Football 2010-2011

[eFestivals]

Bellend's at it again.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-12175278

[TheGayTent]

I'm saying - just this and nothing more - that WHU were lucky to win because they scored a shit goal that would not be a goal on a hundred+ other occasions.

[TheGayTent]

true but i think if arsenal get into the final they will play a very strong team,

[eFestivals]

What you're saying is bollocks as it did happen.

whether a goal happens or not says nothing about whether it was a fluke or not.

And it was a fluke - even the player who scored it thinks so (as seen on TV).

If Obinna's first half shot had gone in and Cole's 2nd half effort hadn't, rather than Foster pulling off a superb save, and misjudging another, you wouldn't be calling it lucky.

but they didn't. So I am.

So you agree it was an excellent move. It was the type of good creative play that Birmingham didn't produce all night - even with a man advanatge. Yet you maintain Birmingham ran WHU ragged. Even knowing Birmingham had less shots, less shots on target, and Green had less saves to make than Foster....

for a period of the 2nd half, they ran you ragged. I ain't the only one who thinks so.

Oh, and I saw the goal from the BML. I saw the goal in the concourse at HT & FT, and on the news this morning. On all ocassions it looked to me as if there was a gap...

And I said there was a gap.

But I also said it was as small a gap as it ever gets. Am I wrong?

[TheGayTent]

And I said there was a gap.

[TheGayTent]

WHU players create chances and hit the target.

Birmingham players create less chances and miss the target with the few they have.

West Ham win game.

West Ham win the game playing with one less player than Birmingham for over 30 minutes.

West Ham are lucky.

Hmm...

[eFestivals]

Did you?

Yes. Otherwise I wouldn't have said that the ball got thru.

A man with three brain cells to rub together would have been able to work out that the "non-existent gap" was not meant literally, because otherwise I'd not have also being saying that something had got thru it.

[eFestivals]

WHU players create chances and hit the target.

Birmingham players create less chances and miss the target with the few they have.

West Ham win game.

West Ham win the game playing with one less player than Birmingham for over 30 minutes.

West Ham are lucky.

Hmm...

You win by putting the ball in the net.

The ball only got into the net for you to win because of Foster being completely crap, and not due to any high skill from WHU. What part of that are you finding so difficult to understand? And more to the point, are you able to point out how that fact is wrong?

If Foster hadn't been that crap we wouldn't be having any convo about about a lucky win for WHU, we'd be talking about an uninspiring tie that'd been drawn.

Edited January 12, 2011 by eFestivals

[TheGayTent]

You win by putting the ball in the net.

The ball only got into the net for you to win because of Foster being completely crap, and not due to any high skill from WHU. What part of that are you finding so difficult to understand? And more to the point, are you able to point out how that fact is wrong?

If Foster hadn't been that crap we wouldn't be having any convo about about a lucky win for WHU, we'd be talking about an uninspiring tie that'd been drawn.

[TheGayTent]

Yes. Otherwise I wouldn't have said that the ball got thru.

A man with three brain cells to rub together would have been able to work out that the "non-existent gap" was not meant literally, because otherwise I'd not have also being saying that something had got thru it.

[eFestivals]

Unsurprisingly you're still missing the point...

Birmingham weren't good enough to create many chances. Even with a man advantage. Birmingham weren't good enough to hit the target with the few chances they did create. West Ham were - yet they were the lucky team?

Foster wasn't and isn't completely crap. Had it not been for Foster, Birmingham would have been three goals down by half time.

It was an uninspiring tie? It was a tie lacking in quality for sure. Uninspiring? You're off you're rocker - it was an excellent cup tie that was great to watch with plenty of incidents despite the poor quality.

When I said "Foster being completely crap", I was specifically referring to the moment of WHU's 2nd goal. As you knew I was, unless you've recently had a lobotomy?

Without that moment of crapness, you would not have won. Shots on target count for nothing in the final score. Chaqnces count for nothing in the final score. Only goals count, and you only got more goals because of that moment of crapness by Foster.

FFS, when my son was 5 he had a greater understanding of words than you're managing here.

The most exciting it got in the half I saw was the WHU player kicking that Brum player in the nuts. That might have been an incident but it wasn't football.

"Excellent cup tie"? Nope, that's the view you've ended up with as a fan of one of the clubs, and the club that happened to fluke the win. If I'd have known in advance what I'd have been watching, I wouldn't have bothered.

[eFestivals]

Oh so we're not supposed to take what you post as literal now? Funny how this changes to suit your needs...partnerships and the like...!

I'm still amused you have the audacity to state an opinion as fact when you've only seen half a game!

Seem I was wrong. You have had that lobotomy.

[TheGayTent]

BTW Neil there was trouble between old bill and Brum fans before the game last night - I saw one Brum fan headbutt a policeman's helmet...clever. He then made friends with a police dog...Oh and some of their lot aimed a few punches at the stewards after they scored - hence the riot police in the 2nd half.

Oh and it will go off at St Andrews.

And yes, all WHU fans are scum - I'll throw that in 2 weeks before you do...

[eFestivals]

BTW Neil there was trouble between old bill and Brum fans before the game last night - I saw one Brum fan headbutt a policeman's helmet...clever. He then made friends with a police dog...Oh and some of their lot aimed a few punches at the stewards after they scored - hence the riot police in the 2nd half.

