Search results

  1. Bianconero81

    Ezequiel Lavezzi - AM RLC - PSG

    What about Bernard and Gaitan? Players wanna leave Shakhtar cuz of the situation in Ukraine, and Benfica are in financial turmoil.
  2. Bianconero81

    Ezequiel Lavezzi - AM RLC - PSG

    Odd numbers Bro. You have an even number of smileys/emoticons :D
  3. Bianconero81

    Ezequiel Lavezzi - AM RLC - PSG

    You bastard :P - - - Updated - - - He isn't worth it. I don't mind Pastore, but he is fragile, inconsistent, and not the fastest player around. We need an injection of pace.
  4. Bianconero81

    Ezequiel Lavezzi - AM RLC - PSG

    Probably :D However, is that just for one season? I don't recall Pastore scoring that often last year :boh:
  5. Bianconero81

    Ezequiel Lavezzi - AM RLC - PSG

    According to Whoscored he scored 2 goals and had 3 assists with an average rating of 6.7 for the 2013-2014 season. According to Wikipedia he had 0 goals and 0 assists :D
  6. Bianconero81

    Ezequiel Lavezzi - AM RLC - PSG

    :shifty: :confused: Not getting any younger, and I'd prefer someone else, but if the alternatives are Cerci and Candreva, then :donedeal:
  7. Bianconero81

    Ezequiel Lavezzi - AM RLC - PSG

    We don't need Lavezzi, and Grosso sucks sweaty ginger balls.
  8. Bianconero81

    Ezequiel Lavezzi - AM RLC - PSG

    I agree with Andy. Seba must stay, and get playing time. I am sure he can put on 15-20 pounds of muscle in the off-season, and it won't affect his playing style or pace.
  9. Bianconero81

    Ezequiel Lavezzi - AM RLC - PSG

    I'm not saying Lavezzi isn't a very good player, but why spend money on someone we don't need, when we have enough quality in a player like Gio, if only he is given the faith and confidence of the coach; so yes, we should invest in our unproven Serie A player based on his mere potential, because...
  10. Bianconero81

    Ezequiel Lavezzi - AM RLC - PSG

    Are we selling Molinaro? :eek: :shocked: :weee: What about Camo? And why is Cannelloni in the heart of our defense? :cry: :sad:
  11. Bianconero81

    Ezequiel Lavezzi - AM RLC - PSG

    No No No! If sacrificing Gio is required to acquire this diminutive Argentine with a ponch, I say Hell NO!!!
  12. Bianconero81

    Ezequiel Lavezzi - AM RLC - PSG

    That would mean u will wear two shirts on the same day :P
  13. Bianconero81

    Ezequiel Lavezzi - AM RLC - PSG

    It's not too attacking. We have 2 ball winners in midfield, and then unleash our creative forces in attack. I want both Ale and Gio to play, but obviously if the incumbent coach does not wish to deploy such a tactic, I hope Diego, Ale, and Giovinco share playing time.
  14. Bianconero81

    Ezequiel Lavezzi - AM RLC - PSG

    Giovinco can play alongside Cassano just in front of Diego, and Behind Amauri in a diamond shaped attack formation something like 4-2-1-2-1 or possibly a 4-2-1-3 Diego Giovinco...
  15. Bianconero81

    Ezequiel Lavezzi - AM RLC - PSG

    Quag better than Lavezzi? Please don't make me laugh. Quag is an over-rated, hard working striker, who scores magnificent goals albeit inconsistently. He is not as consistent or effective as many seem to make him out to be. I would definitely not opt for Quag; he is not an upgrade to...
  16. Bianconero81

    Ezequiel Lavezzi - AM RLC - PSG

    Trigger, you are too serious man. Lighten up :P Did you notice the smiley? haha.
  17. Bianconero81

    Ezequiel Lavezzi - AM RLC - PSG

    You can't defend them. That is taboo; simply unacceptable :P
  18. Bianconero81

    Ezequiel Lavezzi - AM RLC - PSG

    There are more urgent needs, issues that need to be addressed. Our board are dumb, no two ways about it :P
  19. Bianconero81

    Ezequiel Lavezzi - AM RLC - PSG

    Nooooooooooooooooooo!!! Why are our board so dumb? :wallbang:
  20. Bianconero81

    Ezequiel Lavezzi - AM RLC - PSG

    No, but the board seems to think we do :shifty: Apparently we don't have an abundance of attacking players :sigh: :moan: This is the board's policy; keep stacking up the front line and ignore the deficiencies at the back. A winning policy I say :lol: