Kyle Lafferty out of N.I squad

[Amac9 2,060]

By the way Northern Ireland have next to no chance of qualifying. Hopefully Davis sits on the bench

[papaguy51 912]

Nothing wrong with having favoured players though.

If someone asked me the question and held a gun to my head, I'd rather see Naisy, Boyd or Lafferty scoring a winner before I'd have Miller scoring it, for example.

Obviously, Boyd's your favourite player and if pushed, you'd love to see him do a wee bit better than anyone else.

I was like that with Albertz

To be honest, goal poachers are my favourite 'breed' of footballer, McCoist was a massive favourite of mine and i guess after the years he left, Boyd came in and filled the void Coisty left at Rangers.

I thought Negri was going to be immense, but he got 'injured'

*cough* Porrini bawdeeped his burd *cough*

[Gid 46]

And it's turned into the 'let's slag off Lafferty to make Boyd look better' thread. Yawn...

As per, eh?

Quite sad really!

Is it indeed?

So Lafferty has proved himself at Rangers has he Iain?

He's got the potential, and has rescued points for us with some lovely composed finishes.

Chuck Boyd out on the left wing and see how he does! I agree that Laffer hasn't been amazing for us, I'm just a bit concerned at how willingly people are to constantly point out the negatives and ignore the positives with the lad.

But you don't seem too concerned with those who concentrate on the negatives of Boyd.

And all I said is Lafferty is unproven. Please highlight where I said anything negative about Lafferty.

No no, I totally agree that he's mostly unproven. He's proved to me (at least) that he can finish under pressure, perform in bigger games and can be that physical presence up front that we need.

What he hasn't proven is that he can do it consistently, nor has he proven that he can avoid injury/illness for more than three weeks at a time.

Every Lafferty thread in the last ten weeks has ended up as a 'Boyd or Lafferty' debate, even threads with no relation, and they all started with people just focussing on what Lafferty hasn't done, as opposed to what he has done.

Ok so you're admitting that your previous smug little dig had absolutely no value and was unjustified as it was based on previous threads and not this one?

You still haven't told me when I said something negative about Lafferty.

[McBoyd 355]

*cough* Porrini bawdeeped his burd *cough*

Naw, it was playing squash

He always looked miserable as fuck anyway, shame, he'd have been amazing for us if he'd stayed, was it 32 by christmas? That's better than Boyd and Coisty

[ShootSpeedKillLight 0]

*cough* Porrini bawdeeped his burd *cough*

Naw, it was playing squash

He always looked miserable as fuck anyway, shame, he'd have been amazing for us if he'd stayed, was it 32 by christmas? That's better than Boyd and Coisty

It was something mental like 23 goals in 10 games.

[papaguy51 912]

And it's turned into the 'let's slag off Lafferty to make Boyd look better' thread. Yawn...

As per, eh?

Quite sad really!

Is it indeed?

So Lafferty has proved himself at Rangers has he Iain?

He's got the potential, and has rescued points for us with some lovely composed finishes.

Chuck Boyd out on the left wing and see how he does! I agree that Laffer hasn't been amazing for us, I'm just a bit concerned at how willingly people are to constantly point out the negatives and ignore the positives with the lad.

But you don't seem too concerned with those who concentrate on the negatives of Boyd.

And all I said is Lafferty is unproven. Please highlight where I said anything negative about Lafferty.

No no, I totally agree that he's mostly unproven. He's proved to me (at least) that he can finish under pressure, perform in bigger games and can be that physical presence up front that we need.

What he hasn't proven is that he can do it consistently, nor has he proven that he can avoid injury/illness for more than three weeks at a time.

Every Lafferty thread in the last ten weeks has ended up as a 'Boyd or Lafferty' debate, even threads with no relation, and they all started with people just focussing on what Lafferty hasn't done, as opposed to what he has done.

Ok so you're admitting that your previous smug little dig had absolutely no value and was unjustified as it was based on previous threads and not this one?

You still haven't told me when I said something negative about Lafferty.

I never said that you did say anything negative about Lafferty, did I? I just said that people tend to focus on the negatives instead of the positives with him, for reasons unknown to me.

And there's hee haw wrong with pointing out that every Lafferty thread of this ilk has ended up with a Lafferty v Boyd debate.

[McBoyd 355]

*cough* Porrini bawdeeped his burd *cough*

Naw, it was playing squash

He always looked miserable as fuck anyway, shame, he'd have been amazing for us if he'd stayed, was it 32 by christmas? That's better than Boyd and Coisty

It was something mental like 23 goals in 10 games.

Fuck sake, he makes it look simple.

[Gid 46]

And it's turned into the 'let's slag off Lafferty to make Boyd look better' thread. Yawn...

As per, eh?

Quite sad really!

Is it indeed?

So Lafferty has proved himself at Rangers has he Iain?

