last season.Claude Makelele,a year older at 30,left Madrid for £16m.That is a better deal than Wenger got for Viera.Pavel Nedved left Lazio for around £25m,same age as Viera at 29

chuckdee4:
@ I-man

Didn't u think something was wrong when the heralded best player in the world was sold for only £16m, Wenger saw the crook in Henry and still sold him to Barca for a decent amount.
If Henry was still the player he was when at Arsenal and at his best, prof would have flogged him off at a much higher rate. I repeat only Wenger knew the in and out of that Henry deal

Henry left for the amount Barca were prepared to pay.If Henry was determined to go,Wenger can only sell him at the amount Arsenal and the buying club negotiate,in this case,£16m.

If Wenger had the foresight you ascribe to him.He would have sold him in 2006 for £25m,which Barca were prepared to pay then,and save himself £5m in wages on top-total cost of Henry staying after the UCL final was about £14m.