Rooney

by azania Sun 17 Jun 2012, 2:10 pm

First topic message reminder :

The man to take England to the next level? Yes he is a terrific player and has proven it in the EPL? But what has he ever done for England? Totally under-achieved whenever he plays.

Should he start in the (vain) hope that he brings his club form to the international stage?

by mystiroakey Wed 20 Jun 2012, 9:36 am

Its the nature of Rooney or our big players. ts stupid imo. Its like what fans do/did to kp after only scoring a 40. its still good enough and better than the next persons average Rooney - Page 2 732107

. Personally i honestly saw his performance as dummy-half did- who has made a very good analaysis of his game.. it was allright, yet what did our other strikers do?

but your right- he needs to deal with it, because it isnt gonna go away, so it is what it is!

by mobilemaster8 Wed 20 Jun 2012, 10:26 am

Josiah Maiestas wrote:Most of Rooney's goal are penalties or Lineker-esque tap-ins.

Wouldnt start for Barcelona or Real Madrid!

Well if your comparing him to Lineker, he cant be THAT bad can he?

by eirebilly Wed 20 Jun 2012, 10:50 am

I have watched the game and as i said on another thread, if you watch Rooney's movement in the lead up to the goal, its very impressive. Its a poachers goal, granted but his ability to lose his defender and be in a position to nod the ball in unapposed was actually very impressive.

by Thomond Wed 20 Jun 2012, 10:56 am

Rooney hadn't played for over a month, at the beginning he looked a bit rusty, his goal was a tap in but he showed nice movement and awareness to be there for the tap in. Like Billy said.

by Mad for Chelsea Wed 20 Jun 2012, 11:03 am

yes he looked a bit rusty at times, but England look a much better side with him back in. things weren't perfect yesterday, but we got the win, and played some good stuff at times. Gerrard played as well as I've ever seen him do for England, Young looked a bit sharper, and we kept a clean sheet!

by mystiroakey Wed 20 Jun 2012, 11:40 am

eirebilly wrote:I have watched the game and as i said on another thread, if you watch Rooney's movement in the lead up to the goal, its very impressive. Its a poachers goal, granted but his ability to lose his defender and be in a position to nod the ball in unapposed was actually very impressive.

spot on- his movement and passing during the chance that lead up to his headed chance at goal was also what created the chance- even if he did miss it

by Diggers Wed 20 Jun 2012, 11:48 am

The Galveston Giant wrote:If Rooney hadn't tapped that in last night and won England the game, and they had went out, his performance would have been ripped to shreads.

And if a few chances had gone the other way both Germany and Spain could have been heading home early. Rooney did fine and will only get better.

by The Galveston Giant Wed 20 Jun 2012, 12:10 pm

Diggers wrote:
The Galveston Giant wrote:If Rooney hadn't tapped that in last night and won England the game, and they had went out, his performance would have been ripped to shreads.

And if a few chances had gone the other way both Germany and Spain could have been heading home early. Rooney did fine and will only get better.

And so could England have been going home. If England had lost last night Rooney still would have done good? They looked better to me when Carrol came on.

by mystiroakey Wed 20 Jun 2012, 12:11 pm

If england had lost last night 2-1 frnace would have gone home not england thumbsup

by The Galveston Giant Wed 20 Jun 2012, 12:14 pm

If France had won and England lost England would have went home thumbsup

Not sure what Germany and Spain have to do with his performance but there you go.

by Mad for Chelsea Wed 20 Jun 2012, 12:17 pm

yeah but France never looked remotely like winning yesterday (they were absolutely awful)...

by eirebilly Wed 20 Jun 2012, 12:17 pm

Galveston. England looked better when Carrol came on because Welbeck was largely non existent last night. Carroll leading the line with Rooney behind him will make a very good striking partnership.

by mystiroakey Wed 20 Jun 2012, 12:20 pm

The Galveston Giant wrote:If France had won and England lost England would have went home

Not sure what Germany and Spain have to do with his performance but there you go.

england won and france didnt.. fact, both are through fact.. but at least england won- thats a positive for england- fact.

by The Galveston Giant Wed 20 Jun 2012, 12:22 pm

Mad for Chelsea wrote:yeah but France never looked remotely like winning yesterday (they were absolutely awful)...

