Would rather see Pienaar played centrally, just for the simple fact that he shields the ball a hell of a lot better...put Oviedo on the wing or Leighton up and put Oviedo behind him.
I think Osman is too lightweight to be a real defensive eep lying midfielder...... that said... if he was played as a number 10 type player behind a lone striker he has clever enough feet to be effective.
Indeed, seems to be the general consensus. But atm I'd be choosing Barkley for the #10 role.
Does anyone know how long Gibbo is out for?
we cant have the most dribbled past CM in the league in that position, in the AM role he has no physical presence, releases the ball too slowly and cant shoot, in short he should be cover for superior players and no more. We spent years hearing how hard done by he is being played on the wing when he is actually a CM, now were hearing how hard done by he is being played at CM when he is actually a AM
big hard case tx giving red rep out at 4,30 in morning ,ill tell you what my point is lad ,you know f,,k all about football, stick to root beer and hot dogs , i dont agree with every thing lcab says but he was spot on about you being clueless,same feller said it was allright for moyes to play 11 men behind the ball at city 2 year ago
bring back back hibbert asap , brilliantI haven a clue what your memory is like but anyway, after the Reading game you tore into Seamus saying "you didn't want to see him at right back again " either on the bench or on the wing. You seem to be very upset about people berating Osman when you have been guilty of it in the past yourself, just with different players.
http://www.grandoldteam.com/forum/t...oleman-isn-t-up-to-it/page9?highlight=coleman
How do you know that Evertonians are poor in terms of moaning about our players compared to other clubs, there could easily be far worse fans than ours without you knowing.
re-unite os-bert on the right!
Indeed, seems to be the general consensus. But atm I'd be choosing Barkley for the #10 role.
Does anyone know how long Gibbo is out for?