what is so bad about Gilardino??

Originally Posted by zZ[-_-]Zz

so now there is one more weakness to Gilardino... his inability to adapt to various styles of play (which is so widely used these days)... and obviously his limitations to playin' just one way...

if Carlo's attack is so predictable, then how can Milan be playing with various styles of play? If Milan be playing with various styles of play, then how can Carlo 's tactics be predictable?

Talking about limitations to playing just one way? I guess Inzaghi is the first one coming to my mind!

erm... i never said Ancelotti's tactics were predictable... you must have confused me with someone else...

and about Inzaghi... no comments... never liked him... still don't...

Originally Posted by 'zZ[-_-

anyway... i wouldn't call you crazy... but don't forget that Gilardino too did not perform under Lippi (rumoured to be our nex possible coach) durin' the WC... and last but not least... why should a coach adapt his entire style of play (which brought success) to accomodate a single player (regardless of his reputation)? shouldn't it be the player learnin' to adapt to the team & their style of play?

carlo should be better to ask PRANDELLI about Gila do Im right ???

Originally Posted by sheva-gila

carlo should be better to ask PRANDELLI about Gila do Im right ???

nope... wrong... Gilardino should try to work on his limitations & learn to adapt to 10 other players instead of these 10 adaptin' to his limitations...

Originally Posted by zZ[-_-]Zz

nope... wrong... Gilardino should try to work on his limitations & learn to adapt to 10 other players instead of these 10 adaptin' to his limitations...

No, it's Carlo who should change the tactics. Not to adapt them to Gila, but to adapt them to 5-6 players from his starting 11.

If it was Gila the only one underperforming ( like Zlatan Ibrahimovic last year with Juve) then i would have supported you for what you're saying in the quoted post.
But it ain't just Gilardino.

Oliveira seems lost on the field
Nesta is being punk'd by every single serie A attacker
Pirlo scored 0, assisted mostly 1-2 goals, got a stupid red card
Inzaghi is the same as he was in his last season with Juve - pathetic, without a goal in 14 serie A matches in a row ( same goes for Oli)
Seedorf can't do anything on the flanks.

When so many players underperform, then at least 1 of the reasons must be Carlo Ancelotti, and one of the questions he needs to ask himself is : Why does Gila plays so bad now, and so good in Parma or in first part of last season ? What was Prandelli doing better than i am ?

Originally Posted by Tony29.

No, it's Carlo who should change the tactics. Not to adapt them to Gila, but to adapt them to 5-6 players from his starting 11.

If it was Gila the only one underperforming ( like Zlatan Ibrahimovic last year with Juve) then i would have supported you for what you're saying in the quoted post.
But it ain't just Gilardino.

Oliveira seems lost on the field
Nesta is being punk'd by every single serie A attacker
Pirlo scored 0, assisted mostly 1-2 goals, got a stupid red card
Inzaghi is the same as he was in his last season with Juve - pathetic, without a goal in 14 serie A matches in a row ( same goes for Oli)
Seedorf can't do anything on the flanks.

When so many players underperform, then at least 1 of the reasons must be Carlo Ancelotti, and one of the questions he needs to ask himself is : Why does Gila plays so bad now, and so good in Parma or in first part of last season ? What was Prandelli doing better than i am ?

Good point; I'm more convinced by you than anyone else that Ancelotti is at fault.

first of all, I want to congratulate Oksana (Egoitska) for her post on this thread... as much as she is Anti-Gila, she has criticized with much better arguments, and much less bashing than the previous season

And Tony, yes, I think many players are underperforming... it certainly is a transition season... we may not win any titles this season... or have to settle for the losers reward, Coppa Italia... I don't think we have the elements to fight for UCL...

we need to use January transfer market just to set up next season, including the chance of making it to 4th place and next year UCL... then in June we will have to be agressive in the market.

Originally Posted by Tony29.

No, it's Carlo who should change the tactics. Not to adapt them to Gila, but to adapt them to 5-6 players from his starting 11.

If it was Gila the only one underperforming ( like Zlatan Ibrahimovic last year with Juve) then i would have supported you for what you're saying in the quoted post.
But it ain't just Gilardino.

