Jump to content
oneBoro Forum
Rioch's Braves

Rhodes lone striker role in the Premier

Recommended Posts

Stop being a Naughty Boy, Naughty Boy, you Naughty, Naughty Boy. ;)

 

In all seriousness, I can't see Rhodes being the one who caused all the trouble. He's had nothing but good things said about his character throughout his entire career. The name(s) I've been told of are characters who I know for certain have been guilty of douchbaggery in the past...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some people get a kick out of talking BS just to wind people up... Very sad people they are.

 

I don't know who you are referring to, but I haven't seen BWS spouting BS before and in this case he is putting forward his thoughts and what he has heard. He is certainly not trying to wind people up like previous trolls we have had on here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Rhodes will be gone this summer.

 

Fancy a bet on that?

 

That would be a difficult bet to consider, the odds would be stacked hugely in your favour as its not easy to get rid of a £9m player, especially when premier league teams don't seem that interested.

 

I would be willing to bet, that this summer, we'll buy a replacement for Rhodes, a better striker who will be AKs main man. What happens after that will depend on how Rhodes reacts, whether the club think it's worth keeping Rhodes as backup or whether they can get a decent price for him.

 

If he stays I'd be very willing to bet that he starts a lot less games than the striker that is bought in to replace him ( baring injuries of course).

 

In answer to the original question, and I wish I'd just put this to start with....no, I don't think Rhodes will be our loan striker in the premiership, it will be someone else.

 

Well that opinion is a lot different to ''Rhodes will be gone this summer'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As you know, there are no certainties in football, my original comment was, "I think Rhodes will be gone, this summer" I'm not sure why that statement was met with a torrent of abuse, leading to allegations of substance abuse, trolling and general insanity. I dont think it was s provocative statement, but hey ho, we'll just have to wait and see.

 

Apologies for the misspelling of lone, most embarrassing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As you know, there are no certainties in football, my original comment was, "I think Rhodes will be gone, this summer" I'm not sure why that statement was met with a torrent of abuse, leading to allegations of substance abuse, trolling and general insanity. I dont think it was s provocative statement, but hey ho, we'll just have to wait and see.

 

Apologies for the misspelling of lone, most embarrassing.

 

I was just messing around BWS, the context of the error made me chuckle - I promise I'm not a grammar nazi!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As you know, there are no certainties in football, my original comment was, "I think Rhodes will be gone, this summer"   I'm not sure why that statement was met with a torrent of abuse, leading to allegations of substance abuse, trolling and general insanity. I dont think it was s provocative statement, but hey ho, we'll just have to wait and see.

 

Apologies for the misspelling of lone, most embarrassing.

 

I have no issue with your opinion, I just struggle to believe your reasoning for it is all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As you know, there are no certainties in football, my original comment was, "I think Rhodes will be gone, this summer" I'm not sure why that statement was met with a torrent of abuse, leading to allegations of substance abuse, trolling and general insanity. I dont think it was s provocative statement, but hey ho, we'll just have to wait and see.

 

Apologies for the misspelling of lone, most embarrassing.

 

If you're referring to my original comment, aww you delicate little flower :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Rhodes will be gone this summer.

 

Fancy a bet on that?

 

That would be a difficult bet to consider, the odds would be stacked hugely in your favour as its not easy to get rid of a £9m player, especially when premier league teams don't seem that interested.

 

I would be willing to bet, that this summer, we'll buy a replacement for Rhodes, a better striker who will be AKs main man. What happens after that will depend on how Rhodes reacts, whether the club think it's worth keeping Rhodes as backup or whether they can get a decent price for him.

 

If he stays I'd be very willing to bet that he starts a lot less games than the striker that is bought in to replace him ( baring injuries of course).

 

In answer to the original question, and I wish I'd just put this to start with....no, I don't think Rhodes will be our loan striker in the premiership, it will be someone else.

 

Well that opinion is a lot different to ''Rhodes will be gone this summer'

 

Well they are both opinions, but one has has a little more detail and is more considered that the one preceding it. I respect both versions, but I am more inclined to go along with the latter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Rhodes will be gone this summer.

 

Fancy a bet on that?

 

That would be a difficult bet to consider, the odds would be stacked hugely in your favour as its not easy to get rid of a £9m player, especially when premier league teams don't seem that interested.

 

I would be willing to bet, that this summer, we'll buy a replacement for Rhodes, a better striker who will be AKs main man. What happens after that will depend on how Rhodes reacts, whether the club think it's worth keeping Rhodes as backup or whether they can get a decent price for him.

 

If he stays I'd be very willing to bet that he starts a lot less games than the striker that is bought in to replace him ( baring injuries of course).

 

In answer to the original question, and I wish I'd just put this to start with....no, I don't think Rhodes will be our loan striker in the premiership, it will be someone else.

