Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Legs of Wood.....

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Funky View Post
    I think we will get our money back for Mahon if he moves in the summer.

    Lopez is a different sort of player to ML though ones a defensive midfielder and ones more attacking.

    If we were to lose ML it would leave us short of defensive midfielders which are very important in any team.

    Rowlands is very important to Rangers for the reason that he can do both..he is a bit like our version of Stevie Gerrard
    No Lopez is the same type of player as legs and does the job better. But we should hang on to legs unless a good offer is made IMO.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by E4Hoop View Post
      No Lopez is the same type of player as legs and does the job better. But we should hang on to legs unless a good offer is made IMO.
      Not of lot of people seem to realise this, makes me laugh when fans pass Legiertwoods frailties off as a player and start palming him off as some sort of great defensive midfielder just because he is a big lump.

      Truth is in the games I've seen Lopez play he covers just as much ground, defends just as much, wins just as many tackles and gives away far less free kicks. Difference between Lopez and Legiertwood is Lopez's second touch is normally an effective pass where as Legiertwood's is normally a free kick or a throw in.

      Legiertwood in summation is the sort of player you play when don't have a Lopez in squad. He's a safe option at Championship level, fairly averagly consistant, nothing spectacular and largely ineffective. Wait a sec that sounds like a summary of our season....well what do you know! :boss:
      Last edited by W12_Ranger; 18-05-2009, 10:16 PM.

      Comment


      • #18
        I would keep him, good strong player
        I blew a lot on vodka and tonic, gambling and fags. Looking back, I think I overdid it on the tonic. - The one and only Stanley Bowles

        Comment

        Working...
        X