Of course Rooney gets some goals, he has played about a million games. he should have been fecked off years back, four or five tournaments he has had now, and been fecking useless in all of them. Amy other player would have never been given the chances he has. he is a very lucky, lucky boy.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
In defence of Rooney, he has been injured or coming back from injury in at least 2 of the tournaments, and IMO would have been top scorer at Euro 2004 had it again not been for injury.
Of course Rooney gets some goals, he has played about a million games.
---
Genuine question.....
If Rooney played for a mid-table side do you think (based on his performances) that he'd be England captain? Would he even be in the squad? I honestly don't think he would
I 100% agree and on current form Id make him englands no1 Striker
putting team rivalrys aside they guy is a phenomenal player, hes plied his trade had some ups and downs ( Norwich )
this season though he is boardering on un playable
Fantastic talent and im so glad hes English
Kane and sturridge up front for me as the future England paring
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Didn't Messi win player of the tournament at the last WC?
My point is that players who score lots of goals, score lots against minnows.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
True enough. Though, if we were playing the formation listed above, with AOC, Kane, Sterling, Henderson & Sturridge, why would you not play Rooney. It'd have to be either him or Carrick playing just for the wealth of experience they bring.
Who else would you play instead of him?
Rooney's 1 World Cup goal, and I think my Nan would have scored that one
comment by Jay. (U16498)
posted 1 minute ago
True enough. Though, if we were playing the formation listed above, with AOC, Kane, Sterling, Henderson & Sturridge, why would you not play Rooney. It'd have to be either him or Carrick playing just for the wealth of experience they bring.
Who else would you play instead of him?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jay
You'd play Rooney if you wanted to be more attacking and Carrick if you needed to be more defensive.
Count your blessings lads you could be having this international striker debate over Shane long and Connor salmon
comment by kneerash-23 Cara Gold (U6876)
posted 1 minute ago
Count your blessings lads you could be having this international striker debate over Shane long and Connor salmon
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Put in that context Do we play 2 strikers that are in blistering club form, or one of the better strikers of the last decade, what a tough choice
Looking at England Kane more then deserves his place in the next squad if berahino got in for a couple of good months then surely Kane deserves his place now he's been quality.
Studge and Rooney would be my other two picks think you bring Rooney if he's fit, goal wise he might not be as prominent as he once was but he's playing deeper now and also he's got the tournament experience that many of the current players don't.
If you bring a 4th striker then wellbeck I guess
Okay let's replace Welbeck with Kane...
What's Kane like as a left winger?
Tbh I'd play Kane and Welbeck because Sturridge has never impressed me that much internationally.
comment by SAF_The_Legend-FreePalestine (U5768)
posted 9 minutes ago
Okay let's replace Welbeck with Kane...
What's Kane like as a left winger?
Tbh I'd play Kane and Welbeck because Sturridge has never impressed me that much internationally.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Welbeck's been given twice as many chances for England though than Sturridge. Give Sturridge the same chances and he will do as well or better.
comment by Spurtle2 (U1608)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by SAF_The_Legend-FreePalestine (U5768)
posted 9 minutes ago
Okay let's replace Welbeck with Kane...
What's Kane like as a left winger?
Tbh I'd play Kane and Welbeck because Sturridge has never impressed me that much internationally.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Welbeck's been given twice as many chances for England though than Sturridge. Give Sturridge the same chances and he will do as well or better.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not any actual proof of that though, is there. I'm all for letting Sturridge play when he's in decent club form though.
Welbeck had already impressed me more with the chances Sturrudge has had.....
I am not saying don't give Sturridge anymore chances but Welbeck has proven himself to be far better international player so far....
So I'd drop Sturrudge for Kane instead.
comment by Jay. (U16498)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Spurtle2 (U1608)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by SAF_The_Legend-FreePalestine (U5768)
posted 9 minutes ago
Okay let's replace Welbeck with Kane...
What's Kane like as a left winger?
Tbh I'd play Kane and Welbeck because Sturridge has never impressed me that much internationally.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Welbeck's been given twice as many chances for England though than Sturridge. Give Sturridge the same chances and he will do as well or better.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not any actual proof of that though, is there. I'm all for letting Sturridge play when he's in decent club form though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No there is no proof, it's obviously my opinion.
Look at it this way; Welbeck has played San Marino twice, whereas Sturridge has played them once. If Sturridge was to play them next game for example, and score a hat-trick, he'd have a better strike rate than Welbeck for England.
Didn't he play on the wing against them?
Don't forget a fair few of Welbecks England appearances have been on the wing.
Which is why talking about Kane replacing him is silly.... I'd like to give Kane a go over Sturrudge though.
Hasn't Sturridge played on the wing too? Does it even matter?
If you're on the pitch in a forward position you have a chance to score, and Welbeck has had 16 more times than Sturridge has of being on the pitch for England.
Sign in if you want to comment
Kane should take Welbecks place for England
Page 2 of 3
posted on 2/2/15
Of course Rooney gets some goals, he has played about a million games. he should have been fecked off years back, four or five tournaments he has had now, and been fecking useless in all of them. Amy other player would have never been given the chances he has. he is a very lucky, lucky boy.
posted on 2/2/15
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 2/2/15
In defence of Rooney, he has been injured or coming back from injury in at least 2 of the tournaments, and IMO would have been top scorer at Euro 2004 had it again not been for injury.
posted on 2/2/15
Of course Rooney gets some goals, he has played about a million games.
