Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
CharlieFarlie

Ruddy in NO Holt

Recommended Posts

Lennon, Johnson, Pilkington. Just to name a few better than Downing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jermy, an interesting point I was thinking to leading up to the announcement.

Surely the headlines "From Tyre Fitter to England Squad" would cause a few giggles from countries across the world.

A massive, massive shame they haven''t taken him seriously. Nobody prouder would wear the shirt like Holt would.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="AJ"]Jermy, an interesting point I was thinking to leading up to the announcement.

Surely the headlines "From Tyre Fitter to England Squad" would cause a few giggles from countries across the world.

A massive, massive shame they haven''t taken him seriously. Nobody prouder would wear the shirt like Holt would.[/quote]So basically the cnuts have used Holt''s own motivation against him.  Setting the goalkeeper aside . It proves it''s all about image, fashionable faces from fashionable sides.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Aggy"]How is saying that Carroll is a better target man than Holt the same as saying that Holt has been scoring and that is it? It''s saying that Holt is a good target man. Carroll is better. Yep, he''s stronger than Holt and better in the air. So yes, his all round game is poorer than Carroll''s. I''ve seen more of Holt than I have seen of Carroll, but how does that make any impact on anything? How much have you seen of any of the players in the England squad compared to Norwich players? On that basis, the England squad would be full of only Norwich players, because you''ve only seen everyone else once or twice this season. Bit of a silly argument don''t you think! Carroll was prolific in his last couple of seasons at Newcastle. As I said in my post, he isn''t scoring for fun yet, but he has looked more like scoring in the past three or four weeks. I did also say that the one thing Holt had above Carroll is his scoring record this season. If they had both scored the same amount of goals, then Carroll would be easily the better choice, because his strength and aerial ability is better than Holt''s. When he wasn''t scoring - yes, for most of the season - then Holt probably does look the better choice, despite his all round game not being as good as Carroll''s. However, Carroll has started to score again recently, and has looked very dangerous in the past couple of Liverpool games. He looks like he might be getting back to his goalscoring best. He might not be, but he might be. On top of that, Holt is 31, and this would be his one and only tournament if he were to go. Carroll is 22, has shown immense talent whilst at Newcastle, has shown at Liverpool that even when he''s not scoring he is still very strong and very good in the air, and now looks like he might be starting to get some finishing form back. I''m not saying Carroll was a million miles better than Holt or that Holt should have been completely overlooked from the off. But if it''s a three way toss up between Holt, Crouch and Carroll, then Carroll has got the best all round game of the three. Holt has scored the most goals, but his all round game is the weakest of the three. Carroll is starting to look like he might start scoring regularly again, so if he''s got the best all round game, I don''t think it''s that big a deal to take him over Holt and Crouch.[/quote]

 

I couldn''t disagree more and you''re delibertely avoiding my questions.

 

Re- Holt has been scoring and that''s about it.  Because you were signing the praises about every aspec of Carrolls game, his allround play and as a target man and the only part that Holt has over him is goalscoring.

 

He''s stronger than Holt?  In what way, in what situations?

 

He''s better in the air?  In what way, in what situations?  How many headed goals has Carroll scored this season?

 

Carroll was prolific in his last couple of seasons at Newcastle?  How many goals did he score?  How many in the Premier League?

 

How many Premier League goals has Carroll scored in his whole career?

 

Carrolls allround game is better than Holt''s? Why do you think this, which aspects of his allround game are better than Holt''s?

 

And finally, the reason I asked you how much you had seen of Carroll is that you appear to be championing his cause, saying that he is a better allround player than Holt and that he deserves to go ahead of Holt.  I am therefore curious how you seem to know so much about him?[:^)]  It cannot just be from highlights on MOTD if you know so much about Carroll''s allround game.  The England squad would not only be full of Norwich players because I am not the one championing the cause of someone woefully out form, you are and that is why I asked the question i.e., how you can come to justify your opinion?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Aggy"]Am I Shacks'' spokesperson? No, but when discussing the squad selection of the national team on a public messageboard, in which you question one selection and then ask someone to support an argument for another player, I don''t think it''s unreasonable to give my opinion on the matter, on a public messageboard. Do you?[/quote]

 

Firstly, that''s not what I asked and secondly yes you are right, you are free to give your opinion, but likewise I am free to ignore it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="norfolkbroadslim"][quote user="Shack Attack"][quote user="norfolkbroadslim"]

Just to reiterate what others are saying Downing over Johnson is a huge joke!

[/quote]

 

Sorry but Adam Johnson is massively overrated. One good game (often against average opposition) followed by five poor ones. If he were a young foreign winger at Citeh nobody would pay him any attention. Downing has had an awful season but Johnson is not that much better than him if he is any better at all. Neither of them would be in my squad.

[/quote]

 

And you would have taken?

[/quote]

 

How many out and out wingers do you need? I''d take Walcott, Oxlade-Chamberlain and Young. And I''d take Sturridge as one of the strikers as he can play wide too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Aggy" How is saying that Carroll is a better target man than Holt the same as saying that Holt has been scoring and that is it?

