Football 2010-2011

[worm]

They play to TRY AND WIN. They do NOT "play to win" - unless you have your head up your arse like Evra and play for one of the very few clubs that do win.

It's a very minor difference in the words used to describe it, but a HUGE difference in why you do it.

Edited December 10, 2010 by worm

[The Nal]

They are the same. The attempt (trying) is synonymous with playing. Here's why.......

To try and win you must play to win, otherwise you haven't tried. For instance, if you play for a laugh then you haven't tried to win.

You have to play to win to try and win. Fact.

[eFestivals]

They are the same. The attempt (trying) is synonymous with playing. Here's why.......

To try and win you must play to win, otherwise you haven't tried. For instance, if you play for a laugh then you haven't tried to win.

You have to play to win to try and win. Fact.

Anyone who criticises someone for not winning as Evra has has lost their grasp of the game, because it's not possible for everyone to win. Fact!

For someone to win, it is a pre-requisite that someone else losses. Any winner is dependent on there also being a loser.

Edited December 10, 2010 by eFestivals

[ampersand]

Anyone who criticises someone for not winning as Evra has has lost their grasp of the game, because it's not possible for everyone to win. Fact!

[ampersand]

For someone to win, it is a pre-requisite that someone else losses. Any winner is dependent on there also being a loser.

[worm]

For someone to win, it is a pre-requisite that someone else losses. Any winner is dependent on there also being a loser.

[eFestivals]

of course it's not. but in a five year period, arsenal should be embarrassed to not even win a cup.

So you say.

Luckily, the board at Arsenal are smarter than you, because they clearly feel it would be far more embarressing for them to do a Leeds.

even portsmouth have. and they haven't got as good players or spent as much as man utd/chelsea. same with liverpool.

Leeds v2.

And now you've proven my point.

it's cool though neil, we know you get precious when someone says other than good things about arsenal or wenger!

Why not just put a sticker on your head saying "this has all been beyond me?". It'd be far more accurate than the ignorant bollocks you're typed here.

[eFestivals]

Nah, getting a man on the moon was a victory for mankind.

apart for those of mankind who were condemned to death by that 'achievement' of course.

Can you come up with a scenario of only winners to prove yourself right? No you can't.

[ampersand]

So you say.

Luckily, the board at Arsenal are smarter than you, because they clearly feel it would be far more embarressing for them to do a Leeds.

Leeds v2.

And now you've proven my point.

Why not just put a sticker on your head saying "this has all been beyond me?". It'd be far more accurate than the ignorant bollocks you're typed here.

[ampersand]

Can you come up with a scenario of only winners to prove yourself right? No you can't.

[worm]

apart for those of mankind who were condemned to death by that 'achievement' of course.

[pink_triangle]

so the arsenal board have money first and football second? wonderful! anyone would think it was a football team they were running and not a shop.

[eFestivals]

Nevertheless, you have to play to win to try and win.

As I've stated several times, playing to try to win is not the same thing as only playing to win.

[spwan-of-the-devil]

Few rumours around that we are letting Daniel Sturridge go onloan to Swansea in Jan, must mean we're going to sign a striker if that's the case then surely?

[eFestivals]

I can see both points of view. In my opinion Arsenal have at times been too business orientated, Im not saying they should have gone down the man city route. However there are times when just a small increase in expenditure could have taken them to the next level.

"might", not "could".

There are no guarantees of winning that come with spending, and the ability of any team to win anything via the strength of their squad is 100% dependent on the strengths of the squads of the other teams involved.

[eFestivals]

so the arsenal board have money first and football second? wonderful!

No.

They cannot play football if they do not exist because they're bankrupt.

you do realise that you can win trophies and not end up in debt.

yes, but there is no guarantee of doing so, yet Evra believes there should be a guarantee of winning at a club like Arsenal.

I guess he's not known for his knowledge of Utd's own history.

leeds v2 yes, but they still won a cup and weren't the best team in the country. so it can be done!

yep, it can be - if a team gets lucky enough to win; not every team can win, only one can.

All the ambition to win in the world cannot win any club anything.

it's not all beyond me. cos currently, anyone else getting involved has sided with me and not you.

if you were as smart as you like to think you are, you'd know that not everyone has the same knowledge of everything.

[ampersand]

No.

They cannot play football if they do not exist because they're bankrupt.

[Cardboard Box City]

You don't half see some right bollocks posted in this thread. If this was on an actual football forum they'd be lining up to rip in to this.

[eFestivals]

so in order to win the league, you have to be bankrupt? wow, i always wondered what happened to man utd. they just died and disappeared one day...

f**k me, if you had a second brain cell you'd run the risk of being a million times as smart. Moron.

Care to show me where I said "in order to win the league, you have to be bankrupt", moron?

yes, and arsenal are never that one club (in the past 5 years). yet inferior ones have been. why is that?

if you were as smart as you like to think you are you wouldn't need to ask that question because you'd know the answer.

evra stated a fact. yet it was against arsenal so you disliked that fact.

Which "fact" was it that he stated against Arsenal?

Him thinking that they should win something is not within any definition of "fact", apart from in the minds of morons like you.

[eFestivals]

You don't half see some right bollocks posted in this thread. If this was on an actual football forum they'd be lining up to rip in to this.

You do get some right bollocks posted in this thread that'd be ripped to bits by people who know stuffr.

Such as your comment yesterday that Barca were poor against Arsenal.

Such as moron's comment that he thinks I've said a club has to be bankrupt to win the league.

But aside from you two, this thread mostly does quite well.

[spwan-of-the-devil]

You don't half see some right bollocks posted in this thread. If this was on an actual football forum they'd be lining up to rip in to this.

[Cardboard Box City]

You do get some right bollocks posted in this thread that'd be ripped to bits by people who know stuffr.

Such as your comment yesterday that Barca were poor against Arsenal.

Such as moron's comment that he thinks I've said a club has to be bankrupt to win the league.

But aside from you two, this thread mostly does quite well.

Edited December 10, 2010 by Cardboard Box City

[Cardboard Box City]

Anything in the Wheater rumor going around for him to sign for Stoke up your end?

[spwan-of-the-devil]

Getting back to that if you want, you never did answer my question as to how you get a result against Barcelona? (a team you know f**k all about and so have to base your opinion of them on 2 games against your beloved Arsenal and my lack of memory [which I also questioned])

So how do you get a result against Barca without shutting up shop in midfield? For someone who loves to claim that others are either ignorant or blinkered when questioning his sometimes ludicrous 'opinions', you do like to make comments based on pure guesswork and assumtions.

[spwan-of-the-devil]

He's still in contract negotiations as far as I know but they seem to stalling, not seen anything about him moving tho. He's a bit shit anyway when there's not someone of real quality beside him - Robert Huth would do nicely tho.

Edited December 10, 2010 by spwan-of-the-devil