Lappin or Surman

[I am a Banana 0]

Which of these players are the better all rounder and better for our final push!

I have always prefered Lappin as I feel that he gives us much more compared to what surman does - tracks back, heads the ball, stronger in the tackle. Ok he may not be as good on the ball but that is all that surman does that lappin doesn''t. I think especially with tierney playing at left back instead of drury at the moment the extra cover is needed as lappin is the man to do this. I have never been a surman fan, and I don''t see why people got all excited when he started to play. As he hasn''t shown much of his ''quality'' and for me Lappin should be in the team.

 

[Morisons Prozac 0]

So Surman has a quiet game and there are calls for him to be dropped. The way you have worded this it seems as if you have been waiting for Surman to mess up so you could pick a new scapegoat. Or you could just be attention-seeking.

[CDMullins 498]

Surman, but with a rocket up his ar-se becuase he was poor yesterday.

[Captain Fantastic 0]

Honestly, I haven''t been raving about Surman like everyone else has, you only see his quality in such little bursts, doesn''t put his foot in like Hoolahan or Lansbury does. For me he lacks any pace whatsoever, which would be ok if when he got that yard ahead he just whipped the ball in, but he doesn''t. Bristol City game for example I thought he missed out on putting the ball in the box far too many times. If I was picking a midfield 4 it would consist of Fox, Crofts, Lansbury and Hoolahan.

[???? 0]

Surman just needs a breather, remember he is not long back from a long term injury!!

[Excited Canary 19]

I agree, I don''t know what all the hype is about him. He shows glimpses of his class (like that back heel in the build up to Holt''s goal against Reading) but he really doesn''t do that much else. He really does lack pace, and it annoys me like hell when he is in a good crossing opportunity and he turns around and plays it backwards. He actually isn''t that much of an attacking player if I am honest, he never runs at the defenders, and as I say he seems afraid to cross the ball despite when he does he is usually very good! I think he has lots of talent and potential but we are yet to see 1/2 of what he can do just yet. Give him time, I like him.He is however better than Lappin on his day, but like yesterday when we were weathering a storm Lappin is better.

[O.T.B.C 1]

It was a good choice to take him off yesterday for Lappin, Lappin offered more protection for Tierney from Rosinior''s runs. And Lappin got more crosses in and early.

I like Surman, but he has been far too poor this season, although I would stick with him, he has the quality. I actually think sometimes, his brain is on a different wavelength from the rest, except maybe Hoola and Lansbury, he plays balls in to areas that he would be expecting others to run into.

Lappin is great from coming on.

[Salopian 1]

It seems that Surman had a poor game yesterday, but since his restoration to full fitness had been playing very well, even getting the nod in front of Lansbury in the last home game.

I like Lappin''s loyalty and commitment, but I must claim that Surman has more skill, in passing, dribbling, shooting, and generally in touch and control. A Wolves supporter told me that Wolves let him go only because he was so slight and so easily knocked off the ball. He has recently added more bite to his game, and regularly gets back to help the defence.

I don''t know why he did not play well yesterday, but I have to say that when fully fit and committed he can contribute more to the team than Lappin.

[shiplee15 0]

I would pick Surman ahead of Lappin without a doubt when the two are at their best.

Surman i think is a fantastic player, can carry the ball, take players on, whip crosses in, finish and take set pieces.

Lappin offers you the same with crossing the ball and he also offers you that bit more security defensively.

Surman i still don''t think is back to his best since his double injury and i don''t think we will see the best of him until next season due to this, when he will have been training solidly and gotten everything back to full fitness and full ability.

With this is mind i think Lappin would be better for the run-in with his delivery and consistency.

If i had to pick between the two when fully fit, it would be Surman every day of the week.

[Mister Chops 7]

Surman every time, unless he''s sick, injured or dead.

[vos 176]

Agree completely with "I am a Banana". I actually said 3/4 months ago that Lappin is a far better allround player. Lappin is far more energetic and covers his fullback well. Yesterday Tierney was left very exposed time and time again. When Lappin came on we looked better balanced and in a short time he made more crosses than Surman had made in the game so far. It should also be noted that Lappin has just returned after an operation and looked as fit as a fiddle.

To me Surman looks lightweigth and when he loses possession is slow to recover his position.

[Captain Holt 580]

Surman, but I''d rather have the queen on the left wing over Lappin.