It''s saying that Holt is a good target man. Carroll is better. Yep, he''s stronger than Holt and better in the air. So yes, his all round game is poorer than Carroll''s. I''ve seen more of Holt than I have seen of Carroll, but how does that make any impact on anything? How much have you seen of any of the players in the England squad compared to Norwich players? On that basis, the England squad would be full of only Norwich players, because you''ve only seen everyone else once or twice this season. Bit of a silly argument don''t you think!

Carroll was prolific in his last couple of seasons at Newcastle. As I said in my post, he isn''t scoring for fun yet, but he has looked more like scoring in the past three or four weeks.

I did also say that the one thing Holt had above Carroll is his scoring record this season. If they had both scored the same amount of goals, then Carroll would be easily the better choice, because his strength and aerial ability is better than Holt''s.

When he wasn''t scoring - yes, for most of the season - then Holt probably does look the better choice, despite his all round game not being as good as Carroll''s. However, Carroll has started to score again recently, and has looked very dangerous in the past couple of Liverpool games. He looks like he might be getting back to his goalscoring best. He might not be, but he might be.

On top of that, Holt is 31, and this would be his one and only tournament if he were to go. Carroll is 22, has shown immense talent whilst at Newcastle, has shown at Liverpool that even when he''s not scoring he is still very strong and very good in the air, and now looks like he might be starting to get some finishing form back.

I''m not saying Carroll was a million miles better than Holt or that Holt should have been completely overlooked from the off. But if it''s a three way toss up between Holt, Crouch and Carroll, then Carroll has got the best all round game of the three. Holt has scored the most goals, but his all round game is the weakest of the three. Carroll is starting to look like he might start scoring regularly again, so if he''s got the best all round game, I don''t think it''s that big a deal to take him over Holt and Crouch. quote]

I''m sorry my friend but that is a complete crock of sh*t ! Utter nonsense from start to finish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

is Ruddy making the right decision in asking to be excused from the England v Belgium match to get married??!.......He''s just been called up into the swaud for the first time and may well have a chance to play some of the match at Wembley and he''s opted out?!, what kind of an initial impression does that make I wonder?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Asking whether I''m Shacks'' spokesperson isn''t ignoring it, it''s making you look like a bit of a pillock. But hey ho.

How am I ignoring your question?

What do I mean by he is stronger than Holt? Are you serious? I mean he''s stronger - he knocks defenders around more, he holds the ball up better. You know, he''s stronger.

What do I mean by he''s better in the air? Well, what I mean is that he is a better pilot than Holt, far more efficient in both taking off and landing, although Holt has got the slight upper hand in radar reading skills.

What do you think I mean? Don''t be obtuse. I mean he gets up and heads the ball better than Holt. I have never said Holt''s bad in the air - he''s very good. But Carroll is better in my opinion.

How many premier league goals has he scored in his career? Well at newcastle, he scored 14 goals in 31 premier league appearances. Holt has scored 15 in 35.

Now, to repeat again, and I''ll try and go slowly for you, I''ve not said that Carroll has been in better goalscoring form than Holt this season. In fact, I said that that was the one thing Holt had in his advantage. However, I have said that Carroll has started to look more threatening in recent games and so could well be getting back to the form he had at Newcastle. (Let''s remember as well that his 14 in 31 were between the ages of 16 and 21.)

Why do I think Carroll''s allround game is better than Holt''s? Well, if you read my posts, I''m pretty sure that, firstly, I said he''s a better target man. Secondly, I said that he was stronger and better in the air, and is more of a physical presence. (Note I''m saying "more", that suggests that Holt is also strong, also good in the air, and also has a good physical presence, but that Carroll is slightly better in those areas.) So if he''s stronger, better in the air and with more of a physical presence, then he''s got a better all round target man''s game than Holt. Holt has got a better goalscoring record this season, although over the course of their careers, you''d probably argue Carroll''s is better - he was scoring goals in the prem aged 16, Holt hasn''t been good enough to get a chance until he''s in his thirties.

How do I know so much about him? Again, don''t be obtuse. How do you know anything about any footballer? Highlights, watching games on the TV when they''re on sky and nothing else is, watching extended highlights of interesting games on sky plus, or skygo, or various online streams, etc. etc. If you''re trying to insinuate that I''m a Liverpool fan on the sly, well, no, not at all. But I do watch other teams on the TV other than Norwich when Norwich aren''t on or I''ve got nothing better to do. I''m sorry if that''s against your football-watching-beliefs or something!

Finally, I''m hardly championing his cause. I''ve said that it was a three way toss up between Crouch, Holt and Carroll. I''ve tried to offer an opinion on why Carroll has been picked; ie, we only had one position for a big man available, Carroll is better in the air, he''s stronger, he''s a decade younger, and looks like he might be starting to find some goalscoring form - or at least looking more threatening in and around goal - again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And while we''re on the subject this squad is EXACTLY the one that we were all expecting wasn''t it?

What else could we possibly expect after the FA completely bottled it and appointed Hodgson. Cappelo (sp) bottled it at the world cup by picking the same old faces who had never amounted to anything on the international stage and his departure somehow miraculously left the door open for England to salvage some pride and at least pick some talented young players and blood them with a view to competing at the next World Cup. The trouble is that that would have involved picking a talented and ambitious manager who was willing to do just that.

What have they done? Picked a very old manager who, let''s face it, has never won a thing of note, and played the "safe" card. As soon as word had leaked that he had completely bottled his first big decision and dropped Ferdinand under the pretense of being unfit instead of confining Terry to the bin where he belongs, his squad selection was only going to go one way. Same old faces, same old result.

England will not get out of their group.

Huge congratulations to John Ruddy for his selection, hard earned and well deserved, and Holty, if you read these posts, they are not worthy of your wholehearted commitment and loyalty. It is England''s loss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Aggy"]Asking whether I''m Shacks'' spokesperson isn''t ignoring it, it''s making you look like a bit of a pillock. But hey ho. How am I ignoring your question? What do I mean by he is stronger than Holt? Are you serious? I mean he''s stronger - he knocks defenders around more, he holds the ball up better. You know, he''s stronger. What do I mean by he''s better in the air? Well, what I mean is that he is a better pilot than Holt, far more efficient in both taking off and landing, although Holt has got the slight upper hand in radar reading skills. What do you think I mean? Don''t be obtuse. I mean he gets up and heads the ball better than Holt. I have never said Holt''s bad in the air - he''s very good. But Carroll is better in my opinion. How many premier league goals has he scored in his career? Well at newcastle, he scored 14 goals in 31 premier league appearances. Holt has scored 15 in 35. Now, to repeat again, and I''ll try and go slowly for you, I''ve not said that Carroll has been in better goalscoring form than Holt this season. In fact, I said that that was the one thing Holt had in his advantage. However, I have said that Carroll has started to look more threatening in recent games and so could well be getting back to the form he had at Newcastle. (Let''s remember as well that his 14 in 31 were between the ages of 16 and 21.) Why do I think Carroll''s allround game is better than Holt''s? Well, if you read my posts, I''m pretty sure that, firstly, I said he''s a better target man. Secondly, I said that he was stronger and better in the air, and is more of a physical presence. (Note I''m saying "more", that suggests that Holt is also strong, also good in the air, and also has a good physical presence, but that Carroll is slightly better in those areas.) So if he''s stronger, better in the air and with more of a physical presence, then he''s got a better all round target man''s game than Holt. Holt has got a better goalscoring record this season, although over the course of their careers, you''d probably argue Carroll''s is better - he was scoring goals in the prem aged 16, Holt hasn''t been good enough to get a chance until he''s in his thirties. How do I know so much about him? Again, don''t be obtuse. How do you know anything about any footballer? Highlights, watching games on the TV when they''re on sky and nothing else is, watching extended highlights of interesting games on sky plus, or skygo, or various online streams, etc. etc. If you''re trying to insinuate that I''m a Liverpool fan on the sly, well, no, not at all. But I do watch other teams on the TV other than Norwich when Norwich aren''t on or I''ve got nothing better to do. I''m sorry if that''s against your football-watching-beliefs or something! Finally, I''m hardly championing his cause. I''ve said that it was a three way toss up between Crouch, Holt and Carroll. I''ve tried to offer an opinion on why Carroll has been picked; ie, we only had one position for a big man available, Carroll is better in the air, he''s stronger, he''s a decade younger, and looks like he might be starting to find some goalscoring form - or at least looking more threatening in and around goal - again.[/quote]

 

Getting into the insults now I see. 

 

You are talking utter nonesense!!!

 

Carroll wasn''t scoring goals in the Prem at 16 you fool!  He was older than that when he made his debut!  So he was scoring for Newcastle in the Prem BEFORE he made his debut? He didn''t score in the Prem until he was 20!!!

 

Carroll''s career goalscoring record is better than Holt''s don''t talk 5h1te!  And what fictitious facts are you going to produce in support of this statement?[:^)]

 

You''re deluded

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Carroll

Pretty sure he made his premier league debut in the 2006-2007 season. Birthday in January according to Wikipedia, so I reckon that would have made him 17. Ok, I''ll accept my maths was a year out. Not 20 though was he? Unless 2006-2007 was only three years ago? I will retract my statement about him scoring at 16 though, you are correct, he didn''t score until later. He was playing in the prem at 17 though.

My point about their goalscoring records is that Holt has scored the majority of his goals at league 1 or league 2 level. Carroll has only ever played at championship and premiership level. Since breaking into the Newcastle side properly when they got relegated to the championship, he has scored 17 in 39 (compared to Holt''s 21 in 45 last season, so pretty close really), and 11 in 19 at Newcastle (compared to Holt''s 15 in 35).

Now, as I said, this season Holt has got a far superior scoring record. But considering Carroll''s young age and the superb scoring record he got at newcastle in the premiership before he left to join Liverpool, there''s not much between the two over their careers. I can''t, and am not trying to, argue that Carroll has been better in front of goal this season, but before he joined Liverpool, his scoring record was superb. You don''t go from scoring 11 goals in 19 premiership games to being completely crap.

And where are any insults? I said your questions were obtuse. Which, quite clearly they were. What else would I have meant by "he is stronger" and "he is better in the air"? If that''s offensive, then you need to get out more, or stop asking stupid questions!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="G"]

Lennon, Johnson, Pilkington. Just to name a few better than Downing.

