Isa Posted November 11, 2013 Share Posted November 11, 2013 Luna back would be huge. While I think we look a shade bit better defending when Clark or Baker is at LB, I think the team will benefit overall with Luna and Delph back What exactly has Luna contributed offensively since he scored at Arsenal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kwan Posted November 11, 2013 Share Posted November 11, 2013 (edited) Well in general I don't like doing the square peg in round hole thing so I'd rather a LB play LB Edited November 11, 2013 by Kwan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isa Posted November 11, 2013 Share Posted November 11, 2013 I agree but I'm unsure how his return to the team would be 'huge'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted November 11, 2013 Share Posted November 11, 2013 well its nearly 2 weeks away so maybe the international break will aid his recovery maybe thats why Roy never called him up to ENgland squad or maybe it's because he's nowhere near good enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kwan Posted November 11, 2013 Share Posted November 11, 2013 I agree but I'm unsure how his return to the team would be 'huge'? I think Luna just provides better movement and an actual option out wide. Clark can put in some nice crosses but he's very much a CB playing LB and it shows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted November 11, 2013 Share Posted November 11, 2013 In terms of beating a man on his own, he is one of the few we possess that can do it. England players are not quite the elite that they was years ago when the likes of Howard Kendall and Dennis Mortimer, never got a look in relatively and the mercurial Brian Little won one cap....I'm almost laughing writing the last bit, because it was laughable that, that great player got one cap. However Fabian Delph is not England class just yet, he is playing well but he needs to dominate games in order to be knocking on the door to get in to the next "club" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isa Posted November 11, 2013 Share Posted November 11, 2013 I agree but I'm unsure how his return to the team would be 'huge'? I think Luna just provides better movement and an actual option out wide. Clark can put in some nice crosses but he's very much a CB playing LB and it shows. Fair enough. Until Luna himself starts putting in crosses himself, I'll have to agree to disagree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skarroki Posted November 12, 2013 Share Posted November 12, 2013 I know he's not producing assists or goals at the moment but I would put that down to the opposition as much as his ability, he's looked absolute class with the ball at his feet this season. The goal that Lallana scored at the weekend, I personally think that is something Delph could be capable of. with better players and/or more confident players around him he might feel he can try something like that. Lallana is quality and ahead of him in passing and vision at the moment but I would say technical ability is on par. they are of a similar age and both came through into a league1 team. those little jinking runs he makes 2-3 times every match can be some of the best moments of the match for me. it's just something I like to watch 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skruff Posted November 12, 2013 Share Posted November 12, 2013 well its nearly 2 weeks away so maybe the international break will aid his recovery maybe thats why Roy never called him up to ENgland squad or maybe it's because he's nowhere near good enough. He's made some tremendous steps so far this season. Not good enough yet, but he's certainly knocking on the door if not two steps away from doing so. Saying he's _nowhere_ near good enough is far to harsh! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVFCRAMTIN Posted November 17, 2013 Share Posted November 17, 2013 After watching England loosing in that awful match the other night, my hopes that Delph could get called up increased though the midfield in England were HORRIBLE. Only player actually trying to something good was Lallana and Milner. Really looking forward to see Delph against West Brom! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted November 17, 2013 Share Posted November 17, 2013 (edited) Losing not loosing. Loose is the opposite of tight, lose is the opposite of win. I can never work out why so many people spell it wrong. It's actually shorter and easier to spell it right. Edited November 17, 2013 by LondonLax 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVFCRAMTIN Posted November 17, 2013 Share Posted November 17, 2013 Haha sorry I'm writing on my iPhone and I'm from Sweden so the keyboard I'm using is a swedish one. Sorry General! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skruff Posted November 17, 2013 Share Posted November 17, 2013 Losing not loosing. Loose is the opposite of tight, lose is the opposite of win. I can never work out why so many people spell it wrong. It's actually shorter and easier to spell it right. I think I've been doing that mistake for about as long as I've known English. Just learned something new, thanks! I'll tell you why though. When I pronounce losing, it sound more like loosing because of the "long o". The spelling and pronunciation fits more, while losing sounds more like "lawsing"(yes I know it's not pronounced that way). It's a mistake that I often do when spelling out my sentences, because they're based upon my spoken English. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
troon_villan Posted November 17, 2013 Share Posted November 17, 2013 Swedish women are just fantastic. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted November 18, 2013 Share Posted November 18, 2013 Losing not loosing. Loose is the opposite of tight, lose is the opposite of win. I can never work out why so many people spell it wrong. It's actually shorter and easier to spell it right. I think I've been doing that mistake for about as long as I've known English. Just learned something new, thanks!I'll tell you why though. When I pronounce losing, it sound more like loosing because of the "long o". The spelling and pronunciation fits more, while losing sounds more like "lawsing"(yes I know it's not pronounced that way). It's a mistake that I often do when spelling out my sentences, because they're based upon my spoken English. I guess its good to know the right way and its good that londonlax pointed it out...but I'll bet we would all make a pigs ear of writing in Norwegian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVTuco Posted November 18, 2013 VT Supporter Share Posted November 18, 2013 Losing not loosing. Loose is the opposite of tight, lose is the opposite of win. I can never work out why so many people spell it wrong. It's actually shorter and easier to spell it right. Because it sounds like loosing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted November 19, 2013 Share Posted November 19, 2013 Yes, I suppose lose does have a long o sound, but how would you go about spelling the opposite of tight if you were already using 'loose' to mean the opposite of win? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVTuco Posted November 19, 2013 VT Supporter Share Posted November 19, 2013 (edited) I'd rather just do what you say. Edited November 19, 2013 by AVTuco 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AshVilla Posted November 19, 2013 Share Posted November 19, 2013 In terms of beating a man on his own, he is one of the few we possess that can do it. England players are not quite the elite that they was years ago when the likes of Howard Kendall and Dennis Mortimer, never got a look in relatively and the mercurial Brian Little won one cap....I'm almost laughing writing the last bit, because it was laughable that, that great player got one cap. However Fabian Delph is not England class just yet, he is playing well but he needs to dominate games in order to be knocking on the door to get in to the next "club" I cannot see our midfield dominating anyone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morpheus Posted November 19, 2013 Share Posted November 19, 2013 (edited) Losing not loosing. Loose is the opposite of tight, lose is the opposite of win. I can never work out why so many people spell it wrong. It's actually shorter and easier to spell it right. I think I've been doing that mistake for about as long as I've known English. Just learned something new, thanks! I'll tell you why though. When I pronounce losing, it sound more like loosing because of the "long o". The spelling and pronunciation fits more, while losing sounds more like "lawsing"(yes I know it's not pronounced that way). It's a mistake that I often do when spelling out my sentences, because they're based upon my spoken English. What is Dyslexia? Dyslexia simply means difficulty with the written word. It is a descriptive, not a diagnostic term. Unfortunately, the medical-sounding label implies that it is a distinct and identifiable reading disorder with a known medical cause. Edited November 19, 2013 by Morpheus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts