Astroblack Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 Carrick, Hargreaves, Scholes, Brown, Rooney, and Ferdinand. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 I just know that English teams dominate Europe and have been for a while now. since it began it's been won 3 times by English teams (the same as Real Madrid have won it), which includes liverpools luckiest win in the history of football, but that's by the by works out at 2 wins in the last 5 years or 3 in 10/16 total domination, yeah COME ON THE PL!!!! 3 teams in semis this year, all english final last, liverpool and arsenal made finals before that. So thats 5 english teams in the final in the past 4 years. More than other countries nooo? That maybe so! but look at most of the players in those squads, not many English there, are there? Interesting argument against my post... when I have never mentioned players nationality. that's not for me right? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Alan Shearer 9 Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 Can Messi have three sub-par CL performances in a row? Hope he destroys Manure gets a hat trick and wins world player of the year now, Ronaldo's CL form might challenge him for the title now and I'd hate to see the greasy gay cunt win it again. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 Carrick, Hargreaves, Scholes, Brown, Rooney, and Ferdinand. someone else quoted this to me, 11 english started the final last year i'd like to see the stats over the full season mind...not saying anyting either way about this just wondering Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 Can Messi have three sub-par CL performances in a row? Hope he destroys Manure gets a hat trick and wins world player of the year now, Ronaldo's CL form might challenge him for the title now and I'd hate to see the greasy gay cunt win it again. i think he'll get the space in the final he's been denied by chelski and if evra's recent "performance" against lennon is anything to go by it could be a bloodbath, but then the same could be said of ronaldo obviously Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astroblack Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 I think 5/6 six played the majority of the games cause Hargreaves was injured half the time. But you said who started and they started. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
garth Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 I just know that English teams dominate Europe and have been for a while now. since it began it's been won 3 times by English teams (the same as Real Madrid have won it), which includes liverpools luckiest win in the history of football, but that's by the by works out at 2 wins in the last 5 years or 3 in 10/16 total domination, yeah COME ON THE PL!!!! 3 teams in semis this year, all english final last, liverpool and arsenal made finals before that. So thats 5 english teams in the final in the past 4 years. More than other countries nooo? That maybe so! but look at most of the players in those squads, not many English there, are there? Interesting argument against my post... when I have never mentioned players nationality. that's not for me right? Que? please explain!. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcmk Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 90% of the time shambolic.. you dont even watch La Liga do you Real Madrid vs Barca you miss that did you, take off your spanish tinted glasses man. oh sorry, we were discussing juve vs milan in this particular bit weren't we? they're italian in case it escaped your notice Nope. That was actually you saying PL teams cant defend 90% of the time. Shambolic was the word. Its an art form when Italian teams do it, but when Chelsea are winning their tie, and counter attack the opponents its anti football funny that. go back and look at when i referenced 90%, it was the milan/juve game as for chelsea yeah i agree with you, the way they do it is anti-football thanks for agreeing with me - there's a distinct difference between the way italian teams defend and the way chelsea defend that's for sure glad you've seen the light Way to twist my words to suit your argument, if thats what you resorted to. Your probably embarrassed about pretty much every point you made for last 30 minutes. And nope your sentence was aye righto, it was a lesson in the art of defending mate, there are many elements to the game of football - you stick to your "best league in the world" guns though where the defending is f***ing shambolic >90% of the time oh, so i wasn't talking about the juve/milan final when i said it? my mistake i'm not embarrassed mate, i just see subtle differences where you don't and to be honest i've slightly been on the wind up about chelsea but i'll try and outline the difference i see the italians (and the spanish to a large degree) consider defending a massive part of their game, we do not historically...the italians can see a triumph in a well executed 0-0 whereas to the english it's largely seen as a failure, excitement is our aim essentially the italian style is about positioning and tactics more than anything else but this contrasts with the way english teams set up imo - they set up to dominate physically as a priority, it's currently more about booting people off the ball than anything else but it's changing, managers like hiddink are certainly changing that anyways chelsea and liverpool are really the only teams who play this way, arsenal and man u don't and no-one else gets the chance in the PL if, however, you feel the standard of defending in the PL as a whole is good then i'd get yourself away to football school for a crash course What are you on about that's clearly a reference to PL as i'm the one whos saying its the best in the world. Which it is. PL defenses being shambolic is quite something, when Spanish teams are twice as bad. 6-2 last week just wow. No wonder our Colo was considered a good defender there. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 I think 5/6 six played the majority of the games cause Hargreaves was injured half the time. But you said who started and they started. who me? no i didn't this is getting confusing Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
