Wonder what Sir Trev' thinks when he's sees big lumps like Carroll playing at "The Academy"*?
*Gawd I hate all that 'birthplace of total' football balls that the Hammers put about.
Surely that's some place in Holland?
Oh yeah,that's the home of shexy football alright but if I had a pound for every time someone in the media claims that West Ham have always knocked it about on the deck, blah, blah, blah...we'll I'd have enough for a slap up meal at the very least :0)
Wonder what Sir Trev' thinks when he's sees big lumps like Carroll playing at "The Academy"*?
*Gawd I hate all that 'birthplace of total' football balls that the Hammers put about.
Surely that's some place in Holland?
Oh yeah,that's the home of shexy football alright but if I had a pound for every time someone in the media claims that West Ham have always knocked it about on the deck, blah, blah, blah...we'll I'd have enough for a slap up meal at the very least :0)
The really worrying thing is loads of their fans actually believe that nonsense
Wonder what Sir Trev' thinks when he's sees big lumps like Carroll playing at "The Academy"*?
*Gawd I hate all that 'birthplace of total' football balls that the Hammers put about.
Surely that's some place in Holland?
Oh yeah,that's the home of shexy football alright but if I had a pound for every time someone in the media claims that West Ham have always knocked it about on the deck, blah, blah, blah...we'll I'd have enough for a slap up meal at the very least :0)
The really worrying thing is loads of their fans actually believe that nonsense
Not sure it's really as much a fallacy as some of you make out. West Ham are widely recognised as a team that have generally played good football. The problem is that their fans won't ever let you forget it.
Not sure it's really as much a fallacy as some of you make out. West Ham are widely recognised as a team that have generally played good football. The problem is that their fans won't ever let you forget it.
Recognised by who? They have had some great players who played the 'right' way just as every other club has had over the years (mostly) but for every Trevor Brooking or Alan Devonshire there's been a David Cross or a John Hartson. It's just that they have a disproportionate amount of journos as fans who like to propigate this view that they have always played like Barca. Say something often loud and often enough and it becomes true.
I've been watching football for nearly 40 years and they have direct teams, teams that like to knock it about and teams who do a bit of both in that time. Just like pretty much everyone else.
Not sure it's really as much a fallacy as some of you make out. West Ham are widely recognised as a team that have generally played good football. The problem is that their fans won't ever let you forget it.
Recognised by who? They have had some great players who played the 'right' way just as every other club has had over the years (mostly) but for every Trevor Brooking or Alan Devonshire there's been a David Cross or a John Hartson. It's just that they have a disproportionate amount of journos as fans who like to propigate this view that they have always played like Barca. Say something often loud and often enough and it becomes true.
I've been watching football for nearly 40 years and they have direct teams, teams that like to knock it about and teams who do a bit of both in that time. Just like pretty much everyone else.
Reckon you've just gotta look beyond your bitterness/hatred for West Ham to be honest, because you're talking bollocks for the most part.
Not sure it's really as much a fallacy as some of you make out. West Ham are widely recognised as a team that have generally played good football. The problem is that their fans won't ever let you forget it.
Recognised by who? They have had some great players who played the 'right' way just as every other club has had over the years (mostly) but for every Trevor Brooking or Alan Devonshire there's been a David Cross or a John Hartson. It's just that they have a disproportionate amount of journos as fans who like to propigate this view that they have always played like Barca. Say something often loud and often enough and it becomes true.
I've been watching football for nearly 40 years and they have direct teams, teams that like to knock it about and teams who do a bit of both in that time. Just like pretty much everyone else.
Reckon you've just gotta look beyond your bitterness/hatred for West Ham to be honest, because you're talking bollocks for the most part.
Why is he talking bollocks?
West Ham have generally played good football but they have had plenty of managers who have embraced a more direct style with long ball tactics.
Lou Macari - notorious long-ball merchant was there in the early 90's.
Billy Bonds - struggling badly until he brought in Lee Chapman as a target man and started playing it long.
Alan Curbishley - Let's be honest, Curbs didn't mind a bit of hoofball now and again did he?
