Does Carver Disrespect NonBritish Players, MLS, or Team Canada?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sidney

The stupid policy of not starting our best players period.

---

Why did you start a new thread sidney?

Your "point" ends up being a copy of toonarmy's thread. You just want to emphasize your negativity towards Carver. You should have posted your ramblings in his post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sidney

The stupid policy of not starting our best players period.

---

But you called it a "policy on internationals" when his policy on starting players have nothing to do with their international play.

You are forcibly trying to connect things that have no relation to each other. I get that you disagree on how Carver should pick his starting XI, but it has nothing to do with being Brits or not.

Edu, Guevera, Brennan on the bench means our best 11 are not on the field where they should be. The connection is obvious

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joel

completely missed it. we get a draw and a boring game and this board never fails to impress with a bunch of whiny bitches ready to string up the next whipping boy. You were probably kissing carvers his ass last week too when we one 3-1.

This board disgusts me, it's run rampant by kids or people that have no clue about football, and no patience.

---

E-X-A-C-T-L-Y!!!!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sidney

Edu, Guevera, Brennan on the bench means our best 11 are not on the field where they should be. The connection is obvious

---

They were on the bench because they were not in the lineup that won the game last week, not because they are internationals. THERE is your connection.

Carver's policy, whether you agree or not, has been clear. Win a game, get another chance. Now if you disagree with that...expound on it. But don't create a faux-issue that doesn't exist.

I stand by what I said/posted. You can stand by what you said. No faux-issue from where I stand.

Except my position has actual facts to support it. (Carver's consistent statements on the matter.) Yours? Only has circumstantial evidence that needs to ignore certain facts (those very statements) to make it something even worth considering.

Sometimes, you just have to admit you don't have a leg to stand on.

Yes, Carver's policy and statements are consistent. But it cost us 2 points today. As for my posts, they are backed-up (read-em again). As for yours, I'd don't see any solid "evidence." You have your view, I have mine.

How do Carver's statements back up your statements about his supposed bias against Internationals?

And I am quite tired of people saying it cost us 2 points today. That is possible, and it may not be. It's not guaranteed that putting up a different lineup would have gained us 3 points. Likely? Yes. Guaranteed? No.

But what he did does do one thing...he made the bench stronger. And that may gain us valuable points in the tough stretch later this summer. Maybe even more points than the 2 that may have been lost today. But that isn't quantifiable is it? No...we just see the 2 points that slipped away today, not the fact that the team is possibly stronger because of it. But that is why HE gets paid to do what he does...and you don't.

At the end of the day...it's pretty obvious that whatever people think of his rotation policy...it is in fact his policy put in place for a reason...and that reason has nothing to do with "Internationals"...at least most people can see that thankfully.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sidney

Yes, Carver's policy and statements are consistent. But it cost us 2 points today. As for my posts, they are backed-up (read-em again). As for yours, I'd don't see any solid "evidence." You have your view, I have mine.

---

Ah, I see. Today's draw had nothing to do with Rohan shooting wide, Danny going offside on a set piece or Amado not scoring on one of his three very good opportunities.

It was all Carver's fault. Thanks for pointing that out to me. It was not something I would have figured out all by myself. :noidea:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jloome

He's also brought in Robert and Tebily, two guys from Africa. So what the fuck are you bleating about?

---

Robert - Africa. Whatever I agree with ya J but not about that Robert as striker thing :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blizzard

Ah, I see. Today's draw had nothing to do with Rohan shooting wide, Danny going offside on a set piece or Amado not scoring on one of his three very good opportunities.

It was all Carver's fault. Thanks for pointing that out to me. It was not something I would have figured out all by myself. :noidea:

---

Hey Blizz, we've been knocking around on the same boards for a decade or so, so maybe you can tell me: what is it about the advancing years that makes one more inclined to say "oh. yeah. I was wrong. Stupid point, I get it"? Humility is so much simpler and more civil.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by djking2

Robert - Africa. Whatever I agree with ya J but not about that Robert as striker thing :)

---

Dude he is from Africa -- he's from Reunion, which is in the southwest indian ocean, off the coast of East Africa. It's a french overseas department.

Ah, ya might be right about the striker thing. But after watching Cunny quit on that ball that Hartman spilled in the first half (the kind Luciano Emilio buried on us, incidentally) I still think he'd be better than Mr. Century.

Cool owe ya one! If cunny was the only option I'd go with our new African striker anyway :)