garth Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 I think 5/6 six played the majority of the games cause Hargreaves was injured half the time. But you said who started and they started. Point taken!. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 90% of the time shambolic.. you dont even watch La Liga do you Real Madrid vs Barca you miss that did you, take off your spanish tinted glasses man. oh sorry, we were discussing juve vs milan in this particular bit weren't we? they're italian in case it escaped your notice Nope. That was actually you saying PL teams cant defend 90% of the time. Shambolic was the word. Its an art form when Italian teams do it, but when Chelsea are winning their tie, and counter attack the opponents its anti football funny that. go back and look at when i referenced 90%, it was the milan/juve game as for chelsea yeah i agree with you, the way they do it is anti-football thanks for agreeing with me - there's a distinct difference between the way italian teams defend and the way chelsea defend that's for sure glad you've seen the light Way to twist my words to suit your argument, if thats what you resorted to. Your probably embarrassed about pretty much every point you made for last 30 minutes. And nope your sentence was aye righto, it was a lesson in the art of defending mate, there are many elements to the game of football - you stick to your "best league in the world" guns though where the defending is f***ing shambolic >90% of the time oh, so i wasn't talking about the juve/milan final when i said it? my mistake i'm not embarrassed mate, i just see subtle differences where you don't and to be honest i've slightly been on the wind up about chelsea but i'll try and outline the difference i see the italians (and the spanish to a large degree) consider defending a massive part of their game, we do not historically...the italians can see a triumph in a well executed 0-0 whereas to the english it's largely seen as a failure, excitement is our aim essentially the italian style is about positioning and tactics more than anything else but this contrasts with the way english teams set up imo - they set up to dominate physically as a priority, it's currently more about booting people off the ball than anything else but it's changing, managers like hiddink are certainly changing that anyways chelsea and liverpool are really the only teams who play this way, arsenal and man u don't and no-one else gets the chance in the PL if, however, you feel the standard of defending in the PL as a whole is good then i'd get yourself away to football school for a crash course What are you on about that's clearly a reference to PL as i'm the one whos saying its the best in the world. Which it is. PL defenses being shambolic is quite something, when Spanish teams are twice as bad. 6-2 last week just wow. No wonder our Colo was considered a good defender there. wow, staggering, i'll try and help you out though C-O-N-T-R-A-S-T-I-N-G S-T-Y-L-E-S BOOM!! there you go EDIT: good bit ignoring of everything else mind Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcmk Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 90% of the time shambolic.. you dont even watch La Liga do you Real Madrid vs Barca you miss that did you, take off your spanish tinted glasses man. oh sorry, we were discussing juve vs milan in this particular bit weren't we? they're italian in case it escaped your notice Nope. That was actually you saying PL teams cant defend 90% of the time. Shambolic was the word. Its an art form when Italian teams do it, but when Chelsea are winning their tie, and counter attack the opponents its anti football funny that. go back and look at when i referenced 90%, it was the milan/juve game as for chelsea yeah i agree with you, the way they do it is anti-football thanks for agreeing with me - there's a distinct difference between the way italian teams defend and the way chelsea defend that's for sure glad you've seen the light Way to twist my words to suit your argument, if thats what you resorted to. Your probably embarrassed about pretty much every point you made for last 30 minutes. And nope your sentence was aye righto, it was a lesson in the art of defending mate, there are many elements to the game of football - you stick to your "best league in the world" guns though where the defending is f***ing shambolic >90% of the time oh, so i wasn't talking about the juve/milan final when i said it? my mistake i'm not embarrassed mate, i just see subtle differences where you don't and to be honest i've slightly been on the wind up about chelsea but i'll try and outline the difference i see the italians (and the spanish to a large degree) consider defending a massive part