Not sure it's really as much a fallacy as some of you make out. West Ham are widely recognised as a team that have generally played good football. The problem is that their fans won't ever let you forget it.
Recognised by who? They have had some great players who played the 'right' way just as every other club has had over the years (mostly) but for every Trevor Brooking or Alan Devonshire there's been a David Cross or a John Hartson. It's just that they have a disproportionate amount of journos as fans who like to propigate this view that they have always played like Barca. Say something often loud and often enough and it becomes true.
I've been watching football for nearly 40 years and they have direct teams, teams that like to knock it about and teams who do a bit of both in that time. Just like pretty much everyone else.
Reckon you've just gotta look beyond your bitterness/hatred for West Ham to be honest, because you're talking bollocks for the most part.
Why is he talking bollocks?
West Ham have generally played good football but they have had plenty of managers who have embraced a more direct style with long ball tactics.
Lou Macari - notorious long-ball merchant was there in the early 90's.
Billy Bonds - struggling badly until he brought in Lee Chapman as a target man and started playing it long.
Alan Curbishley - Let's be honest, Curbs didn't mind a bit of hoofball now and again did he?
Big Sam - Andy Carroll - no need to say any more.
To say the notion that West Ham have traditionally adopted a carpet-style of football is simply the work of a handful of journalists is ludicrous. Thus, I dismissed his comments as such.
Let's not forget Macari was only there a year or so, and Bonds three or four years. Regardless, the philosophy at the club always used to be keeping the ball on the deck - it was there for all to see for years!
I note the word "generally" in your post - something we both seem to agree on anyway?
I suspect Bournemouth is a member of the "Scott Parker only won the FW Player of the year award because all the journalists are West Ham fans" camp too? Even though the last West Ham player to win it before Parker was a certain Bobby Moore. It's a flimsy argument which simply doesn't stack up to actuality.
Of course, the above point is just an assumption. But as he's already had three digs at West Ham in this thread, perhaps his dislike has clouded his judgement.
However, to outright deny West Ham used to have a notoriety for playing an aesthetically pleasing game is not only ignorant, it's also wrong.
A bit like Spurs are renowned for adopting a more "if you score four, we'll score five" approach, hence why they generally tend to score and concede a hefty number of goals. Just an example.
I don't think either can be denied personally.
No smoke without fire as they say - it's certainly nothing to do with journalists. I don't need someone to tell me how a team plays; I'll observe it myself. As have a lot of people.
Not sure it's really as much a fallacy as some of you make out. West Ham are widely recognised as a team that have generally played good football. The problem is that their fans won't ever let you forget it.
Recognised by who? They have had some great players who played the 'right' way just as every other club has had over the years (mostly) but for every Trevor Brooking or Alan Devonshire there's been a David Cross or a John Hartson. It's just that they have a disproportionate amount of journos as fans who like to propigate this view that they have always played like Barca. Say something often loud and often enough and it becomes true.
I've been watching football for nearly 40 years and they have direct teams, teams that like to knock it about and teams who do a bit of both in that time. Just like pretty much everyone else.
Well said and speaking as an Ilford boy, I couldn't agree more. Brooking was a class above, Devonshire had a bit of flair, who else was there Clyde Best, Mike Small?? Horrible little ground with a quagmire of a pitch that other teams found difficult to adapt to. Except Charlton of course who aside from one disasterous Boxing day, used to regularly come away with 3 points. Jim Melrose 9 seconds anyone?
Never understood what was so great about Carroll in the first place. Anyone who buys a player who at the time only had FOUR MONTHS Premiership experience for £35 million is completely off their rocker.
Liverpool/Dalglish clearly had this dated romanticism with the 'old fashioned English number 9 up top' rubbish. Sorry to say it, but players like Carroll will never ever get you into the Champions League.
Never understood what was so great about Carroll in the first place. Anyone who buys a player who at the time only had FOUR MONTHS Premiership experience for £35 million is completely off their rocker.
I seem to recall that Carroll didn't even want to go but Mike Ashley bit Dalglish's hand off when they mumbling muppet tabled a £35m bid.