He's got the potential, and has rescued points for us with some lovely composed finishes.

Chuck Boyd out on the left wing and see how he does! I agree that Laffer hasn't been amazing for us, I'm just a bit concerned at how willingly people are to constantly point out the negatives and ignore the positives with the lad.

But you don't seem too concerned with those who concentrate on the negatives of Boyd.

And all I said is Lafferty is unproven. Please highlight where I said anything negative about Lafferty.

No no, I totally agree that he's mostly unproven. He's proved to me (at least) that he can finish under pressure, perform in bigger games and can be that physical presence up front that we need.

What he hasn't proven is that he can do it consistently, nor has he proven that he can avoid injury/illness for more than three weeks at a time.

Every Lafferty thread in the last ten weeks has ended up as a 'Boyd or Lafferty' debate, even threads with no relation, and they all started with people just focussing on what Lafferty hasn't done, as opposed to what he has done.

Ok so you're admitting that your previous smug little dig had absolutely no value and was unjustified as it was based on previous threads and not this one?

You still haven't told me when I said something negative about Lafferty.

I never said that you did say anything negative about Lafferty, did I? I just said that people tend to focus on the negatives instead of the positives with him, for reasons unknown to me.

And there's hee haw wrong with pointing out that every Lafferty thread of this ilk has ended up with a Lafferty v Boyd debate.

You agreed with a post which said this thread had turned into a "slag Lafferty" one and you said "it's sad".

I'm still waiting on you justifying it by telling me when I slagged off Lafferty and if you're admitting I didn't slag him then are you gonna apologise for your snidey remark?

[papaguy51 912]

And it's turned into the 'let's slag off Lafferty to make Boyd look better' thread. Yawn...

As per, eh?

Quite sad really!

Is it indeed?

So Lafferty has proved himself at Rangers has he Iain?

He's got the potential, and has rescued points for us with some lovely composed finishes.

Chuck Boyd out on the left wing and see how he does! I agree that Laffer hasn't been amazing for us, I'm just a bit concerned at how willingly people are to constantly point out the negatives and ignore the positives with the lad.

But you don't seem too concerned with those who concentrate on the negatives of Boyd.

And all I said is Lafferty is unproven. Please highlight where I said anything negative about Lafferty.

No no, I totally agree that he's mostly unproven. He's proved to me (at least) that he can finish under pressure, perform in bigger games and can be that physical presence up front that we need.

What he hasn't proven is that he can do it consistently, nor has he proven that he can avoid injury/illness for more than three weeks at a time.

Every Lafferty thread in the last ten weeks has ended up as a 'Boyd or Lafferty' debate, even threads with no relation, and they all started with people just focussing on what Lafferty hasn't done, as opposed to what he has done.

Ok so you're admitting that your previous smug little dig had absolutely no value and was unjustified as it was based on previous threads and not this one?

You still haven't told me when I said something negative about Lafferty.

I never said that you did say anything negative about Lafferty, did I? I just said that people tend to focus on the negatives instead of the positives with him, for reasons unknown to me.

And there's hee haw wrong with pointing out that every Lafferty thread of this ilk has ended up with a Lafferty v Boyd debate.

You agreed with a post which said this thread had turned into a "slag Lafferty" one and you said "it's sad".

I'm still waiting on you justifying it by telling me when I slagged off Lafferty and if you're admitting I didn't slag him then are you gonna apologise for your snidey remark?

I think it is sad when people refuse to give Lafferty any credit for the positive stuff he has done with us.

[Gid 46]

I will take your avoidance of the question as an admission that you were wrong.

It takes a big man to admit when they are wrong mind.

[papaguy51 912]

I will take your avoidance of the question as an admission that you were wrong.

It takes a big man to admit when they are wrong mind.

I find your petty wee agenda against anything I say pretty sad.

I feel no need to apologise for anything. Have you asked for an apology from any of the other two lads who said the same thing?

[Gid 46]

I will take your avoidance of the question as an admission that you were wrong.

It takes a big man to admit when they are wrong mind.

I find your petty wee agenda against anything I say pretty sad.

I feel no need to apologise for anything. Have you asked for an apology from any of the other two lads who said the same thing?

No but no one else made a smug and unjustified comment.

[papaguy51 912]

I will take your avoidance of the question as an admission that you were wrong.

It takes a big man to admit when they are wrong mind.

I find your petty wee agenda against anything I say pretty sad.

I feel no need to apologise for anything. Have you asked for an apology from any of the other two lads who said the same thing?

No but no one else made a smug and unjustified comment.

I was jumping the gun Gid, I apologise for that, if that's what you mean.

I just thought we were going to have another Lafferty/Boyd debate and it was the last thing we needed.

I certainly didn't claim that you were being heavily biased towards either player though.

[Gid 46]

I will take your avoidance of the question as an admission that you were wrong.

