by Deathy » 09 Jul 2009 18:06
by SteveRoyal » 09 Jul 2009 18:06
floyd__streeteSteveRoyal he could shine and make significant steps towards becoming a decent striker.
Yeah and I want to moonwalk, son, but life's a sh*thouse.
by leww_rfc » 09 Jul 2009 18:08
SteveRoyal Long deserves the Number 9. Patiently waiting for his chance in the first team and this season he could shine and make significant steps towards becoming a decent striker.
by Deathy » 09 Jul 2009 18:10
leww_rfcSteveRoyal Long deserves the Number 9. Patiently waiting for his chance in the first team and this season he could shine and make significant steps towards becoming a decent striker.
totally agree.
by SteveRoyal » 09 Jul 2009 18:14
Deathyleww_rfcSteveRoyal Long deserves the Number 9. Patiently waiting for his chance in the first team and this season he could shine and make significant steps towards becoming a decent striker.
totally agree.
He is poo. If our hopes are on his shoulders, we're f**ked.
by leww_rfc » 09 Jul 2009 18:15
Deathyleww_rfcSteveRoyal Long deserves the Number 9. Patiently waiting for his chance in the first team and this season he could shine and make significant steps towards becoming a decent striker.
totally agree.
He is poo. If our hopes are on his shoulders, we're f**ked.
by Deathy » 09 Jul 2009 18:27
SteveRoyal If Rodgers can make Priskin and Smith perform as well as they did last season, what's to say he can't make Long just as good, if not better?
He learned from the best (Doyle).
by brendywendy » 09 Jul 2009 18:32
by Harpers So Solid Crew » 09 Jul 2009 18:34
by SteveRoyal » 09 Jul 2009 18:36
DeathySteveRoyal If Rodgers can make Priskin and Smith perform as well as they did last season, what's to say he can't make Long just as good, if not better?
He learned from the best (Doyle).
He's Brendan Rodgers, not St fecking David. No chance. The boy has been 'developing' long enough and his first touch and passing are still as they were when he arrived. Decent headerer of the ball, fecking awful player though. He'll be rumbled this season and hopefully gone by next summer.
by moo » 09 Jul 2009 19:04
by Ian Royal » 09 Jul 2009 20:12
by URZZ » 09 Jul 2009 20:40
by Southbank Old Boy » 09 Jul 2009 21:18
Ian Royal FFS it's just a number.
Seahawk. It goes back to the days when there were no squad numbers, just 1-11 + 12, 13, 14 for the bench.
It may be something to do with the really old formations today with inside halfs and centre halfs and stuff. Which doesn't mean a lot to me I'm afraid.
But under the more recent, but still 10-15 years old at least 4-4-2 the formation looked like this
................1
2.......5............6.......3
7...........4......8.........11
...........9........10
Number 9 was usually the main striker, because he was the first striker on the team sheet.
by seahawk10 » 09 Jul 2009 22:28
by Deathy » 09 Jul 2009 23:29
brendywendy he'll get ten goals in the 1st 8 games and i will LOL at you
maybe
by Mike Hunt » 09 Jul 2009 23:53
by leww_rfc » 09 Jul 2009 23:59
Mike Hunt Here is the pic
by Deathy » 10 Jul 2009 00:01
Mike Hunt Here is the pic
by SLAMMED » 10 Jul 2009 00:05
Users browsing this forum: WestYorksRoyal and 194 guests