My point is people are saying Rooney played well, which i don't think he did, and would they think that of the same performance had England gone out, i don't think so.

I don't think he done all that bad to be fair just people expect things he's not capable of.

by The Galveston Giant Wed 20 Jun 2012, 12:27 pm

mystiroakey wrote:
The Galveston Giant wrote:If France had won and England lost England would have went home

Not sure what Germany and Spain have to do with his performance but there you go.

england won and france didnt.. fact, both are through fact.. but at least england won- thats a positive for england- fact.

Rooney did not play well and it was ignored because he scored and won the game. Fact.

by Diggers Wed 20 Jun 2012, 12:33 pm

The Galveston Giant wrote:
Diggers wrote:
The Galveston Giant wrote:If Rooney hadn't tapped that in last night and won England the game, and they had went out, his performance would have been ripped to shreads.

And if a few chances had gone the other way both Germany and Spain could have been heading home early. Rooney did fine and will only get better.

And so could England have been going home. If England had lost last night Rooney still would have done good? They looked better to me when Carrol came on.

I dont think Rooney was anything like as bad as you are making out. He was rusty but still had a much better game than Wellbeck for instance. He will get better.
The "if" debate is pointless. "If" the Ukraine had been winning England woudl have had to attack more and Rooney "might" have scored a goal because of that as England woudl have been more offensive. Etc. etc...utterly pointless.

by The Galveston Giant Wed 20 Jun 2012, 12:38 pm

Diggers wrote:
The Galveston Giant wrote:
Diggers wrote:
The Galveston Giant wrote:If Rooney hadn't tapped that in last night and won England the game, and they had went out, his performance would have been ripped to shreads.

And if a few chances had gone the other way both Germany and Spain could have been heading home early. Rooney did fine and will only get better.

And so could England have been going home. If England had lost last night Rooney still would have done good? They looked better to me when Carrol came on.
I dont think Rooney was anything like as bad as you are making out. He was rusty but still had a much better game than Wellbeck for instance. He will get better.
The "if" debate is pointless. "If" the Ukraine had been winning England woudl have had to attack more and Rooney "might" have scored a goal because of that as England woudl have been more offensive. Etc. etc...utterly pointless.

We could keep going round in Circles but i only made one point, if England had went home last night would Rooney's performance be acceptable, because somebody would be the scapegoat. Would you like to answer?

by JamesLincs Wed 20 Jun 2012, 12:41 pm

what do you mean if? it didnt happen, and rooney scored! so you can cross him off the blame list

by The Galveston Giant Wed 20 Jun 2012, 12:45 pm

What do you mean what do i mean if, it's pretty simple, Rooney was gash but he gets let off because he scored and won the game, fair enough. Would it be the same had England gone out, anyone going to answer? No because we all know the answer.

by JamesLincs Wed 20 Jun 2012, 12:47 pm

ding ding ding ding

yes, he scored, so the question doesnt need to be asked does it.

whats with everyone and their 'if' questions today. getting desperate just because they all expected us to be knocked out by now

someone said earlier, IF england lost last night and france won, we would of been going hme.... DURRRRRRRRRRRRR

by The Galveston Giant Wed 20 Jun 2012, 12:49 pm

I asked a question which everyone has done well to avoid, answer it.

by Diggers Wed 20 Jun 2012, 12:49 pm

The Galveston Giant wrote:
Diggers wrote:
The Galveston Giant wrote:
Diggers wrote:
The Galveston Giant wrote:If Rooney hadn't tapped that in last night and won England the game, and they had went out, his performance would have been ripped to shreads.

And if a few chances had gone the other way both Germany and Spain could have been heading home early. Rooney did fine and will only get better.

And so could England have been going home. If England had lost last night Rooney still would have done good? They looked better to me when Carrol came on.
I dont think Rooney was anything like as bad as you are making out. He was rusty but still had a much better game than Wellbeck for instance. He will get better.
The "if" debate is pointless. "If" the Ukraine had been winning England woudl have had to attack more and Rooney "might" have scored a goal because of that as England woudl have been more offensive. Etc. etc...utterly pointless.

We could keep going round in Circles but i only made one point, if England had went home last night would Rooney's performance be acceptable, because somebody would be the scapegoat. Would you like to answer?

What you mean if Rooneys performance wasnt actually the performance that he had...ie he didnt score when in fact he did score....then he would have been blamed ? What a bizarre question. Yes he would have been blamed for not scoring...but hang on, he actually did score.
Would Hart have been blamed if he hadnt made a save and we went one down...yes....if Terry had missed a tackle...yes......in other words if all there performances were worse than they actually were.
Strikers are on the pitch to score to score goals you know, its a pretty big tick when they get a goal. His movement was great last night, he needs his first touch to improve which it will, we know he has a great first touch but he was rusty, the movement is all the instinct he has from being a top player.

by JamesLincs Wed 20 Jun 2012, 12:51 pm

because it doesnt need answering, idiot. he scored. you can ask that question if it happens against italy and we lose, and then while youre at it you can ask why joe hart, glenn johnson, ashley cole, john terry, joleon lescott, scott parker and steven gerrard allowed italy to score

by JamesLincs Wed 20 Jun 2012, 12:52 pm

lmao, it was actually you who asked that question Very Happy

by The Galveston Giant Wed 20 Jun 2012, 12:53 pm

Diggers wrote:
The Galveston Giant wrote:
Diggers wrote:
The Galveston Giant wrote:
Diggers wrote:
The Galveston Giant wrote:If Rooney hadn't tapped that in last night and won England the game, and they had went out, his performance would have been ripped to shreads.

And if a few chances had gone the other way both Germany and Spain could have been heading home early. Rooney did fine and will only get better.

And so could England have been going home. If England had lost last night Rooney still would have done good? They looked better to me when Carrol came on.
I dont think Rooney was anything like as bad as you are making out. He was rusty but still had a much better game than Wellbeck for instance. He will get better.
The "if" debate is pointless. "If" the Ukraine had been winning England woudl have had to attack more and Rooney "might" have scored a goal because of that as England woudl have been more offensive. Etc. etc...utterly pointless.

We could keep going round in Circles but i only made one point, if England had went home last night would Rooney's performance be acceptable, because somebody would be the scapegoat. Would you like to answer?

What you mean if Rooneys performance wasnt actually the performance that he had...ie he didnt score when in fact he did score....then he would have been blamed ? What a bizarre question. Yes he would have been blamed for not scoring...but hang on, he actually did score.
Would Hart have been blamed if he hadnt made a save and we went one down...yes....if Terry had missed a tackle...yes......in other words if all there performances were worse than they actually were.
Strikers are on the pitch to score to score goals you know, its a pretty big tick when they get a goal. His movement was great last night, he needs his first touch to improve which it will, we know he has a great first touch but he was rusty, the movement is all the instinct he has from being a top player.

I don't really know what you're going on about, had England gone home would Rooneys perfomance be acceptable to you.

by Mad for Chelsea Wed 20 Jun 2012, 12:53 pm

I didn't actually think Rooney was "gash" as such, I thought (much like most) that it was a mixed bag, but that he did well to be in the right place at the right time to score the crucial goal. I also think England are simply a better team with him in it.

