₦airaland Forum

chrisley024: Blackett should be promoted I think

I also think so. He has a kind of confidence and very calm.

elampiro: This one no resemble fluke again o. It's looks like we are back to ourselves.

Good.

I just hope we carry this form into next season. Win those first five games and be at the top or within the scheme of things. This will be a real confidence booster to the team throughout the season.

With this system, it will be difficult for teams to beat Man United. I hope the system works very well in the EPL.

Purist: Rooney didn't make contact with the ball. That was a beauty by Young.

Oh! Ok, just watched it over again.

I think Rooney scored the goal.

elampiro: I saw up to 37 minutes on MUTV livestream. Then it stopped working. Later I got last one minute via an Arab site.

The site posted by @Odunharry is working.

Line up vs Inter

#mufc team v Inter: Lindegaard; Smalling, Jones, Evans; Valencia, Fletcher, Herrera, Young; Mata; Rooney, Welbeck.

malvisguy212: you quote luke 4:41 , this verse nail you down , thank you for quoting it, even the demon know who He is, but he don't want them to say it because his time is not yet, DO YOU KNOW WHAT WILL HAPPEN IF THE SCRIBE AND PHARISEES KNOW THAT SOME PEOPLE CALLED HIM THE SON OF GOD? THEY WILL KILL HIM, THAT MEAN THE PROPHECY OF HIS DEATH WILL NOT BE FULFILLED.

Hahahaha! You just keep on embarrassing yourself in a public forum with all that you typed. Did you even read all that you typed before posting at all? I can now see that you have problem understanding English Language. Do you know the meaning of being rebuked? He rejected it just like he rejected it from others. Demons who are evil said that just like human being said so. But he has always rejected being called such.

Maybe you are just reading your Bible because i can see that you are now running from pillar to post with all these responses. I have expected all these responses earlier.

* You are now claiming that he rejected being called son of God because he'd be killed.
So you are also now telling me that Jesus was afraid to die despite the fact that you Christians said he came to sacrifice himself for you.
Was he not eventually killed according to you Christians because of the denial? Was it part of the prophesy for him to DENY his true identity? When did he now reveal his true identity before his supposed death? Give me a verse in the Bible where it was prophesy that Jesus will deny his true identity in order for the prophecy of his death to be fulfilled. Also give me the verse where he revealed his true identity to people to really know that he's truly the son of God.

It is a total lie that the high priest did not know people call him the son of God. Why did they take him to the high priest if they didn't know that he's being called the son of God? Why did the high priest posed that question to him?
Was it not that they wanted him to confirm it in their presence which he denied and rejected.
You said they will kill him if he had accepted and that means the prophecy of his death will not be fulfilled. But you forgot that it was after his denial and rejection that he's the son of God that the judgement of death sentence was passed onto him.

Read these:

Matthew 26:62-67
62 Then the high priest stood up and said to Jesus, “Are you not going to answer? What is this testimony that these men are bringing against you?” 63 But Jesus remained silent. The high priest said to him, “I charge you under oath by the living God: Tell us if you are the Messiah, the Son of God.” 64 “You have said so,” Jesus replied. “But I say to all of you: From now on you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven.”[a] 65 Then the high priest tore his clothes and said, “He has spoken blasphemy! Why do we need any more witnesses? Look, now you have heard the blasphemy. 66 What do you think?” “He is worthy of death,” they answered. 67 Then they spit in his face and struck him with their fists. Others slapped him.

I thought as much that you know nothing about your religion, about Jesus you follow and the Bible.

matthew16:13-17 was very clear, jesus ask them, who do people say I AM[ God], peter reply YOU ARE SON OF THE MOST HIGH GOD.[direct answer]
This is jesus reply, blessed are you peter for flash and blood did not revel this to you, but my FATHER.

You confused, mary was highly favour, all generation called her blessed because she was favour by God the father, the same word was us to abraham and even sarah.

You always enter into my trap.
So God was no longer referred to as blessed again according to you.
You now know that the blessed that Jesus was referring to was Virgin Mary.
You said this earlier:

You even sound confused, first you say jesus did not called himself son of God, and later you admit He called himself son of the blessed one, WHO IS THE BLESSED ONE IF IT NOT GOD?

You now say this:

This is jesus reply, blessed are you peter for flash and blood did not revel this to you, but my FATHER.
You confused, mary was highly favour, all generation called her blessed because she was favour by God the father, the same word was us to abraham and even sarah.

You also first said this earlier:

I think a big reason of why Jesus never directly said that He was the Son of God (unless He was asked to say it) was because He wanted the people to exercise faith in Him, rather than seeing miracles and the like to prove to them that He was.

You said this now:

but he don't want them to say it because his time is not yet, DO YOU KNOW WHAT WILL HAPPEN IF THE SCRIBE AND PHARISEES KNOW THAT SOME PEOPLE CALLED HIM THE SON OF GOD? THEY WILL KILL HIM, THAT MEAN THE PROPHECY OF HIS DEATH WILL NOT BE FULFILLED.

You also said that the Mathew who wrote the Mathew chapter in the Bible was a disciple of Jesus which i have been able to prove to you that he wasn't.

Who is now the confused person? It is you.

