Immanuel >> Fung. I don't care if you try and argue that Immanuel would just be a batsman, it is irrelevant. Immanuel is a better keeper than Fung at this stage.
Is Immanuel really that far ahead of Fung? He has only played the 6 FC games, and only 2 of them in BS.
How ****ing stupid are you? I never said that. Fung was the first choice, one of the first people I actually approached and if he had the chance to come here again he'd start, such is our situation. You're just going on about gibberish now.
What are the Saders looking like? 1. 2. Retzel 3. 4. Hayes 5. 6. Immanuel 7. Tyson 8. Kovas 9. Wilson 10. Bullpitt 11. Rocker Who slots into the gaps?
If Fung went to the Saders at this very moment, how would you justify him being a better keeper than Immanuel?
I don't think we can be compared this early tbh. 1) Forms are to be reset, I think. 2) He has played about 6 FC games. At that stage in my career, I was also averaging over 55 I think. Basically what I was when I first started.
Yeah, but Fung averages 36 in 36 games. A couple of bad ones from Bibu, or a poor season like Fung's and he isn't the star he is made out to be. I'd have Bibu in my side first off but a couple of poor games and I'd be getting him out of there faster than Usain Bolt can run 100m.
My arguement from the start was that Fung would be the 2nd choice keeper, and that he would play Seconds because of this yes? What I didn't take into account was the extremely shit nature of the Saders batting, which means he makes it in on his batting alone. When I tried to justify my reasoning, you jumped down my throat saying you approached Fung first and that he'd be keeper, so I asked how that would be so.