---
posted on 2/2/15
Genuine question.....
If Rooney played for a mid-table side do you think (based on his performances) that he'd be England captain? Would he even be in the squad? I honestly don't think he would
posted on 2/2/15
I 100% agree and on current form Id make him englands no1 Striker
putting team rivalrys aside they guy is a phenomenal player, hes plied his trade had some ups and downs ( Norwich )
this season though he is boardering on un playable
Fantastic talent and im so glad hes English
Kane and sturridge up front for me as the future England paring
posted on 2/2/15
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 2/2/15
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 2/2/15
Didn't Messi win player of the tournament at the last WC?
posted on 2/2/15
My point is that players who score lots of goals, score lots against minnows.
posted on 2/2/15
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 2/2/15
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 2/2/15
True enough. Though, if we were playing the formation listed above, with AOC, Kane, Sterling, Henderson & Sturridge, why would you not play Rooney. It'd have to be either him or Carrick playing just for the wealth of experience they bring.
Who else would you play instead of him?
posted on 2/2/15
Rooney's 1 World Cup goal, and I think my Nan would have scored that one
posted on 2/2/15
comment by Jay. (U16498)
posted 1 minute ago
True enough. Though, if we were playing the formation listed above, with AOC, Kane, Sterling, Henderson & Sturridge, why would you not play Rooney. It'd have to be either him or Carrick playing just for the wealth of experience they bring.
Who else would you play instead of him?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jay
You'd play Rooney if you wanted to be more attacking and Carrick if you needed to be more defensive.
posted on 2/2/15
Count your blessings lads you could be having this international striker debate over Shane long and Connor salmon
posted on 2/2/15
comment by kneerash-23 Cara Gold (U6876)
posted 1 minute ago
Count your blessings lads you could be having this international striker debate over Shane long and Connor salmon
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Put in that context Do we play 2 strikers that are in blistering club form, or one of the better strikers of the last decade, what a tough choice
posted on 2/2/15
Looking at England Kane more then deserves his place in the next squad if berahino got in for a couple of good months then surely Kane deserves his place now he's been quality.
Studge and Rooney would be my other two picks think you bring Rooney if he's fit, goal wise he might not be as prominent as he once was but he's playing deeper now and also he's got the tournament experience that many of the current players don't.
If you bring a 4th striker then wellbeck I guess
posted on 2/2/15
Okay let's replace Welbeck with Kane...
What's Kane like as a left winger?
Tbh I'd play Kane and Welbeck because Sturridge has never impressed me that much internationally.
posted on 2/2/15
comment by SAF_The_Legend-FreePalestine (U5768)
posted 9 minutes ago
Okay let's replace Welbeck with Kane...
What's Kane like as a left winger?
Tbh I'd play Kane and Welbeck because Sturridge has never impressed me that much internationally.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Welbeck's been given twice as many chances for England though than Sturridge. Give Sturridge the same chances and he will do as well or better.
posted on 2/2/15
comment by Spurtle2 (U1608)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by SAF_The_Legend-FreePalestine (U5768)
posted 9 minutes ago
Okay let's replace Welbeck with Kane...
What's Kane like as a left winger?
Tbh I'd play Kane and Welbeck because Sturridge has never impressed me that much internationally.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Welbeck's been given twice as many chances for England though than Sturridge. Give Sturridge the same chances and he will do as well or better.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not any actual proof of that though, is there. I'm all for letting Sturridge play when he's in decent club form though.
posted on 2/2/15
Welbeck had already impressed me more with the chances Sturrudge has had.....
I am not saying don't give Sturridge anymore chances but Welbeck has proven himself to be far better international player so far....
So I'd drop Sturrudge for Kane instead.
posted on 2/2/15
comment by Jay. (U16498)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Spurtle2 (U1608)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by SAF_The_Legend-FreePalestine (U5768)
posted 9 minutes ago
Okay let's replace Welbeck with Kane...
What's Kane like as a left winger?
Tbh I'd play Kane and Welbeck because Sturridge has never impressed me that much internationally.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Welbeck's been given twice as many chances for England though than Sturridge. Give Sturridge the same chances and he will do as well or better.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not any actual proof of that though, is there. I'm all for letting Sturridge play when he's in decent club form though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No there is no proof, it's obviously my opinion.
Look at it this way; Welbeck has played San Marino twice, whereas Sturridge has played them once. If Sturridge was to play them next game for example, and score a hat-trick, he'd have a better strike rate than Welbeck for England.
posted on 2/2/15
Didn't he play on the wing against them?
Don't forget a fair few of Welbecks England appearances have been on the wing.
Which is why talking about Kane replacing him is silly.... I'd like to give Kane a go over Sturrudge though.
posted on 2/2/15
Hasn't Sturridge played on the wing too? Does it even matter?
If you're on the pitch in a forward position you have a chance to score, and Welbeck has had 16 more times than Sturridge has of being on the pitch for England.
Page 2 of 3