of their game, we do not historically...the italians can see a triumph in a well executed 0-0 whereas to the english it's largely seen as a failure, excitement is our aim essentially the italian style is about positioning and tactics more than anything else but this contrasts with the way english teams set up imo - they set up to dominate physically as a priority, it's currently more about booting people off the ball than anything else but it's changing, managers like hiddink are certainly changing that anyways chelsea and liverpool are really the only teams who play this way, arsenal and man u don't and no-one else gets the chance in the PL if, however, you feel the standard of defending in the PL as a whole is good then i'd get yourself away to football school for a crash course What are you on about that's clearly a reference to PL as i'm the one whos saying its the best in the world. Which it is. PL defenses being shambolic is quite something, when Spanish teams are twice as bad. 6-2 last week just wow. No wonder our Colo was considered a good defender there. wow, staggering, i'll try and help you out though C-O-N-T-R-A-S-T-I-N-G S-T-Y-L-E-S BOOM!! there you go Where defenders dont have to head, run, read the game or bully strikers Ok Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astroblack Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 Sorry guys, its 1 30 am, Got a paper to write. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 90% of the time shambolic.. you dont even watch La Liga do you Real Madrid vs Barca you miss that did you, take off your spanish tinted glasses man. oh sorry, we were discussing juve vs milan in this particular bit weren't we? they're italian in case it escaped your notice Nope. That was actually you saying PL teams cant defend 90% of the time. Shambolic was the word. Its an art form when Italian teams do it, but when Chelsea are winning their tie, and counter attack the opponents its anti football funny that. go back and look at when i referenced 90%, it was the milan/juve game as for chelsea yeah i agree with you, the way they do it is anti-football thanks for agreeing with me - there's a distinct difference between the way italian teams defend and the way chelsea defend that's for sure glad you've seen the light Way to twist my words to suit your argument, if thats what you resorted to. Your probably embarrassed about pretty much every point you made for last 30 minutes. And nope your sentence was aye righto, it was a lesson in the art of defending mate, there are many elements to the game of football - you stick to your "best league in the world" guns though where the defending is f***ing shambolic >90% of the time oh, so i wasn't talking about the juve/milan final when i said it? my mistake i'm not embarrassed mate, i just see subtle differences where you don't and to be honest i've slightly been on the wind up about chelsea but i'll try and outline the difference i see the italians (and the spanish to a large degree) consider defending a massive part of their game, we do not historically...the italians can see a triumph in a well executed 0-0 whereas to the english it's largely seen as a failure, excitement is our aim essentially the italian style is about positioning and tactics more than anything else but this contrasts with the way english teams set up imo - they set up to dominate physically as a priority, it's currently more about booting people off the ball than anything else but it's changing, managers like hiddink are certainly changing that anyways chelsea and liverpool are really the only teams who play this way, arsenal and man u don't and no-one else gets the chance in the PL if, however, you feel the standard of defending in the PL as a whole is good then i'd get yourself away to football school for a crash course What are you on about that's clearly a reference to PL as i'm the one whos saying its the best in the world. Which it is. PL defenses being shambolic is quite something, when Spanish teams are twice as bad. 6-2 last week just wow. No wonder our Colo was considered a good defender there. wow, staggering, i'll try and help you out though C-O-N-T-R-A-S-T-I-N-G S-T-Y-L-E-S BOOM!! there you go Where defenders dont have to head, run, read the game or bully strikers Ok ah, i'll rephrase to "Where defenders dont have to exclusively head, run, and rely on bullying strikers" also, why isn't this working in reverse then? if the spanish defenders are so bad why didn't chelski (or man u last year) simply go to the nou camp and obliterate them? doesn't make sense following your logic, nor does both teams setting up very defensively against barca if they were so bad in defence and both english teams defences are so good, does it? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcmk Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 90% of the time shambolic.. you dont even watch La Liga do you Real Madrid vs Barca you miss that did you, take off your spanish tinted glasses man. oh sorry, we were discussing juve vs milan in this particular bit weren't we? they're italian in case it escaped your notice Nope. That was actually you saying PL teams cant defend 90% of the time. Shambolic was the word. Its an art form when Italian teams do it, but when Chelsea are winning their tie, and counter attack the opponents its anti football funny that. go back and look at when i referenced 90%, it was the milan/juve game as for chelsea yeah i agree with you, the way they do it is anti-football thanks for agreeing with me - there's a distinct difference between the way italian teams defend and the way chelsea defend that's for sure glad you've seen the light Way to twist my words to suit your argument, if thats what you resorted to. Your probably embarrassed about pretty much every point you made for last 30 minutes. And nope your sentence was aye righto, it was a lesson in the art of defending mate, there are many elements to the game of football - you stick to your "best league in the world" guns though where the defending is f***ing shambolic >90% of the time oh, so i wasn't talking about the juve/milan final when i said it? my mistake i'm not embarrassed mate, i just see subtle differences where you don't and to be honest i've slightly been on the wind up about chelsea but i'll try and outline the difference i see the italians (and the spanish to a large degree) consider defending a massive part of their game, we do not historically...the italians can see a triumph in a well executed 0-0 whereas to the english it's largely seen as a failure, excitement is our aim essentially the italian style is about positioning and tactics more than anything else but this contrasts with the way english teams set up imo - they set up to dominate physically as a priority, it's currently more about booting people off the ball than anything else but it's changing, managers like hiddink are certainly changing that anyways chelsea and liverpool are really the only teams who play this way, arsenal and man u don't and no-one else gets the chance in the PL if, however, you feel the standard of defending in the PL as a whole is good then i'd get yourself away to football school for a crash course What are you on about that's clearly a reference to PL as i'm the one whos saying its the best in the world. Which it is. PL defenses being shambolic is quite something, when Spanish teams are twice as bad. 6-2 last week just wow. No wonder our Colo was considered a good defender there. wow, staggering, i'll try and help you out though C-O-N-T-R-A-S-T-I-N-G S-T-Y-L-E-S BOOM!! there you go Where defenders dont have to head, run, read the game or bully strikers Ok ah, i'll rephrase to "Where defenders dont have to exclusively head, run, and rely on bullying strikers" also, why isn't this working in reverse then? if the spanish defenders are so bad why didn't chelski (or man u last year) simply go to the nou camp and obliterate them? doesn't make sense following your logic, nor does both teams setting up very defensively against barca if they were so bad in defence and both english teams defences are so good, does it? Because they were confident of containing Barcelona - which they did - and were always looking to counter as they leave themselves super exposed + weak defense. They throw too many men forward, Chelsea should of scored more today. Chelsea had their tactics spot on.. got screwed by the referee. Which you will now probably attempt to defend too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 90% of the time shambolic.. you dont even watch La Liga do you Real Madrid vs Barca you miss that did you, take off your spanish tinted glasses man. oh sorry, we were discussing juve vs milan in this particular bit weren't we? they're italian in case it escaped your notice Nope. That was actually you saying PL teams cant defend 90% of the time. Shambolic was the word. Its an art form when Italian teams do it, but when Chelsea are winning their tie, and counter attack the opponents its anti football funny that. go back and look at when i referenced 90%, it was the milan/juve game as for chelsea yeah i agree with you, the way they do it is anti-football thanks for agreeing with me - there's a distinct difference between the way italian teams defend and the way chelsea defend that's for sure glad you've seen the light Way to twist my words to suit your argument, if thats what you resorted to. Your probably embarrassed about pretty much every point you made for last 30 minutes. And nope your sentence was aye righto, it was a lesson in the art of defending mate, there are many elements to the game of football - you stick to your "best league in the world" guns though where the defending is f***ing shambolic >90% of the time oh, so i wasn't talking about the juve/milan final when i said it? my mistake i'm not embarrassed mate, i just see subtle differences where you don't and to be honest i've slightly been on the wind up about chelsea but i'll try and outline the difference i see the italians (and the spanish to a large degree) consider defending a massive part of their game, we do not historically...the italians can see a triumph in a well executed 0-0 whereas to the english it's largely seen as a failure, excitement is our aim essentially the italian style is about positioning and tactics more than anything else but this contrasts with the way english teams set up imo - they set up to dominate physically as a priority, it's currently more about booting people off the ball than anything else but it's changing, managers like hiddink are certainly changing that anyways chelsea and liverpool are really the only teams who play this way, arsenal and man u don't and no-one else gets the chance in the PL if, however, you feel the standard of defending in the PL as a whole is good then i'd get yourself away to football school for a crash course What are you on about that's clearly a reference to PL as i'm the one whos saying its the best in the world. Which