I still maintain that Jesus never called himself the son of God at any time. As people were trying to call him that name, he rejected being called that. He denied being called that until his so called death according to the Bible. It was his denial that even brought about his death sentence judgement. All your cock and bull story can only be told to a kindergarten.

I am done with you on this because it doesn't worth it.

malvisguy212: In Matthew 16:13-17, Jesus says my father, meaning that He is the Son of God: Now when Jesus came into the
district of Caesarea Philippi, he
asked his disciples, "Who do people
say that the Son of Man is?" And
they said, "Some say John the
Baptist, others say Elijah, and others Jeremiah or one of the prophets." He
said to them, "But who do you say
that I am?" Simon Peter replied,
"You are the CHRIST , the Son of the
living GOD ." And Jesus answered
him, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar- Jonah! For flesh and blood has not
revealed this to you, but my Father
who is in heaven. Also, a high priest asks Jesus if He is
indeed the "Son of the Blessed", in which
He replies "I am" in Mark 14:61-62: But he remained silent and made no
answer. Again the high priest asked
him, "Are you the Christ, the Son of
the Blessed?" And Jesus said, "I am,
and you will see the Son of Man
seated at the right hand of Power, and coming with the clouds of
heaven." I think a big reason of why Jesus never directly said that He was the Son of God (unless He was asked to say it) was
because He wanted the people to
exercise faith in Him, rather than seeing miracles and the like to prove to them
that He was.

Can you please answer my question ? How many disciples jesus had according to the quran?

What do you Christians call God? Is it not your father the same way he called him his father? But he never called Himself the only Son of God.

At the point when he would have announced his sonship to God to the whole world, he denied it. You are now saying you "think". How dare you "think" for Jesus or God?

Luke 4:41 "And demons also came out of many, crying, “You are the Son of God!” But he rebuke them and would not allow them to speak, because they knew that he was the Christ".

This is the evidence that he's talking about Blessed Virgin Mary:

Luke 1:46-48 "46[b] And Mary said[/b], My soul doth magnify the Lord, 47 And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour. 48 For he hath regarded the low estate of his handmaiden: for, behold, from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed".

Are you shocked? Hahahaha! You can see that you know nothing about your Bible.That is from the same Bible you are quoting.

Virgin Mary giving birth to Jesus without any man's having anything to do with her is just one of the miracles of God.

malvisguy212: the good thin is that you admit jesus called himself, the son of man and the son of the blessed one, who is the man? Or the blessed one? If you don't know the father of jesus , you do not know the true God.
You even sound confused, first you say jesus did not called himself son of God, and later you admit He called himself son of the blessed one, WHO IS THE BLESSED ONE IF IT NOT GOD?

So you are simply telling me that God is Man. That is absurdity of the highest order.
This is simple and pure English Language. They asked a person if he is the son of God but he refused to admit that he is but that he's the son of man. You are now telling me that the man is God. What a ............

If you don't know who blessed is, you only need to tell me. My ten year old girl will tell you that the blessed is Mary the mother of Jesus.

I can see that you know nothing about the religion you practice. You only follow what you are taught dogmatically without even doing your own research.

ACCORDING TO THE BIBLE, JESUS HAD 12 DISCIPLES, NOW HOW MANY DISCIPLES THE QURAN MENTION, CAN WE HERE THERE ACCOUNT?

IT WAS NO MAN THAT CALLED JESUS HIS SON, IT WAS GOD HIMSELF, BUT YOU SAID IT ONLY A PARABLE, OTHER PROPHET SAY THE SAME THIN, CAN WE HERE THERE PARABLE? THANK YOU

Like i said in my earlier post, you have not been able to defend all that you have quoted from the Bible successfully. You now want me to tell you what you don't know in the Qur'an. Or, maybe i am underestimating you about your knowledge of the Holy Qur'an. Maybe you need to tell me how many disciples the Holy Qur'an recognize with the chapters and verses. After all i went into the Bible to bring out quotes to disprove your quotes.

I asked you again, who did God tell that Jesus was his son? Who was that quote revealed to?

You are becoming even more confused. Otherwise, how will you say because Jesus said he is the light of the world then he is the son of God? So in your own knowledge, Light of the world also means Son of God.

If it's not parable when someone called himself light of the world, that means he is the electrical light or whichever that we use in seeing.

I prefer to believe what the subject of the matter (Jesus) himself said about himself, rather that believe what second, third and witnesses said about him. I picked all my quotations from the same Mathew you picked yours from.

There are only two reasoning when we have contradictory statements like these. It is either one is wrong of the two are wrong. The two cannot be correct at the same time.

You will need to go and read your Bible very well and not just what they tell you. Did you even offer Bible Knowledge when you were in the secondary school?

malvisguy212: if you say the bible is corrupted, then you should be able to provide the real gospel,how many disciple did the quran mention? We the christians , we will nite say the quran is corrupted but the quran is the word devil use to bring down the truth,muhammad was in the cave of hira when the truth descend on him, what truth? Why the truth dint descend on other prophet? Are they living in lies?

Can you mention the prophet that speak in parable?which of them claim to be light of the world?

What i have been able to deduce from all that you have typed is that you don't even know your Bible very well.

We are still talking about what you said about Jesus and the disciples of Jesus, you are already jumping into the compilation of the Holy Qur'an.