It takes a big man to admit when they are wrong mind.

I find your petty wee agenda against anything I say pretty sad.

I feel no need to apologise for anything. Have you asked for an apology from any of the other two lads who said the same thing?

No but no one else made a smug and unjustified comment.

I was jumping the gun Gid, I apologise for that, if that's what you mean.

I just thought we were going to have another Lafferty/Boyd debate and it was the last thing we needed.

I certainly didn't claim that you were being heavily biased towards either player though.

Thank you.

For the record I would like to see Lafferty get a decent run up top.

It just pisses me off when the same people who dismiss Boyd at every opportunity (and I'm not saying you're one of them) are even quicker at praising Lafferty who is unproven IMO.

[papaguy51 912]

I will take your avoidance of the question as an admission that you were wrong.

It takes a big man to admit when they are wrong mind.

I find your petty wee agenda against anything I say pretty sad.

I feel no need to apologise for anything. Have you asked for an apology from any of the other two lads who said the same thing?

No but no one else made a smug and unjustified comment.

I was jumping the gun Gid, I apologise for that, if that's what you mean.

I just thought we were going to have another Lafferty/Boyd debate and it was the last thing we needed.

I certainly didn't claim that you were being heavily biased towards either player though.

Thank you.

For the record I would like to see Lafferty get a decent run up top.

It just pisses me off when the same people who dismiss Boyd at every opportunity (and I'm not saying you're one of them) are even quicker at praising Lafferty who is unproven IMO.

I wasn't aware what bit you were after an apology for, hence the confusion.

However, as I said, too much expectation on young players' shoulders - that just seems to be what we do.

[papaguy51 912]

Asking Lafferty to try and match Boyd's goal tally is only going to crush his confidence. He won't ever score 30 goals a season, but he might wel score 20 and then play a part in setting up another 15.

I think if Lafferty got all the penalties and had a willing runner like Miller or Novo alongside, I think he could score as many as Boyd.

He'd also need Boyd's superhuman injury record as well though.

[Gid 46]

Asking Lafferty to try and match Boyd's goal tally is only going to crush his confidence. He won't ever score 30 goals a season, but he might wel score 20 and then play a part in setting up another 15.

Correct and if he can reach 20 goals then he'll be doing well.

[Amac9 2,060]

Asking Lafferty to try and match Boyd's goal tally is only going to crush his confidence. He won't ever score 30 goals a season, but he might wel score 20 and then play a part in setting up another 15.

I think if Lafferty got all the penalties and had a willing runner like Miller or Novo alongside, I think he could score as many as Boyd.

He'd also need Boyd's superhuman injury record as well though.

It's easy not to get injured when you don't run

[FlippinEck 3,751]

Lafferty has had a lot more poor games than people can maybe remember. For a big guy he is poor in the air, against celtic he tried to rather bring the ball down from the air with his feet with varied success. Some people have a go at other members for a poor first touch yet I remember a point against Celtic where Lafferty had 3 chances to bring a ball down with nobody around him and each touch took the ball further away from him before he lost it. If we had some kind of hybrid of all our strikers we would be laughing but unfortunately we dont, and if we are being honest, the £3.5Million we paid for Lafferty, potential or not was a complete rip off when all we can say is hes put in some good performances and some bad, when we could say that about all our players. Id love Lafferty to get a good run up front though and try and redeem himself, the injury to Boyd might let this happen.

[papaguy51 912]

It's a pity that the technology isn't there to combine bodyparts from all our strikers into one super-striker.

He'd be worth about £100m

[stewiegriffin 0]

None of them hold a candle to SEBO!!!!

[FlippinEck 3,751]

The workrate/creativity of Miller, the natural finishing instinct of Boyd with Laffertys vision and composure and Nachos... pace? Bring back cousin and we can get someone who can challenge for a ball in the air and mould him into our super striker

[Gid 46]

Lafferty has had a lot more poor games than people can maybe remember. For a big guy he is poor in the air, against celtic he tried to rather bring the ball down from the air with his feet with varied success. Some people have a go at other members for a poor first touch yet I remember a point against Celtic where Lafferty had 3 chances to bring a ball down with nobody around him and each touch took the ball further away from him before he lost it. If we had some kind of hybrid of all our strikers we would be laughing but unfortunately we dont, and if we are being honest, the £3.5Million we paid for Lafferty, potential or not was a complete rip off when all we can say is hes put in some good performances and some bad, when we could say that about all our players. Id love Lafferty to get a good run up front though and try and redeem himself, the injury to Boyd might let this happen.

The voice of reason.

[MayboleLoyal_atb 3,772]

More bad games than good so far IMO.

[papaguy51 912]

It's no surprise that most of his good games came when he was up front with Miller, yet almost all of his bad ones were when he was thrown out on the left wing.

Simples.