it is. PL defenses being shambolic is quite something, when Spanish teams are twice as bad. 6-2 last week just wow. No wonder our Colo was considered a good defender there. wow, staggering, i'll try and help you out though C-O-N-T-R-A-S-T-I-N-G S-T-Y-L-E-S BOOM!! there you go Where defenders dont have to head, run, read the game or bully strikers Ok ah, i'll rephrase to "Where defenders dont have to exclusively head, run, and rely on bullying strikers" also, why isn't this working in reverse then? if the spanish defenders are so bad why didn't chelski (or man u last year) simply go to the nou camp and obliterate them? doesn't make sense following your logic, nor does both teams setting up very defensively against barca if they were so bad in defence and both english teams defences are so good, does it? Because they confident of containing Barcelona - which they did - and were always looking to counter as they leave themselves super exposed. They throw too many men forward, Chelsea should of scored more today. Chelsea had their tactics spot on.. got screwed by the referee. Which you will now probably attempt to defend too. barca were screwed out of a penalty in the first leg, just to balance things out for you where chelsea had about one shot and barca 20 or something, the very same stats you were taking the piss out of barca for last night!! also patently they didn't have their tactics spot on 'cause they lost you've not answered my question though - why did both teams approach barca in this manner if their defence is so bad and why did barca only concede 2 goals in 4 games against them if their defence is so shit? and before you ask why barca only scored 1 goal you've already answered it - both teams set up to stop them playing rather than playing themselves Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcmk Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 90% of the time shambolic.. you dont even watch La Liga do you Real Madrid vs Barca you miss that did you, take off your spanish tinted glasses man. oh sorry, we were discussing juve vs milan in this particular bit weren't we? they're italian in case it escaped your notice Nope. That was actually you saying PL teams cant defend 90% of the time. Shambolic was the word. Its an art form when Italian teams do it, but when Chelsea are winning their tie, and counter attack the opponents its anti football funny that. go back and look at when i referenced 90%, it was the milan/juve game as for chelsea yeah i agree with you, the way they do it is anti-football thanks for agreeing with me - there's a distinct difference between the way italian teams defend and the way chelsea defend that's for sure glad you've seen the light Way to twist my words to suit your argument, if thats what you resorted to. Your probably embarrassed about pretty much every point you made for last 30 minutes. And nope your sentence was aye righto, it was a lesson in the art of defending mate, there are many elements to the game of football - you stick to your "best league in the world" guns though where the defending is f***ing shambolic >90% of the time oh, so i wasn't talking about the juve/milan final when i said it? my mistake i'm not embarrassed mate, i just see subtle differences where you don't and to be honest i've slightly been on the wind up about chelsea but i'll try and outline the difference i see the italians (and the spanish to a large degree) consider defending a massive part of their game, we do not historically...the italians can see a triumph in a well executed 0-0 whereas to the english it's largely seen as a failure, excitement is our aim essentially the italian style is about positioning and tactics more than anything else but this contrasts with the way english teams set up imo - they set up to dominate physically as a priority, it's currently more about booting people off the ball than anything else but it's changing, managers like hiddink are certainly changing that anyways chelsea and liverpool are really the only teams who play this way, arsenal and man u don't and no-one else gets the chance in the PL if, however, you feel the standard of defending in the PL as a whole is good then i'd get yourself away to football school for a crash course What are you on about that's clearly a reference to PL as i'm the one whos saying its the best in the world. Which it is. PL defenses being shambolic is quite something, when Spanish teams are twice as bad. 6-2 last week just wow. No wonder our Colo was considered a good defender there. wow, staggering, i'll try and help you out though C-O-N-T-R-A-S-T-I-N-G S-T-Y-L-E-S BOOM!! there you go Where defenders dont have to head, run, read the game or bully strikers Ok ah, i'll rephrase to "Where defenders dont have to exclusively head, run, and rely on bullying strikers" also, why isn't this working in reverse then? if the spanish defenders are so bad why didn't chelski (or man u last year) simply go to the nou camp and obliterate them? doesn't make sense following your logic, nor does both teams setting up very defensively against barca if they were so bad in defence and both english teams defences are so good, does it? Because they confident of containing Barcelona - which they did - and were always looking to counter as they leave themselves super exposed. They throw too many men forward, Chelsea should of scored more today. Chelsea had their tactics spot on.. got screwed by the referee. Which you will now probably attempt to defend too. barca were