You said that Jesus is the Son of God and i showed you in the same Bible where he REJECTED being called such, rather he called himself son of man or son of the blessed. You have not been able to bring out where Jesus himself confirmed himself to be son of God.

You don't even know how the compilation of the Bible was brought about. You were believing that it was Jesus Disciples who never kept any records or writings of about the life of Jesus during his lifetime. Even if they, were they also spoken to by the angels to reveal all these things you are talking about? If you are going to give me any quote, i will rather want you to give me a direct quote from Jesus or from God and not from those that called themselves witnesses and some that were not.

About the Holy Qur'an and Prophet Muhammed (SAW) that you mentioned about, i won't say anything about because you know nothing about that. The one you even believe you know something about, i have been able to see that you know nothing about it at all.

You have still not been able to defend your statements and quotations. Why do you like calling somebody a name that he rejected during his lifetime. How can you call Mathew a disciple of Jesus when he himself copied from Mark who's name wasn't even among Jesus' disciple and you want me to believe that.

Just forget it.

malvisguy212: luke is an apostle, matthew is one of jesus christ disciple.

I totally disagree with this.
Gospel of Mathew wasn't the same Disciple of Jesus. As a matter of fact, none of the Gospels in the New testament was written by Jesus disciples.
Gospel of Mathew was written by an anonymous person who wasn't even an eye witness. Or, how else can you describe a situation where some of the source of Mathew were from Mark who also wasn't a disciple of Jesus.

The same thing also apply to Luke. The New Testament was compiled 150 years after the so called death of Jesus.
My question now is that, did God directly reveal all these to them or where was their source of getting all these things when they were not even there when Jesus was alive.

read my coment again. It was no man that called him the son of God, even the wise men and angel worship Him, if jesus is not the son of God, he would av forbid them to do such, tell me which prophet has that kind of benefit? John 1:1. In the beginning was the word , the word was with God , the word was God.

Can you show me where Jesus himself literally called himself the son of God and not what people call him?
In most places in the Bible, Jesus referred to himself as son of man. Even when the high priest commanded him by the living God, he still called himself the son of man. Mathew 26: 63-64 "63But Jesus remained silent. And the high priest said to him, “I adjure you by the living God, tell us if you are the Christ, the Son of God.” 64 Jesus said to him, “You have said so. But I tell you, from now on you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven.

See also where he openly accepted to be the son of the blessed according to Mark 14: 61-62 "61 But he held his peace, and answered nothing. Again the high priest asked him, and said unto him, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?

62 And Jesus said, I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven".

The question is which word is that?read the beginning. Genesis1:1 and God said LET THERE BE LIGHT.which prophet of God has made claim to be the light of the world? No one but JESUS, JOHN8:12. AND JESUS SPOKE TO THE PHARISEES AGAIN, I AM THE LIGHT OF THE WORLD,HE WHO FOLLOW ME WILL HAVE THE LIGHT OF LIFE AND WILL NEVER WALK IN DARKNESS.

This is like a parable. Every prophet sent by God to the world is LIGHT to wherever such prophet is sent to. It is not until they say that that we have to know that all prophets of God are Light because the message they are being sent to deliver is LIGHT. Or will you rather call the message DARKNESS?

Arturo Vidal's agent holds talks with Manchester United, who are also weighing up a bid for Real Madrid's Angel di Maria

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2689232/Arturo-Vidals-agent-holds-talks-Manchester-United-weighing-bid-Angel-di-Maria.html#ixzz37CaTCFKy

malvisguy212: Luke 1:35
And the angel answered and said unto
her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee,
and the power of the Highest shall
overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be
called the Son of God. It was no man who decided to call Jesus
the Son of God, it was God Himself who
called him His Son. God confirmed the
message of this angel in:
Matthew 3:16-17
And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo,
the heavens were opened unto him, and
he saw the Spirit of God descending like a
dove, and lighting upon him: And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is
my beloved Son, in whom I am well
pleased. But the Devil was not happy with the
development, which provides salvation to
mankind and depopulates the kingdom of
Satan. He brought his message by
appointing his prophet from the descent
of Ishmael who God did not have covenant of prophethood with to oppose
the work of salvation done by Jesus. He
raised the Quran against the Bible.

Who were Luke and Mathew that made those statements?

Where did they get those statements from?

Were those statements revealed to them by God?

So, he was even called the son of God before his birth. What is the authenticity of this God's sonship?

Please, i'll like to learn.

dademola: 1. david moyes signed a 6yr contract-he didnt take the job on a temporary basis! U shudnt be comparing him to a RDM that was used as a stop-gap after AVB was fired! 2. Like i pointed out earlier; when most newly appointed managers decide to fire the backroom staff they meet on ground, it is usually done so as to accommodate the "tried and trusted" guys they are used to. The "tried and trusted" as used in this context, means that the incoming manager has achieved some form of remarkable success with these guys! Phil neville?? 3. Nobody is saying moyes shud work with phelan and co forever- the idea is for them to aid the transition process( which was never going to be easy). After the 1st season, he cld then take stock of the situation, and decide if he wants to continue working with them or not! It's very annoying when he says he's still getting to knw the players, when there were pple who clda easily helped him out!

My point also is that the decision is his and his decision was that he doesn't want to work with them whether for short or long term. This will not bring about any unhealthy rivalry which may come up between him and the former backroom staff which may now give him some excuses for his failures. There will definitely be conflict because he will also have his own idea of he wants to shape his team which may be different from what they have. Coaches have different ways of building their teams.