Not sure it's really as much a fallacy as some of you make out. West Ham are widely recognised as a team that have generally played good football. The problem is that their fans won't ever let you forget it.
Recognised by who? They have had some great players who played the 'right' way just as every other club has had over the years (mostly) but for every Trevor Brooking or Alan Devonshire there's been a David Cross or a John Hartson. It's just that they have a disproportionate amount of journos as fans who like to propigate this view that they have always played like Barca. Say something often loud and often enough and it becomes true.
I've been watching football for nearly 40 years and they have direct teams, teams that like to knock it about and teams who do a bit of both in that time. Just like pretty much everyone else.
Reckon you've just gotta look beyond your bitterness/hatred for West Ham to be honest, because you're talking bollocks for the most part.
Why is he talking bollocks?
West Ham have generally played good football but they have had plenty of managers who have embraced a more direct style with long ball tactics.
Lou Macari - notorious long-ball merchant was there in the early 90's.
Billy Bonds - struggling badly until he brought in Lee Chapman as a target man and started playing it long.
Alan Curbishley - Let's be honest, Curbs didn't mind a bit of hoofball now and again did he?
Big Sam - Andy Carroll - no need to say any more.
To say the notion that West Ham have traditionally adopted a carpet-style of football is simply the work of a handful of journalists is ludicrous. Thus, I dismissed his comments as such.
Let's not forget Macari was only there a year or so, and Bonds three or four years. Regardless, the philosophy at the club always used to be keeping the ball on the deck - it was there for all to see for years!
I note the word "generally" in your post - something we both seem to agree on anyway?
I suspect Bournemouth is a member of the "Scott Parker only won the FW Player of the year award because all the journalists are West Ham fans" camp too? Even though the last West Ham player to win it before Parker was a certain Bobby Moore. It's a flimsy argument which simply doesn't stack up to actuality.
Of course, the above point is just an assumption. But as he's already had three digs at West Ham in this thread, perhaps his dislike has clouded his judgement.
However, to outright deny West Ham used to have a notoriety for playing an aesthetically pleasing game is not only ignorant, it's also wrong.
A bit like Spurs are renowned for adopting a more "if you score four, we'll score five" approach, hence why they generally tend to score and concede a hefty number of goals. Just an example.
I don't think either can be denied personally.
No smoke without fire as they say - it's certainly nothing to do with journalists. I don't need someone to tell me how a team plays; I'll observe it myself. As have a lot of people.
Some good points in there tbf despite your slightly aggresive way of making them and irrelevent/incorrect ramblings about Parker, etc.
Equally WHU is the club I know best after us, my family all following them. Yes, if you go back far enough, they had a reputation for attractive football (and generally deserved if you go back far enough too) but the actuality of that's long since gone. However the myth it remains the case IS still regularly perpetuated by the Martin Samuels et al.
Ormiston Addick said: Kenny Dalglish made four big name signings at Anfield
Andy Carroll - On Loan to Wet Spam Charlie Adam - Being sold to Stoke Stewart Downing - Replaced by a 17 year old Jordan Henderson - Not in the team
.......Great return for 75 million quid, eh?
Couldn't have put it better myself Ormy. The scousers wanted Dalglish and this is the result. The man was out of touch and living in another era and I couldn't be more happy!
I think the most fascinating part of this will be if Carroll does really well at Wet Spam and scores goals....while Liverpool struggle in the PL and don't score enough goals.
That will put a lot of pressure on Rogers.
My view is that if you play Carroll with the the right partner and with two good wide midfielders or full-backs who can cross a good ball then he can be very dangerous indeed.
He is not the mug people paint him as, he is a right handful if given the right service.
Agree again Ormy my Dutch colleagues raved over the goal he scored against Sweden at the Euro's. He does hold the ball well and as you say he is a handful when given the right service.
I think the most fascinating part of this will be if Carroll does really well at Wet Spam and scores goals....while Liverpool struggle in the PL and don't score enough goals.
That will put a lot of pressure on Rogers.