[/quote]........just how poor does downing have to be to get dropped. 48 shots at goal, zero goals this season in the premiership, crossing success, 20.9%, that is just 1 in five crosses finding a team mate. i just cannot see why managers, club and country, keep persevereing with this very average player. stats from the liverpool official site.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Genuinely pissed off at this news. What a joke. Great for the lad Ruddy but really... England needs Holt. Usual crap coming up in June no doubt...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="norfolkbroadslim"]

[quote user="Aggy"]Asking whether I''m Shacks'' spokesperson isn''t ignoring it, it''s making you look like a bit of a pillock. But hey ho. How am I ignoring your question? What do I mean by he is stronger than Holt? Are you serious? I mean he''s stronger - he knocks defenders around more, he holds the ball up better. You know, he''s stronger. What do I mean by he''s better in the air? Well, what I mean is that he is a better pilot than Holt, far more efficient in both taking off and landing, although Holt has got the slight upper hand in radar reading skills. What do you think I mean? Don''t be obtuse. I mean he gets up and heads the ball better than Holt. I have never said Holt''s bad in the air - he''s very good. But Carroll is better in my opinion. How many premier league goals has he scored in his career? Well at newcastle, he scored 14 goals in 31 premier league appearances. Holt has scored 15 in 35. Now, to repeat again, and I''ll try and go slowly for you, I''ve not said that Carroll has been in better goalscoring form than Holt this season. In fact, I said that that was the one thing Holt had in his advantage. However, I have said that Carroll has started to look more threatening in recent games and so could well be getting back to the form he had at Newcastle. (Let''s remember as well that his 14 in 31 were between the ages of 16 and 21.) Why do I think Carroll''s allround game is better than Holt''s? Well, if you read my posts, I''m pretty sure that, firstly, I said he''s a better target man. Secondly, I said that he was stronger and better in the air, and is more of a physical presence. (Note I''m saying "more", that suggests that Holt is also strong, also good in the air, and also has a good physical presence, but that Carroll is slightly better in those areas.) So if he''s stronger, better in the air and with more of a physical presence, then he''s got a better all round target man''s game than Holt. Holt has got a better goalscoring record this season, although over the course of their careers, you''d probably argue Carroll''s is better - he was scoring goals in the prem aged 16, Holt hasn''t been good enough to get a chance until he''s in his thirties. How do I know so much about him? Again, don''t be obtuse. How do you know anything about any footballer? Highlights, watching games on the TV when they''re on sky and nothing else is, watching extended highlights of interesting games on sky plus, or skygo, or various online streams, etc. etc. If you''re trying to insinuate that I''m a Liverpool fan on the sly, well, no, not at all. But I do watch other teams on the TV other than Norwich when Norwich aren''t on or I''ve got nothing better to do. I''m sorry if that''s against your football-watching-beliefs or something! Finally, I''m hardly championing his cause. I''ve said that it was a three way toss up between Crouch, Holt and Carroll. I''ve tried to offer an opinion on why Carroll has been picked; ie, we only had one position for a big man available, Carroll is better in the air, he''s stronger, he''s a decade younger, and looks like he might be starting to find some goalscoring form - or at least looking more threatening in and around goal - again.[/quote]

 

Getting into the insults now I see. 

 

You are talking utter nonesense!!!

 

Carroll wasn''t scoring goals in the Prem at 16 you fool!  He was older than that when he made his debut!  So he was scoring for Newcastle in the Prem BEFORE he made his debut? He didn''t score in the Prem until he was 20!!!

 

Carroll''s career goalscoring record is better than Holt''s don''t talk 5h1te!  And what fictitious facts are you going to produce in support of this statement?[:^)]

 

You''re deluded

[/quote]

Don''t worry Aggy. Since the beginning of all this" Grant Holt for England" speculation , the dyed in the wool exponents such as NBS etc have resorted to insults aimed at anyone who does not share their blinkered, yellow specs view on the matter.  They blithely ignore any reference to the fact that GH is the wrong side of 31, and has never kicked an international football in his life. That does not make you, I or anyone else who''s trying to see the wider picture , "anti Holt", "anti Norwich", " talking claptrap", "a pillock" or any other such silly, childish suggestion. It''s merely the way we see it. and, perhaps more significantly how other professional operators have regularly seen it in the past, and even MORE significantly, how Roy Hodgson sees it.

 

But, just to be clear on this... I''d love to see Holt in an England shirt, but I can see why he''s not been chosen, and why it aint going to happen in the future either. Equally, I''m dismayed that fellow oldies (and failed ones at that) such as Terry, Barry, Gerrard et al are included, but I''ll get behind whoever is chosen against France, and that''s that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Aggy"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Carroll Pretty sure he made his premier league debut in the 2006-2007 season. Birthday in January according to Wikipedia, so I reckon that would have made him 17. Ok, I''ll accept my maths was a year out. Not 20 though was he? Unless 2006-2007 was only three years ago? I will retract my statement about him scoring at 16 though, you are correct, he didn''t score until later. He was playing in the prem at 17 though. My point about their goalscoring records is that Holt has scored the majority of his goals at league 1 or league 2 level. Carroll has only ever played at championship and premiership level. Since breaking into the Newcastle side properly when they got relegated to the championship, he has scored 17 in 39 (compared to Holt''s 21 in 45 last season, so pretty close really), and 11 in 19 at Newcastle (compared to Holt''s 15 in 35). Now, as I said, this season Holt has got a far superior scoring record. But considering Carroll''s young age and the superb scoring record he got at newcastle in the premiership before he left to join Liverpool, there''s not much between the two over their careers. I can''t, and am not trying to, argue that Carroll has been better in front of goal this season, but before he joined Liverpool, his scoring record was superb. You don''t go from scoring 11 goals in 19 premiership games to being completely crap. And where are any insults? I said your questions were obtuse. Which, quite clearly they were. What else would I have meant by "he is stronger" and "he is better in the air"? If that''s offensive, then you need to get out more, or stop asking stupid questions![/quote]

