To be fair, that is a very little thing and he performed it expertly. The ball rolled without too much wobble and it was very easy to pick up. Not many could have done that job better.







It wouldn't be so bad were it not so obvious, [ievery time[/i, that he's going to throw a deep wedge ball. Even King occasionally looks like he's taking a drive before he passes it, but Radford always, always looks like he's going to do exactly what he does. There's no forward movement, no engaging of the defence and no disguise to the play at all. He could really do with watching Graham to see how to give a pass whilst keeping the defence interested.

i'll try any be polite as i can.



you know f**k all about rl.



your gasnier comments proved it.



stick to hkr.

The posters behind the 'Rommel' persona are purely after reactions (and do remarkably well considering the extremely weak and transparent material. That says more about the responders than anything, though).







The frequency is a 'Radford thing'. The extra yards are negligible, pointless and at the expense of a quick play. It increases the possibility of slipping a pass out but removes any chance of getting a good position on the ground, winning the tackle, breaking/busting the tackle or doing anything else remotely positive. Yesterday, he was setting himself to offload even before he'd make 'impact' (if you can call it that) with the defenders. That means the main benefit of an offload (forcing the tacklers to make an extra tackle for no gain, tiring them and meaning they are out of position) was negated, with them not having to engage with Radford and being able to retreat to rejoin the line with no chance of them being caught out.







I've pointed out in another thread why Radford's effort here was terrible. He made good contact with the smallest player in the game, had has arms around Burrow and was brushed off easily.







That was, obviously I thought, a little less serious than the other points (still true, still poor play, but not something to get too worked up about). Maybe you should reassign the "'most stupid remark' ever posted" award.







There's not much I can do to change that. If you're willing to accept low standards on the say so of a partially-sighted thug (another not-totally-serious remark there, just in case you didn't pick up on it), that's your prerogative. I'd rather watch the game and make my own decisions if that's alright with you.

I think Radders is ok, he does his job, doesn't set the world alight. But, he isnt that sort of player. His captain credentials are questionable but i dont know how influencial he is off the field and in training.



He is however not a LF, look at Leeds, they have their LF who very easly slots in at 6 and leads them around the park. We need another creative player there, Washy i do rate but would have hoped he was more influencial on games with the ball in hand when he is playing



Berrigan for LF next year for me. Radders back up front row.

Pretty well summed up.

You see this is what makes me laugh. Not this particular comment, but the number of times I read people saying who Agar should play where.



I bet every week the team playing on the park has been picked in their precise positions by various people on here but it's never the right formation when it's assessed on this board afterwards. No we'd rather all say move Washbrook to 6, Berrigan to centre, Whiting to 13 (that one's me by the way), R Horne to fullback, Lee to second row, Hall to centre, Radford to prop, get rid of King, Thackeray, Cusack and Dowes, Manu to start, get rid of Tickle. It's just laughable. Yeaman can't tackle etc etc etc.



I'd love to see us all being assessed in our workplaces in the same way. Move Chucky to toilet cleaning, Wilf to fork-lift, Standee to bagel production, Kosh to HR, ComeOnYouUll to reception, downtheante to the complaints desk.



I think it was Millward who said when asked if he read what they said on the message boards "if you listen to the people in the stands, you end up sitting with them".

top post

Well said!!!



I am though just wondering how many more posts are going to go off at the same tangent...

It wasn't Millward - or at least he wasn't the first to use the phrase.



And I don't think anyone expects Agar to base his selections on what's said on here. Well - maybe one or two might.



It's a discussion forum. You seem to be struggling with that concept somewhat.

Indeed, luckily for us Agar keeps ballsing things up which allows us to discuss him!!

He shouldnt of read the Cheerleaders thread then