Had England lost and gone out, we'd be rightfully slating the team for a disappointing performance (well I would anyway), but we didn't, we qualified in first position in a group that wasn't all that easy, so far so good.

by The Galveston Giant Wed 20 Jun 2012, 12:55 pm

JamesLincs wrote:because it doesnt need answering, idiot. he scored. you can ask that question if it happens against italy and we lose, and then while youre at it you can ask why joe hart, glenn johnson, ashley cole, john terry, joleon lescott, scott parker and steven gerrard allowed italy to score

Because everyone was excited to have Rooney back and everything you hear is about him, and then he puts in a perfomance like that. You still haven't answered the question idiot. Yes or No?

by Diggers Wed 20 Jun 2012, 12:58 pm

They didnt go home because Rooney scored. The goal was part of his performance. Take the goal away and it was a worse performance......but it wasnt...because he scored....
God this is painful.

by The Galveston Giant Wed 20 Jun 2012, 1:14 pm

No it's funny, so you are agreeing his goal hid his poor performance, they wouldn't have went home even if he didn't score, why won't you answer the question Diggers. It's a simple point i've made but all you keep saying is England didn't go home.

by mystiroakey Wed 20 Jun 2012, 1:15 pm

the goal didnt hide his performance galv- it was his performance

by The Galveston Giant Wed 20 Jun 2012, 1:22 pm

If England go out on Sunday Mystiroakey, and Rooney puts in the same performance without scoring, will you be happy with his contribution?

by mystiroakey Wed 20 Jun 2012, 1:23 pm

i wouldnt concentrate on rooney at all. If we all go out trying our best then i will be abit gutted but happy enough, if any player does something shocking which impacts on our game negatively i will concentrate on that- same goes if a player does really well

by JamesLincs Wed 20 Jun 2012, 1:24 pm

if if if if if if if if if if if if if

by mystiroakey Wed 20 Jun 2012, 1:28 pm

rooney tried his best yesterday- if you want to argue he didnt you may at least have a point Galv. But i dont think you do. I think you expect to much from him. He is picked for the team and that is that. Most super star type players never shine for every intentional. But i tell ya what rooney didnt look out of place and he looked as though he gave it his all. Thats all i expect

by Diggers Wed 20 Jun 2012, 1:29 pm

The Galveston Giant wrote:If England go out on Sunday Mystiroakey, and Rooney puts in the same performance without scoring, will you be happy with his contribution?

It wouldnt be the same performance though would it...because he wouldnt have scored. It would then be the performance that you keep trying to tell us to judge him on from last nights game...the fantasy one that never actually happened.
A question for you, do you accept that the game would have been played out totally differently if England had been losing 1-0 ?

by Diggers Wed 20 Jun 2012, 1:32 pm

The Galveston Giant wrote:No it's funny, so you are agreeing his goal hid his poor performance, they wouldn't have went home even if he didn't score, why won't you answer the question Diggers. It's a simple point i've made but all you keep saying is England didn't go home.

By the way I did answer your quetion ages ago. If his performance had been worse than the performance he actually gave and England went out then he would have copped some flack. But as he didnt give that performance and did what strikers are meant to do and scored...he didnt. Its really not rocket science.

by The Galveston Giant Wed 20 Jun 2012, 1:34 pm

mystiroakey wrote:rooney tried his best yesterday- if you want to argue he didnt you may at least have a point Galv. But i dont think you do. I think you expect to much from him. He is picked for the team and that is that. Most super star type players never shine for every intentional. But i tell ya what rooney didnt look out of place and he looked as though he gave it his all. Thats all i expect

A while back i actually stated he didn't do that bad because i don't actually rate him as others do, which is why i wanted to see if people would have been happy with the performance had England went out.

by mystiroakey Wed 20 Jun 2012, 1:38 pm

Rooney is coping flack though isnt he, i thought he was fine though and people scrutinize him because of who he is!. Anyway lets be clear on something. England have got through the group because we didnt conceade. Rooneys performnace also helped the cause by doing his promary job(to score). Terry did his job to trick a linesman to bring justice to an offside goal. Gerrad put in a captains performance- and everyone deserves credit for giving 100%..

by mystiroakey Wed 20 Jun 2012, 1:42 pm

The Galveston Giant wrote:
mystiroakey wrote:rooney tried his best yesterday- if you want to argue he didnt you may at least have a point Galv. But i dont think you do. I think you expect to much from him. He is picked for the team and that is that. Most super star type players never shine for every intentional. But i tell ya what rooney didnt look out of place and he looked as though he gave it his all. Thats all i expect

A while back i actually stated he didn't do that bad because i don't actually rate him as others do, which is why i wanted to see if people would have been happy with the performance had England went out.