 

Pillock you called me a pillock.

 

He was 18 when he made his Premier League debut and 20 when he first scored in the Prem.

 

I''m not claiming to be an expert on Andy Carroll, far from it, but having been born in Newcastle and bred in Northumberland all my life, 30 odd years, I know a bit.

 

I don''t think Carroll is 5h1t, but likewise I don''t think he deserves his place in the England squad.  I also don''t think his allround game is better than Holt''s.  Personally I think Holt links the play better.

 

Carroll sure is a big lad and had he stayed at Newcastle and not had the £35m price tag hanging over his head, then he may well have justified his inclusion.

 

For £35m, there weren''t many Newcastle fans sad to see him go and for now having the likes of Ba, Cisse, Cabaye , Ben Arthur etc etc for the price of 1 Andy Carroll, I can''t really blame them.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i am surprised that no-one has picked up Woy''s comments on Ruddy ie Hart is an obvious No 1 (granted), and Rob Green is an obvious No 2 (only in the childish sense Woy you retard)

And really championing Andy Carroll as some posters have done whatever next lets start a Saurez Ambassador for Sport or who about John Terry as lead for Kick it Out. This is an absurd standpoint and not just as Norwich fans

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Eric Pickles Pie Supplier"][quote user="norfolkbroadslim"]

[quote user="Aggy"]Asking whether I''m Shacks'' spokesperson isn''t ignoring it, it''s making you look like a bit of a pillock. But hey ho. How am I ignoring your question? What do I mean by he is stronger than Holt? Are you serious? I mean he''s stronger - he knocks defenders around more, he holds the ball up better. You know, he''s stronger. What do I mean by he''s better in the air? Well, what I mean is that he is a better pilot than Holt, far more efficient in both taking off and landing, although Holt has got the slight upper hand in radar reading skills. What do you think I mean? Don''t be obtuse. I mean he gets up and heads the ball better than Holt. I have never said Holt''s bad in the air - he''s very good. But Carroll is better in my opinion. How many premier league goals has he scored in his career? Well at newcastle, he scored 14 goals in 31 premier league appearances. Holt has scored 15 in 35. Now, to repeat again, and I''ll try and go slowly for you, I''ve not said that Carroll has been in better goalscoring form than Holt this season. In fact, I said that that was the one thing Holt had in his advantage. However, I have said that Carroll has started to look more threatening in recent games and so could well be getting back to the form he had at Newcastle. (Let''s remember as well that his 14 in 31 were between the ages of 16 and 21.) Why do I think Carroll''s allround game is better than Holt''s? Well, if you read my posts, I''m pretty sure that, firstly, I said he''s a better target man. Secondly, I said that he was stronger and better in the air, and is more of a physical presence. (Note I''m saying "more", that suggests that Holt is also strong, also good in the air, and also has a good physical presence, but that Carroll is slightly better in those areas.) So if he''s stronger, better in the air and with more of a physical presence, then he''s got a better all round target man''s game than Holt. Holt has got a better goalscoring record this season, although over the course of their careers, you''d probably argue Carroll''s is better - he was scoring goals in the prem aged 16, Holt hasn''t been good enough to get a chance until he''s in his thirties. How do I know so much about him? Again, don''t be obtuse. How do you know anything about any footballer? Highlights, watching games on the TV when they''re on sky and nothing else is, watching extended highlights of interesting games on sky plus, or skygo, or various online streams, etc. etc. If you''re trying to insinuate that I''m a Liverpool fan on the sly, well, no, not at all. But I do watch other teams on the TV other than Norwich when Norwich aren''t on or I''ve got nothing better to do. I''m sorry if that''s against your football-watching-beliefs or something! Finally, I''m hardly championing his cause. I''ve said that it was a three way toss up between Crouch, Holt and Carroll. I''ve tried to offer an opinion on why Carroll has been picked; ie, we only had one position for a big man available, Carroll is better in the air, he''s stronger, he''s a decade younger, and looks like he might be starting to find some goalscoring form - or at least looking more threatening in and around goal - again.[/quote]

 

Getting into the insults now I see. 

 

You are talking utter nonesense!!!

 

Carroll wasn''t scoring goals in the Prem at 16 you fool!  He was older than that when he made his debut!  So he was scoring for Newcastle in the Prem BEFORE he made his debut? He didn''t score in the Prem until he was 20!!!

