Eric Dier

[TheSpurEst]

I pick out sentences that nullify your arguement....

"He´s untouchable......unless I think he should be dropped. But not you.....you cant say which games he should be dropped for. Its only ok If I say it, and when I decide"

Thats basically your stance and you´re too blind to even realise it.
So I couldnt less for the rest of your post because you´re incosistent and its impossible to debate.

It does not nullify anything, but you just seem to be blatantly stupid (just no reason to beat around the bush and can just say it) to understand the differences between the decisions and the very fact that NOT ALL PLAYERS ARE EQUAL, NOT ALL SITUATIONS (COMPETITIONS) ARE EQUAL.

If game is deemed less important (like EFL Cup has been and still is) then some players are allowed to have rest. They were not dropped. Or to explain it other way - no one expected that the EFL game lineup was stronger because of exclusion of Kane (or Vertonghen for the this instance) - other way around, it was intentionally weaker to give players rest. While you still seem to suggest that team would become stronger by dropping Kane at times, which is not true.

Sidetrack -> /If I buy an expensive Hugo Boss suit, I wear it to my friends weddings and to other most important events of my life. If I do not wear it to work every day does not mean, I think that other clothes are better than this one. No. It is other way around - for less important occasions I wear everyday suits. But for important occasions I bring out Hugo Boss./

You just take posts sentence by sentence, failing to see the main point. Then you reinvent some kind of connections between points that are actually not there, and then you come back and think you have proven anything. You love to argue just for the sake of it. Only the fact that you have steered this discussion from Dier to Kane proves it - you just try to latch onto every sentence (that in your head) seem like good option for arguing instead of focusing to the main point. Which is : some players are more "replaceable" than others. And Dier is about most replacable player in our starting XI, while Kane and Eriksen are among most "irreplaceable"'s of the XI.

 

[Raiders]

So....when you said he was “untouchable”, you meant he can be dropped?

He actually said "intouchable" first, but there we go.

 

[TheSpurEst]

Prob with this is:

1. Wanyama is a shadow of his former hights.

2. We can only pick current Dier or Vic OR pick on the basis of one or the other refinding their form.

We don't have the selective ability to drop Dier '18 in preference for Wanyama '16.

This is Poch's quandry.

Well, just saying but CM Wanyama of 29.09.2018 II half was much more convincing that CM Dier of 29.09.2018 I half...

 

[sammyspurs]

It does not nullify anything, but you just seem to be blatantly stupid (just no reason to beat around the bush and can just say it) to understand the differences between the decisions and the very fact that NOT ALL PLAYERS ARE EQUAL, NOT ALL SITUATIONS (COMPETITIONS) ARE EQUAL.

If game is deemed less important (like EFL Cup has been and still is) then some players are allowed to have rest. They were not dropped. Or to explain it other way - no one expected that the EFL game lineup was stronger because of exclusion of Kane (or Vertonghen for the this instance) - other way around, it was intentionally weaker to give players rest. While you still seem to suggest that team would become stronger by dropping Kane at times, which is not true.

Sidetrack -> /If I buy an expensive Hugo Boss suit, I wear it to my friends weddings and to other most important events of my life. If I do not wear it to work every day does not mean, I think that other clothes are better than this one. No. It is other way around - for less important occasions I wear everyday suits. But for important occasions I bring out Hugo Boss./

You just take posts sentence by sentence, failing to see the main point. Then you reinvent some kind of connections between points that are actually not there, and then you come back and think you have proven anything. You love to argue just for the sake of it. Only the fact that you have steered this discussion from Dier to Kane proves it - you just try to latch onto every sentence (that in your head) seem like good option for arguing instead of focusing to the main point. Which is : some players are more "replaceable" than others. And Dier is about most replacable player in our starting XI, while Kane and Eriksen are among most "irreplaceable"'s of the XI.

Yeah, like I said. Kane is undroppable unless you think it’s ok to drop him.

And you still think that’s a fair point.

 

[TheSpurEst]

Yeah, like I said. Kane is undroppable unless you think it’s ok to drop him.

And you still think that’s a fair point.

Thanks for proving my point
You don't have mental capacity to understand "setting priorities" nor difference between "choosing to rest player in less important games" or "dropping them because they are not in form". Case rested.

 

[sammyspurs]

Thanks for proving my point
You don't have mental capacity to understand "setting priorities" nor difference between "choosing to rest player in less important games" or "dropping them because they are not in form". Case rested.

You said he was undroppable, then you supported him being dropped

 

[TheSpurEst]

You said he was undroppable, then you supported him being dropped

 

[sammyspurs]

Exactly..I told you you had nullified yourself.
There is nothing to add because you believe one thing then you believe the total opposite

 

[Rocket]

Exactly..I told you you had nullified yourself.
There is nothing to add because you stand believe one thing then you believe the total opposite

I think TheSpurEst is drawing a distinction between being dropped (for someone considered a better option) and being rested (against weaker opposition or for a game the result of which the gaffer doesn't care about). Whether that was in his mind at the time of his original assertion I can't tell you. But it seems like a perfectly sensible differentiation to me. Had the Watford (LC) game been the Huddersfield (PL) game, Kane would not have been dropped OR rested.

 

[TheSpurEst]

I think TheSpurEst is drawing a distinction between being dropped (for someone considered a better option) and being rested (against weaker opposition or for a game the result of which the gaffer doesn't care about). Whether that was in his mind at the time of his original assertion I can't tell you. But it seems like a perfectly sensible differentiation to me. Had the Watford (LC) game been the Huddersfield (PL) game, Kane would not have been dropped OR rested.