Oh and it will go off at St Andrews.

And yes, all WHU fans are scum - I'll throw that in 2 weeks before you do...

You'll throw it in like I won't ever throw it in. That lobotomy has clearly worked.

[TheGayTent]

When I said "Foster being completely crap", I was specifically referring to the moment of WHU's 2nd goal. As you knew I was, unless you've recently had a lobotomy?

Without that moment of crapness, you would not have won. Shots on target count for nothing in the final score. Chaqnces count for nothing in the final score. Only goals count, and you only got more goals because of that moment of crapness by Foster.

FFS, when my son was 5 he had a greater understanding of words than you're managing here.

The most exciting it got in the half I saw was the WHU player kicking that Brum player in the nuts. That might have been an incident but it wasn't football.

"Excellent cup tie"? Nope, that's the view you've ended up with as a fan of one of the clubs, and the club that happened to fluke the win. If I'd have known in advance what I'd have been watching, I wouldn't have bothered.

[eFestivals]

Your ex must be a genius, as if your son is as clever as you claim, he clearly doesn't get it from you. See, I can resort to personal insults too. Difference is I don't - and i don't as when you do it, it always means you've lost the argument and have run out of bullshit to back up your (foolish) opinion.

It would have been an excellent cup tie regardless of whether we'd won or lost and regardless of whether I follow either of the sides involved. High energy, action packed, plenty of shots, close, swinging fortunes, sending off, goals and gaffes.

Oh, what "gaffe" was that then? Not the "gaffe" that gifted WHU their second goal and so the win, perchance?

So after all that, you now as good as say yourself that you fluked it. But it's me who's lost the argument, oh yeah. PMSL.

As for excellent cup tie, I guess it depends on a liking for poor quality. As a WHU regular in recent years it's all you've known, so I do understand.

[worm]

See, I can resort to personal insults too. Difference is I don't - and i don't as when you do it, it always means you've lost the argument and have run out of bullshit to back up your (foolish) opinion.

[TheGayTent]

Oh, what "gaffe" was that then? Not the "gaffe" that gifted WHU their second goal and so the win, perchance?

So after all that, you now as good as say yourself that you fluked it. But it's me who's lost the argument, oh yeah. PMSL.

As for excellent cup tie, I guess it depends on a liking for poor quality. As a WHU regular in recent years it's all you've known, so I do understand.

[TheGayTent]

It's a shame because now and again he has a point,

[worm]

You win by putting the ball in the net.......more times than the other team.

Edited January 12, 2011 by worm

[worm]

Really? I don't remember many in the 5 years I've been here.

[ampersand]

The last sentence sums you up - you need to stop watching the top 4 all the time. You never know you might actually learn something!

[eFestivals]

A goalkeeper making a ricket doesn't make the opposition lucky.

it does if it results in a win that otherwise wouldn't have happened. Which is exactly what happened.

The last sentence sums you up - you need to stop watching the top 4 all the time. You never know you might actually learn something!

I watch more than the top 4 - I watch Aldershot, remember? So I know a poor quality match when I see one.

Perhaps the poor quality had little to do with WHU last night tho. They were, after all, playing Brum. See, I've watched Brum more than enough to know they're almost always dire.

[eFestivals]

Corrected for you.

There is a very sound argument that all victories result from exploiting weaknesses and creating errors in the opposing team/player. You seemed to support this in the Man Utd being skilled at cheating debate. It applies here in putting pressure on a weak keeper. It was going to give at some point, it's just that the point in question was unfortunate for the keeper.

By any measure, Foster is not a weak keeper.

But he is a keeper that can make a cock-up, like any keeper. And last night he made a huge cock up (have you even seen it? - it makes Green's cock-up at the world cup look like a good save! ), and gifted WHU a goal that they wouldn't have otherwise got if that same game was replayed as it was 100 times over (and probably 10,000 times over).

West Ham were lucky that he made that cock-up in that game and not in another. It had f**k all to do with "putting pressure on a weak keeper", it was just one of those unfortunate things.

TGT has been banging on about how many shots WHU had last night, and the amount of saves Foster had to make. I didn't see the 1st half myself (Foster could have slept thru nearly all the 2nd he was so unused), but I very much doubt if there was any shot he saved that was a weak as the shot he fumbled. Cole scuffed it (his own words), and then Foster let a shot go thru his legs that my 75 year old mum could have saved; both Cole and Foster were completely shit at that moment, the sort of thing that happens once in a player's career - and WHU got lucky as a result.

The way the tie played out it was NOT "going to give at some point". For something to give there has to be a shot; if memory serves me right that Cole shot was the only WHU shot on target in all of the 2nd half (but if I'm wrong and there were others, the number was very very small and didn't make Foster do anything to stop them).

[lharris92]

problem for us hammers is, we play amazing one game (like in the 1/4 final against man utd) then the rest of the time we are below average or piss poor (newcastle the other week). tbh i missed the first leg cause im at uni, but im going to the away leg, & im fully expecting the stewards to react to the smallest of things and react way over the top, just because its west ham fans, and that makes the crowd even worse..

happens all the time so im just expecting the result to be marred by "hooliganism", even though in the main there isn't that much trouble with west ham fans when we go away.