We wouldnt have gone out if rooney hadnt scored, The main job was to draw anyway. so its a sort of odd discussion from my pov.

Obviously it was very nice to top the group but the goal didnt even seal it.

It was allways about giving him a run. I will expect more next game- yes- but i wont expect on an unrealistic level. As long as he tries and doesnt do anything stupid- its all good really

by The Galveston Giant Wed 20 Jun 2012, 1:48 pm

Diggers wrote:
The Galveston Giant wrote:If England go out on Sunday Mystiroakey, and Rooney puts in the same performance without scoring, will you be happy with his contribution?

It wouldnt be the same performance though would it...because he wouldnt have scored. It would then be the performance that you keep trying to tell us to judge him on from last nights game...the fantasy one that never actually happened.
A question for you, do you accept that the game would have been played out totally differently if England had been losing 1-0 ?

Yes but that doesn't mean Rooney would have played any better, it could have showed him up even more. What is not Rocket science is replacing the word same with similair. If Rooney puts on a similair performance on Sunday without scoring, and England go home, will you be happy with him?

by mystiroakey Wed 20 Jun 2012, 1:52 pm

He needs to up his level abit Galv- but he hasnt played a comp game for abit. All the same I wouldnt be that gutted if he played the way he did- He still showed some invention and carved out some nice through balls! He gave it 100%, so if he gives it 100% again next time I cant be disappointed with him!

by Diggers Wed 20 Jun 2012, 1:59 pm

And it could have meant that he looked much better and sharper having more of the ball. You only seem to want these hypothetical scenarios to fit your own needs. The simple fact is the game would have been different which is why your analogy is so utterly pointless in the first place.
If Rooney looks as rusty in the second game and doesnt score...cue another hypothetical scenario.... then he would get more stick as he has now had 90 minutes of game time. But if he puts in the same rusty performance and scores the winner...hang on, thats the same performance as last night....then he will still be doing a good strikers job.
Most strikers who have the sort of goal scoring record that Rooney has dont do anything like as much in terms of work rate and creativity, they just poach. He plays as a genuine number 10 and scores the goals.
You do realise he has only played 35 mins of competitive football in 5 weeks ? But he still played OK and scored the winner so his performance last night was absoloutley fine.

by The Galveston Giant Wed 20 Jun 2012, 2:03 pm

mystiroakey wrote:
The Galveston Giant wrote:
mystiroakey wrote:rooney tried his best yesterday- if you want to argue he didnt you may at least have a point Galv. But i dont think you do. I think you expect to much from him. He is picked for the team and that is that. Most super star type players never shine for every intentional. But i tell ya what rooney didnt look out of place and he looked as though he gave it his all. Thats all i expect

A while back i actually stated he didn't do that bad because i don't actually rate him as others do, which is why i wanted to see if people would have been happy with the performance had England went out.

We wouldnt have gone out if rooney hadnt scored, The main job was to draw anyway. so its a sort of odd discussion from my pov.

Obviously it was very nice to top the group but the goal didnt even seal it.

It was allways about giving him a run. I will expect more next game- yes- but i wont expect on an unrealistic level. As long as he tries and doesnt do anything stupid- its all good really

Had also stated Engalnd wouldn't have went home if he hadn't scored, like i say mate you seem to have your head screwed on when it comes to England so all's good. I actually think the manager would have been the scapegoat anyway had they went, but i don't think Rooneys performances merit the hype.

by The Galveston Giant Wed 20 Jun 2012, 2:06 pm

Diggers wrote:And it could have meant that he looked much better and sharper having more of the ball. You only seem to want these hypothetical scenarios to fit your own needs. The simple fact is the game would have been different which is why your analogy is so utterly pointless in the first place.
If Rooney looks as rusty in the second game and doesnt score...cue another hypothetical scenario.... then he would get more stick as he has now had 90 minutes of game time. But if he puts in the same rusty performance and scores the winner...hang on, thats the same performance as last night....then he will still be doing a good strikers job.
Most strikers who have the sort of goal scoring record that Rooney has dont do anything like as much in terms of work rate and creativity, they just poach. He plays as a genuine number 10 and scores the goals.
You do realise he has only played 35 mins of competitive football in 5 weeks ? But he still played OK and scored the winner so his performance last night was absoloutley fine.