screwed out of a penalty in the first leg, just to balance things out for you where chelsea had about one shot and barca 20 or something, the very same stats you were taking the piss out of barca for last night!! also patently they didn't have their tactics spot on 'cause they lost you've not answered my question though - why did both teams approach barca in this manner if their defence is so bad and why did barca only concede 2 goals in 4 games against them if their defence is so s***? and before you ask why barca only scored 1 goal you've already answered it - both teams set up to stop them playing rather than playing themselves Now your just making stuff up. Chelsea had 1 shot on target only thing you got right in that whole post. Drogba one on one with the keeper, as Barca defense were beyond a joke. Hiddink paid Barcelona too much respect first game, was nothing clinical about them. That whole XX amount of games scoring, didnt hold much water. Stamford bridge Chelsea got the early goal, didn't need another. Didn't need an open game as they can shut them out and counter attack which they did well imo. The referee screwed them on more then one occasion. If Chelsea needed to attack been a different game. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 90% of the time shambolic.. you dont even watch La Liga do you Real Madrid vs Barca you miss that did you, take off your spanish tinted glasses man. oh sorry, we were discussing juve vs milan in this particular bit weren't we? they're italian in case it escaped your notice Nope. That was actually you saying PL teams cant defend 90% of the time. Shambolic was the word. Its an art form when Italian teams do it, but when Chelsea are winning their tie, and counter attack the opponents its anti football funny that. go back and look at when i referenced 90%, it was the milan/juve game as for chelsea yeah i agree with you, the way they do it is anti-football thanks for agreeing with me - there's a distinct difference between the way italian teams defend and the way chelsea defend that's for sure glad you've seen the light Way to twist my words to suit your argument, if thats what you resorted to. Your probably embarrassed about pretty much every point you made for last 30 minutes. And nope your sentence was aye righto, it was a lesson in the art of defending mate, there are many elements to the game of football - you stick to your "best league in the world" guns though where the defending is f***ing shambolic >90% of the time oh, so i wasn't talking about the juve/milan final when i said it? my mistake i'm not embarrassed mate, i just see subtle differences where you don't and to be honest i've slightly been on the wind up about chelsea but i'll try and outline the difference i see the italians (and the spanish to a large degree) consider defending a massive part of their game, we do not historically...the italians can see a triumph in a well executed 0-0 whereas to the english it's largely seen as a failure, excitement is our aim essentially the italian style is about positioning and tactics more than anything else but this contrasts with the way english teams set up imo - they set up to dominate physically as a priority, it's currently more about booting people off the ball than anything else but it's changing, managers like hiddink are certainly changing that anyways chelsea and liverpool are really the only teams who play this way, arsenal and man u don't and no-one else gets the chance in the PL if, however, you feel the standard of defending in the PL as a whole is good then i'd get yourself away to football school for a crash course What are you on about that's clearly a reference to PL as i'm the one whos saying its the best in the world. Which it is. PL defenses being shambolic is quite something, when Spanish teams are twice as bad. 6-2 last week just wow. No wonder our Colo was considered a good defender there. wow, staggering, i'll try and help you out though C-O-N-T-R-A-S-T-I-N-G S-T-Y-L-E-S BOOM!! there you go Where defenders dont have to head, run, read the game or bully strikers Ok ah, i'll rephrase to "Where defenders dont have to exclusively head, run, and rely on bullying strikers" also, why isn't this working in reverse then? if the spanish defenders are so bad why didn't chelski (or man u last year) simply go to the nou camp and obliterate them? doesn't make sense following your logic, nor does both teams setting up very defensively against barca if they were so bad in defence and both english teams defences are so good, does it? Because they confident of containing Barcelona - which they did - and were always looking to counter as they leave themselves super exposed. They throw too many men forward, Chelsea should of scored more today. Chelsea had their tactics spot on.. got screwed by the referee. Which you will now probably attempt to defend too. barca were screwed out of a penalty in the first leg, just to balance things out for you where chelsea had about one shot and barca 20 or something, the very same stats you were taking the piss out of barca for last night!! also patently they didn't have their tactics spot on 'cause they lost you've not answered my question though - why did both teams approach barca in this manner if their defence is so bad and why did barca only concede 2 goals in 4 games against them if their defence is so s***? and before you ask why barca only scored 1 goal you've already answered it - both teams set up to stop them playing rather than