 

Carroll''s career goalscoring record is better than Holt''s don''t talk 5h1te!  And what fictitious facts are you going to produce in support of this statement?[:^)]

 

You''re deluded

[/quote]

Don''t worry Aggy. Since the beginning of all this" Grant Holt for England" speculation , the dyed in the wool exponents such as NBS etc have resorted to insults aimed at anyone who does not share their blinkered, yellow specs view on the matter.  They blithely ignore any reference to the fact that GH is the wrong side of 31, and has never kicked an international football in his life. That does not make you, I or anyone else who''s trying to see the wider picture , "anti Holt", "anti Norwich", " talking claptrap", "a pillock" or any other such silly, childish suggestion. It''s merely the way we see it. and, perhaps more significantly how other professional operators have regularly seen it in the past, and even MORE significantly, how Roy Hodgson sees it.

 

But, just to be clear on this... I''d love to see Holt in an England shirt, but I can see why he''s not been chosen, and why it aint going to happen in the future either. Equally, I''m dismayed that fellow oldies (and failed ones at that) such as Terry, Barry, Gerrard et al are included, but I''ll get behind whoever is chosen against France, and that''s that.

[/quote]

 

Dear oh deat, a valiant attempt at support of Aggy there, Eric, but may I point out that he is the one who started the insults and he is the one who called me a pillock!

 

So in a round about way, you''re supporting me with your anti pillock and insults comments, cheers[Y]

 

I am not ignoring the fact that Holt is 31.  Whatever his age, he deserves to be there on merit.  I can see the wider picture, but quite simply, imho Andy Carroll does not deserve to be in the England Squad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I didn''t call you a pillock. I said that by ignoring my opinion on a question you had just asked on a public messageboard by saying "are you Shacks'' spokesperson" made you "look like a bit of a pillock."

There is a difference between looking like a pillock and being one, and that is hardly starting anything, when you''ve just tried to completely undermine what was a completely neutral answer to your question on said public messageboard. It wasn''t an offensive opinion, I merely said in response to your question that I would have probably taken Lennon and maybe Adam Johnson. If you think that answering with "are you Shacks'' spokesperson" is an acceptable way of responding to such a comment, then perhaps my suggestion was correct.

Your last post aimed at me is fair enough. And had that been your initial response (ie; a response that outlines your reasons for disagreeing with me), rather than a number of posts asking obtuse questions to try and make my argument look silly, then I would have left it at that and agreed to disagree.

I would agree that 35 million was an outrageous amount of money for him. And if you don''t think his all round game is better than Holt''s then fair enough. I was more talking about his target man attributes than his all round game (as in he''s a better all round target man, not his link play), as I believe that is what he has been selected for. He''s not there to link the play, he''s there to hold the win the flick ons and get on the end of crosses. At least that''s what I assume. Throughout, I have been trying to rationalise rather than justify his inclusion. I''m not trying to say he definitely should have gone over Holt, I''m trying to offer a reason for why he has gone instead of Holt.

Personally, I think that he is a better target man in terms of holding the ball up, putting himself around and winning flick ons than is Holt. And I think that if he ever finds the goalscoring form that he had at Newcastle a couple of seasons ago, he will be an awesome player. Presumably, Hodgson has looked at his recent form (admittedly only in the last couple of games), has seen that he has been performing much better in those last couple of games, and is hoping he can continue to perform in the Euros in such a way. I''d have loved to have seen Holt scoring the winner in the Euro final, of course I would, but I can also understand other reasons why he hasn''t been picked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Aggy"]

How many premier league goals has he scored in his career? Well at newcastle, he scored 14 goals in 31 premier league appearances. Holt has scored 15 in 35.[/quote]I love how you''ve simply lumped all the seasons together to make his record appear comparable to Holt''s, when it simply isn''t.08/09 - 3 goals in 14 games - 4.67 games per goal09/10 - 0 prem goals as playing in CCC10/11 - 13 goals in 26 games - 2 games per goal11/12 - 4 goals in 32 games - 8 games per goalTotal of 20 goals in 72 games - 3.6 games per goalCompare this to Holt with 15 in 36 games - 2.4 games per goal.Sorry but your figures don''t stack up, and presenting them the way you did is misleading and simply incorrect.Add in the fact that his good form last season for Newcastle is somewhat irrelevant after such a poor season this year. Had it not been for those late couple of goals, he''d have been a truly laughable choice, whereas it''s just highly questionable now...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Aggy"]I didn''t call you a pillock. I said that by ignoring my opinion on a question you had just asked on a public messageboard by saying "are you Shacks'' spokesperson" made you "look like a bit of a pillock." There is a difference between looking like a pillock and being one, and that is hardly starting anything, when you''ve just tried to completely undermine what was a completely neutral answer to your question on said public messageboard. It wasn''t an offensive opinion, I merely said in response to your question that I would have probably taken Lennon and maybe Adam Johnson. If you think that answering with "are you Shacks'' spokesperson" is an acceptable way of responding to such a comment, then perhaps my suggestion was correct. Your last post aimed at me is fair enough. And had that been your initial response (ie; a response that outlines your reasons for disagreeing with me), rather than a number of posts asking obtuse questions to try and make my argument look silly, then I would have left it at that and agreed to disagree. I would agree that 35 million was an outrageous amount of money for him. And if you don''t think his all round game is better than Holt''s then fair enough. I was more talking about his target man attributes than his all round game (as in he''s a better all round target man, not his link play), as I believe that is what he has been selected for. He''s not there to link the play, he''s there to hold the win the flick ons and get on the end of crosses. At least that''s what I assume. Throughout, I have been trying to rationalise rather than justify his inclusion. I''m not trying to say he definitely should have gone over Holt, I''m trying to offer a reason for why he has gone instead of Holt. Personally, I think that he is a better target man in terms of holding the ball up, putting himself around and winning flick ons than is Holt. And I think that if he ever finds the goalscoring form that he had at Newcastle a couple of seasons ago, he will be an awesome player. Presumably, Hodgson has looked at his recent form (admittedly only in the last couple of games), has seen that he has been performing much better in those last couple of games, and is hoping he can continue to perform in the Euros in such a way. I''d have loved to have seen Holt scoring the winner in the Euro final, of course I would, but I can also understand other reasons why he hasn''t been picked.[/quote]