Oliveira seems lost on the field
Nesta is being punk'd by every single serie A attacker
Pirlo scored 0, assisted mostly 1-2 goals, got a stupid red card
Inzaghi is the same as he was in his last season with Juve - pathetic, without a goal in 14 serie A matches in a row ( same goes for Oli)
Seedorf can't do anything on the flanks.

When so many players underperform, then at least 1 of the reasons must be Carlo Ancelotti, and one of the questions he needs to ask himself is : Why does Gila plays so bad now, and so good in Parma or in first part of last season ? What was Prandelli doing better than i am ?

yeah... and how come Gilardino didn't perform for Italy durin' the WC... it has little to do with strategy & tactics than it has to do with his own inability & limitations... tho i'm not excusin' Ancelotti from any blame... but in this case... there is little Ancelotti can do if the striker himself has no ability...

I concur with Tony29's comments. I would like to share my thoughts on the discussion. I think the current Milan system is not a bad system but we just don't have the right people to make it perfect. I don't plan to bash Carletto in full blown scale, but he is not aware of the limitation on this squad such as aging defense, creative but weak midfielders, etc. and change the style of plays. To insist on having Seedorf starting on the left midfielder role and having Pirlo to track back constantly are mistakes.

Well, I don't know if I can use Lentini's career in Milan to compare with Gila's. I think even though before Lentini got injured in the car accident, he wasn't delivering what he supposed to deliver to the team, and eventually got injured and sold. Even though Gila didn't have the same unlucky accident, he might be the type of players who shine in smaller team but become a choker in a big team. I don't know - I hope he's not this case. We only have so much time and patience on the players, and if they cannot deliver when given enough opportunities, I am afraid that they should not stay with the team forever. Down to the last wire, it's all business - players get paid to do their job. That's my stand.

Anyway, keep up the great discussion here eh -)

Originally Posted by zZ[-_-]Zz

and i'm not actin' like a victim... i'm just disappointed at some irregularities displayed in general... not anyone in particular... and definitely not hintin' it is you...

but i would appreciate it if you do at least read my post before wrongly accusin' me of usin' vulgarities... i'm cool if you edit my post if i did somethin' wrong & later warn me of my behaviour... but i'm not happy that you said i was the one at fault when clearly i am innocent...

(The bold highlighting is mine.)

Originally Posted by zZ[-_-]Zz

and everyone here knows what i am all about... thanks but they don't need to you help define me one bit...

Truest thing you've said yet!

As for this:

Originally Posted by zZ[-_-]Zz

i don't understand you one bit... first you say you have read all my posts on Gilardino... than now you ask me to repeat them to you again like some broken record? i have said what i wanted to say... and it is up to you to go find them on your own since you are so interested... all your questions can be found because i have spoken on them...


and it is a fact you don't understand English... look at my previous post you quoted & how you totally misunderstood everythin'... or is it because of your selective readin' that has gotten the better of your brain?

Sadly, there aren't enough hours in a day for me to track down every anti-Gila tirade you've ever posted, though rest assured that I did read the entirety of this thread. Just some advice, though: the "I know you are but what am I?" tack you're on (regarding who's read whose posts) is so 1985. Come on, man, where's the creativity?

As for English, I guess I must not be too familiar with the language after all, since I never knew that English consisted mainly of a deluge of ellipses interspersed with brief phrases that always begin with a lowercase letter.

Anyway, rather than ask you yet again to actually answer my question instead of risking the impending exhaustion of your vocabulary of insults, I'll say instead that I'm hoping to see Gila put in a good performance against Fiorentina-- going to be a tough game, surely, but where there's hope there's always a chance. Forza Gila, Forza Milan!

Originally Posted by zZ[-_-]Zz

yeah... and how come Gilardino didn't perform for Italy durin' the WC... it has little to do with strategy & tactics than it has to do with his own inability & limitations... tho i'm not excusin' Ancelotti from any blame... but in this case... there is little Ancelotti can do if the striker himself has no ability...

