Page 3 of 3
Posted:
Fri Jun 04, 2004 1:19 pmby stmichael
ckay wrote:Wasn't Murphy our second top scorer 2002-2003 season?
in his last two seasons murphy has scored 17 goals for us, which is not bad at all for a midfielder who doesn't play on a regular basis anymore.
as for him being the weakest link, that's rubbish. last season, the weakest link was harry kewell who decided not to bother playing for the last four months of the season.
Posted:
Fri Jun 04, 2004 1:21 pmby ckay
stmichael wrote:ckay wrote:Wasn't Murphy our second top scorer 2002-2003 season?
in his last two seasons murphy has scored 17 goals for us, which is not bad at all for a midfielder who doesn't play on a regular basis anymore.
as for him being the weakest link, that's rubbish. last season, the weakest link was harry kewell who decided not to bother playing for the last four months of the season.
Spot on mate!!!!!
Posted:
Fri Jun 04, 2004 1:35 pmby banana
Brian McClair scored a lot of goals for United. Still he was s.hit. I do not judge a player solely on how many goals he scores. I see a player with absolutely no speed, no movement, no determination and I hate it. Murphy scored 5 goals last season. 3 of them were penalties. I think 2 goals are way too few for an offensive midfielder. How many did Pires score? Lampard? Scholes? These are the players holding Murphy's position in the other top teams. What do you think Wenger would have said if we offered them Murphy in exchange for Pires?
I do not see Kewell as a bad player and he was certainly not our weakest link last year. If you were a defender, would you rather play against Murphy or Kewell? Who do you think would be most difficult to handle?
Posted:
Fri Jun 04, 2004 1:50 pmby stmichael
last season:
kewell played 49 matches scored 11. of these goals 9 were before christmas. i agree that kewell has more ability in his liitle toe than murphy. however in the latter stages of the season the guy's effort in certain games was unacceptable for our football club.
danny murphy played 42 games, scored 8 goals. a large proportion of these games were as a substitute. however the goals were vital and at least he can score from 12 yards, unlike a certain england striker i know.
don't even compare him to pires (19) scholes (14) and lampard (15). everyone knows he's not in that class. i wouldn't have him in the first eleven if we had more squad depth in midfield. however he was played on the right because diouf was sh#te and smicer was smicer.
Posted:
Fri Jun 04, 2004 1:58 pmby banana
I do agree with you. And it is our misfortune that we have to rely on players like him to create chances and produce goals. I have never seen a player with less speed, movement, determination and winner instinct. I hate it. No wonder why we finished 30 points behind Arsenal.
Posted:
Fri Jun 04, 2004 2:04 pmby stmichael
we need to pull out all the stops to get someone like malbranque, who would be ideal for our side. 