 

But that''s what happens on this forum, people make sweeping statements, claim false truths etc etc and then if you ask them to justify their opinion, or why they think something or if they claim something as fact that isn''t fact, so many get all so offended by it.  So, if you find that obtuse, that''s your problem.

 

Dean Coney was a prolific goalscorer for Norwich City........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No I haven''t Indie. He scored 14 in 33 (bad maths, going back 33 games not 31!) in his last two seasons in the prem at Newcastle.

I then later compared Holt''s most recent season in the championship with Carroll''s most recent season in the championship. And then I compared Holt''s scoring record this season with Carroll''s scoring record in the premiership before his move to Liverpool.

I made it quite clear I was discounting his time at Liverpool, for the reasons above. I said that this season you can''t argue Holt''s record has been better. But that before this season, Carroll''s scoring record was pretty impressive.

And his good form for Newcastle is not irrelevant at all. As I have also said, if he can get back to that form, then he''s going to be an absolutely awesome all round traditional centre forward. And clearly, given his performances in the past two or three weeks, Hodgson feels he is getting back to that sort of form. You don''t score 11 in 19 games in the premiership aged 21 or however old he was if you''re a terrible player. If Hodgson believes he has seen enough to suggest he''s getting back towards that form, then it goes someway to explaining his inclusion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nobody has passed an opinion on the fact that Holt committed the most fouls in the Prem this season, that I mentioned on another thread. Even Adrian Durham on Talksport has mentioned that this was one major reason why he had reservations.  At international level Holt would have been a major risk, as conceding free-kicks is a definite worry. My heart has always said Holt but the head has to rule IMO.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="norfolkbroadslim"]

 

Dear oh deat, a valiant attempt at support of Aggy there, Eric, but may I point out that he is the one who started the insults and he is the one who called me a pillock!

 

So in a round about way, you''re supporting me with your anti pillock and insults comments, cheers[Y]

 

I am not ignoring the fact that Holt is 31.  Whatever his age, he deserves to be there on merit.  I can see the wider picture, but quite simply, imho Andy Carroll does not deserve to be in the England Squad.

[/quote]

 

Well, OK, NBS. I stand corrected on the niceties of the "pillock" question. But I''m not "supporting" anyone (other than Norwich City FC, of course !)

 

You can quote stats till the cows come home.There are factors that would favour Holt. There are factors that would favour Carroll. There are factors that would favour Crouch. And several others. There are also factors against each. All I am saying is that , looking at the wider picture, and with a view to the future, I can see why Carroll has been given the nod. A few weeks ago he could not hit a cow''s arse with a banjo, but you do not suddenly become a bad player overnight, so in my opinion (and , as I say, clearly in that of Mr Hodgson) he represents the best option in what is, frankly, a pretty mediocre bunch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well if saying that my opinion is that Carroll is stronger and better in the air than Holt is a "sweeping statement" or is claiming a false truth, then what is the point in having a messageboard?

I''ve given my opinion. The statistics I gave above were out on maths by 2 games as I have noticed in the post above (so that probably changes the goals per game ratio by about 0.3 or something), and I was happy to admit that he made his debut at 17 rather than 16 and didn''t score until he was 20.

I wasn''t really trying to push those stats anyway. I said that, in my opinion, the goalscoring record of Carroll before his move to Liverpool was better than Holt''s, based on his age and the fact that his goals were in the prem and the championship.

How am I supposed to explain to you what I mean by saying I think Carroll is better in the air than Holt, other than saying I think Carroll is better in the air than Holt?

Originally, my opinion on why Carroll was picked and Holt wasn''t, was because I thought Carroll was better in the air and was stronger than Holt, and that he seemed to be getting back to the goalscoring form he had at Newcastle.

What in that original point is a sweeping statement or is a claim to a false truth? It''s my opinion, yes. If you disagree with it, then fine. If you want to ask obtuse questions, then fine. But if you want to ask obtuse questions and clamber all over people''s perfectly reasonable answers with your own responses such as "are you shacks'' spokesperson", then don''t bring out the crying about insults card when someone says you start to look like a bit of a pillock.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Aggy"]No I haven''t Indie. He scored 14 in 33 (bad maths,

going back 33 games not 31!) in his last two seasons in the prem at

Newcastle.