Thank you.
This was what I thought.
And said... for a few times.

 

[sammyspurs]

I think TheSpurEst is drawing a distinction between being dropped (for someone considered a better option) and being rested (against weaker opposition or for a game the result of which the gaffer doesn't care about). Whether that was in his mind at the time of his original assertion I can't tell you. But it seems like a perfectly sensible differentiation to me. Had the Watford (LC) game been the Huddersfield (PL) game, Kane would not have been dropped OR rested.

And as I said, he can draw all the distinctions he likes after the fact. He can go through life moving the goalposts when he gets his pants pulled down all he likes, but maybe next time he shouldnt be so hysterical and conclusive in his statements......like calling Kane untouchable, and then two minutes later lauding him being benched and then talking priorities.

Ive not once mentioned a competition when Ive called for Kane to be dropped. But SpurEst has taken it upon himself to try and create a fake situation where I said bench Harry for all the important games, and he said only bench Harry for the Carabou.

None of that happened. What happend was SpurEst called Harry undroppable, then changed his mind but couldnt own it. Simple as that.

 

[ArcspacE]

Thank you.
This was what I thought.
And said... for a few times.

Kane was rested in a lesser game - he's one of our most important players. Rocket science it is not. Don't feed the troll - he called Kane a Rasiak few weeks back

 

[sammyspurs]

Thank you.
This was what I thought.
And said... for a few times.

But you only thought that when I reminded you that Kane was dropped for the Watford game...up until that point, you was trying to mock my views that he should be benched sometimes.

Which is why you said:

Harry Kane is absolutely intouchable.

Nothing there about "except in some games"....you added that when you realised you had completely and utterly contradicted yourself.

 

[spursmalc]

Did none of you listen to Poch;'s strop with the Media the other week. players are NOT dropped. If they are not picked for a particular match it is for a number of reasons. Trippier and Toby were not dropped because they did not go to Milan. Whether Dier or Davies play on Wednesday it will not be because they are dropped but because Wanyama, Rose or another is prefered due to fitness, tactics or simply that the other player is not playing as well.

 

[sammyspurs]

Did none of you listen to Poch;'s strop with the Media the other week. players are NOT dropped. If they are not picked for a particular match it is for a number of reasons. Trippier and Toby were not dropped because they did not go to Milan. Whether Dier or Davies play on Wednesday it will not be because they are dropped but because Wanyama, Rose or another is prefered due to fitness, tactics or simply that the other player is not playing as well.

Call it what you want.....rotation, rest whatever. If your not picked and not injured, your dropped. Or benched or whatever the fuck.

Is this the new one now? After 8 months of saying Kane should play EVERY game, people are now ok with him being dropped.
As long as you call it something else.

LOL

 

[spursmalc]

Call it what you want.....rotation, rest whatever. If your not picked and not injured, your dropped. Or benched or whatever the fuck.

Is this the new one now? After 8 months of saying Kane should play EVERY game, people are now ok with him being dropped.
As long as you call it something else.

LOL

So was Messi dropped at the weekend? No he was rested as was Kane on Wednesday. Poch has stated he will be making changes for this match. He never says I will be dropping players.

 

[bus-conductor]

Call it what you want.....rotation, rest whatever. If your not picked and not injured, your dropped. Or benched or whatever the fuck.

Is this the new one now? After 8 months of saying Kane should play EVERY game, people are now ok with him being dropped.
As long as you call it something else.

LOL

Not everyone is OK with Kane playing every game. But there's a massive difference in why people don't think Kane should play every game and why they don't think Dier should. Kane should have been given more time to recover last season, and generally, he should be given games off (like some domestic cup or dead rubber euro games) to avoid mental and physical fatigue and injury. Same goes for Eriksen.

With Dier, people don't want him rested, or rotated, they just want him not to be playing in midfield any more because he's not very good at it.

 

[sammyspurs]

So was Messi dropped at the weekend? No he was rested as was Kane on Wednesday. Poch has stated he will be making changes for this match. He never says I will be dropping players.

Yes Messi was dropped, rested, benched etc etc etc

It means the same thing. Theres one or two people trying to jump on the "rest Kane" bandwagen now its happened. One week ago they didnt agree though, no matter what you called it.

 

[TheSpurEst]

But you only thought that when I reminded you that Kane was dropped for the Watford game...up until that point, you was trying to mock my views that he should be benched sometimes.

Which is why you said:

Nothing there about "except in some games"....you added that when you realised you had completely and utterly contradicted yourself.

Haha, just fook off, you are pathetic parody of yourself.
It is beyond me, how can it be needed to explain every obvious thing explicitly (I mean in your world every post has to be 20 pg long, because you would expect ppl to explain every detail in lenght).

Just like it has been said, it is different if you REST someone (and you REST best players in early rounds of EFL) and to DROP a player (let's say in EPL or CL game). Not using something in less important game does not make him any less untouchable.

What you have been banging here (and in number of other topics as well!) has been that we should bench Kane in EPL/CL games as well as he is out of form. It is substantially different.

Now, go on and rot in my ignore list, really don't have time to waste on person who just does not have basic understanding of ... well anything longer than 1 sentence. Pathetic troll.

 

[sammyspurs]

With Dier, people don't want him rested, or rotated, they just want him not to be playing in midfield any more because he's not very good at it.

Good for them. Ive never said otherwise....just pointing out that poor form is poor form, and certain players dont deserve a pass and others slated.

Eriksen playing shit is not better than Dier playing shit