As it is right now, he doesn't have any alibi. If he fails then he and his backroom staff takes the blame with no tenable excuse.

I am done with this. These are all my personal opinions. Different people with different opinions.

Oghos1: ^^^
Finally sum1 whose opinion is nt being guided by unnecessary hate.
How refreshing

Mine is that i love all Utd players but the moment you cannot give out the kind of performance that merit you putting on our jersey then you should just go to other clubs where such performance will be appreciated. We have some average players whom we have been expecting to step up their game but they are not. That is the reason why Utd don't usually go for big time players.

You can see this where our net transfers over some years is being compared to Stoke and Aston villa. Adequate replacement of quality players have been the major problem we have been having for some years now. That is why Giggs is still playing for us at 40. SAF didn't retire him before he retired. So also we are seeing that with DM. He must be performing better than all the younger players. Like i said, he is the one seeing them on daily basis, we are not.

dademola: most of the managers u are talking about, are managers with some form of pedigree, so it can be argued that they shud be allowed have their "tried and trusted" guys around them!! Last time i checked moyes' Resume, i didnt see any achievment that shud warrant him being granted such a luxury!

I do not support the idea of him retaining SAF's backroom staffs. What do you think will be happening now if he retained them and there are all these problems? There will definitely be coaches crisis and they will be pointing accusing fingers at one another. He (DM) may have his own idea while they too will want to be controlling with the mind that they have been there before him. This will create conflict among them. Now they will be saying he's not listening to advice while he'll be saying they didn't give him free hand to select. That ego conflict will surely happen.

It is better the way he has brought his own backroom staff. If he is going to sink or swim, he will do that with his backroom staff with no excuse.

Please, what pedigree did RDM had before taking Chelsea to win Champions league and FA cup in just three months after his appointment as care taker manager of Chelsea? You need to lecture me on that.

Also, do you know that he had to bring in his former Chelsea team mate Eddie Newton to work as his assistant?

coogar: david moyes is the root cause of all the problems you listed here. he's the one with the controllers - the players are just the players. will you blame the players on your FIFA 14 because you got whooped by the computer? hell no.

I will give the players the majority of the blames.

Is he the one telling them to be making individual errors even at the beginning of the season when Vidic was making defensive errors in ball clearance?

Is he the one who told Cleverley not to raise his game to the form he was at the beginning of 2011/12 season before he sustained a ligament damage in the match against Bolton? Unless you want to tell me he has raised his game up to that level.

Is he also the one responsible for Valencia's decline in form since last season? Valencia haven't been able to replicate his form of 2011/12. He is just getting worse by the week. Wing play has been the tradition of Man Utd. In the days of Lee Sharpe and Andrei Kanchelskis to Ryan Giggs and David Beckham; from the great Cristiano Ronaldo, Valencia was able to give us quality crosses in 2011/12 which made him win Manchester United Players' Player of the Year.
Do you know that Utd have 423 of the 533 crosses whipped in failed to find their target (a Premier League high). I am sure 50% of those crosses belongs to Valencia. If half of those crosses have met their targets. we wouldn't be where we are right now.

Also, so many players making individual errors and getting sent off unnecessarily.

coogar: moyes has zero man management qualities.....he's divided the squad into two. he overuses the first group & he's frozen the second group out. the first group are fatigued & getting injured or tired, the second group are now rusty with no confidence.

If he had zero man management qualities as you have said, then he would have had crisis with his players at Everton. It would have been better if you could mention those players he had overused and who he was supposed to have used at any particular game because out of 29 matches played so far this season, no single player have played more than 22/23 matches except maybe De Gea.

He is the one at the training ground with these players and he sees them everyday and we don't. I don't believe he'll see a player who is performing in training and deliberately froze him out. At this moment if he has such a player with him he'll definitely use such a player because he has only bought only one player who is even out injured.

He has virtually given nearly all the players opportunities to show what they have got to offer but most of them are not stepping up except some few ones. Cleverley was meant to replace Scholes but he hasn't given up to 30% of what Scholes gave us when he was his age.

coogar: age & injury are no excuses if moyes had simply used fergie's blueprint. fergie was rotating rio, fergie gave RVP a special training regime that made him complete 38 league games last season. injury to players is a direct outcome of the pre-historic training regime of david moyes!

The most reliable midfielder we have right now is almost 32 1/2years old. He is the only one who can pass and drive the ball forward on a regular basis. How many of our rivals has a 32 1/2yrs old running the show for them from the midfield? Once he's out we face problem.

I could remember in 2009/10 when we were very unlucky with injuries. That was part of the reasons why we lost the trophy to Chelsea. We were fielding Carrick and Fletcher as center backs in matches in the first part of the season. SAF must have given those players the same pre-historic training regime. Also, is it not the same training he was giving to Everton players? Have we had a stable team this season? It is out of what he has on ground that he will select.

We’ve missed Phil Jones, Robin van Persie, Michael Carrick, Nani, Nemanja Vidic, Wayne Rooney, Rafael and Darren Fletcher in most part of the season. If our rivals can miss seven to eight of their important players and still maintain their respective positions on the league table then i'll accept. if City can miss Kompany, Toure, Fernandinho, Agüero, Silva and Negredo; Chelsea - Terry, Cahill, Lampard, Ramires, Oscar, Mata and Hazard for six to eight weeks.