[/quote]No, it was 16 in 40, look it up on Soccerbase if you don''t believe me:http://www.soccerbase.com/players/player.sd?player_id=45285[quote]I

then later compared Holt''s most recent season in the championship with

Carroll''s most recent season in the championship.[/quote]17 in 39 for Carroll - 2.29 games per goal21 in 45 for Holt - 2.14 games per goalHolt wins again...[quote]And

then I compared Holt''s scoring record this season with Carroll''s

scoring record in the premiership before his move to Liverpool.[/quote]

16 in 40 for Carroll -  2.5 games per goal

15 in 36 for Holt - 2.4 games per goalHolt wins again [quote]I made it quite clear I was discounting his time at

Liverpool[/quote]Because it''s rubbish...So in essence, Holt has outperformed Carroll in their respective last seasons in the prem and the CCC, and most importantly his current form this season has been a world better than Carroll''sThe defence rests...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I did say Carroll was prolific in his last couple of seasons at Newcastle. So, I''ve gone off the last two seasons of him being in the prem at Newcastle, and discussed the middle season of the championship elsewhere. If I''m discussing the prolificness of his last couple of seasons, why would I include the games before the last couple of seasons? I also said that I was basing my results from the point after he made himself a regular starter in the prem side the season they got relegated.

I said the results between Carroll and Holt''s season in the championship were very close as well.

And Carroll didn''t play 40 games in his last half season at newcastle did he? Again, if you''d bothered to read it, I said I was basing it on those last couple of seasons in the prem - so 14 in 33 = 2.3 (better than Holt), and the last half a season at Newcastle he scored 11 in 19 = 1.7 (much better than Holt).

Now, I''ll repeat again, I said that before his time at Liverpool, Carroll''s record was probably better than Holt''s. I didn''t say that he was definitely a million miles better. But the records are quite similar, Holt was slightly better in the championship, but Carroll was slightly better in the premiership (if we''re going off the last couple of seasons he was at Newcastle, which is what I have said I was going off all the way through). So only slight differences, but 1-1 really. Yet, Carroll''s record in his last half season at Newcastle in the prem saw him score a goal every 1.7 games, which is much better than Holt''s record and, given Carroll''s age in the mix as well, I believe that Carroll just about nicks it.

On the age point, admittedly I said 16 instead of 17 for the debut. But I also said he was scoring in the prem between 16 and 21. NBS then brought up the point that he didn''t start scoring until he was 20. So, it seems that NBS is also willing to accept that the first few seasons where he was making impact sub appearances as a youngster (even if it is 17 instead of 16) are omitted fairly in this instance. Going from the time he first established himself properly in the side in the prem, through the championship season, and into the final season in the prem that he was with Newcastle, the stats are as I portrayed them (apart from miscounting to 31 instead of 33 games!)

So, yes, if you want to use your statistics as you have done then fine. But please read my argument before trying to disprove it. I have always said I''m talking about the last few seasons he was at Newcastle, since he established himself in the first team.

Final point - current season has been worse than Holt''s agreed. Never said anywhere that I disagree with that. However, I have said that anyone who can score a goal every 1.7 games in the premiership at the age of 20 or 21 whatever, has clearly got talent. He''s not an average player. One can only assume that Hodgson believes, based on the return to some sort of form in his last few games of the season, that Carroll is starting to get back towards that prolific form. Hence the point i''ve been making throughout.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Aggy"]

And Carroll didn''t play 40 games in his last half season at newcastle did he? Again, if you''d bothered to read it, I said I was basing it on those last couple of seasons in the prem - so 14 in 33 = 2.3 (better than Holt), and the last half a season at Newcastle he scored 11 in 19 = 1.7 (much better than Holt).[/quote]Fair enough, for some reason I''d included the 7 games at Liverpool in this, making it 14 in 33 as you say, and the only period where Carroll has outperformed Holt - and then only by 0.1 games per goal - wow...Talk about fudging the stats to try to support your point...You state it''s based on the last couple of seasons in the prem, but then remove all the Liverpool games regardless of the season involved.If I wanted to I could probably manipulate the stats for a number of players like this to make them appear better on paper than in reality, but this is just a shambolic attempt to justify Carroll''s selection.You can''t just ignore his time at Liverpool - be it this season, or the 7 games he played at the end of last season for them, purely to support your argument - you have to look at the whole picture to get a fair view.Aside from his good run over 18 games at Newcastle last year, Holt has been superior to Carroll with his goalscoring throughout, and THIS season is far more relevant than LAST season...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Very pleased for Ruddy, he deserves it.

So does Holty, but was never likely to happen. Hopefully Ruddy can establish himself as back up GK for the next decade with England. Unfortunately for him, he''ll never be better than Hart, but he''ll get appearances in the odd friendly and I think he has a great chance of being 1st choice when Hart is injured.

Maybe during next season we could see some other names from Norwich appear in the England squad? If Pilks and Howson continue their fine form next season, surely they are good enough for England? And young enough. R.Bennett as well, maybe even E.Bennett. Not likely I know, but they are at least worth considering for the England squad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...