playing themselves Now your just making stuff up. Chelsea had 1 shot on target only thing you got right in that whole post. Drogba one on one with the keeper, as Barca defense were beyond a joke. Hiddink paid Barcelona too much respect first game, was nothing clinical about them. That whole XX amount of games scoring, didnt hold much water. Stamford bridge Chelsea got the early goal, didn't need another. Didn't need an open game as they can shut them out and counter attack which they did well imo. The referee screwed them on more then one occasion. If Chelsea needed to attack been a different game. eh? what have i made up like? that's just you making things up resorting to "the referee robbed" them shit, honestly...is that like when chelsea went through at barca's expense after a blatant foul on the keeper or is that not counted as a screwing? what goes around comes around you also said their tactics were "spot on" yet they "gave them too much respect first game"? make your mind up dude...presumably spot on tactics must include everything going your way from the ref as well in your world does it? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest firetotheworks Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 Want Man U to win. f*** Barca, f*** Messi, f*** La Liga. Prem. was gonna chomp but this is surely a piss take I hate this Barcelona w***-fest, was a complete farce today. They were completely toothless in attack, all these great players and one shot on goal and barely a sniff at their home ground. I thought there superb passing moves can tear apart anything.. obviously not. Over-rated. Surely a Man Utd win. You obviously haven't watched them this season then? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 Want Man U to win. f*** Barca, f*** Messi, f*** La Liga. Prem. was gonna chomp but this is surely a piss take I hate this Barcelona w***-fest, was a complete farce today. They were completely toothless in attack, all these great players and one shot on goal and barely a sniff at their home ground. I thought there superb passing moves can tear apart anything.. obviously not. Over-rated. Surely a Man Utd win. You obviously haven't watched them this season then? they can't defend, doncha know! oh and the refs screw teams for them Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcmk Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 90% of the time shambolic.. you dont even watch La Liga do you Real Madrid vs Barca you miss that did you, take off your spanish tinted glasses man. oh sorry, we were discussing juve vs milan in this particular bit weren't we? they're italian in case it escaped your notice Nope. That was actually you saying PL teams cant defend 90% of the time. Shambolic was the word. Its an art form when Italian teams do it, but when Chelsea are winning their tie, and counter attack the opponents its anti football funny that. go back and look at when i referenced 90%, it was the milan/juve game as for chelsea yeah i agree with you, the way they do it is anti-football thanks for agreeing with me - there's a distinct difference between the way italian teams defend and the way chelsea defend that's for sure glad you've seen the light Way to twist my words to suit your argument, if thats what you resorted to. Your probably embarrassed about pretty much every point you made for last 30 minutes. And nope your sentence was aye righto, it was a lesson in the art of defending mate, there are many elements to the game of football - you stick to your "best league in the world" guns though where the defending is f***ing shambolic >90% of the time oh, so i wasn't talking about the juve/milan final when i said it? my mistake i'm not embarrassed mate, i just see subtle differences where you don't and to be honest i've slightly been on the wind up about chelsea but i'll try and outline the difference i see the italians (and the spanish to a large degree) consider defending a massive part of their game, we do not historically...the italians can see a triumph in a well executed 0-0 whereas to the english it's largely seen as a failure, excitement is our aim essentially the italian style is about positioning and tactics more than anything else but this contrasts with the way english teams set up imo - they set up to dominate physically as a priority, it's currently more about booting people off the ball than anything else but it's changing, managers like hiddink are certainly changing that anyways chelsea and liverpool are really the only teams who play this way, arsenal and man u don't and no-one else gets the chance in the PL if, however, you feel the standard of defending in the PL as a whole is good then i'd get yourself away to football school for a crash course What are you on about that's clearly a reference to PL as i'm the one whos saying its the best in the world. Which it is. PL defenses being shambolic is quite something, when Spanish teams are twice as bad. 6-2 last week just wow. No wonder our Colo was considered a good defender there. wow, staggering, i'll try and help you out though C-O-N-T-R-A-S-T-I-N-G S-T-Y-L-E-S BOOM!! there you go Where defenders dont have to head, run, read the game or bully strikers Ok ah, i'll rephrase to "Where defenders dont have to exclusively head, run, and rely on bullying strikers" also, why isn't this working in reverse then? if the spanish defenders are so bad why didn't chelski (or man u last year) simply go to the nou camp and obliterate them? doesn't make sense following