I dunno that it has been established that injuries to key players at Arsenal has contributed their inability to win trophy.

coogar: moyes is why we are losing games like it's out of fashion. guess what? he still lies to the camera the players are doing well. he's not a leader of men. tactically, he's a disgrace! after sunderland went 2 goals up, he should have played all his attacking options & grab a draw or win - his first sub was fletcher. hernandez was brought on like the 85th minute. how do you explain such tactical daftness?

I am not exonerating him totally but the players must take large chunk of the blames. He may have his problem with substitutions just like SAF had in the past. Substitution is like a gamble it may work it may not a la Fabio. When SAF was still the manager, a lot of forum member criticized his substitutions and team lists. Some even go to the extent of abusing his asst Phelan. We can not all be satisfied.

The problem we are having right now has been there since about 3 to 4 years now. If not why did SAF had to bring Scholes out of retirement when he saw that City would run away with the trophy? That was the pointer to the problem we have now.

Don't even mention last season because we didn't have this kind of injury crisis then. Also, RVP was injury free, he solely won the trophy for us.

Man Utd problems are

1. The players must take highest proportion of the blame because those players we believe would step up their games are really doing nothing.
2. Injuries to key players are not really helping matters as well.
3. Age is catching up with some players as well.
4. Players are making too many individual errors.

I am not expecting much from this squad this season. The only target for me is top 4. Then there should be quality reinforcement in the summer for us to move on.

elampiro, hands up and keep quiet. Anything you say shall be used against you in the court of Nairaland.

elampiro: There is a dozen and one ways I can go about this argument, but I just want to keep it simple and try and avoid too much argument as the season is about to start.

The only tree because his fellow striker could not support him with goals, thereby allowing defenders, wingers and midfield players to push for goals thereby exposing the rear.


2011/2012: Somebody that scored over 20 goals had already done enough. When RVP and Berbatov went dry, Rooney supported them with goals.

2009/10: Why won't him be injured when he was carrying a mighty load that season. The support was very weak. We lost Ronaldo, Tevez and Hargreaves and it wasn't so easy.

Was Rooney the only player on the pitch? Rooney is more likely to score against the big teams more than any of our players. In the match against Man City, how many times did we get into their box? No thanks to the men at the middle of the park.

.......................................
How our strikers helped one another.

2012/13
RVP led the attack: He scored 25 assisted 8.

Wayne Rooney scored 12 goals and assisted 10
Chicharito scored 10 assisted 3

Rooney helped with 22 goals to the team success. Assisted his co strikers with 10 goals in the season.

...................................................
[b]2011/12
Lead striker: Wayne Rooney 26 goals, 5 assists.

Support striker: Berbatov scored 7 assisted 0
Chicharito scored 10 assisted 2.
Welbeck scored 9 assisted 4

Three other 3 strikers could only come up with 6 assist while supporting. This means defenders,midfield players and wingers will have to push forward to help search for goals while leaving the defence exposed.

If the assistant strikers have done better in assisting for goals, the league should have been won.

.........................................

2010/11
Berbatov lead the attack: scored 21 and assisted 4.

Wayne Rooney scored 11 assisted 11
Chicharito scored 13 assisted 1.

This means Rooney contributed 22 goals to the league success playing behind the strikers. Rooney again helped his fellow strikers with 11 assists.

.........................................
2009/10
Rooney led: Wayne Rooney scored 26 assisted 3
Berbatov scored 12 assisted 5.

Berbatov could only come up with 5 assistS all season. If he had done better more goals should have been scored to win the league. So Rooney only got 5 assist from his partner.



[/b]

How time flies. This was elampiro some months back about Rooney as the lead striker in 2011/12. But now things have changed. He is now singing another tune about Rooney's position in the team in that same year.

This has shown that elampiro knows nothing about football other than to be following what bloggers write about football analysis.

elampiro: Some charts......

Ahahaha! Is this not the same Zonal Marking site where someone brought out a chart sometimes ago to prove to you that Hargo played from the right side of the midfield in 2008 Champions league final against Chelsea to reduce Ashley Cole's threat rather than Cole and Lampard as you believed?

When you discredited the interpretation of the chart then, how do you now want anybody on this forum to rely on your interpretation of these charts. Or what has changed since between then and now?

This was your comment on the chart that was posted then:

elampiro: Exactly the way you want to see it.

There are different analysis for the two chart. The creator of the chart sees the first one as a pure 4-3-3. Go and read from the source. The second was analysed as 4-2-1-3. Hagreaves was meant to stop Ashley Cole and Lampard in that one off formation of 2007/2008 UCL final.

All these doesn't change the fact that Rooney was the lead striker in 2011/12.

Happy New Year to you all forum members. GGMU

montelik: DAMN see pages and pages of epistles.

@ tess 1 welcome to our raucous thread. Happy new year to all. May be a fruitful one for us all.

I wish u the same bro. I love this thread sooooooooooo much.

elampiro: The article says nothing. Just general statements which I read a zillion years ago. You and Coogar have not brought any data. You brought a chart when Welbeck was 9 and Rooney was 10 in same match they played.

Rooney was played very deep in 2011/12. He also played in RM, CM too.

Chicha and Welbeck were 9. Chicjha alone had 16 matches and Welbeck 20. They might have a few in beween.

By this weekend, I will argue this matter better. Even if it means taking one match at a time over all 38 matches.

If you don't believe the article i posted, why should i believe yours. As far as i am concerned, those four articles have cancelled each order out. I even believe the one i posted the more because it aligned with the facts that are on ground. So your must be a dubious article.

So you want to tell me that you didn't see where it was written that the most used formation in that season was 4-4-2 and it was used 31 times out of 38 league matches. You need to go and get a pair of glasses to be able to read properly. Or is it that you were dazed by those facts?

I don't even have that time to continue an argument that is done and dusted.

I rest my case.

coogar: yes, it did.
the article generally summarised the difference in rooney's position. you need to learn the difference between CF/SS & AM. I think your problem is you dunno the difference between SS & AM.

Rooney has even played as no 9 in this season but elampiro may dispute this as well.

elampiro: Learn to bow out when u see a superior argument.
In that article did you not see Rooney was quoted? I read it them in many media.

Rooney played number 10 in 2011/12. Then a little in midfield (CM and RM). Welbeck did not play behind Rooney.

Lol! Where is the superior argument? The article and Rooney's quote have already countered all the articles you posted. What remains to be countered are the facts/records presented by Coogar and I. And that is the truth. When there are facts/records, they will always remain the true source(s) of information. You need to go to the Courts and see where facts/records supersede oral evidence.

I have been a keen reader of all that members discuss here since the past six or seven months but didn't just have the time to register and contribute. I have read a lot of articles posted by elampiro in order to tell us how 'important' Rooney is to United. Also about De Gea and recently about "converting' Jones into a midfielder. I didn't just have the time all this while.

coogar: this boy go kill elampiro today.

tess_1, when did you start supporting united? you seem very intelligent about the tactical side of football.



do we need any further evidence to substantiate rooney was an arrowhead in 11/12?

Way back in the early 90s

elampiro: Wayne Rooney: I love playing midfield but draw the line at right-back

Massimo Marioni Monday 21 Nov 2011 3:53 pm ⁠

Wayne Rooney insists he’s embracing his new role in central midfielder, and is happy to play anywhere for Manchester United – as long as it’s not right-back.

Middle of the action: Rooney (Picture: AP)

The 26-year-old has been deployed in a deeper position by Sir Alex Ferguson in recent weeks, presumably in a bid to fill the creative void left by Paul Scholes ’ retirement in the summer.

But Rooney suggests that even though he’s loving his new lease of life in the centre of the park, there is a limit to where he’s willing to perform.

‘I love it. I don’t care where I play. I’m just happy to be on the pitch, I’ll play anywhere.

‘Well, probably not right-back, no. But midfield is a role where you can get on the ball and influence the game a bit more.’

Rooney is likely to continue in the unfamiliar role for United’s Champions League clash against Benfica on Tuesday, and will be hoping to add to his three goals in the completion, despite not having found the net in the Premier League for two months.

http://metro.co.uk/2011/11/21/wayne-rooney-i-love-playing-midfield-for-manchester-united-but-i-draw-the-line-at-right-back-227524/

Ahaha! You didn't disappoint me a bit. I knew this is where you are heading to when you said you don't need any facts/records to buttress your point.

I want you to juxtapose what you posted with this:

Wayne Rooney: Man Utd striker 'didn't want to play in midfield'

Wayne Rooney says he considered his future at Manchester United last summer because he was played out of position by former manager Sir Alex Ferguson.

The England striker, 27, was linked with a move to Chelsea, but has scored five goals for the Old Trafford club this term under new boss David Moyes.

"I got told to play in midfield and I didn't want to," said Rooney.

"I just think there had to come a point when, for my own career, I had to be a bit selfish really."

Rooney, speaking for the first time about his reasons for considering his future, says his performances last season were affected by not playing in "my position".

He was subsequently dropped by Ferguson for the second leg of United's Champions League quarter-final against Real Madrid, which prompted questions about his future during the summer - and attracted two bids from Chelsea.

"Everyone at the club knew where I wanted to play and I think that's why I was disappointed," said Rooney, who has scored 36 goals in 84 games for England.

"I actually felt when I played in midfield I did OK, but I didn't want to play there. I've had no problem in the past playing out of position. But I felt I deserved the right to play in my position and that wasn't happening.

"I think, naturally, I was a bit disappointed and maybe that affected some of the games I played. I know myself that last year wasn't my best season but there were times when I was playing in different positions.

"I didn't feel I got a consistent run of games up front. Sometimes when you're not playing in one position all the time it's difficult to adapt."

Under Moyes - the manager who gave him his professional debut at Everton - Rooney has been a regular starter up front this season, alongside Robin van Persie.

"David Moyes has come in, he's playing me up front and I'm enjoying it," added Rooney. "I'm not saying I wouldn't [go into midfield] for instance if it was the last 10 to 15 minutes of a game, if we were holding on a bit and I got asked to drop to the left, or drop back, to help see out the game.