Actually, you're the first man i hear saying Gila didn't perform well for Italy during the WC !
Sure, noone will remember the prevous WC because of Gilardino, but he was far from what you're presenting him to be.
He was a team player, and a perfect one, just like everyone in Italian team was.

It took me some 30 minutes to go through FIFA WC 2006 official site, to look for quotes, player ratings, statistics etc, because i think that's the only way to give value to my arguments !

1. Italy-Ghana 2:0
Italy plays 4-3-1-2 formation with Gila and Toni in attack, and later, at 1:0 both of them were substituted by Del Piero and Iaquinta, leaving the 4-4-2 formation unchanged.
Gilardino, Totti, Toni, Zaccardo and Camoranesi got 5.5 for their performance, and they were the worst rated players in Italian team.
So, Gila didn't have some brilliant match. He only managed to hit the post from his only shot at the goal.
His partner Toni was more active, with 6 shots on goal, one of them a crossbar.

2. Italy-USA 1:1
Lippi again with 4-3-1-2 formation and again with Gila-Toni partnership. He had to change it to 4-3-2 after De Rossi got a red card, when he substitited Totti with Gattuso.
Gilardino scored the only goal for Italy.
Toni, who was among the worst rated player in Italian team, with 4.00 ( Gila got a 6.00) was substituted in 60th minute while Gila played the entire match, and had another good chance from free-kick when USA goalkeeper had big troubles stopping his shot.

3. Italy-Czech Republic
This time Italy with 4-4-1-1 formation, with Gila as lone striker. He played until 60th minute, with only 1 shot on goal. He got 6.00 this time.

4. 1/8 finals
Italy-Australia 1:0
Again 4-3-1-2, and again Gila-Toni in attack.
Gila didn't get a great rate, he got 5.5 ... But his partner in attack got 5.00 and in post match analasys it was said that Gila worked hard, tried to score but Italian tactics were very defensive on this match, which didn't allow the attackers to show more.
Toni was said to be the worst Italian on the field, very selfish and missed 2 easy goal chances.
Bot of them were substituted until 55th minute, which left Iaquainta as a lone striker.



And now.... we get to the point which is your main argument why was Gila a fluke on this WC.
You say " If he was good, why did Lippi put him on bench in the knock out stages"

I'll tell you why. It's because, just like France, Lippi knew that he has more chances if he plays 4-4-1-1 formation, and not 4-4-2 formation.
Lippi needed only one striker and he decided to play Toni. Now, you can use this as an argument that Toni is/was better than Gila, which i won't deny, but how can you use it as an argument Gila was bad ??
Because, if Gila was bad, Lippi could have continued using 4-4-2 or 4-3-1-2 formation, and simply replace Gilardino with Del Piero, Inzaghi or Iaquinta.
But Lippi didn't do that. He changed the tactics because he knew he needs stronger midfield in knock-out stages.
And he was right if you know that both finalists played with only 1 attacker in later stages.
One Trezeguet was put on the bench just so France can play with only Henry up-front. Does this means Trez is a bad player ????

I'll continue

1/4 finals
Italy-Ukrain 3:0
Toni was MOM , imo, although Gattuso got the prize.
Italian played with only 1 attacker for the entire 90 minutes. Gila, Inzaghi , Del Piero and Iaquinta didn't play at all

1/2 finals
Italy-Germany 2:0
Italy with 4-3-1-1 , and Toni up front.
Everywhere i looked, Toni was the worst rated player in Italian squad, and he was of course substituted by Gila in 70 minute.
Gila had great 50 minutes, and he assisted the second goal for Italy.

The final
Italy-France 0:0
Again 4-3-1-1 with Toni, and Gila didn't play on this match.


So, can you tell me why do you think Gila had a bad WC ?
And what do you think about my explanation from above, about why Gila didn't start the last 3 matches ?
Do you think Lippi didn't start him because he had to change the tactics, or you think he had to change the tactics because Gila was bad ?

Sorry guys for such a long post !

I agree with you Tony, and let me add that everyone (i.e., all strikers) are an integral part of the team.