your logic, nor does both teams setting up very defensively against barca if they were so bad in defence and both english teams defences are so good, does it? Because they confident of containing Barcelona - which they did - and were always looking to counter as they leave themselves super exposed. They throw too many men forward, Chelsea should of scored more today. Chelsea had their tactics spot on.. got screwed by the referee. Which you will now probably attempt to defend too. barca were screwed out of a penalty in the first leg, just to balance things out for you where chelsea had about one shot and barca 20 or something, the very same stats you were taking the piss out of barca for last night!! also patently they didn't have their tactics spot on 'cause they lost you've not answered my question though - why did both teams approach barca in this manner if their defence is so bad and why did barca only concede 2 goals in 4 games against them if their defence is so s***? and before you ask why barca only scored 1 goal you've already answered it - both teams set up to stop them playing rather than playing themselves Now your just making stuff up. Chelsea had 1 shot on target only thing you got right in that whole post. Drogba one on one with the keeper, as Barca defense were beyond a joke. Hiddink paid Barcelona too much respect first game, was nothing clinical about them. That whole XX amount of games scoring, didnt hold much water. Stamford bridge Chelsea got the early goal, didn't need another. Didn't need an open game as they can shut them out and counter attack which they did well imo. The referee screwed them on more then one occasion. If Chelsea needed to attack been a different game. eh? what have i made up like? that's just you making things up resorting to "the referee robbed" them s***, honestly...is that like when chelsea went through at barca's expense after a blatant foul on the keeper or is that not counted as a screwing? what goes around comes around you also said their tactics were "spot on" yet they "gave them too much respect first game"? make your mind up dude 0-0 suggests they didnt lose, that result away from home is good for a semi final first leg nope? Tactics spot on comment were more for the match yesterday, where they didnt need to attack, just let Barcelona over commit men forward and counterattack them, only thing lacking was the goals. I suppose the job to contain and counter is easier when up against a toothless attack like what was shown tonight. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 Want Man U to win. f*** Barca, f*** Messi, f*** La Liga. Prem. was gonna chomp but this is surely a piss take I hate this Barcelona w***-fest, was a complete farce today. They were completely toothless in attack, all these great players and one shot on goal and barely a sniff at their home ground. I thought there superb passing moves can tear apart anything.. obviously not. Over-rated. Surely a Man Utd win. You obviously haven't watched them this season then? actually i've just noticed this bit in bold :lol: :lol: dude has been arguing with me for an hour that they tactically contained a team who are "toothless" in attack priceless Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcmk Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 Want Man U to win. f*** Barca, f*** Messi, f*** La Liga. Prem. was gonna chomp but this is surely a piss take I hate this Barcelona w***-fest, was a complete farce today. They were completely toothless in attack, all these great players and one shot on goal and barely a sniff at their home ground. I thought there superb passing moves can tear apart anything.. obviously not. Over-rated. Surely a Man Utd win. You obviously haven't watched them this season then? English Premier League > La Liga. Whole world seems to think so too. Plus 3 English teams in semi finals, would of been 4 if Liverpool haven't have played Chelsea i reckon. Suggests standard is better in this country. When Barcelona faced a good English team they should of got knocked out. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcmk Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 Want Man U to win. f*** Barca, f*** Messi, f*** La Liga. Prem. was gonna chomp but this is surely a piss take I hate this Barcelona w***-fest, was a complete farce today. They were completely toothless in attack, all these great players and one shot on goal and barely a sniff at their home ground. I thought there superb passing moves can tear apart anything.. obviously not. Over-rated. Surely a Man Utd win. You obviously haven't watched them this season then? actually i've just noticed this bit in bold :lol: :lol: dude has been arguing with me for an hour that they tactically contained a team who are "toothless" in attack priceless ye and you would argue that one shot on goal, chasing the game for 80 minutes is good priceless Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 0-0 suggests they didnt lose, that result away from home is good for a semi final first leg nope? Tactics spot on comment were more for the match yesterday, where they didnt need to attack, just let Barcelona over commit men forward and counterattack them, only thing lacking was the goals. are you mental? chelsea were spot on but the only thing lacking was goals, the week before barca battered them and didn't score but they're toothless in a attack? what gives man, are you trying to contradict yourself? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now