 

Well that opinion is a lot different to ''Rhodes will be gone this summer'

 

Well they are both opinions, but one has has a little more detail and is more considered that the one preceding it. I respect both versions, but I am more inclined to go along with the latter.

 

So they are not the same then.

 

'I think Rhodes will be gone in the summer'

 

Is a lot different to

 

'We might buy another striker'

 

 

God this forum is hard work sometimes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Offloading Rhodes so soon won't make any sense. It's like expecting Lonesome George to find a wife on his own. The main problem behind the Rhodes in 4-2-3-1 lies in a lack of an effective 2nd striker in the hole. Ramirez is a 10, not a false 9. The nearest bloke who can play as the false 9 behind Rhodes will be Kike II. Given how he had to endure the nightmare last time round, I'm not sure if AK will want to play with fire. It's always extremely damning if you're forced to choose between form and tactical needs instead of both. Either way, we'll need to play compact and upfront if we're to try imagining Rhodes scoring under this kind of circumstances. Not to mention having 2 out of 3 attacking players supporting him up close.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Offloading Rhodes so soon won't make any sense. It's like expecting Lonesome George to find a wife on his own. The main problem behind the Rhodes in 4-2-3-1 lies in a lack of an effective 2nd striker in the hole. Ramirez is a 10, not a false 9. The nearest bloke who can play as the false 9 behind Rhodes will be Kike II. Given how he had to endure the nightmare last time round, I'm not sure if AK will want to play with fire. It's always extremely damning if you're forced to choose between form and tactical needs instead of both. Either way, we'll need to play compact and upfront if we're to try imagining Rhodes scoring under this kind of circumstances. Not to mention having 2 out of 3 attacking players supporting him up close.

 

I may be out of the loop with all these new "positions" but I thought the point of a false 9 was that the opposition thought he was playing as a number 9 but he drops deep and doesn't, leaving his team with no outright forward. Not sure how you can play a false 9 with a 9. Wouldn't that make him a number 10???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Offloading Rhodes so soon won't make any sense. It's like expecting Lonesome George to find a wife on his own. The main problem behind the Rhodes in 4-2-3-1 lies in a lack of an effective 2nd striker in the hole. Ramirez is a 10, not a false 9. The nearest bloke who can play as the false 9 behind Rhodes will be Kike II. Given how he had to endure the nightmare last time round, I'm not sure if AK will want to play with fire. It's always extremely damning if you're forced to choose between form and tactical needs instead of both. Either way, we'll need to play compact and upfront if we're to try imagining Rhodes scoring under this kind of circumstances. Not to mention having 2 out of 3 attacking players supporting him up close.

 

I may be out of the loop with all these new "positions" but I thought the point of a false 9 was that the opposition thought he was playing as a number 9 but he drops deep and doesn't, leaving his team with no outright forward.  Not sure how you can play a false 9 with a 9.  Wouldn't that make him a number 10???

 

I'm with you robson.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Offloading Rhodes so soon won't make any sense. It's like expecting Lonesome George to find a wife on his own. The main problem behind the Rhodes in 4-2-3-1 lies in a lack of an effective 2nd striker in the hole. Ramirez is a 10, not a false 9. The nearest bloke who can play as the false 9 behind Rhodes will be Kike II. Given how he had to endure the nightmare last time round, I'm not sure if AK will want to play with fire. It's always extremely damning if you're forced to choose between form and tactical needs instead of both. Either way, we'll need to play compact and upfront if we're to try imagining Rhodes scoring under this kind of circumstances. Not to mention having 2 out of 3 attacking players supporting him up close.

 

I may be out of the loop with all these new "positions" but I thought the point of a false 9 was that the opposition thought he was playing as a number 9 but he drops deep and doesn't, leaving his team with no outright forward.  Not sure how you can play a false 9 with a 9.  Wouldn't that make him a number 10???

 

I'm with you robson.

 

yep false 9 is a strikers position, not an AMC one.

 

source: extensive experience in football manager ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Offloading Rhodes so soon won't make any sense. It's like expecting Lonesome George to find a wife on his own. The main problem behind the Rhodes in 4-2-3-1 lies in a lack of an effective 2nd striker in the hole. Ramirez is a 10, not a false 9. The nearest bloke who can play as the false 9 behind Rhodes will be Kike II. Given how he had to endure the nightmare last time round, I'm not sure if AK will want to play with fire. It's always extremely damning if you're forced to choose between form and tactical needs instead of both. Either way, we'll need to play compact and upfront if we're to try imagining Rhodes scoring under this kind of circumstances. Not to mention having 2 out of 3 attacking players supporting him up close.

 

I may be out of the loop with all these new "positions" but I thought the point of a false 9 was that the opposition thought he was playing as a number 9 but he drops deep and doesn't, leaving his team with no outright forward. Not sure how you can play a false 9 with a 9. Wouldn't that make him a number 10???

 

You are correct. False 9 is term that people like to use but don't really fully understand it, kind of like 'moneyball'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...