There are other players with similair game time, it's no excuse. It's his job. I didn't see anyone in the first set of games off the pace.

by Diggers Wed 20 Jun 2012, 2:07 pm

I dont think anyone has hyped his performance. As far as I can see all the media and anyone on here...bar you.....is saying that he looked rusty but his movement was good both for the miss and the goal. He ran himself into the ground and as usual the signs were good for a promising partnership with Gerrard who had a great game.
Nobody is saying he was MOTM or played like Messi on a good day.

by Diggers Wed 20 Jun 2012, 2:11 pm

The Galveston Giant wrote:
Diggers wrote:And it could have meant that he looked much better and sharper having more of the ball. You only seem to want these hypothetical scenarios to fit your own needs. The simple fact is the game would have been different which is why your analogy is so utterly pointless in the first place.
If Rooney looks as rusty in the second game and doesnt score...cue another hypothetical scenario.... then he would get more stick as he has now had 90 minutes of game time. But if he puts in the same rusty performance and scores the winner...hang on, thats the same performance as last night....then he will still be doing a good strikers job.
Most strikers who have the sort of goal scoring record that Rooney has dont do anything like as much in terms of work rate and creativity, they just poach. He plays as a genuine number 10 and scores the goals.
You do realise he has only played 35 mins of competitive football in 5 weeks ? But he still played OK and scored the winner so his performance last night was absoloutley fine.

There are other players with similair game time, it's no excuse. It's his job. I didn't see anyone in the first set of games off the pace.

Now you are just making yourself look silly. Of course it matters. Nothing makes up for match sharpness, the England 11 in the first game had plenty of that.

by The Galveston Giant Wed 20 Jun 2012, 3:07 pm

Diggers wrote:
The Galveston Giant wrote:
Diggers wrote:And it could have meant that he looked much better and sharper having more of the ball. You only seem to want these hypothetical scenarios to fit your own needs. The simple fact is the game would have been different which is why your analogy is so utterly pointless in the first place.
If Rooney looks as rusty in the second game and doesnt score...cue another hypothetical scenario.... then he would get more stick as he has now had 90 minutes of game time. But if he puts in the same rusty performance and scores the winner...hang on, thats the same performance as last night....then he will still be doing a good strikers job.
Most strikers who have the sort of goal scoring record that Rooney has dont do anything like as much in terms of work rate and creativity, they just poach. He plays as a genuine number 10 and scores the goals.
You do realise he has only played 35 mins of competitive football in 5 weeks ? But he still played OK and scored the winner so his performance last night was absoloutley fine.

There are other players with similair game time, it's no excuse. It's his job. I didn't see anyone in the first set of games off the pace.

Now you are just making yourself look silly. Of course it matters. Nothing makes up for match sharpness, the England 11 in the first game had plenty of that.

So he will be match fit for Italy then? How much competitve football had the other English players played before the first game?

by Diggers Wed 20 Jun 2012, 3:40 pm

Well obviously he is going to more match fit as he has played a match.
The other players had played more in the friendly matches and also to state what should be obvious the first Euro game was nearly 2 ago weeks so a lot closer to the end of the season than Rooneys last games.

by JamesLincs Wed 20 Jun 2012, 3:44 pm

chelsea and liverpool players have had cup finals too

by dyrewolfe Wed 20 Jun 2012, 4:18 pm

Well, it was a goal my granny could have scored, but fair play to Wazza for getting into position to score it. Considering he was still rusty, I think he did okay.

I don't think its Rooney we should be worrying about, however. The whole team will need to step up their performances to another level if we are to beat Italy.

by Sponsored content