"I'd always go in and try to help the team. I'm not saying I'd throw my arms up and not do it. I can play in midfield. Maybe when I'm a bit older, losing my legs a bit, I can go back there."

http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/24466899

elampiro: The Tactics Board- Nine and a half
July 13th, 2012
Nine and a half-
In the last season and a half, Wayne Rooney has made the deep-lying forward position his own. Sir Alex Ferguson has made the 4-4-1-1 his dominate formation. Wayne Rooney plays as the deep-lying forward, with Javier Hernandez or Danny Welbeck working in front of him. This allows Rooney to drop deep into midfield, and spread the ball out to the striker and wingers in front of him, while also remaining an extremely dangerous scoring threat himself. He’s able to be both a creator, and scorer.
Rooney plays a ‘Number 10′ extremely well. He is good with the ball at his feet, and he’s able to play quality short passes. In addition, he has a great tactical sense to pick out the right pass to create openings for others. The only problem is, his goal scoring abilities go to waste as a straight ‘Number 10′. In addition, he’s equally skilled as a ‘Number 9′. He’s got a lethal shot, and the strength and agility to work against defenders in the box. But, again, the problem is that his creative abilities go to waste as a straight ‘Number 9′.
Wayne Rooney is equally dangerous as a goal scorer, and a creator, making it hard to classify him. He is too complete a player to be classified as either a ‘Number 9′ or a ‘Number 10′, which leads him to be classified as something extremely rare: a ‘Nine and a half’.
http://redrants.com/the-tactics-board-nine-and-a-half/
Wayne Rooney isn’t the first player to be thought of as a ‘Nine and a half’. Marco Van Basten is one of the most common examples, but there are few players who have the skills and abilities to play this role. It’s hard to find a player that can both create chances for others, while also retaining a dangerous goal scoring threat. While these players are extremely rare to come across, they have become slightly more common now. With Dutch ‘Total Football’, and the playing style of the current Barcelona and Spanish National team, players are required to have better all-around skills. They are no longer allowed to just specialize on one typical playing style. Robbie Fowler is an ideal example. He was a dominate goal scorer. He didn’t have good pace, or speed, or agility, or ball control, but he could put the ball in the net. This type of player is no longer used, as Fowler is only 37 and last played for a team in Thailand.
The trend now is towards more complete forwards, in the mould of Wayne Rooney, Carlos Tevez, Zlatan Ibrahimovic and Lionel Messi. They all qualify as ‘Nine and a half’s, as well as being world class strikers. They are great goal scoring players, but they are also creative threats. Their creative abilities are great, and that makes them extremely valuable. Having the creativity, vision, passing ability, and tactical awareness necessary to create goal-scoring chances for their teammates, as well as being top notch strikers, makes them the key to their teams attack.
Playing a Nine and a half-
Teams struggle against a ‘Nine and a half’ for many reasons. The main advantage that ‘Nine and a half’s have is how versatile they are, and Wayne Rooney is a perfect example of this. In 2011/2012, he played as the lone striker up front, the deep-lying forward behind the main striker, the left-winger, and as a central midfielder. They are hard to shut down for the defense due to their variety of abilities, and it causes the defense many problems.
Playing a Nine and a half-
Teams struggle against a ‘Nine and a half’ for many reasons. The main advantage that ‘Nine and a half’s have is how versatile they are, and Wayne Rooney is a perfect example of this. In 2011/2012, he played as the lone striker up front, the deep-lying forward behind the main striker, the left-winger, and as a central midfielder. They are hard to shut down for the defense due to their variety of abilities, and it causes the defense many problems.

ISMH! So you want me to believe this article when i have facts/records that proved otherwise. I can see that you believe so much in articles written by some bloggers in order to attract traffic to their websites. I can as well sit in the comfort of my home and write articles about Rooney and you will believe it.

If when you were born, your parents pent to the local govt to register your birth and you have a birth certificate to show for this. If somebody somewhere then woke up one day say write about you and wrote different date of birth for you and you choose to accept it as against the one registered for you, that is your own cup of gari.

Football of these days have facts/records which are produced and kept by heavily paid private organization. How do you now expect me to believe a blogger when these facts/records a readily available? You can only get facts from match day or through these paid organisation. I can only choose to believe this organizations and not all these bloggers who write whatever they like without facts.

Coogar even brought out some facts to prove to you that he played as a no 9 but you choose to believe some articles.

This is also from another site. Read well and tell me which one to believe btw this and the one you posted. You will even see why Rooney's goals dropped from 2011/12 and 2012/13.

Tactical Analysis: Is Wayne Rooney playing as a no.10 or striker for Manchester United?

Wayne Rooney’s position has been subject to debate ever since he first burst onto the scene. Some would consider him a no.10, whilst others might suggest he is best as a lone striker following an impressive 27 goal haul as the focal point of Manchester United’s attack in 2011-12. The United forward claimed that he fell out with Sir Alex Ferguson over his position, with the United boss moving him into centre-midfield at times. So where does Wayne Rooney actually play?

Rooney’s role last season

The drop in goals from 27 in 2011-12 to just 12 league season is the result of a shift in position for Wayne Rooney. The signing of Robin van Persie meant that he was no longer the focal point of United’s attacks. Rooney was ‘relegated’ in a manner of speaking, to a no.10, an out and out attacking midfielder playing a support role. Rooney also registered ten Premier League assists from his slightly deeper position. One thing that caused him to put in a transfer request was allegedly the fact that he was dropped into central midfield on occasion, a position that was relatively unfamiliar for him. With van Persie though, he certainly was no longer the main striker and was clearly relegated to a deeper role behind the Dutch forward.