My view is that if you play Carroll with the the right partner and with two good wide midfielders or full-backs who can cross a good ball then he can be very dangerous indeed.
He is not the mug people paint him as, he is a right handful if given the right service.
I think the most fascinating part of this will be if Carroll does really well at Wet Spam and scores goals....while Liverpool struggle in the PL and don't score enough goals.
That will put a lot of pressure on Rogers.
My view is that if you play Carroll with the the right partner and with two good wide midfielders or full-backs who can cross a good ball then he can be very dangerous indeed.
He is not the mug people paint him as, he is a right handful if given the right service.
Absolutely. I actually rate Carroll highly and he's still going to improve. His move to Liverpool came far too soon and I think he will do really well at WHU.
His success at WHU will depend on them finding him a decent channel runner, a younger version of Craig Bellamy, who can get between the CB and FB and turn teams around.
Just not sure WHU have the players to service Carroll correctly.
Comments
*Gawd I hate all that 'birthplace of total' football balls that the Hammers put about.
Andy Carroll - On Loan to Wet Spam
Charlie Adam - Being sold to Stoke
Stewart Downing - Replaced by a 17 year old
Jordan Henderson - Not in the team
.......Great return for 75 million quid, eh?
Must be in line for some mention about solving World peace?
I've been watching football for nearly 40 years and they have direct teams, teams that like to knock it about and teams who do a bit of both in that time. Just like pretty much everyone else.
West Ham have generally played good football but they have had plenty of managers who have embraced a more direct style with long ball tactics.
Lou Macari - notorious long-ball merchant was there in the early 90's.
Billy Bonds - struggling badly until he brought in Lee Chapman as a target man and started playing it long.
Alan Curbishley - Let's be honest, Curbs didn't mind a bit of hoofball now and again did he?
Big Sam - Andy Carroll - no need to say any more.
Let's not forget Macari was only there a year or so, and Bonds three or four years. Regardless, the philosophy at the club always used to be keeping the ball on the deck - it was there for all to see for years!
I note the word "generally" in your post - something we both seem to agree on anyway?
I suspect Bournemouth is a member of the "Scott Parker only won the FW Player of the year award because all the journalists are West Ham fans" camp too? Even though the last West Ham player to win it before Parker was a certain Bobby Moore. It's a flimsy argument which simply doesn't stack up to actuality.
Of course, the above point is just an assumption. But as he's already had three digs at West Ham in this thread, perhaps his dislike has clouded his judgement.
However, to outright deny West Ham used to have a notoriety for playing an aesthetically pleasing game is not only ignorant, it's also wrong.
A bit like Spurs are renowned for adopting a more "if you score four, we'll score five" approach, hence why they generally tend to score and concede a hefty number of goals. Just an example.
I don't think either can be denied personally.
No smoke without fire as they say - it's certainly nothing to do with journalists. I don't need someone to tell me how a team plays; I'll observe it myself. As have a lot of people.
I hate West Ham, I hope they go down.
Liverpool/Dalglish clearly had this dated romanticism with the 'old fashioned English number 9 up top' rubbish. Sorry to say it, but players like Carroll will never ever get you into the Champions League.
Equally WHU is the club I know best after us, my family all following them. Yes, if you go back far enough, they had a reputation for attractive football (and generally deserved if you go back far enough too) but the actuality of that's long since gone. However the myth it remains the case IS still regularly perpetuated by the Martin Samuels et al.
Kenny Dalglish made four big name signings at Anfield
Andy Carroll - On Loan to Wet Spam
Charlie Adam - Being sold to Stoke
Stewart Downing - Replaced by a 17 year old
Jordan Henderson - Not in the team
.......Great return for 75 million quid, eh?
Couldn't have put it better myself Ormy. The scousers wanted Dalglish and this is the result. The man was out of touch and living in another era and I couldn't be more happy!
That will put a lot of pressure on Rogers.
My view is that if you play Carroll with the the right partner and with two good wide midfielders or full-backs who can cross a good ball then he can be very dangerous indeed.
He is not the mug people paint him as, he is a right handful if given the right service.
Just not sure WHU have the players to service Carroll correctly.