Originally Posted by San Ringhio

As for English, I guess I must not be too familiar with the language after all, since I never knew that English consisted mainly of a deluge of ellipses interspersed with brief phrases that always begin with a lowercase letter.

understandin' of the English language has nothin' to do with one's style of writin'... this isn't a report or proposal that requires the correct grammar etc... thus the casual form of writin' on my part...

however understandin' of the English language is based on interpretatin' what is said... which clearly you are so lackin'...

Originally Posted by zZ[-_-]Zz

apparently you need to be the one clarifyin' your supposed readin' of my posts... of which you prove to be nothin' short of extraordinary stupidity at this point...

Originally Posted by San Ringhio

You realize that, based on the way you phrased that, you just said I've proven your posts to be "nothin' short of extraordinary stupidity", right? I wouldn't have chosen those words myself, but hey, if you say so...

read carefully again... my comments of your extraordinary stupidity is at your acclaimed readin' of my posts... not the fact my posts are stupid... bad understandin' of English would lead to that misunderstandin'... or is this even too difficult for you to answer? sorry to let you know that there is no vaccine for stupidity...

Originally Posted by Tony29.

So, can you tell me why do you think Gila had a bad WC ?
And what do you think about my explanation from above, about why Gila didn't start the last 3 matches ?
Do you think Lippi didn't start him because he had to change the tactics, or you think he had to change the tactics because Gila was bad ?

Sorry guys for such a long post !

i'll get back to you another day... i haven't had time to read the entire post yet...

As a rule, I don't like to pass judgment upon nor correct English grammar on international messageboards unless asked, because I think it creates a discouraging and unwelcoming atmosphere for English-as-a-second-language readers/posters.

However, since you've opened the topic on your own-- and since it seems that you'd really, really like to discuss your grammar with me-- I'll make an exception.

Originally Posted by zZ[-_-]Zz

understandin' of the English language has nothin' to do with one's style of writin'...

Not necessarily, perhaps, though you would do well to avoid such highly entertaining hypocrisy in your attacks-- there's nothing more amusing than someone posting a stream of semi-coherent, ungrammatical "English" (I use the term loosely) to accuse someone else of not understanding the language.

Hear that sound? That's your credibility plummeting.

Here's another good one (thanks for these little gems by the way, they're great for a laugh):

Originally Posted by zZ[-_-]Zz

read carefully again... my comments of your extraordinary stupidity is at your acclaimed readin' of my posts... not the fact my posts are stupid...

The highlighting is mine. That's interesting: so you're saying it's a fact that your posts are stupid?

Now, let's take a look at your favorite sentence, shall we?

Here's the first clause:

Originally Posted by zZ[-_-]Zz

apparently you need to be the one clarifyin' your supposed readin' of my posts...

This is an independent clause. It can stand grammatically as its own sentence (congratulations!); however, your use of an ellipsis, along with the second clause's lack of a subject, indicates an intention for these two clauses to be a part of the same sentence. The non-capitalization further indicates that the second clause is to be a part of the same sentence as is the first clause.

Here's the second clause:

Originally Posted by zZ[-_-]Zz

of which you prove to be nothin' short of extraordinary stupidity at this point...

The "of" is unneccessary addition and grammatically improper (it would be correct only in a sentence such as "Zz has made several embarrassingly inept posts, of which this one is the most recent"), so I'll assume the second clause is intended to begin with "which". That makes this second clause an adjective clause. Since this adjective clause has no subject of its own, "my posts" (the object of the first clause) thereby becomes the subject of the (dependent) second clause.

Thus, the adjective clause "which you have proven to be nothin' short of extraordinary stupidity at this point" modifies-- in other words, contributes some added description to-- the noun phrase "my posts".

I'll hand it to you, you're fairly tenacious as inarticulate forum trolls go, but you've got to try a lot harder than that. But hey, I know you're a busy guy-- it's probably pretty hard to manage posting at least twenty or so mouth-frothing anti-Gilardino posts in the matter of a few days and still have time to peruse the thesaurus for interesting names to call me.

Clearly, your obsessive anti-Gila fixation is winning out over the thesaurus lately.