Wayne Rooney under David Moyes

David Moyes has been pretty amendment that he views Rooney as a centre-forward, shifting him from a deeper role to place him up front alongside Robin van Persie. If we look at the average position maps from Manchester United versus Bayer Leverkusen we could see this first hand:

Rooney (10) is playing alongside Robin van Persie (20) in what is essentially a conventional(ish) 4-4-2 formation. The same can be said of Rooney from the defeat to Manchester City. Even though he is alongside van Persie in his average position from this tie, he played a different role. Rooney touched the ball a total of 64 times and played 39 passes, van Persie on the other hand only played 24 passes and had just 48 touches of the ball. This is reflective in the two players action-area graphics.

Rooney spends a lot of his time dropping off the front, as we might expect of a no.10, despite having a similar average position to van Persie:

Despite being positioned as a striker he is dropping off a lot into the deeper areas we would associate with Wayne Rooney, a player who often drops back into midfield to pick up the ball and influence the play.

If we look at van Persie’s action areas, we can see it as more reflective of a centre-forward, with little dropping back and spending more time in the penalty area:

So despite being alongside each other, Rooney was still playing off of van Persie, albeit not quite as a number ten, but also not quite as a number nine, more of a hybrid. Something we can see from the 1-1 draw with Southampton

Rooney as a no.9 and a half?

What we can ascertain from Rooney’s form this season is that he is not really a number 10 any more. Rooney is playing further up the pitch nearer to Robin van Persie in what can loosely be described as a 4-4-2 formation. Rooney was also leading the line against Manchester City. Last year he was in support, which is why he enjoyed less goals for United. This season he has been better in front of goal but is still maintaining a high number of passes per game, an average of just over 45. To put that into context that is more passes per game than Arsenal’s Jack Wilshere and Chelsea’s Oscar.

One factor is that Robin van Persie has reduced his role to a pure no.9, who is no longer as involved in build up play as he was last year. RvP’s passing has reduced to averaging just 19.4 passes per game, down from 27 passes per game last season. Interestingly he is also creating less chances for his team-mates this year, with just 0.1 chances created per game, compared to 1.8 per game last season, a drastic shift in form and in the role he is playing. Rooney as such is having to work hard performing a duel role as a striker and as a no.10 to link things up, with RvP playing as a goal hanging forward now.

Rooney is more than capable of playing as a striker, as he did very well for United in 2011-12 and as he often does for England to great effect. He is also very adept as a number ten, playing in support, something he did better last season than he got credit for, he has also began to do this for England playing behind Daniel Sturridge which will be something to watch going into Brazil 2014.

http://thinkfootball.co.uk/archives/12554

I can see that you read football on the interne instead of watching and analysing properly. You need real football education.

I don't even know which argument to follow again.

!. You said the top 9 was shared among Berba, Chicha and Welbeck.
Berba who only stated 5 games with 512 mins.
Welbeck who just came back from loan will lead our attack where Chicha and Rooney were available.

2. You said that Rooney never topped 9 for us.
Only for you to change that he may have been used as a 9 in one or two occasions out of 32 starts.

All these in the name of justifying how good he is. He hasn't done anything extra ordinary. What he is doing in Man Utd some other player can do better as a no 10. He is not the only player who has such a work rate in the world. Anyway that is what he is being paid for.

I am out of here.

elampiro: Welbeck was 9 in 2011/12

Nani, Valencia, Young, Giggs had high paying time. JS Park aslo played some matches.

Check the stat.

So, they too played as 9? This is absurd.

elampiro: When I said Rooney never played as number 9, I was only emphatically telling you that Rooney was not our number 9 that season. He may have had 1 or 2 occasions he was drafted there.

Chicha and Welbeck were our 9 that season.

Chciha had 16 games as 9. Telll me where else welbeck played?

Chicha + Welbeck 9
Rooney 10
Berba 9

1. I asked you the other time that did you understand the meaning of what you said that Rooney never played as no 9. You are now saying he may have been drafted on 1 or 2 occasions out of 32 starts. Lololol!

2. Why has Rooney not been able to at least score more than 16 goals from the same position (10) in other 8 seasons? Answer me.

3. Welbeck was rarely used as a top 9. He was mostly used as AM or shunted to the LM/RM.

elampiro: 1. Stop confusing facts. Rooney was 10 in that season.
2. If Welbeck didn't play 9, where did he play?
3. Answer the above, then I will give you an all round answer.


*** A number 9 cannot be a one of top ten passers from the midfield.

I never said he didn't play as 9. I said SAF rarely use Welbeck as a 9. You were the one who said Rooney never played as 9 in that season.

coogar: the truth & nothing but the truth. fergie played a variety of formations that season of which 4-4-2 was the most used formation & rooney played as one of the two strikers, always in the box. i now have all the facts of 11/12, contrary to elampiro's lies that rooney played as a 10.

according to opta stats, united played 442 in 31 times, 451(twice) 4411(twice) 4141(twice) and 433(once). rooney played as one of the arrowheads in 11/12 season & that was the reason he got plenty of goals from that position & assisted less than his normal return as a 10.

And elampiro said Rooney never played as no 9.